[Bluecyclone]

Reminds me of my cyclone compared to 14 or earlier camaro. The handling is the key to track and displacement for the 1/4. I have a lot of suspension work to do on my new 16 GT that I did for my 14 3.7 pony. The Camaro is now top dog from the factory, I'll admit to that. Happy 50th Chevy Camaro!

[17SSfifty]

Originally Posted by Michigan1LTRS

I would just get a new friend.

haha!! Alright thanks for clearing it up!

[17SSfifty]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I also agree that this is correct.

But if I wanted to get more specific I'd add:

Camaro 1LE vs. GT350
Camaro Z/28 vs. GT350R

The fact that your buddy says its the SS vs the GT350 is a little funny. A $38K car versus a $57K car minimum. Sure makes the Chevy look good.

Yea I thought it was funny as well.

[TheZman]

Price tags on cars isn't the end all be all meter anymore as far as performance goes like it use to be.. The Camaro SS is better then most Euro sports car that cost north of $80k.. Its a lot better then the BMW M4 for example. Not to knock the Shelby GT350 but just like those Euro cars your paying a premium for the name. Yes its a great track car but you can option out the Camaro SS to compete against it on the track for less money.

[SpookShow'84]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

I'm sorry, the V6 to V8 comparison isn't even close...unless 10 carlengths is now considered a "few cars". 112mph trap speed compared to 103mph...come on now.

I've read several threads here where people ask what they should choose, V6 camaro VS V8 mustang...and virtually everyone save for a few camaro fanboys recommend the V8. To say that they are within a few car lengths of each-other is asinine.

As for the road coarse, I've yet to see any comparison with the same drivers on the same day comparing the 1le V6 camaro to the V8 mustang. Could it be a second quicker around VIR? Sure it could. The mustang could be 3 seconds quicker...who knows for sure. My guess is the 1le is easier to drive at it's limits, having far superior tires and a track duty suspension.

I'm adding an edit here.

While I believe some people may cross shop a V6 camaro to a base V8 mustang based solely on price, I don't believe the opposite to be true. That doesn't mean the performance of the two vehicles is even remotely close, but rather that the V6 camaro is in such a higher price point that the allure of buying an american icon with a V8 for nearly the same price is huge.

With that said, for the majority...camaro people are going to buy a camaro, and mustang people are going to buy a mustang.

I'm not trying to slam the GT, I'm just calling it like I see it, your lengthy rebuttal adds to the validity of the claim. "Easier to drive at it's limits" vs. the GT being a better to live with DD are part of the cross shop dilemma.

Anyway, 112mph is 16.43' per .1 second or an 82.15' win margin. The GT is 15.69' long. That is 5.24 cars, not 10. Math is not asinine.

The same could be said for the quarter mile as to the driver and day/track question on the road course claim. The 1LE has better tires and suspension than the base V6 that GM reports at 13.5 seconds. Car and Driver has the M6G at 13.0. Put a bad driver in the GT and a good one in the V6 1LE and the race is going to be closer.

They cost about the same, a 5-6 car 1/4 win by the GT qualifies as a "few" to me. The road course win margin by the V6 1LE would be comparable as a few cars. The GT has classic American muscle car appeal, the V6 1LE has equal track rat appeal and will be more rare and visually distinct from other Camaros. The cool factor of the two cars is close depending on what you want from a performance car, it could go either way depending on your persuasion.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

I'm not trying to slam the GT, I'm just calling it like I see it, your lengthy rebuttal adds to the validity of the claim. "Easier to drive at it's limits" vs. the GT being a better to live with DD are part of the cross shop dilemma.

Anyway, 112mph is 16.43' per .1 second or 82.15' win margin. The GT is 15.69' long. That is 5.24 cars, not 10. Math is not asinine.

The same could be said for the quarter mile as to the driver and day/track question on the road course claim. The 1LE has better tires and suspension that the base V6 that GM reports at 13.5 seconds. Car and Driver has the M6G at 13.0. Put a bad driver in the GT and a good one in the V6 1LE and the race is going to be closer.

They cost about the same, a 5-6 car 1/4 win by the GT qualifies as a "few" to me. The road course win margin by the V6 1LE would be comparable as a few cars. The GT has classic American muscle car appeal, the V6 1LE has equal track rat appeal and will be more rare and visually distinct from other Camaros. The cool factor of the two cars is close depending on what you want from a performance car, it could go either way depending on your persuasion.

The GT is an honest .8 quicker in the 1/4 mile given average drivers and auto transmissions. By the same calculation, you are looking at closer to an 8.5 car length advantage. Either calculation is not a "few" car lengths. The large discrepancy in MPH points to just how lopsided this is. To think that they are even close is silly. If the V6 camaro is within a “few” carlengths of the GT, then that would make the GT neck and neck with the Camaro SS.

Anyone that purchases a V6 camaro expecting to be able to keep up with a stock mustang GT is going to be sorely disappointed.

As for my "easier to drive at the limits" comment, that was pointed at the track. In daily driver duty, the 99% aren't going to notice a difference, one way or the other.

[SpookShow'84]

The numbers are time related as well, so the SS to GT win margin is mathematically about 7.5 cars. Pretty close to the IRL results.

As we don't have a solid 1/4 number published for the V6 1LE yet I don't see how either of us can prove it is .5 or .8 for sure. I'm assuming the auto trans published base V6 time will mirror a manual V6 1LE time with it's improvments. The fast list here doesn't show even one car for a V6 1/4 time, so GM's 1/4 time I think is appropriate to use.

