Why are mustangs faster?

[Topher3134]

I think they gained 10 hp. But the whole car was reworked

[stlrammer]

The real question is, "Would you rather be seen in a Camaro or a Mustang?"

[VADER SS L99]

The 2011-2013 Mustang is faster from model to model mostly because of the weight difference and add to the fact that it has better gearing and a SRA and there you go. Their auto car also gets a true Coyote 5.0 with great trans gearing unlike our auto car that gets a lackluster SUV/truck motor called the L99.

So what if they have had a faster car for 2-3 years. It doesnt make up for the fact that the Mustang has been getting its butt kicked model for model from 67-2002, and 2010. From 1998 to 2011 it took them 13years to surpass the performance of a LS1 F-body. Thats pretty sad. The tables have turned for now. The Mustang has always out sold the Camaro but not been as fast. Now the Camaro is out selling the Mustang but isn't as fast.

[Deki]

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

So what if they have had a faster car for 2-3 years. It doesnt make up for the fact that the Mustang has been getting its butt kicked model for model from 67-2002, and 2010. From 1998 to 2011 it took them 13years to surpass the performance of a LS1 F-body. Thats pretty sad. The tables have turned for now. The Mustang has always out sold the Camaro but not been as fast. Now the Camaro is out selling the Mustang but isn't as fast.

I agree. I owned a 4th Gen Fbody, and I never understood why people would buy the Mustang over a Camaro/Firebird when it came to performance. However, the Mustang outsold the Camaro and Firebird 2 to 1 combined, and it was because it was easier to see out of, had a usable trunk, and had a better driving position. Ford didn't have to fight the performance fight, their sales were there regardless. In my opinion, it's the 5th Gen that made the Mustang the performer it is today, otherwise Ford would have been putting that anemic 3V in it still.

Funny enough, now that the Camaro has been re-released for 2010+, it still has the same poor visibility and less usable trunk, but it's outselling the Mustang. Weird how things change. I think that trend will decline as the novelty of the re-release wears off, but I hope good sales still continue for GM.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by Deki

I agree. I owned a 4th Gen Fbody, and I never understood why people would buy the Mustang over a Camaro/Firebird when it came to performance. However, the Mustang outsold the Camaro and Firebird 2 to 1 combined, and it was because it was easier to see out of, had a usable trunk, and had a better driving position. Ford didn't have to fight the performance fight, their sales were there regardless. In my opinion, it's the 5th Gen that made the Mustang the performer it is today, otherwise Ford would have been putting that anemic 3V in it still.

Funny enough, now that the Camaro has been re-released for 2010+, it still has the same poor visibility and less usable trunk, but it's outselling the Mustang. Weird how things change. I think that trend will decline as the novelty of the re-release wears off, but I hope good sales still continue for GM.

I think it's kinda wierd we consider 300 hp and 320 ft-lbs anemic these days.

[8AD•SS]

They edge a little stock for stock, weight mostly but gears aren't in our favor either but it's all good. Always someone a little faster and most (most not all) who are really concerned with winning the race aren't going to leave their car stock. So now it becomes a pay to play scenario. As long as you love what you have and what your doing with it a little time here and there from the factory shouldn't matter. Just my .02 cents.

Mike.

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by Coyotekiller

More power? What did they do? Add an intake kit and give it 5 HP?

They claimed to have reworked a few things to bump it from 412 to 420. I think in reality, they just under-rated it to begin with and started advertising it as a little closer to the actual number...kinda like how the V6 Camaro has 304, and then suddenly had 312 the next year.

Originally Posted by Rock36

I think it's kinda wierd we consider 300 hp and 320 ft-lbs anemic these days.

I know, isn't it great? These are the good old days.

[GrabberB5.Slow]

Originally Posted by Coyotekiller

More power? What did they do? Add an intake kit and give it 5 HP?

Upgraded Pistons for late 2012 models to 2013 models. Some early 2013 models don't have oil squirters either, but some late 2013 model owners have said that Ford put them back in. And 412hp was a little under rated to begin with.

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

The 2011-2013 Mustang is faster from model to model mostly because of the weight difference and add to the fact that it has better gearing and a SRA and there you go. Their auto car also gets a true Coyote 5.0 with great trans gearing unlike our auto car that gets a lackluster SUV/truck motor called the L99.

So what if they have had a faster car for 2-3 years. It doesnt make up for the fact that the Mustang has been getting its butt kicked model for model from 67-2002, and 2010. From 1998 to 2011 it took them 13years to surpass the performance of a LS1 F-body. Thats pretty sad. The tables have turned for now. The Mustang has always out sold the Camaro but not been as fast. Now the Camaro is out selling the Mustang but isn't as fast.

But the Camaro wasn't faster for the 03-09 model years .

Just bustin' your chops buddy, but seriously the gap between has alot to do with why the Camaro outsells the Mustang right now IMO.

[C5RocksC5]

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

The 2011-2013 Mustang is faster from model to model mostly because of the weight difference and add to the fact that it has better gearing and a SRA and there you go. Their auto car also gets a true Coyote 5.0 with great trans gearing unlike our auto car that gets a lackluster SUV/truck motor called the L99.

So what if they have had a faster car for 2-3 years. It doesnt make up for the fact that the Mustang has been getting its butt kicked model for model from 67-2002, and 2010. From 1998 to 2011 it took them 13years to surpass the performance of a LS1 F-body. Thats pretty sad. The tables have turned for now. The Mustang has always out sold the Camaro but not been as fast. Now the Camaro is out selling the Mustang but isn't as fast.

Perhaps my memory fails me but I thought 5.0s in the 90s were faster in the than the Camaros.

[Coyotekiller]

Originally Posted by pdari

Perhaps my memory fails me but I thought 5.0s in the 90s were faster in the than the Camaros.

Stock for stock, no.

[Chrisco22]

stock for stock im 3-3 against 10-12 v6 mustangs. just saying.

[Try666me]

Originally Posted by stlrammer

The real question is, "Would you rather be seen in a Camaro or a Mustang?"

+1

I'd rather drive a Camaro SS that runs 13's vs a Mustang that runs 10's!


But like veryone has said, gearing and the little bit of weight the camaros have over the 5.0. Really stock vs stock its a drivers race.

[ChrisBlair]

Originally Posted by Rock36

I think it's kinda wierd we consider 300 hp and 320 ft-lbs anemic these days.

My flipping 2.0L four cylinder had 340 ft/lbs with the full GM factory warranty!

When you consider that back in the day HP was gross, not brake, that 2.0L I4 made more HP (290 bhp) and torque than many V8s did in the day. That's impressive

Actually, the LS3 is slightly wanting in the torque department, in order to move the freight of an SS. Another 50 lb/ft and the car would be something else

[lexlueger]

Originally Posted by Try666me

+1

I'd rather drive a Camaro SS that runs 13's vs a Mustang that runs 10's!