[LESS1]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

The GT350 and GT350R are every bit the "sports car" that any Camaro is, so that's not really a definitive factor for the Camaro.

I would argue the Mustang sells better than the Camaro for a number of other reasons. A few being: name recognition and heritage; livability: i.e. better ergonomics, better visibility, bigger trunk, bigger back seats, etc., (it's been easier to see out of than the Camaro since the fox body days - I had a 3rd gen and 4th gen Trans Am - you couldn't even see the hood in the 4th gen!), lower cost base V8 option (up until the LT1 Camaro was introduced last year), styling (subjective, but I think most people would argue the Mustang looks better than the Camaro - I realize not this crowd), more comfortable for daily driving.

Challenger sells better for many of those same reasons, although not necessarily the name recognition or heritage - as those are on par w/ the Camaro IMO. Dodge also does more marketing and pushes the boundaries (Hellcat, Demon, Redeye) that grabs attention. The ZL1 grabbed attn. back in 2017, but nothing since. The ZLE doesn't quite speak to the public like a wild 797 hp Grand Tourer widebody that weighs almost 4,600 lbs and looks pretty cool going down the road.

Sure, the base SS is better handling the the base GT and PP1, and the SLE is about as quick around a track but better balanced than the PP2, but we're talking about only a tiny fragment of people that care about those minute differences. A PP1 w/ MagneRide is really good - I can attest, that's what I have. It's a blast on back roads. A PP2 is really good (except for tramlining). The GT350R is exceptional. Randy P. called the GT500 CFTP a true Supercar (not Supercar killer). It's not like the Mustang is hurting for track prowess.

That's where the Camaro faithful fall short nowadays. They hang their hat on that the SS goes around a track better than a PP1, or that the SLE is potentially slightly quicker around a track than the PP2 (both wearing Cup 2 tires), but that doesn't matter that much, really, in the grand scheme of things. Most people want a cool car that accelerates well, looks good, and is fun to drive and easy to live with.

In order for those great Camaros to exist (ZL1, ZLE, Z28, etc.), GM needs to sell enough of the base models and SS models to keep the nameplate going. I hope it does, because competition breeds improvement, on both sides.

Setting a few things right here. First of all, name recognition and heritage. I think you will find if you lose the Frod blinders these are equal with maybe a slight edge to Mustang in the heritage category for being first to market. As for ergo this is fact however, I would add Camaro premise was/is a true sports car first, utility second. Obviously with this approach sacrifices are necessary.

Marketing is a hot topic here so I am steering clear. Looks are subjective so on to comfort. I would argue GM version of MRC is superior and in my experience is very compliant on both surface roads as well as highways. The Mustang and Shelby I test drove (same roads as Camaro test drive) did not have the same level of compliance and felt less refined. One caveat... all of the above is true if you fit comfortably in the car. Of course, this is my opinion, the same as you expressed above.

Concerning handling, not close, Camaro superior. How many times has any Mustang and or Shelby been referred to as “world class chassis” …? I will wait if you want to google this. By the way, just ask Randy… he bought one, cannot do better than that now can you when someone puts his or her money down.

PP1/PP2 GT350 are not faster than SLE. The only exception is on exceptionally long circuits, VIR comes to mind, where GT350 HP advantage can be exploited. However, I will add if SLE is on the same tire GT350 is dead even or behind SLE… again I will wait if you would like to google this too.

Concerning ZLE and Dodge. Umm go to any racetrack and you will see ZL1/ZLE. To date, I have seen one SRT Track pack (in my rearview mirror) at any track event. Again, this is subjective. For myself and other Camaro Track Rats ZL1/ZLE are incredibly relevant… Dodge not really, to heavy, old chassis weak suspension…etc.

I am adding this topic. Refinement. Not even close, Mustang is a build it yourself chassis with many flaws needing attention to compare with even the base Camaro. I am including GTXXX cars here since this is true for these as well. Concerning sales, this is subjective. In my case, I want the best performing Pony/Sports Car that offers world class performance. Easy choice and I have a track warranty… hard to beat that for the money.

You are obviously in a different situation and went with a Mustang, nothing wrong with either approach. Agree with sales support model, this is where the Camaro Team might have overshot the target with no compromises, ok a few compromises, towards producing the best chassis for the price point. Worked out great for the Camaro Track Rats. Not so good for the majority of the addressable market. A simple case of a superior product being made less relevant in the market by a less focused product.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

And you don't think that's related to gearing?

