Edmunds.com bashes Mustang and praises Camaro

[SVT_MAN]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Featu...otopanel..1.*#4

 

This article isn't comparing the 2010 Mustang to the 2010 Camaro. What gives? They keep saying how horrible Ford's engines are.

 

I think that it will be a sad day when the Camaro has an IRS and the Mustang doesn't though. Camaro has always had more of a redneck image than the Mustang, and an IRS in the Camaro will officially make it a more sophisticated car, suspension-wise at least.

Edited July 19, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[P71_CrownVic]

You must have linked the wrong article. There was no 'Mustang bashing' in that article.

[SVT_MAN]

You must have linked the wrong article. There was no 'Mustang bashing' in that article.

 

You must be nice. Oh wait - no - you're an ass.

[P71_CrownVic]

You must be nice. Oh wait - no - you're an ass.

 

 

Anyway, you want to link the correct article?

[jpd80]

If GM's recent practice of slightly underestimating the output of its engines before certification holds, the 6.3-liter small-block should make about 425 hp. That would be, not coincidentally, a little less power than the motor is capable of in the base Corvette but is essentially identical to the output of Dodge's meanest Challenger, the SRT8.

Oh, and it will mercilessly stomp the relatively small V8 that sits in the Mustang GT.

Opinions are not facts.

Can't see any real bashing there, just that the Camaro is now on a hiding to nothing.

Unless it comfortably beats the Mustang, this writer will look a little foolish.

 

Quad cam VCT 5.0 Mustang Vs Camaro 6.2 2V pushrod old guy engine.

Edited July 19, 2008 by jpd80

[pcsario]

You must have linked the wrong article. There was no 'Mustang bashing' in that article.

 

Yup, I only saw a reasonable guy offering fair commentary rooted firmly in reality.

 

Can you imagine if that article was written by a member here?

[P71_CrownVic]

Can you imagine if that article was written by a member here?

 

The :cheerleader: would look like this...

 

[Edstock]

I hope the next Mustang loses more weight, and has an IRS option.

 

GM put a lot of effort into the Camaro, and are to be congratulated.

 

I have yet to see it in the flesh, but, IMHO the front-end looks over-done, and the back-end seems somewhat awkward. Just my opinion, but the tailights and the panel backing them just seem awkward. The point is, I wonder how well the design will age.

[mlhm5]

Opinions are not facts.

Can't see any real bashing there, just that the Camaro is now on a hiding to nothing.

Unless it comfortably beats the Mustang, this writer will look a little foolish.

 

Quad cam VCT 5.0 Mustang Vs Camaro 6.2 2V pushrod old guy engine.

 

Most manufacturers are terrified of innovation in their "icon" models, and prefer to keep things the way they were back in the glory days, at any cost.

 

The Mustang still has a SRA.

[jpd80]

Most manufacturers are terrified of innovation in their "icon" models, and prefer to keep things the way they were back in the glory days, at any cost.

 

The Mustang still has a SRA.

Falcon does.

 

Mustang engineers are talking constantly.

 

Edit,

hopefully will be at least an option on the Control Blade IRS.

Edited July 19, 2008 by jpd80

[Ford Jellymoulds]

I hope the next Mustang loses more weight, and has an IRS option.

 

GM put a lot of effort into the Camaro, and are to be congratulated.

 

I have yet to see it in the flesh, but, IMHO the front-end looks over-done, and the back-end seems somewhat awkward. Just my opinion, but the tailights and the panel backing them just seem awkward. The point is, I wonder how well the design will age.

 

I hope the next Mustang gets lighter and lower it will handle a lot better.

 

 

[jpd80]

I hope the next Mustang gets lighter and lower it will handle a lot better.

 

 

I can see a 3,000 lb 2.5 Ecoboost Mustang making a monkey out of the v8 Camaro.

It's a leap of faith but GM is still planted in the past and won't embrace technology.

[MarkFive]

I wonder how well the design will age.

 

Its already aged more than any other car that has come to market. How long ago did we first see it?

 

I think GM would have been better off to keep the lid on it a bit longer than they did.

[MarkFive]

Can you imagine if that article was written by a member here?

