[ChefBorOzzy]

I'm pretty sure Ford boys are idiots as well. Constant trolling and excuse making because Ford puts out inferior vehicles PRETTY MUCH across the board.

YOU JUST WAIT UNTIL THE MUSTANG GETS UPDATED, GUISE. - Ford dummies

[BlaqWhole]

Chevy guys, Ford guys, everyone in between...we're ALL idiots, lol!! It's just that us over here with team Chevy have the faster cars while they all are just trying to keep up. And we don't pay markups like they do for their inferior vehicles.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

I'm pretty sure Ford boys are idiots as well. Constant trolling and excuse making because Ford puts out inferior vehicles PRETTY MUCH across the board.

YOU JUST WAIT UNTIL THE MUSTANG GETS UPDATED, GUISE. - Ford dummies

...the tires are crap
...it didn't have the right option package.
...if had too many options and was therefore heavy.
...they didn't change the brake fluid

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by hotlap

...the tires are crap
...it didn't have the right option package.
...if had too many options and was therefore heavy.
...they didn't change the brake fluid

Blinker fluid...

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Bluecyclone

2015 GT is Gen 1 Coyote, 2016-17 Gen 2, 18 is gen 3. Coyote went from 420 Hp crank gen 1, to 435 Hp crank gen 2. Other internal parts were upgraded as well. Gen 3 is 460 Hp crank DI & port. This is all out of 302 CI. displacement vs 6.2 in the Camaro. Both are 12 sec. cars easily. I enjoy running thru the twisty's but have never found a Camaro SS or ZL1 to run with off track. This duo of sports cars put a hurt on most any other RWD cars sold today & it's a great time to be a Gearhead! So let's enjoy our respective pony cars and Drive.

Its a old school 2 valve low tech pushrod 6.2 versus a very high tech 4 valve DOHC 5.0. Wish Ford would build a 6.2 pushrod motor like GM and Dodge so apples and apples can be compared. Or maybe GM should bring on a DOHC 5.5 naturally aspirated engine to end the controversy.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

Its a old school 2 valve low tech pushrod 6.2 versus a very high tech 4 valve DOHC 5.0. Wish Ford would build a 6.2 pushrod motor like GM and Dodge so apples and apples can be compared. Or maybe GM should bring on a DOHC 5.5 naturally aspirated engine to end the controversy.

I don't see why that's necessary to compare the cars. They have taken different paths to achieve the same goals, and that a lot of the reason it is interesting to compare. The more similar they become, the less interesting it will be.

I mean, how close to apples to apples do we need? Eventually we will be comparing a 2018 GT to a 2018 GT.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

Its a old school 2 valve low tech pushrod 6.2 versus a very high tech 4 valve DOHC 5.0. Wish Ford would build a 6.2 pushrod motor like GM and Dodge so apples and apples can be compared. Or maybe GM should bring on a DOHC 5.5 naturally aspirated engine to end the controversy.

I would not call a direct inject V8 that makes 460 HP, is light weight, small in outer dimensions, and gets good fuel economy "low tech". This exact same engine can easily go over 500 HP with the very simple "low tech" cam in cam design that the Viper uses. Compare this simple "low tech" cost with what the compete redesign of the 5.0 needed to get 460 HP.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-...-valve-timing/



thus completely eliminating the phasing / overlap advantage a twin cam with cam phasers offer. Note I'm talking cam overlap not the inherent greater flow area of 4 valves vs 2 valves. GM played around with two cams in the block in the late 90s, this is effectively solved with cam in cam about 8% increase in HP and much broader torque range vs just phasing a solid cam.

So if low tech = smaller lighter package, lower center of gravity, significantly more drivable and usable torque, better MPG, cheaper to produce, completely rebuildable, easy to work on, cheap parts, and can see huge gains in HP be simple additional technology like cam in cam. I think I'll stick to simple stupid.

