[wnta1ss]

Have to point out that the claim about the A10 Mustang being quicker than the A8 SS is not really true from what I've been seeing. Again, from real-world observations, they are close to the SS now, but not quicker in the 1/4 mile. Obviously this would not give you the low-end torque that you want, as the Coyote needs a lot of rpm to work. That's why I did not suggest that a sideways move be considered, because if you want lower-rpm torque, then it's either Camaro SS or 392 out of the ~40k muscle car market.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Mrbobcat

Yeah, I thought about it as it would most likely be the smarter move since I already have a set of winter wheels and tires for it. It does look to be a tick quicker than the other two especially at higher speeds. A couple bolt-ons and tune would probably even things out. But then again it looks like even Chevy parts aren't all that inexpensive.

You might want to read this latest review on the 2019 prior to making your purchase decision, it may be more than a tick slower.
https://www.motortrend.com/cars/chev...t-test-review/

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by wnta1ss

Have to point out that the claim about the A10 Mustang being quicker than the A8 SS is not really true from what I've been seeing. Again, from real-world observations, they are close to the SS now, but not quicker in the 1/4 mile. Obviously this would not give you the low-end torque that you want, as the Coyote needs a lot of rpm to work. That's why I did not suggest that a sideways move be considered, because if you want lower-rpm torque, then it's either Camaro SS or 392 out of the ~40k muscle car market.

When they test the GT against the SS it is usually a GT that has every option, mode, feature, etc...which is like 3 of them. So that is when the GT is faster. It has to be optioned a specific way and have all the specific modes needed. And even then it has to be ideal conditions with a pro driver and they need the entire day to get the absolute best time out of it. So what you're seeing at the track is what the vast majority of GTs produced will do. The SS comes as it is. All of them. You don't have to option in a drag mode or drag pack or race pack or super-racer-boy-M6G-Mustang-fanboy-Evans-track rental-unlimited pack thingy to hit the times that you see.

GM builds the SS, charges a price for it, and the performance you get is across the board. Ford takes a GT, removes like 15 million features from it, then nickel and dimes you for every added on feature. So the base GT ain't worth shit and is slow as hell. But people get them for mid $20K so they're ok with that because they had to scrape pennies after getting turned down for the SS they wanted. The SS however comes standard with everything performance related in a trim specific category whether it's a 1SS, 2SS, whatever. The only add-ons are comfort stuff and visual stuff. So chances are that in the wild a SS will likely beat a GT unless the GT is fully optioned and the owner paid around Mid $40K to low $50K range for it. In those cases it is a driver's race. But when a magazine has to test them and options out the absolute best GT they can get their hands on with every feature added onto it and in the best possible conditions the GT might win be a small amount.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

When they test the GT against the SS it is usually a GT that has every option, mode, feature, etc...which is like 3 of them. So that is when the GT is faster. It has to be optioned a specific way and have all the specific modes needed. And even then it has to be ideal conditions with a pro driver and they need the entire day to get the absolute best time out of it. So what you're seeing at the track is what the vast majority of GTs produced will do. The SS comes as it is. All of them. You don't have to option in a drag mode or drag pack or race pack or super-racer-boy-M6G-Mustang-fanboy-Evans-track rental-unlimited pack thingy to hit the times that you see.

GM builds the SS, charges a price for it, and the performance you get is across the board. Ford takes a GT, removes like 15 million features from it, then nickel and dimes you for every added on feature. So the base GT ain't worth shit and is slow as hell. But people get them for mid $20K so they're ok with that because they had to scrape pennies after getting turned down for the SS they wanted. The SS however comes standard with everything performance related in a trim specific category whether it's a 1SS, 2SS, whatever. The only add-ons are comfort stuff and visual stuff. So chances are that in the wild a SS will likely beat a GT unless the GT is fully optioned and the owner paid around Mid $40K to low $50K range for it. In those cases it is a driver's race. But when a magazine has to test them and options out the absolute best GT they can get their hands on with every feature added onto it and in the best possible conditions the GT might win be a small amount.

12.4 @ 115 for the A10 SS
12.1 @ 118 for the A10 GT

Please stop. You can pick up a GT with everything you need to run this number for 37k-40k all day long.

[rocket403]

So the Camaro is the slowest in the 1/4 mile of the Challenger 392 (1320 11.7) Mustang GT (12.1) and Camaro SS (12.4)

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

12.4 @ 115 for the A10 SS
12.1 @ 118 for the A10 GT

Please stop. You can pick up a GT with everything you need to run this number for 37k-40k all day long.

So now you're back to talking about the automatics I see. Funny how you shift gears whenever you think it suits you.

And for the record, the point is that the SS, EVERY SS, comes with everything you need to run the times they claim. WIth the Mustang that shit has to be optioned in. Otherwise it isn't even close. We all know this.

Originally Posted by rocket403

So the Camaro is the slowest in the 1/4 mile of the Challenger 392 (1320 11.7) Mustang GT (12.1) and Camaro SS (12.4)

Well I'm not sure the 1320 has been tested yet so nothing is official. And technically, the GT would still be the slowest since the M6 version can't seem to get close to what the A10 claims to be doing. So all in all, amongst all V8s with all trans configurations, the Mustang is the slowest. Well it is faster than the 5.7 Hemi Challenger. So the Challenger is the slowest and then the Mustang GT is the second slowest. The only time the Mustang is faster is when stipulations are involved to suit newmoon's argument.

[7speed]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

So now you're back to talking about the automatics I see. Funny how you shift gears whenever you think it suits you.

And for the record, the point is that the SS, EVERY SS, comes with everything you need to run the times they claim. WIth the Mustang that shit has to be optioned in. Otherwise it isn't even close. We all know this.

