[LesserO2Evils]

Originally Posted by Denis

that color is seriously awesome. I think its the best color you can get for the new Mustang.

Completely agreed. Gorgeous color!

[KMPrenger]

He quoted one of my posts here. My day is made!

[KMPrenger]

Oh hey Pill,

Since your reading this thread, I think you had better check out this one:

http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=423058

where it says the new Camaro is ATS based, and suspensions will swap out. All this time you've been saying CTS based. Wrong again my friend. This happens when you make stuff up.

[90503]

KMP...I'd let it go......His hatred of anything and everything GM and Camaro is so deep, that he will believe nothing he doesn't want to....The negativity over there is reaching a fever pitch. No matter what facts are presented, if they don't fit his narrative, you will be a mere believer in lies...IMO it's hopeless over there and not worth engaging....It's just an excuse for them to spew more hatred and juvenile taunts....

...Entertaining, though!....

[Denis]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Oh hey Pill,

Since your reading this thread, I think you had better check out this one:

http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=423058

where it says the new Camaro is ATS based, and suspensions will swap out. All this time you've been saying CTS based. Wrong again my friend. This happens when you make stuff up.

woh woh wooooh....that would involve using actual facts and not conjecture. hes not going to be interested in that information.

[SpeedIsLife]

I don't think it's fair to say it's based on either the ATS or CTS. The article says they're similar, which they should be since it's on Alpha.
It doesn't say the Camaro is based on the ATS.
Drawing direct comparisons to the CTS or ATS isn't going to work since the Camaro uses a unique variation of Alpha. Saying "the article says it's based on the ATS" is just as inaccurate as Pill saying it's based on the CTS. Before you attack Pill for spreading wrong information I would make sure your own evidence isn't comprised and by extension making the attack rebound.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by 90503

KMP...I'd let it go......His hatred of anything and everything GM and Camaro is so deep, that he will believe nothing he doesn't want to....The negativity over there is reaching a fever pitch. No matter what facts are presented, if they don't fit his narrative, you will be a mere believer in lies...IMO it's hopeless over there and not worth engaging....It's just an excuse for them to spew more hatred and juvenile taunts....

...Entertaining, though!....

You are exactly right. But it is entertaining in a harmful way lol. I do need to give it up...its like a bad habit.

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

I don't think it's fair to say it's based on either the ATS or CTS. The article says they're similar, which they should be since it's on Alpha.
It doesn't say the Camaro is based on the ATS.
Drawing direct comparisons to the CTS or ATS isn't going to work since the Camaro uses a unique variation of Alpha. Saying "the article says it's based on the ATS" is just as inaccurate as Pill saying it's based on the CTS. Before you attack Pill for spreading wrong information I would make sure your own evidence isn't comprised and by extension making the attack rebound.

Oh I agree 100%, and that's exactly how I felt. But he insists its more CTS than ATS, as another way of saying the car is going to be heavy. Honestly, as long as we are the same weight as Mustang, there is no argument to be made on either side, and just will make heads up competition more interesting.

[KMPrenger]

garagelogic still isn't happy that I once called him a pill "cheerleader". He now calls me "KMPregnant". Guess I touched a nerve.

Apparently I am also beck peddling on what I said earlier. If that makes them feel better great, although not true. Pill is correct, and there will be "screams". If the base 1SS isn't at least somewhere under 3,750lbs I'll be one of them.

I've already said in the past that if the weights are what Pill says they are as of his latest post (currently he is saying 3780-3820lbs...lord knows he's thrown numbers around from upper 3,600 to mid 3,800), then I will give Pill the credit he is due, and I will then call out GM for their very miss informed press releases about weight. I am not above that at all.

But if the weight is under his prediction....or if the car does lose 200 pounds curb weight...WILL he own up to his wrong prediction??? Will his cheerleaders say anything remote to "well what do you know...GM really did it"...we'll see.

Despite it all, nothing changes the fact that these guys are fanboys of the ages, and biased beyond control. It also doesn't change the fact that the 2016 Camaro will outperform the 2016 Mustang in just about every performance metric. If nothing else, that's something I can hang my hat on.

They changed the title of that epic thread to "2017 Mustang will outperform the Chevy Camaro in every way" for a reason. B/c they know whats coming. But I have also said that in 2017 Ford could up the ante and put the Camaro in its place again. I have no reason to think otherwise.

