[Fraxum]

Personal experience here. My friend's auto 2013 GT Auto ran some low 12.4s bone stock. He ran 12.5s bone stock with his 2015 auto GT. With his 2015 he is running 11.9s with DRs, a homemade CAI, and a canned tune.

So I think an auto 5.0 GT with the driver mod is a close run for a M6 '16 SS. Drivers race actually. Most of the M6 5.0s are much closer to 5th gen Camaros at the track.

[z28guy30]

Here is what the typical race will look like... https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=NCaixy1SFew

[JFM-jr]

Originally Posted by Fraxum

Personal experience here. My friend's auto 2013 GT Auto ran some low 12.4s bone stock. He ran 12.5s bone stock with his 2015 auto GT. With his 2015 he is running 11.9s with DRs, a homemade CAI, and a canned tune.

So I think an auto 5.0 GT with the driver mod is a close run for a M6 '16 SS. Drivers race actually. Most of the M6 5.0s are much closer to 5th gen Camaros at the track.

I have a friend with a 2014 and I agree its pretty quick and good for low 12s. For some reason the 16 GT is a slug I know its heavier than the prior years.

[z28guy30]

Back when I had my 5th gen Camaro SS (manual) my friend and I both drove each other's cars and I admitted his 2014 Mustang GT (manual)with CAI, and Catback felt faster than my car. It does not compare to the way my 2016 1SS (A8) pulls though. I would go as far to say the GT350 vs Camaro SS is a closer race in the 1/4 than the Camaro SS vs Mustang GT

[oldman]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

You're in for an extremely rude awakening.

Think not, I know how to spin a wrench. heads / headers / cam on this car will NOT be as hard as a LT1 and probably equal to a ls1. We all know the 5.0 is NEAR IMPOSSIBLE to work on, hence it is always CAI, exhaust and tune. Heads and cam(s), ain't gonna happen on a 5.0 for the vast majority of the owners.

So I've already stated the Mustang niche, CAI, tune, decat exhaust, DR and a banzai launch, prep track. Well that ain't working on the street as already stated. By this time next year a cam / head package is going to bring my ride upto 550+ HP for 2K, and that ain't ever going to happen on the 5.0. It is 5x the cost per HP. So stock for stock mod for mod it is all 6gen.

Enter the one trick pony, tune, CAI, decat exhaust, DR i can do xyz.. Meaning low 12s to mid 12s on the street at best. This is exactly the LS1 vs Cobra of the late 90s.

Face it HP and torque make for a better street car vs gears, DR and a launch. Two ways to skin the 1/4 mile cat, but only one works in the real world.



Oh and don't worry, there will be guys with 6th gen, DR, bolt ons and either a converter for the A8, or 4.10 for the M6 in the mid 11s by summer.


Here Diablo says 28 HP for a 5.0 with tune and CAI:
https://www.diablosport.com/vehicles...stang-50l.html

for the LT1 20 to 25 HP
https://www.diablosport.com/vehicles...06-tuning.html

so basically a wash, but it is SO easy to go from there on the LT1, and near impossible on the 5.0.

Let me know how your .83g ride handles.

[96MrBass]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

Isn't this where we start hearing about how ugly the Camaro is, the "real world" of SCCA and the golden ratio?

You forgot the it doesn't look like a muscle car anymore and it's so small that you can't see out of it lol.

[z28guy30]

Originally Posted by 96MrBass

You forgot the it doesn't look like a muscle car anymore and it's so small that you can't see out of it lol.

Compared to the 5th gen Camaro the new Camaro does look small, but that is because the 5th gen is a pig.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by z28guy30

I see some Mustang guys have the same opinion on here. As I said in the original post though...there is a half a second difference between the two cars.

This mostly stems from them wanting to believe the higher revving lower torque dohc design is superior/faster if the two motors were in the same car.

With the cars weighing within 100lbs of each other now and only a 20 hp difference a lot of the mustang crowd wants to think the difference is .2 or so. They have gearing and torque multiplication figured etc and most seem to think torque means nothing. Some would rather rev another few hundred rpm and feel special.

They are now finding out the hard way that the no bottom end feminine powerband of the Ford OHC motors will not compete with both using IRS and both similar weight. The s197 advantage was from a 300lb weight disparity as well as having a solid rear axle.

Admitting it is more just proves what most of us have known since the introduction of the ls1. Ill take the cubes, pushrods and torque any day. Ill change one cam and gain more and spend less than you doing 4. The list goes on. In the NA game this is nothing new. They've never had the torch. They just thought they did.

If the ls3 was in the new Camaro it would still beat the GT. By a good few tenths. The LS2 would be interesting.

They do take to FI very well I must admit.

[z28guy30]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

This mostly stems from them wanting to believe the higher revving lower torque dohc design is superior/faster if the two motors were in the same car.