Well I'm not sure the 1320 has been tested yet so nothing is official. And technically, the GT would still be the slowest since the M6 version can't seem to get close to what the A10 claims to be doing. So all in all, amongst all V8s with all trans configurations, the Mustang is the slowest. Well it is faster than the 5.7 Hemi Challenger. So the Challenger is the slowest and then the Mustang GT is the second slowest. The only time the Mustang is faster is when stipulations are involved to suit newmoon's argument.

Thank you..... you have to have the Mustang with gt performance package to put it drag mode to rip off the fastest times.

You may like the Challenger 392 or 1320. I had a 15 RT new and it was nice and comfortable, I improved handling and feel when I added strut bar and SRT springs. I liked it a lot and had no issues for the 27,000 miles. So don't let people say that they aren't reliable. People with these Camaros had tranny issues, diff issues, headliner (me), front end link (me). I ended up getting Camaro later because I missed that button down feel, (I had a 370z before the Challenger). My Camaro is feels like a more powerful 370z. The Chrysler keeps updating the Challenger so modern enough but starting to show its age I think.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

So now you're back to talking about the automatics I see. Funny how you shift gears whenever you think it suits you.

And for the record, the point is that the SS, EVERY SS, comes with everything you need to run the times they claim. WIth the Mustang that shit has to be optioned in. Otherwise it isn't even close. We all know this.

Well I'm not sure the 1320 has been tested yet so nothing is official. And technically, the GT would still be the slowest since the M6 version can't seem to get close to what the A10 claims to be doing. So all in all, amongst all V8s with all trans configurations, the Mustang is the slowest. Well it is faster than the 5.7 Hemi Challenger. So the Challenger is the slowest and then the Mustang GT is the second slowest. The only time the Mustang is faster is when stipulations are involved to suit newmoon's argument.

Geez, here we go again. Ha, man, you are doing the exact same thing. You are picking one and claiming it because it suits your narrative that you think the Mustang GT is the slowest. When arguing about "fastest" you choose the fastest vehicle, not the slowest version of said vehicle. Otherwise you just sound like you're in denial. Anyway, the fact is many people have run high 11s easily, with the automatic 18 GT. The car traps 119 mph (one publication has trapped 120 mph). And I have seen 11.9s on a non PP1 auto equipped car. So, yes, the GT is faster than the SS. You also realize that the manual GT traps the same (115+mph) as the auto and manual SS? The manual is about a tenth slower than the SS because wide gear spacing and no rev match in the 18s. Keep going, however and the manual passes the SS because the gen 3 coyote makes a 10-15 more ponies than the SS.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by newmoon

12.4 @ 115 for the A10 SS
12.1 @ 118 for the A10 GT

Please stop. You can pick up a GT with everything you need to run this number for 37k-40k all day long.

Didn't Car and Driver run 0-60 in 3.9 sec and 12.2 s @ 118 mph in the SS A10? They also ran 0-60: 4.0 sec with a 12.2 sec 1/4 in the M6?

Would the GT A10 need to have optional Michelin PS tires ...and optional 3.55 gears? And to actually be faster, the GT would need to be launched from a stop in drag race mode? That compared to any SS ..cus they're all the same?


Aren't you the same track, same day guy?

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Geez, here we go again. Ha, man, you are doing the exact same thing. You are picking one and claiming it because it suits your narrative that you think the Mustang GT is the slowest. When arguing about "fastest" you choose the fastest vehicle, not the slowest version of said vehicle. Otherwise you just sound like you're in denial. Anyway, the fact is many people have run high 11s easily, with the automatic 18 GT. The car traps 119 mph (one publication has trapped 120 mph). And I have seen 11.9s on a non PP1 auto equipped car. So, yes, the GT is faster than the SS. You also realize that the manual GT traps the same (115+mph) as the auto and manual SS? The manual is about a tenth slower than the SS because wide gear spacing and no rev match in the 18s. Keep going, however and the manual passes the SS because the gen 3 coyote makes a 10-15 more ponies than the SS.

Its called deflection and denial. This review by MT was not good at all. The new A10 option didn't do anything for the SS, there is no torque advantage as many expected there would be as compared to the GT.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by newmoon

This review by MT was not good at all. The new A10 option didn't do anything for the SS, there is no torque advantage as many expected there would be as compared to the GT.

Honestly, the review was so bad I don't know that I'd even consider it a review. And to make matters worse, is that the previous A8 cars never got a fully blown best case run at the strip like the Mustangs did...

Still, it amazes me how rarely the Camaros perform as bad as the magazines say they do..

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Didn't Car and Driver run 0-60 in 3.9 sec and 12.2 s @ 118 mph in the SS A10? They also ran 0-60: 4.0 sec with a 12.2 sec 1/4 in the M6?

Would the GT A10 need to have optional Michelin PS tires ...and optional 3.55 gears? And to actually be faster, the GT would need to be launched from a stop in drag race mode? That compared to any SS ..cus they're all the same?


Aren't you the same track, same day guy?

You must be referring to the C&D article that ran the GT to 3.8 0-60, 12.1 @ 120 mph times correct

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by newmoon

You must be referring to the C&D article that ran the GT to 3.8 0-60, 12.1 @ 120 mph times correct

Yeah the one where the GT PP1 A10 Drag Mode beat the M6 SS by .1 lol.

A10 didn't help the SS like we thought it might.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

SAnd for the record, the point is that the SS, EVERY SS, comes with everything you need to run the times they claim. WIth the Mustang that shit has to be optioned in. Otherwise it isn't even close. We all know this.

WORD