Because it doesn't pull away right after the quarter mile, in fact m6 vs m6 the camaro traps higher in the quarter and usually beats the mustang in a roll race too, because most post people don't roll race past 140mph. Typical publisher numbers show ss and ss 1le's have been tested at 12.3-12.5 @114-118, gt pp1 and pp2's 12.6 @113-115. 480hp Bullitt's I've seen 12.8 @115.

The mustang is faster to 150mph than the camaro, 23.3 (pp2) vs 25.6 (1le) according to instrumented testing. The camaro becomes a dog because it has to shift into a really steep overdrive 5th gear after 139 mph where the mustang can stay in the 1:1 4th gear all the way to 150mph due to the higher redline obviously.

However, before that 5th gear shift according to instrumented tests from Car and Driver, Road and Track, and in roll racing practice, the camaro is faster and reaches 130mph quicker. 0-130 in 15.7 (1le) vs 16.4 (pp1) (the 480 hp Bullit in 16.6). 130 is quite a bit after the 1/4 and yet the mustang is still behind.

The m7 c7 corvette is also powered by the same lt1 and it reaches 150mph faster than the 5.0 mustang at 22.1 for a stingray and 22.9 for a more aero heavy GS. Why? Because the corvette has different gearing than the Camaro that allows it to stay in 4th gear all the way to 147mph (while 4th is a 1:1 like the camaro and the mustang, the rear end gearing is 3.42 unlike the 3.73 in the ss and gt). Now while the corvette is lighter and more aero dynamic than both the camaro and the mustang, that alone does not cause this discrepancy being that the corvette is only about a tenth or two quicker than the camaro in the quarter mile and only a couple of tenths faster to 130mph at 15.5 for a GS. It's the early shift into 5th that kills the camaro past 135.

For reference the 460hp lt1 stingray corvette is just as fast to 150mph as a super high reving 526hp shelby gt350. Though to be fair the gt350 has to shift into 5th to reach 150 like the camaro, but it is more aggresively geared with fith gear being the 1:1 for the gt350s trans however.

The coyote's main advantage up top is just being able to stay in an equal gear for longer time due to the extra 900 rpm before redline. So we can keep listening to the mustang bros saying how hard it pulls up top or look at the numbers and learn. I will say, based on feel though, the coyote keeps on building where the camaro feels like it hits hard early and plateus, but feel doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Yes, gearing is a major difference between the two. If you look at the LT1 dyno chart, it falls on its face around 4800 RPM. The torque curve drops off a cliff and the power curve flattens out.

Still, I find it funny how quick people discredit 20 horsepower that took minimal upgrades for the Bullett V8. GM could have easily modified the LT1 for the Z/28 or even used the 6.6 liter V8 but GM chose not to.

That is my biggest complaint with GM. They develop engines and release them and don't consider what the competition is fielding. The Alpha chassis is better by a massive margin. The chassis doesn't translate into sales. No Alpha based car sells well. GM is completely unwilling to deviate from their formula, even at the expense of sales or the brand as a whole. Because GM is so rigid in their decision making, the Camaro will likely die again.

[siggy_30]

Originally Posted by LESS1

Setting a few things right here. First of all, name recognition and heritage. I think you will find if you lose the Frod blinders these are equal with maybe a slight edge to Mustang in the heritage category for being first to market. As for ergo this is fact however, I would add Camaro premise was/is a true sports car first, utility second. Obviously with this approach sacrifices are necessary.

Marketing is a hot topic here so I am steering clear. Looks are subjective so on to comfort. I would argue GM version of MRC is superior and in my experience is very compliant on both surface roads as well as highways. The Mustang and Shelby I test drove (same roads as Camaro test drive) did not have the same level of compliance and felt less refined. One caveat... all of the above is true if you fit comfortably in the car. Of course, this is my opinion, the same as you expressed above.

Concerning handling, not close, Camaro superior. How many times has any Mustang and or Shelby been referred to as “world class chassis” …? I will wait if you want to google this. By the way, just ask Randy… he bought one, cannot do better than that now can you when someone puts his or her money down.

