09-20-2015, 04:04 PM | #71 |
Drives: 16' 2SS M6 Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 573
|
Camaro only for me....would not own and do not like Mustang period. Love the styling of the Challenger, but too heavy and love the modding options of the LS engines.
|
09-20-2015, 08:54 PM | #72 |
Iron fist, lead foot
Drives: 2003 Mustang Cobra Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,228
|
I'm a Mustang fan...obviously. But I do respect Camaro. Competition makes everyone better. However as far as GM pony cars go, I've always preferred Firebirds. Pontiac was always my favorite GM subbrand. Seeing it die really was hard.
__________________
'03 SVT Cobra-SC4.6L V8 || modded with mods'n'stuff
|
09-20-2015, 09:31 PM | #73 | |
Drives: 2014 Camaro SS Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,006
|
Quote:
For instance, I certainly like the Camaro more than I do a Mustang. But I'd be dishonest to say I hate it, or dislike it. No, quite the opposite, the Mustang is one hellova machine. If I could afford it, I'd have a Mustang right next to the Camaro in my garage. And a Challenger, and a M4, and a GTR, and a 911, etc. Save the hate for a Prius or something. But, to your point, I do hold a special place in my heart for Camaros - my dad had two when I was growing up - and new gen HEMIs - my dad and I have supercharged two of them, one still sits in his garage, never to be sold.
__________________
SOLD: 2014 Camaro Coupe 2SS/RS M6 Blue Ray Metallic, NPP, Nav
2014 Stingray Premiere Edition Coupe #142/500 Z51 3LT M7 Laguna Blue, Magride, NPP, Exposed Carbon Fiber Roof, Carbon Fiber Dash, Suede Wrapped Interior Canceled: 2016 Camaro Coupe 1AK37 2SS Coupe, G7E Garnet Red, BRJ Adrenaline Red Trim, F55 Magnetic Ride, NPP Exhaust, CF5 Sunroof, 56R Gray Split spoke w/ machined face, RN2 LPO Illuminated Bowtie, VYW Premium Floor Mats, W2D LPO Cargo Net |
|
09-20-2015, 10:22 PM | #74 | |
Drives: 14 Silverado LTZ Z71, 16 Camaro SS Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Posts: 4,407
|
Quote:
Although my like for the mustang is probably at an all time low right now...how a lot of the owners/fans are acting lately is just something for the ages. I know its not the mustangs fault...but the thought of being associated with them makes me nauseous at this point in time. |
|
09-21-2015, 01:49 AM | #75 |
I like the Camaro SS, Mustang GT & Challenger SRT8 enough that I bought all 3 new within an 18 month time frame. I have owned every gen of Camaro + a few Firebirds and have own 1/2 doz Mustangs.
__________________
It's nice to have options.
|
|
09-21-2015, 11:40 AM | #76 | |
Drives: 2014 Fusion Hybrid... for now! Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: midwest
Posts: 14
|
Quote:
The Challenger was beautiful, but offered less in visceral thrills than the other three. The 2011 GT500 got a bigger blower from Ford Racing (their Super Pak) shortly after I bought it; if not for my gimpy left leg, I'd probably still have it today. Turned the ZL1 back in to the dealership when I was laid off at the start of 2014. Hope to get a 2SS Camaro this coming spring if the stars align. |
|
09-21-2015, 01:52 PM | #77 | |
Iron fist, lead foot
Drives: 2003 Mustang Cobra Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,228
|
Quote:
Now, don't get me wrong, I understand that execution plays a huge part. But I just feel that hating an inanimate object is too much of a waste of time and effort.
