View Poll Results: ?
The Camaro still has the edge.
24
17.39%
The Mustang now has the edge.
48
34.78%
It's a driver's race.
66
47.83%
Voters: 138. You may not vote on this poll
Test Data Comparo - LS3 Camaro SS vs 5.0 Mustang GT
#1
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Test Data Comparo - LS3 Camaro SS vs 5.0 Mustang GT
This thread contains all the test data the major review outlets have on the Camaro and repowered Mustang.
With all the test data in one place it gives everyone a better picture of how the performance of these cars compare to each other.
With all the test data in one place it gives everyone a better picture of how the performance of these cars compare to each other.
#2
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car and Driver
Camaro - March 2009
PRICE AS TESTED: $32,195 (base price: $30,995)
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 376 cu in, 6162cc
Power (SAE net): 426 bhp @ 5900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 112.3 in Length: 190.4 in Width: 75.5 in Height: 54.2 in
Curb weight: 3859 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 161 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.92 g
Camaro - July 2009
PRICE AS TESTED: $34,225 (base price: $30,995)
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 376 cu in, 6162cc
Power (SAE net): 426 bhp @ 5900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 162 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g
Mustang - March 2010
PRICE AS TESTED: $32,980 (base price: $30,495)
ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 302 cu in, 4951 cc
Power (SAE net): 412 bhp @ 6500 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 390 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in Length: 188.1 in Width: 73.9 in Height: 55.8 in
Curb weight: 3580 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.2 sec @ 109 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.94 g
Camaro - March 2009
PRICE AS TESTED: $32,195 (base price: $30,995)
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 376 cu in, 6162cc
Power (SAE net): 426 bhp @ 5900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 112.3 in Length: 190.4 in Width: 75.5 in Height: 54.2 in
Curb weight: 3859 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 161 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.92 g
Camaro - July 2009
PRICE AS TESTED: $34,225 (base price: $30,995)
ENGINE TYPE: pushrod 16-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 376 cu in, 6162cc
Power (SAE net): 426 bhp @ 5900 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 162 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g
Mustang - March 2010
PRICE AS TESTED: $32,980 (base price: $30,495)
ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 302 cu in, 4951 cc
Power (SAE net): 412 bhp @ 6500 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 390 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in Length: 188.1 in Width: 73.9 in Height: 55.8 in
Curb weight: 3580 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.2 sec @ 109 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 153 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.94 g
#3
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds
Camaro - March 2009
Price as-tested - $35,380
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 5
0-75 mph (sec.) 6.7
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.0 @ 110.9
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.7
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 109
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 68.6
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.88
Camaro - August 2009
Price as-tested - As-tested MSRP $36,825
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 5.0
0-75 mph (sec.) 6.8
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.1 @ 109.4
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.7
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 111
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 65.8
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.86g
Mustang - April 2010
Price as-tested - $40,035
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 4.8
0-75 mph (sec.) 7.0
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.0 @110.6
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.5
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 109
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.3
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.91g
Camaro - March 2009
Price as-tested - $35,380
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 5
0-75 mph (sec.) 6.7
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.0 @ 110.9
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.7
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 109
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 68.6
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.88
Camaro - August 2009
Price as-tested - As-tested MSRP $36,825
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 5.0
0-75 mph (sec.) 6.8
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.1 @ 109.4
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.7
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 111
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 65.8
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.86g
Mustang - April 2010
Price as-tested - $40,035
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 3.4
0-60 mph (sec.) 4.8
0-75 mph (sec.) 7.0
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.0 @110.6
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.5
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 109
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.3
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.91g