PP1/PP2 GT350 are not faster than SLE. The only exception is on exceptionally long circuits, VIR comes to mind, where GT350 HP advantage can be exploited. However, I will add if SLE is on the same tire GT350 is dead even or behind SLE… again I will wait if you would like to google this too.

Concerning ZLE and Dodge. Umm go to any racetrack and you will see ZL1/ZLE. To date, I have seen one SRT Track pack (in my rearview mirror) at any track event. Again, this is subjective. For myself and other Camaro Track Rats ZL1/ZLE are incredibly relevant… Dodge not really, to heavy, old chassis weak suspension…etc.

I am adding this topic. Refinement. Not even close, Mustang is a build it yourself chassis with many flaws needing attention to compare with even the base Camaro. I am including GTXXX cars here since this is true for these as well. Concerning sales, this is subjective. In my case, I want the best performing Pony/Sports Car that offers world class performance. Easy choice and I have a track warranty… hard to beat that for the money.

You are obviously in a different situation and went with a Mustang, nothing wrong with either approach. Agree with sales support model, this is where the Camaro Team might have overshot the target with no compromises, ok a few compromises, towards producing the best chassis for the price point. Worked out great for the Camaro Track Rats. Not so good for the majority of the addressable market. A simple case of a superior product being made less relevant in the market by a less focused product.

Sales are subjective? Learn something new every day. I need to tell my friends who are in sales about this logic. “Boss, my sales are low, but by golly, the ones who bought were extremely happy! You can’t measure that boss.”

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Yes, gearing is a major difference between the two. If you look at the LT1 dyno chart, it falls on its face around 4800 RPM. The torque curve drops off a cliff and the power curve flattens out.

Still, I find it funny how quick people discredit 20 horsepower that took minimal upgrades for the Bullett V8. GM could have easily modified the LT1 for the Z/28 or even used the 6.6 liter V8 but GM chose not to.

That is my biggest complaint with GM. They develop engines and release them and don't consider what the competition is fielding. The Alpha chassis is better by a massive margin. The chassis doesn't translate into sales. No Alpha based car sells well. GM is completely unwilling to deviate from their formula, even at the expense of sales or the brand as a whole. Because GM is so rigid in their decision making, the Camaro will likely die again.

I think you need to look at those torque curves again. It doesn't drop off hard after 4800, its after 5k. The 5.0 also starts dropping before 5k, though it doesn maintain it better without a big drop after 5.5k, But the lt1 also starts making its torque before the 5.0. Either way they just make power differently and I'm glad they are different, makes for two different driving experiences.

I don't discredit the extra 20 hp, I think its great and hoped GM would do something like this for a trim like the 1le. I do however make note of the fact that the only car we have to reference at the moment with the extra 20hp is not a better performer than the standard 5.0. In fact it typically has shown to have slower numbers. Tires play a factor for sure off the line but after that they are no excuse. Hopefully the mach 1 makes better use of the extra 20hp with its more aggressive set up though.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by LESS1

Setting a few things right here. First of all, name recognition and heritage. I think you will find if you lose the Frod blinders these are equal with maybe a slight edge to Mustang in the heritage category for being first to market. As for ergo this is fact however, I would add Camaro premise was/is a true sports car first, utility second. Obviously with this approach sacrifices are necessary.

Marketing is a hot topic here so I am steering clear. Looks are subjective so on to comfort. I would argue GM version of MRC is superior and in my experience is very compliant on both surface roads as well as highways. The Mustang and Shelby I test drove (same roads as Camaro test drive) did not have the same level of compliance and felt less refined. One caveat... all of the above is true if you fit comfortably in the car. Of course, this is my opinion, the same as you expressed above.

Concerning handling, not close, Camaro superior. How many times has any Mustang and or Shelby been referred to as “world class chassis” …? I will wait if you want to google this. By the way, just ask Randy… he bought one, cannot do better than that now can you when someone puts his or her money down.

PP1/PP2 GT350 are not faster than SLE. The only exception is on exceptionally long circuits, VIR comes to mind, where GT350 HP advantage can be exploited. However, I will add if SLE is on the same tire GT350 is dead even or behind SLE… again I will wait if you would like to google this too.

