30 OTT 6 Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 GM had a press release describing the performance and weight of the new Camaro: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/14/2016-chevy-camaro-performance-figures/ These are GM's numbers so they might be a bit rosier. But the fact remains, the weight advantage the Mustang had is now gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 It is going to be difficult for the Mustang during the next several years.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 These cars have their fans on both sides. They will buy what they want. I confess the Camero is a great improvement on what was already there. The Mustang is an all new design. The comparisons will be interesting to see. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 MT's instruments pulled a 5.6s 0-60 w/the EB 2.3, Autoblog clocked 5.1s w/the EB 2.3, which are comparable w/the GM V6. So I don't think the Mustang's going to have "too hard a time" over the next few years. The Camaro is not a transformational car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92LX302 Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 10 Speed Automatic + DI should help the Mustang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 (edited) MT's instruments pulled a 5.6s 0-60 w/the EB 2.3, Autoblog clocked 5.1s w/the EB 2.3, which are comparable w/the GM V6. So I don't think the Mustang's going to have "too hard a time" over the next few years. The Camaro is not a transformational car. 4.0 is for the 8 speed auto. 4.3 for the manual. GT/ manual is in that area depending on who tested it. If the mustang gets the 10 speed auto it'll probably be close also. Edited September 14, 2015 by MY93SHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Perhaps some of that new Alcoa aluminum may help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 MT's instruments pulled a 5.6s 0-60 w/the EB 2.3, Autoblog clocked 5.1s w/the EB 2.3, which are comparable w/the GM V6. So I don't think the Mustang's going to have "too hard a time" over the next few years. The Camaro is not a transformational car. Yeah, too many variables unless the cars are run under the same conditions on the same day and with same test equipment. The Mustangs may be closer than seems at first glance, especially if the refresh includes some more weight reduction to counter the new Camaro's advantage... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-S Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 On any given day with any given driver and any given car performance results will vary. Besides, no one is probably going to buy a Camaro or a Mustang based solely on performance. It will be interesting to see the sales results though because that's what really matters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 On any given day with any given driver and any given car performance results will vary. Besides, no one is probably going to buy a Camaro or a Mustang based solely on performance. It will be interesting to see the sales results though because that's what really matters. Agreed. If you want a Mustang, you're not going to the Camaro or Challenger because they might be 1/10 faster on paper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 In the 1990's the Mustang was slower then the F-body twins, but yet still outsold it. Not sure what happened with the past couple years with the Camaro outselling the Mustang, but I'm attributing that partly to pent up demand from it being out of production for so long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 It appears the new Camaro will have more interior options and the convertible operation is a step up from the Mustang. I was hoping to buy a Mustang this year.. instead, we ordered a new truck this month. Looking forward to the Mustang vs Camaro testing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 In the 1990's the Mustang was slower then the F-body twins, but yet still outsold it. Not sure what happened with the past couple years with the Camaro outselling the Mustang, but I'm attributing that partly to pent up demand from it being out of production for so long. My understanding of the Mustang success of the late 80s and early 90s is the volume was being driven by the LX 4 cyl. as a sporty economy car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 It appears the new Camaro will have more interior options and the convertible operation is a step up from the Mustang. I was hoping to buy a Mustang this year.. instead, we ordered a new truck this month. Looking forward to the Mustang vs Camaro testing. Congrats on the new truck. I see it in your sig, but what's the specs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think it's safe to say that brand, price and styling have a much more significant effect on sales than a few tenths of a second on a racetrack. Attempts to one up the other in raw performance is just ego and bragging rights, not actual sales results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I think it's safe to say that brand, price and styling have a much more significant effect on sales than a few tenths of a second on a racetrack. Attempts to one up the other in raw performance is just ego and bragging rights, not actual sales results. Mind you, that 6.2 DI and 8-speed auto power train is a mighty slick unit. Any car that claims 12flat for the quarter for that price is good value. While the 5.0 in the heavier Mustang would struggle to equal that performance, I have a hunch that aside from GT350, Ford could do something interesting with the next gen 3.5 Ecoboost at the right price to level the scores in terms of weight and performance..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 Mind you, that 6.2 DI and 8-speed auto power train is a mighty slick unit. Any car that claims 12flat for the quarter for that price is good value. While the 5.0 in the heavier Mustang would struggle to equal that performance, I have a hunch that aside from GT350, Ford could do something interesting with the next gen 3.5 Ecoboost at the right price to level the scores in terms of weight and performance..... Perhaps a lighter Mustang with a new transmission could level the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.