With the cars weighing within 100lbs of each other now and only a 20 hp difference a lot of the mustang crowd wants to think the difference is .2 or so. They have gearing and torque multiplication figured etc and most seem to think torque means nothing. Some would rather rev another few hundred rpm and feel special.
Well they are now finding out the hard way that the no bottom end feminine powerband of the Ford OHC motors will not compete with both using IRS and both similar weight. The s197 advantage was from a 300lb weight disparity as well as having a solid rear axle.

Admitting it is more just proves what most of us have known since the introduction of the ls1. Ill take the cubes, displacement and torque any day. Ill change one cam and gain more and spend less than you doing 4. The list goes on. In the NA game this is nothing new. They've never had the torch. They just thought they did.

They do take to FI very well I must admit.

You seem to get it. I hate to go into magazine comparisons but I saw someone posted them earlier. Every magazine test on the 2016 Camaro SS has resulted in a 12.3-12.5 1/4 mile. Since 2011... every magazine test I have seen on the 5.0 Mustang never got below a 12.8 in the 1/4 mile. Crazy how people are claiming 12.4-12.5 on a bone stock GT. It definitely can't be common. People have claimed to have ran 11.9-12.0 in the new Camaro but it is rare.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

This mostly stems from them wanting to believe the higher revving lower torque dohc design is superior/faster if the two motors were in the same car.

With the cars weighing within 100lbs of each other now and only a 20 hp difference a lot of the mustang crowd wants to think the difference is .2 or so. They have gearing and torque multiplication figured etc and most seem to think torque means nothing. Some would rather rev another few hundred rpm and feel special.

They are now finding out the hard way that the no bottom end feminine powerband of the Ford OHC motors will not compete with both using IRS and both similar weight. The s197 advantage was from a 300lb weight disparity as well as having a solid rear axle.

Admitting it is more just proves what most of us have known since the introduction of the ls1. Ill take the cubes, pushrods and torque any day. Ill change one cam and gain more and spend less than you doing 4. The list goes on. In the NA game this is nothing new. They've never had the torch. They just thought they did.

If the ls3 was in the new Camaro it would still beat the GT. By a good few tenths. The LS2 would be interesting.

They do take to FI very well I must admit.

even in the LS1 days the Cobra guys for the most part junked the IRS..

[oldman]

Originally Posted by z28guy30

You seem to get it. I hate to go into magazine comparisons but I saw someone posted them earlier. Every magazine test on the 2016 Camaro SS has resulted in a 12.3-12.5 1/4 mile. Since 2011... every magazine test I have seen on the 5.0 Mustang never got below a 12.8 in the 1/4 mile. Crazy how people are claiming 12.4-12.5 on a bone stock GT. It definitely can't be common. People have claimed to have ran 11.9-12.0 in the new Camaro but it is rare.

The average Mustang is 13.0 and the Average Camaro is a 12.4. So .5 or more stock vs stock, mod vs mod. Limited to 220 wear street tires and a normal road HP and torque is gonna win by even a bigger margin vs rev and a launch.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by z28guy30

Compared to the 5th gen Camaro the new Camaro does look small, but that is because the 5th gen is a pig.

My Camaro is tiny parked next to my Challenger, it is closer to my Type R in size....

[ParisTNDude]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

You're a bit off on the Mustang times, but it's still not a drivers race.

Depending on gearing, the Mustang automatic averages between 12.6 and 12.8 in the 1/4 with 3.55's and between 12.7 and 12.9 with 3.15's. That's bone stock on stock 235 all seasons. 13's are certainly possible if the driver biffs it on the launch and spins, or hops the wheels and has to get out of it, etc.

The Camaro has run everything from a 11.9X in mine shaft, supernaturally good air all the way up to a 12.8X in SoCal.

Listening to many of your comments that, to me, seem to bash the 6th gen Camaro or elevate an inferior car to higher levels than they deserve, can I ask you a question?

When did you last own a Camaro and what is your daily driver now? Someone asked you that question back in December and you never answered.
There are times when your posts give the impression that you have spent a lot of time researching specifications on the 2016 Camaro and your comments are very accurate and informative. That's why I'm curious how or why you quote obvious false information such as this "average" drag strip performance of the Mustang. You've proven you can find factual information on the Camaro, but you most often highly exaggerate it's competitor's performance. Just curious.

[titanfan]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

Listening to many of your comments that, to me, seem to bash the 6th gen Camaro or elevate an inferior car to higher levels than they deserve, can I ask you a question?

When did you last own a Camaro and what is your daily driver now? Someone asked you that question back in December and you never answered.
There are times when your posts give the impression that you have spent a lot of time researching specifications on the 2016 Camaro and your comments are very accurate and informative. That's why I'm curious how or why you quote obvious false information such as this "average" drag strip performance of the Mustang. You've proven you can find factual information on the Camaro, but you most often highly exaggerate it's competitor's performance. Just curious.

Obviously, he's a troll. But why do you care, anyway? Is he not "Camaroish" enough for you to be participating on the forum?