I'm just pointing out that the V6 1LE has more in common with a M6G GT than the GT has with a SS.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

The GT is an honest .8 quicker in the 1/4 mile given average drivers and auto transmissions. By the same calculation, you are looking at closer to an 8.5 car length advantage. Either calculation is not a "few" car lengths. The large discrepancy in MPH points to just how lopsided this is. To think that they are even close is silly. If the V6 camaro is within a “few” carlengths of the GT, then that would make the GT neck and neck with the Camaro SS.

Anyone that purchases a V6 camaro expecting to be able to keep up with a stock mustang GT is going to be sorely disappointed.

As for my "easier to drive at the limits" comment, that was pointed at the track. In daily driver duty, the 99% aren't going to notice a difference, one way or the other.

I'm forced to agree. We are talking half a sec at best difference in times for the LT V6 and the low side average for a GT M6 being 13.0. The LT V6 can give a Challenger RT a run, but it's not going to be close vs any GT.

C&D also did test a V6 A8 and got 13.7 out of it. Maybe C&D sucks at launching but still shows a huge gap.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

The numbers are time related as well, so the SS to GT win margin is mathematically about 7.5 cars. Pretty close to the IRL results.

As we don't have a solid 1/4 number published for the V6 1LE yet I don't see how either of us can prove it is .5 or .8 for sure. I'm assuming the auto trans published base V6 time will mirror a manual V6 1LE time with it's improvments. The fast list here doesn't show even one car for a V6 1/4 time, so GM's 1/4 time I think is appropriate to use.

I'm just pointing out that the V6 1LE has more in common with a M6G GT than the GT has with a SS.

Considering the V8 1le and 1SS post comparable 1/4 ets and MPH, I think it would be pretty safe to assume the V6 variants are going to be spot on to each other.

The GT posts a much more comparable ET and MPH to the 1SS than the V6 does to the GT.

I don't think you realize just how much of an ass kicking 5 car-lengths is, let alone 7-8.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

I'm forced to agree. We are talking half a sec at best difference in times for the LT V6 and the low side average for a GT M6 being 13.0. The LT V6 can give a Challenger RT a run, but it's not going to be close vs any GT.

C&D also did test a V6 A8 and got 13.7 out of it. Maybe C&D sucks at launching but still shows a huge gap.

Even a 13.7 is a respectable time for what it is, nothing wrong with that. Getting 103mph out of a stock V6 camaro shows how far we've come. The discrepancy between 103mph and 113 mph however is enormous. I've been on the receiving end of many an 8 carlength beat-down, and I can tell you from my perspective my opponents were a mile away.

To my original point (not directed at anyone in here), as 100 people here to choose between comparably equipped V6 camaros and mustang GTs given the same price, I'd venture to say 95 of them would choose the mustang. Of those 5 choosing the camaro, it's likely because their insurance on the GT would be too high.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

To my original point (not directed at anyone in here), as 100 people here to choose between comparably equipped V6 camaros and mustang GTs given the same price, I'd venture to say 95 of them would choose the mustang. Of those 5 choosing the camaro, it's likely because their insurance on the GT would be too high.

Insurance and fuel costs. Not sure if I'd say 95 out of 100, but it would come down to budget for sure. Many won't buy a V8 simply because they think it will cost that much more for ownership, even though it might be a smaller difference than they think.

[SpookShow'84]

Oh it's 2 bus lengths, it's big. I'm not using acceleration as the sole factor in comparing the models though.

If you want to use the 1/4 mile as the sole deciding factor though. Per C&D; SS=12.3, GT=13.0, base V6 = 13.7. The splits are the same according to those numbers. Which way is correct in commonality points?

The whole package/scope of the car has a lot of other points

Compared to the GT, the SS is too much $, handles better, dramatically better per the performance numbers (speed, braking, acceleration). Styling is subjective, slight edge to the SS.

The only metric that the GT has a decided advantage over the V6 1LE is in the quarter. Most of the other variables are extremely close. In all other ways the GT is not comparable to an SS.

[17SSfifty]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

Even a 13.7 is a respectable time for what it is, nothing wrong with that. Getting 103mph out of a stock V6 camaro shows how far we've come. The discrepancy between 103mph and 113 mph however is enormous. I've been on the receiving end of many an 8 carlength beat-down, and I can tell you from my perspective my opponents were a mile away.

To my original point (not directed at anyone in here), as 100 people here to choose between comparably equipped V6 camaros and mustang GTs given the same price, I'd venture to say 95 of them would choose the mustang. Of those 5 choosing the camaro, it's likely because their insurance on the GT would be too high.

I personally would never buy a muscle car with anything less than a V8 under the hood. Many would go for the GT just based on the fact it's a V8 vs a V6 Camaro. I don't think it's fair to compare performance on a V6 camaro to a V8 mustang. The results are way different. I recently sold my 2015 GT and bought my 2017 SS. My insurance difference was only 36 bucks.

[Fraxum]

Originally Posted by jdasnt3

The GT and SS are still a comparable. When the GT outshined the 5th Gen SS, we took it in stride and got our butts handed to us at the drag strip. LOL Now, it's the other way around.

Yup, comparable. A 5.0 Mustang with an auto will take down a green SS driver with an M6 SS. My friends 2017 auto GT ran all 12s stock so far with 200 miles on the car and now is running consistant 12.5s with 245x17 DRs. How many M6 SSes are runing consistent 12.5s with or without DRs? Just a few.

Now with a little seat time the M6 SS drivers will own most stock Mustang M6 GT drivers. We do have the upper hand stock. But once the mods are added the Mustangs, even the S550s, seem to be faster.