Concerning ZLE and Dodge. Umm go to any racetrack and you will see ZL1/ZLE. To date, I have seen one SRT Track pack (in my rearview mirror) at any track event. Again, this is subjective. For myself and other Camaro Track Rats ZL1/ZLE are incredibly relevant… Dodge not really, to heavy, old chassis weak suspension…etc.

I am adding this topic. Refinement. Not even close, Mustang is a build it yourself chassis with many flaws needing attention to compare with even the base Camaro. I am including GTXXX cars here since this is true for these as well. Concerning sales, this is subjective. In my case, I want the best performing Pony/Sports Car that offers world class performance. Easy choice and I have a track warranty… hard to beat that for the money.

You are obviously in a different situation and went with a Mustang, nothing wrong with either approach. Agree with sales support model, this is where the Camaro Team might have overshot the target with no compromises, ok a few compromises, towards producing the best chassis for the price point. Worked out great for the Camaro Track Rats. Not so good for the majority of the addressable market. A simple case of a superior product being made less relevant in the market by a less focused product.

I just realized he said the ss 1le is "about as quick as the pp2" around a track, insinuating that the pp2 is quicker... and that it's "potentially capable of being slightly faster than a pp2 with the same tires" lol.

This wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't something already discussed and brought up to these guys before, time after time. They hang their hat on the lightning lap times of the pp2 vs the 1le. The one they know was done by different drivers (editors at that) on different days.

When they already know that when they were run on the Laguna Seca by the same pro driver in Randy Pobst, granted different days, the ss 1le put the faster time up.

Ofcourse the Throttle House comparison were they had the same tires is reduced to "slightly faster", even though it was over a second difference in a small track. 1:11.5 vs 1:12.7. Most of these close match ups are usually seperated by tenths of a second.

So the ss 1le isn't potentially slightly faster on the same tire, it's been faster on the oem tires too.

The gt350 vs the ss 1le is atleast debatable, because the 1le could faster before the 2019 cup 2 tire update for the base gt350, but now the newer gt350s have a tire advantage and did put up a faster Laguna Seca time than the 1le.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

The issue is GM doesn't develop engines like Ford does. They develop a base V8, a mid tier V8 and a Corvette only top tier V8. Once the engine is released, GM doesn't touch it again.

Ford upgrades their engines over the lifespan. Ford constantly develops new engines. Ford is pushing the boundaries with their engines. From the BOSS 302 to the 5.2 Voodoo to the Bullett 5.0, they constantly look to increase power or try new things.

I feel GM is more into good enough, cheap, dependable. The LT2 is 500 HP and it would be easy peasy to put something like that into the Camaro, but no need as the SS works well enough. Cam in cam technology could get 50 more HP and we know the engine can be taken out to 7.0 liters. But all this comes at a price and GM feels that what they have is "good enough". Basically GM is sandbagging it and could with relative ease completely destroy the 5.0 and / or the 5.2 with an LT1 based engine NA. The just choose to make money on a proven package. Ford has to keep trying (all good) competition makes both cars better.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

I think you need to look at those torque curves again. It doesn't drop off hard after 4800, its after 5k. The 5.0 also starts dropping before 5k, though it doesn maintain it better without a big drop after 5.5k, But the lt1 also starts making its torque before the 5.0. Either way they just make power differently and I'm glad they are different, makes for two different driving experiences.

I don't discredit the extra 20 hp, I think its great and hoped GM would do something like this for a trim like the 1le. I do however make note of the fact that the only car we have to reference at the moment with the extra 20hp is not a better performer than the standard 5.0. In fact it typically has shown to have slower numbers. Tires play a factor for sure off the line but after that they are no excuse. Hopefully the mach 1 makes better use of the extra 20hp with its more aggressive set up though.

Here's a dyno chart of the LS3, LS7 and LT1. You can see how the LT1 drops way off after the peak torque at 4600 RPM. It ends up at LS3 torque levels by redline. The LS3 and LS7 both carry their torque curves much better than the LT1.

Originally Posted by oldman

I feel GM is more into good enough, cheap, dependable. The LT2 is 500 HP and it would be easy peasy to put something like that into the Camaro, but no need as the SS works well enough. Cam in cam technology could get 50 more HP and we know the engine can be taken out to 7.0 liters. But all this comes at a price and GM feels that what they have is "good enough". Basically GM is sandbagging it and could with relative ease completely destroy the 5.0 and / or the 5.2 with an LT1 based engine NA. The just choose to make money on a proven package. Ford has to keep trying (all good) competition makes both cars better.