 

You are a member here and based on your post count, you are a lot more active than a lot of other people. For someone who consistently feels the need to tell it like it is against all of the cheerleaders you seem to have a lot of vested interest in this company.

 

Aside from everything Ford Europe, is there anything you like about Ford North America?

[SVT_MAN]

I can see a 3,000 lb 2.5 Ecoboost Mustang making a monkey out of the v8 Camaro.

It's a leap of faith but GM is still planted in the past and won't embrace technology.

 

At the same time, GM is offering an IRS on the Camaro. What is Ford doing with the Mustang?

 

 

BTW: This is what I thought I was unfair:

Expect the V6 to make about 305 hp (based on Chevy's 300 hp estimate) and 270 lb-ft of torque on regular gas. Not to flog a dead horse, but that's more horsepower than is offered by the Mustang GT's V8.

 

Mustang GT is offering 300 hp now, yes. But will the 2010 model? I doubt it. I'm sure it will offer significantly more. I'm just saying that they are not comparing apples to apples.

 

 

Quad cam VCT 5.0 Mustang Vs Camaro 6.2 2V pushrod old guy engine.

 

Honestly doesn't bother me that the Camaro is still a pushrod motor. GM has refined it to the point that there isn't much point in doing a SOHC / DOHC motor in a V8 configuration.

Edited July 19, 2008 by SVT_MAN

[White99GT]

At the same time, GM is offering an IRS on the Camaro. What is Ford doing with the Mustang?

 

The Mustang Cobra/Cobra R came with IRS from 1999-2004; it wasn't universally loved though. I think that's why Ford didn't hesitate to go back with an improved panhard/3-link SRA for the S197.

 

BTW: This is what I thought I was unfair:

Expect the V6 to make about 305 hp (based on Chevy's 300 hp estimate) and 270 lb-ft of torque on regular gas. Not to flog a dead horse, but that's more horsepower than is offered by the Mustang GT's V8.

 

The 4.6 3V is a just a tune tweak and air box away from 315HP and 325 TQ, as evidenced by the Bullitt. Hopefully Ford gives the 2010 GT at least that.

 

Honestly doesn't bother me that the Camaro is still a pushrod motor. GM has refined it to the point that there isn't much point in doing a SOHC / DOHC motor in a V8 configuration.

 

I'm not so sure about that. The new 5.0L 4V appears to be making numbers on par with the LS3 6.2, and despite the LSXs power they don't rev as freely or as smoothly as a good 4V Modular.

[SVT_MAN]

The Mustang Cobra/Cobra R came with IRS from 1999-2004; it wasn't universally loved though. I think that's why Ford didn't hesitate to go back with an improved panhard/3-link SRA for the S197.

 

 

 

The 4.6 3V is a just a tune tweak and air box away from 315HP and 325 TQ, as evidenced by the Bullitt. Hopefully Ford gives the 2010 GT at least that.

 

 

 

I'm not so sure about that. The new 5.0L 4V appears to be making numbers on par with the LS3 6.2, and despite the LSXs power they don't rev as freely or as smoothly as a good 4V Modular.

 

I hear ya on the Cobra / Cobra R IRS. However, I don't think that is really a fair comparison in all honesty though. The reason that I say that: The IRS was basically a rigged up setup on the Fox bodies. Ford designed the new platform with bolt-on IRS capabilities from the beginning, but then dumped the IRS at the last minute for cost savings - IIRC.

 

I guess I can't speak on the LS3 motor since I've never actually been in a vehicle with one, but the LS1s are definitely pretty smooth for pushrod power.

[FoMoCobra]

Its just a typical article introducing the new Camaro and comparing it to what is currently available in the market.

 

Weight has still not been officially released and that is what seperates the men from the boys.

Even with 425 hp & 6 speed Manual I doubt the Camaro will break the 4.9 second 0-60 mark thanks to its expected weight of 4100+ pounds.

 

A stock manual GT w/300 hp will do 4.9-5.0 second runs all day long....

 

I would hope (and Imagine) that the next Shelby gets an indy rear.

[White99GT]

I hear ya on the Cobra / Cobra R IRS. However, I don't think that is really a fair comparison in all honesty though. The reason that I say that: The IRS was basically a rigged up setup on the Fox bodies. Ford designed the new platform with bolt-on IRS capabilities from the beginning, but then dumped the IRS at the last minute for cost savings - IIRC.