__________________
'03 SVT Cobra-SC4.6L V8 || modded with mods'n'stuff
Last edited by crysalis_01; 09-21-2015 at 08:09 PM. |
|
09-21-2015, 02:34 PM | #78 | |
Drives: 2011 Camaro 2ss Join Date: May 2013
Location: nj
Posts: 1,559
|
Quote:
|
|
09-21-2015, 03:00 PM | #79 |
Drives: 1SS, A8, MRC, NPP, Blade Spoiler Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,485
|
I like both. Growing up, my father had two different '66 Mustangs (the first was a 289 stick, and the second was an inline six with auto). But my uncle was a GM dealer (Chevy mostly, but other GM products as well throughout the years), so we got discounts on what he sold.
My take on the latest versions: The Mustang still looks like a Mustang which is a good thing. But the front end looks a bit too corporate. I can live with that, but the back end looks horrible. Way to plastic looking. I like the Coyote engine, but wish it was DI and a bit larger displacement. It revs well through the RPM range, but feels a little light on the low end. Thank god they finally put IRS in the Mustang. Long overdue. I don't like how they structured the models, as the V6 looks like it's only for fleet sales now. The turbo 4 is too heavy. The brakes on the performance pack are completely overkill, and will be a big wake-up call for folks who have them once they find out the price to replace the pads and/or rotors. That should have been a seperate option. I also don't like how the 6th Gen Mustang doesn't out perform the 5th. Fail. The Camaro looks great to me. I know others wanted a more radical change, but I didn't want that. The 5th Gen looked great so the 6th Gen looks even better. The rear end is not as good as the original 5th Gen rear, but it's growing on me. Love the rest in terms of external looks. Interior wise, I love the updated look, but don't like the Pink Floyd Laser Light Show stuff. Performance wise, Chevy hit a grand slam walk-off home run (based off of what we know so far), and I think this thing is going to spank the Mustang in all categories except price. I would have liked to see the electronic differential in the Camaro, or at least a Torsen rear. Also would have loved to see the performance data recorder as an option as well. The six piston Brembo option should have been a factory option instead of a dealer option, so it would be cheaper for those who want it (don't think I would want it). I haven't driven the LT1 yet, but some say it drops off a bit in the higher RPMs. I suspect that is true by looking at the dyno charts. But perhaps that is because it puts out such great torque in the low and mid ranges. It still puts out more torque than the Coyote accross the whole RPM range, so can't complain about that. Nothing is perfect I guess, but both the LT1 and Coyote are great engines as far as I am concerned. So, overall, I like the Camaro better, but if there was only the Mustang available (like there used to be for many years), I would own one no problem. There in lies the rub: if there were no Camaro, the Mustang would not be as good as it is now. Competition is great for consumers. |
09-21-2015, 03:30 PM | #80 | |
Drives: Hopefully 6th gen Camaro Join Date: May 2015
Location: Socal
Posts: 586
|
Quote:
|
|
09-22-2015, 03:19 AM | #81 |
Drives: AUDI 80 Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 151
|
@whiteboyblues2001
i agree with you on near all things. Performance data recorder as in the C7 would be a very nice option, indeed. And for the 6piston bremboīs i hope they will deliver it as std. or at least an option to europe as the Ford sells itīs PP as std. in ALL Stangīs for our faster autobahn driving. But one thing i will not give up to complain about it; the oldschool pushrodīs V8 from chevy. I drove the coyote some thousands of km and chevyīs V8 in a Camaro 2012 and that LT1 in C7 for only 1000km but i said it and say it again; these pushrods have good torque from the cellar but thatīs it, over 4000rpm it breathes hard and rev up to limit let me feel bad for it....for sporty driving i like the coyote better, much more lively. You dont feel the few hp left but a little less torque at low end of course with 1.2ltr left. Perhaps itīs due to our more sporty driving daily on autobahn why most europeans like a broader usable rev band more? Chevyīs fable to hold on on pushrods only! for the V8īs remembers me at the outgoing Ford policy where Mustangs came 10years with completely