Ford has always been pushing their engines. Sure, the 4.6 hung around way too long but they made improvements along the way. Ford had the Coyote in development before the 5th gen Camaro was launched. They had the supercharged GT500 well before the Camaro came back. The 662 horsepower GT500 was in the works before the ZL1 was revealed.

I agree, GM suffers from the good enough mindset. They should be looking to push things as far as possible, but they don't. Ford and Dodge both do a much better job of creating interesting engines. GM, no so much.

Of course, this is all before the FPC V8 in the C8 is revealed. Maybe GM is finally getting over the "good enough" mentality.

[oldman]

I find power, MPG, good torque, low CG, cheap to build, buy and own pretty intresting.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Here's a dyno chart of the LS3, LS7 and LT1. You can see how the LT1 drops way off after the peak torque at 4600 RPM. It ends up at LS3 torque levels by redline. The LS3 and LS7 both carry their torque curves much better than the LT1.

I must be missing something? I see the LT1 producing WAY more HP (which is a function of torque and RPM) under the usable curve 4800 RPM to 6200 RPM, not even close. The LT1 is a FAR better engine. There is no "drop off" the LT1 is producing so much more torque vs the LS3 that we are just watching a gentle return to the expected torque values of a 6.2 engine. Once RPM is mentioned we are really talking HP and one can see how much MORE HP the LT1 makes in its usable rev range... not even close.

[radz28]

It seems like GM gave up on Camaro right after they dropped the 6th Gen. Slow sales don't help, but their target audience seems quite narrow, IMO. I also think the result of that is a lot more focused, and BETTER car. The result of THAT is a car that most people don't have a place for in their life. If GM can't make money on the car, they'll stop supporting it. I feel like they didn't support it for very long though. There has been no freshness for a few years already, and that, for a good part, wasn't accessible to the masses (i.e. expensive).

That sucks.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Here's a dyno chart of the LS3, LS7 and LT1. You can see how the LT1 drops way off after the peak torque at 4600 RPM. It ends up at LS3 torque levels by redline. The LS3 and LS7 both carry their torque curves much better than the LT1.



Ford has always been pushing their engines. Sure, the 4.6 hung around way too long but they made improvements along the way. Ford had the Coyote in development before the 5th gen Camaro was launched. They had the supercharged GT500 well before the Camaro came back. The 662 horsepower GT500 was in the works before the ZL1 was revealed.

I agree, GM suffers from the good enough mindset. They should be looking to push things as far as possible, but they don't. Ford and Dodge both do a much better job of creating interesting engines. GM, no so much.

Of course, this is all before the FPC V8 in the C8 is revealed. Maybe GM is finally getting over the "good enough" mentality.

I get that the lt1 starts to fall off after peak torque but that graph is especially severe and while its convenient for your argument there are other graphs that show a much more gradual taper similar to the ls3/ls7 curves you compared it to.

[oldman]

I've already predicted one of two things will happen:
4dr Camaro more like a GTO of old
or
2dr Camaro based on the C8 with toned down body work, manual trans and OHV only V8, the C8 will go only DOHC with DCT

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by oldman

I've already predicted one of two things will happen:
4dr Camaro more like a GTO of old...

They tried that with the SS.
Great performing car, practical, roomy 4 door with plenty of trunk space.
Not many sold most likely because it looked like just about a dozen other midsize boring sedans.
Although from most accounts the SS is a better sports sedan, Dodge did a much better job making the Charger look sporty. I think GM blew a good opportunity.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

They tried that with the SS.
Great performing car, practical, roomy 4 door with plenty of trunk space.
Not many sold most likely because it looked like just about a dozen other midsize boring sedans.
Although from most accounts the SS is a better sports sedan, Dodge did a much better job making the Charger look sporty. I think GM blew a good opportunity.

True. Plus GM was just trying to meet their contractual agreement with Holden as far as producing the cars they were suppposed to. They literally put nothing into advertising and were just riding it out till it died.

Not to say that it would have been successful if they had tried, but they didn't even try with the SS. On multiple levels imo.