 

I guess I can't speak on the LS3 motor since I've never actually been in a vehicle with one, but the LS1s are definitely pretty smooth for pushrod power.

 

The Cobra IRS is actually pretty good once you upgrade bushings, so I'm not sure the geometry was as big of a problem as some made it out to be.

 

LSXs are not smooth revvers, at least not when compared to a 4V Mod motor. 4V always feel like they want to rev and they like it when you let them, LS1/LS2/LS3 seem much less comfortable over 4,000 rpm. Driven, raced and worked on many.

[Ford-150]

that article throws around HP so much that i would not even consider it journalism.....it's unprofessional and seems like it was written by a fanboy

 

its like reading an article from 5.0 Mustang about a Mustang. Except 5.0 Mustang are Mustang enthusiasts and Edmunds is supposed to be unbiased towards bashing

 

but the Mustang does need an IRS at least as an option....is it in all possible to literally take the one from the Falcon and bolt it onto a Mustang?

 

also the Mustang GT seems to be pretty fast with 300 HP or everybody is just slow with 400+....

Edited July 20, 2008 by Ford-150

[papilgee4evaeva]

Edmunds said that GM expects the LS3 V8 to achieve 15/23 mpg, due to cylinder deactivation.

 

They better have AFM, as the same engine without it in the upcoming G8 GXP was predicted to make 13/18 as reported by Motor Trend.

[jpd80]

Weight has still not been officially released and that is what seperates the men from the boys.

Even with 425 hp & 6 speed Manual I doubt the Camaro will break the 4.9 second 0-60 mark thanks to its expected weight of 4100+ pounds.

Behave, the donor Zeta - Pontiac G8 isn't even 4,000 lb!

I'd expect the Camaro to be about 3700 lb or about 300 lb lighter than the G8/Commodore.

 

And btw, the 425 hp Aussie Holden HSV R8 pulls 0-60 in 5.1 and 13.2 quarter mile

so expect better than this for the lighter Camaro!!

 

Head-to-head: HSV v FPV

We head to the race track to see which is Australia's fastest car, the HSV ClubSport R8 or the FPV F6.

Edited July 20, 2008 by jpd80

[Extreme4x4]

Leaked information from Mondays press release say the base weight (V6), will be 3750 appx. They are guessing 3900+ on the V8. Official HP for the 3.6L V6 is 296. The 6.2L V8 (SS) will have 416hp.

 

All that really remains to be seen is the price.

[White99GT]

Behave, the donor Zeta - Pontiac G8 isn't even 4,000 lb!

I'd expect the Camaro to be about 3700 lb or about 300 lb lighter than the G8/Commodore.

 

And btw, the 425 hp Aussie Holden HSV R8 pulls 0-60 in 5.1 and 13.2 quarter mile

so expect better than this for the lighter Camaro!!

 

Head-to-head: HSV v FPV

We head to the race track to see which is Australia's fastest car, the HSV ClubSport R8 or the FPV F6.

 

The Pontiac G8 GXP (6.2) weighs 4050 lbs. minimum. The Camaro SS is going to be fairly close to that in weight, see Charger/Challenger for evidence.

 

If the new V6 Camaro weighs 3700 lbs., a 3.5/3.7 V6 Mustang @ 265-275 HP will beat it consistently.

 

The current Mustang V6 weighs 3350 lbs., the 3.5 would only drop that number down even lower.

 

So much for the the 3700 lb. V6 Camaro outrunning the 3450 lb. Mustang GT.

[theVengineguy]

Camaro is nice, and I believe it deserves the proper recognition. However, what is the starting price gonna be? I do not see an I4 producing 200 hp, I do not see a cheap no frills model. If Camaro starts at $23K, assuming a 296hp V6, 6 speed, limited slip, which $23K sounds about right, this car is not going to be a beacon for GM. Problem with cars like this is when everyone who wants one gets it, they are done. The current Mustang embodies this, along with the last Thunderbird, SRT10's, Chevy SSR, Challenger, GTO, Viper, PT Cruiser, etc. They need to get the Camaro down to $15-18K for it to be affordable for the youth, and to carry on the bowtie legacy.