Oh and I do build and race B18C and K20 Honda engines, so it ain't like I'm scared of 4 valve.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by oldman

I would not call a direct inject V8 that makes 460 HP, is light weight, small in outer dimensions, and gets good fuel economy "low tech". This exact same engine can easily go over 500 HP with the very simple "low tech" cam in cam design that the Viper uses. Compare this simple "low tech" cost with what the compete redesign of the 5.0 needed to get 460 HP.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-...-valve-timing/



thus completely eliminating the phasing / overlap advantage a twin cam with cam phasers offer. Note I'm talking cam overlap not the inherent greater flow area of 4 valves vs 2 valves. GM played around with two cams in the block in the late 90s, this is effectively solved with cam in cam about 8% increase in HP and much broader torque range vs just phasing a solid cam.

So if low tech = smaller lighter package, lower center of gravity, significantly more drivable and usable torque, better MPG, cheaper to produce, completely rebuildable, easy to work on, cheap parts, and can see huge gains in HP be simple additional technology like cam in cam. I think I'll stick to simple stupid.

Oh and I do build and race B18C and K20 Honda engines, so it ain't like I'm scared of 4 valve.

Yeah, comments like that are VERY uninformed. People think the DOHC is some brand new state of the art tech that JUST came out a decade ago. LOL

[TEEZYSS]

Have any other 18's run 11's bone stock?

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by TEEZYSS

Have any other 18's run 11's bone stock?

I'm curious has any publication review run an SS into the 11s, how about a very low 12? Any? or do we simply have to take the word of private owners that their car is 100% stock, running pump gas, and has done so?

Is this the fastest verified Pass? (Summary: Driver-Jeff Lutz, Private Track Rental, over 80 passes best-12:21)
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/2016-...ed-1500-miles/

[Zeke.Malvo]

Originally Posted by oldman

I would not call a direct inject V8 that makes 460 HP, is light weight, small in outer dimensions, and gets good fuel economy "low tech". This exact same engine can easily go over 500 HP with the very simple "low tech" cam in cam design that the Viper uses. Compare this simple "low tech" cost with what the compete redesign of the 5.0 needed to get 460 HP.

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-...-valve-timing/



thus completely eliminating the phasing / overlap advantage a twin cam with cam phasers offer. Note I'm talking cam overlap not the inherent greater flow area of 4 valves vs 2 valves. GM played around with two cams in the block in the late 90s, this is effectively solved with cam in cam about 8% increase in HP and much broader torque range vs just phasing a solid cam.

So if low tech = smaller lighter package, lower center of gravity, significantly more drivable and usable torque, better MPG, cheaper to produce, completely rebuildable, easy to work on, cheap parts, and can see huge gains in HP be simple additional technology like cam in cam. I think I'll stick to simple stupid.

Oh and I do build and race B18C and K20 Honda engines, so it ain't like I'm scared of 4 valve.

The LT1 is more expensive than the 5.0 Coyote by a healthy margin and they both weigh the same. But I do agree that the LT1 is not low tech.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by TEEZYSS

Have any other 18's run 11's bone stock?

As far as I know, only the Hot Rod magazine test with Evan Smith driving it hit 11's. 11.8XX was his best time, said bone stock and only adjusted tire pressure. I believe he was consistently hitting high 11's too.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Zeke.Malvo

The LT1 is more expensive than the 5.0 Coyote by a healthy margin and they both weigh the same. But I do agree that the LT1 is not low tech.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Do you mean to produce and/or buy? I wasn't aware of that. I have to admit I am slightly surprised. I just assumed the Coyote would be more expensive considering it is bigger and has more moving parts, 4 cam shafts etc etc. YTou learn something new everyday i guess.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I'm curious has any publication review run an SS into the 11s, how about a very low 12? Any? or do we simply have to take the word of private owners that their car is 100% stock, running pump gas, and has done so?

Is this the fastest verified Pass? (Summary: Driver-Jeff Lutz, Private Track Rental, over 80 passes 12:21)
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/2016-...ed-1500-miles/

Here are a couple of other magazine reviews:

Car and Driver finished up their long term test after 40,000 miles in a manual 2016 Camaro and it ran a 12.3 sec @ 118 mph in their testing.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...rm-test-review

MotorTrend in their initial review did a 12.3 sec @ 116.1 also in a manual

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-...t-test-review/