outdated life rearaxles. We have in germany some Mustang tuners and they did their best but never could match a modern IRS....a pushrod with same capacity as a modern DOHC will always have less power/torque, worse mpg and emission data. I remember my dadīsold BMW M6 from 2005 with itīs 5.0 n/a V10 cranking out 507hp at 7800rpm? i dont know anymore but these rpmīs are not possible with psuhrods and only 2valves/cyl. AUDIīs 4.2 n/a V8 in the RS5 cranks out 450 hp like the LT1 with 2ltr !! less capacity and i bet it is not heavier. i was told to be a troll in that opinion but i dont care about that because facts always beats fanboys ;-) Last edited by Noob; 09-22-2015 at 03:43 AM. |
09-22-2015, 08:40 AM | #82 | |
Drives: 1SS, A8, MRC, NPP, Blade Spoiler Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,485
|
Quote:
While it is possible to rev higher with pushrods (the LS7 redlines at 7,000 rpm), everything has it's tradeoffs. When you put your peak HP at high rpm's you have to shape your cam to move the peak torque near the peak HP. This removes torque from down low. Using variable valve timing and direct injection helps to broaden the torque curve across all rmp's. This helps both OHC and OHV engines. I suspect that the free reving you feel from the Coyote is largely due to the variable valve timing giving you better low end torque while the OHC lets you rev higher. Adding VVT to the pushrod engine helps with the upper end on the OHV engine, BUT in GM's implimentation, there is only one cam, so you can not adjust the exhaust and intake valves sparately. This may be partly responsible for the drop off in the high end on the LT1. BUT, keep in mind that it is mostly emissions and fuel efficiency that is making the GM engineers tune the cam to a non agressive profile. If you were to replace the cam with a more agressive one, the top end would open up very nicely. Of course you won't get as good of gas mileage, but it's all a trade off. WIth that said, some of the information you posted is factually inacurate. An OHC engine will NOT put out more torque than and OHV engine. All that happens when you switch to an OHC engine is you can rev a bit higher. Since HP=TQ x RPM/5252 you ONLY add HP NOT torque! So let's say you and I are both engineers at a car company who wants to make it's existing engine significanly more powerfull. You decide to add OHC to the engine, and I decide to add displacement. Your engine will add HP at the top end, and everything else will remain the same. My engine will add low end torque, mid range torque, high end torque, low end HP, mid range HP, and high end HP. How is yours better again? It's not. Why is it not? Because folks like you keep comparing and OHV engine with a OHC engine of the same displacement. But in the real world displacement wins. Take a look at the 2016 SS and the 2016 Mustang GT. The Camaro blows the GT away in performance across the board! Sure it redlines at 6500 instead of 7000, but that is no comfort when losing the race! My main issue with OHC is you HAVE TO rev the engine to get power. It feels to me like you always have to downshift and make the engine scream to get any use out of it. I like there to be power in every rpm range. I don't want to HAVE to downshift. I would like to to be an option of course, but I don't want to have to do it to make power. Feels lame. Last edited by whiteboyblues2001; 09-22-2015 at 09:07 AM. |
|
09-22-2015, 09:26 AM | #83 | |
Drives: 2005 Cobalt Base - 5 speed Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Ohio
Posts: 444
|
Quote:
http://www.camaro6.com/forums/attach...1&d=1441539404 Considering physical space (which, you know, is kind of a concern given that we all operate in physical space), an OHV engine will always be capable of more displacement, power, and torque, with equal fuel economy and emissions as a similarly sized OHC engine (compare the 2015 mustang with the 5.0 to the 2015 camaro with the 6.2 for fuel economy). |
|
09-22-2015, 09:29 AM | #84 | |
Drives: 1SS, A8, MRC, NPP, Blade Spoiler Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,485
|
Quote:
Very true. GM considered OHC when they were developing the LT1, but it's too big (especailly too tall) to fit in the Corvette. Can you imagine trying to fit a supercharged OHC engine into the Corvette? Not going to happen. But the LT4 fits nicely. |
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|