Now there is the difference between myself, and those like Garagelogic, and thePill. True car guy, versus blind fanboy. I know which side I'd rather be on.

Bring on the 2017 Mustang. That's what they are waiting for...and kudos to Ford if they can bring it. I just know I'll be enjoying the hell out of my 2016 1SS that I have on order.

I remember when I used to enjoy visiting Mustang6G. lol...yes I admit it.

[SpeedIsLife]

Ford hasn't properly released the GT350 weight..just the R and they're under regular production now.

The way the manufacturers are holding onto MPG and Weight info is so annoying.

They know...just won't talk

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Ford hasn't properly released the GT350 weight..just the R and they're under regular production now.

The way the manufacturers are holding onto MPG and Weight info is so annoying.

They know...just won't talk

All there weights are on Fords website. In fact the 350r actually gained 5lbs since the initial weight release.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

...nothing changes the fact that these guys are fanboys of the ages, and biased beyond control...

...I remember when I used to enjoy visiting Mustang6G. lol...yes I admit it.

Its like the Jerry Springer show. Embarrassing to admit you watch and you wouldn't want to be seen there.

M6G: Loaded with bleeped profanity and posters who aren't afraid to embarrass themselves on a web forum, "M6G" features thePill who is anti Camaro, aiming his rhetoric squarely at fanboys and viewers who rubberneck at traffic accidents

[SpeedIsLife]

One of the pro GM posters did post up a shot of the CTSV and 6th Gen undersides and the 6th Gen does look much closer to the CTS than the ATS. Again, they're all on Alpha but the Camaro is closer to one than the other.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

garagelogic still isn't happy that I once called him a pill "cheerleader". He now calls me "KMPregnant". Guess I touched a nerve.

Apparently I am also beck peddling on what I said earlier. If that makes them feel better great, although not true. Pill is correct, and there will be "screams". If the base 1SS isn't at least somewhere under 3,750lbs I'll be one of them.

I've already said in the past that if the weights are what Pill says they are as of his latest post (currently he is saying 3780-3820lbs...lord knows he's thrown numbers around from upper 3,600 to mid 3,800), then I will give Pill the credit he is due, and I will then call out GM for their very miss informed press releases about weight. I am not above that at all.

But if the weight is under his prediction....or if the car does lose 200 pounds curb weight...WILL he own up to his wrong prediction??? Will his cheerleaders say anything remote to "well what do you know...GM really did it"...we'll see.

Despite it all, nothing changes the fact that these guys are fanboys of the ages, and biased beyond control. It also doesn't change the fact that the 2016 Camaro will outperform the 2016 Mustang in just about every performance metric. If nothing else, that's something I can hang my hat on.

They changed the title of that epic thread to "2017 Mustang will outperform the Chevy Camaro in every way" for a reason. B/c they know whats coming. But I have also said that in 2017 Ford could up the ante and put the Camaro in its place again. I have no reason to think otherwise.

Now there is the difference between myself, and those like Garagelogic, and thePill. True car guy, versus blind fanboy. I know which side I'd rather be on.

Bring on the 2017 Mustang. That's what they are waiting for...and kudos to Ford if they can bring it. I just know I'll be enjoying the hell out of my 2016 1SS that I have on order.

I remember when I used to enjoy visiting Mustang6G. lol...yes I admit it.

With the Mustang selling the way it is, I would say there is very little chance significant improvements will be made to the 2017 Mustang GT. It is even debatable whether Ford will make any money on the GT350 after all the R&D that went into that car. Maybe it has more to do with getting people to the dealership to check out the GT350 that will end up driving away in an Ecoboost. It is possible the FPC motor trickles down to some variant of the GT at some point, but that seems a bit far fetched as there isn't much room between the GT and the GT350.

Ford took advantage while GM was limited to the Zeta platform for the Camaro. With those days gone, they are going to need a motor as cheap as the 5.0 with the output of the LT1 to keep up, and I don't think they will spend the money on that for at least a few years.

[SpeedIsLife]

One of the requirements for ALL Ford Performance cars is that they are produced at a profit. This was instituted under SVO/SVT. If the GT350 wasn't profitable then it wouldn't have been green lit.