#4
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Motor Trend
Camaro - March 2009
Price as tested - $35,380
Curb weight - 3859 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.7
0-70mph - 5.8
0-80mph - 7.3
0-90mph - 8.8
0-100mph - 10.5
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 13.0 @ 111mph
Braking
60-0mph - 105 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.90g
Figure eight - 25.8 @ 0.80g average
Mustang - March 2010
Price as tested - $39,750
Curb weight - 3620 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.3
0-70mph - 5.5
0-80mph - 6.9
0-90mph - 8.5
0-100mph - 10.3
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 12.8 @ 110.8mph
Braking
60-0mph - 105 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.94g
Figure eight - 25.3 @ 0.75g average
Camaro and Mustang - July 2010
Camaro
Price as tested - $36,465
Curb weight - 3859 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.7
0-70mph - 5.8
0-80mph - 7.4
0-90mph - 8.9
0-100mph - 10.7
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 13.1 @ 110.8mph
Braking
60-0mph - 108 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.92g
Figure eight - 25.2 @ 0.73g average
Mustang
Price as tested - $39,755
Curb weight - 3612 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.4
0-70mph - 5.6
0-80mph - 6.8
0-90mph - 8.4
0-100mph - 10.2
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 12.7 @ 111.3mph
Braking
60-0mph - 104 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.97g
Figure eight - 24.7 @ 0.77g average
Camaro - March 2009
Price as tested - $35,380
Curb weight - 3859 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.7
0-70mph - 5.8
0-80mph - 7.3
0-90mph - 8.8
0-100mph - 10.5
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 13.0 @ 111mph
Braking
60-0mph - 105 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.90g
Figure eight - 25.8 @ 0.80g average
Mustang - March 2010
Price as tested - $39,750
Curb weight - 3620 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.3
0-70mph - 5.5
0-80mph - 6.9
0-90mph - 8.5
0-100mph - 10.3
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 12.8 @ 110.8mph
Braking
60-0mph - 105 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.94g
Figure eight - 25.3 @ 0.75g average
Camaro and Mustang - July 2010
Camaro
Price as tested - $36,465
Curb weight - 3859 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.7
0-70mph - 5.8
0-80mph - 7.4
0-90mph - 8.9
0-100mph - 10.7
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 13.1 @ 110.8mph
Braking
60-0mph - 108 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.92g
Figure eight - 25.2 @ 0.73g average
Mustang
Price as tested - $39,755
Curb weight - 3612 lb
Acceleration
0-60mph - 4.4
0-70mph - 5.6
0-80mph - 6.8
0-90mph - 8.4
0-100mph - 10.2
45-65mph - 2.1
1/4 - 12.7 @ 111.3mph
Braking
60-0mph - 104 ft
Handling
Max lateral g - 0.97g
Figure eight - 24.7 @ 0.77g average
Trending Topics
#9
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't say that. The Camaro is faster through the slalom in a few of these tests. It's also not far off at all on MT's figure eight.
That's hardly running away from the SS which the Mustang should given the weight difference. If anything that speaks volumes about how competent the Camaro suspension truly is.
That's hardly running away from the SS which the Mustang should given the weight difference. If anything that speaks volumes about how competent the Camaro suspension truly is.
#11
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,370
Likes: 0
Received 1,800 Likes
on
1,282 Posts
Neither seems to be a clear winner in the 1/4 mile category, I'd call it a driver's race (but I'd rather see comparasion data of auto vs auto to remove most of the driver error factor). As for 0-60, Mustang seems to be in front, they are either easier to launch/better set up for traction, and/or the gearing-to-weight & power ratio is in favor of the Mustang. But, with 1mph or less of trap speed difference between the two, in a typical street-style roll race they would be nearly equal.
I think they are excellent competition for each other. I don't see either as a clear-cut overall winner.
I think they are excellent competition for each other. I don't see either as a clear-cut overall winner.
#12
Both appear to be AMAZING performance cars for the money and if I were in the market right now I would have a VERY difficult time deciding on one over the other. So yes, "competition" has definitely improved the breed here, both companies have done their homework.
#13
TECH Addict
iTrader: (30)
i think considering that the SS is CHEAPER than the mustang in all the tests(at least i'm pretty sure) i think it's safe to say it may be the better bang for the buck considering how close they are overall. Imagine what you can do with the money you saved It always seemed that in previous Gens the Mustang was always cheaper than the Camaro and now in order to get a decently equiped 5.0 it's gonna cost ya more.
#14
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think considering that the SS is CHEAPER than the mustang in all the tests(at least i'm pretty sure) i think it's safe to say it may be the better bang for the buck considering how close they are overall. Imagine what you can do with the money you saved It always seemed that in previous Gens the Mustang was always cheaper than the Camaro and now in order to get a decently equiped 5.0 it's gonna cost ya more.
The Camaro is entirely new from the ground up with modern engineering and a clean-sheet design inside and out. Also to have Brembo brakes on the Mustang (which it had for all the tests) you have to pay an addtional $1600 over the base price. They come standard on the Camaro SS.
If anything you'd think Ford would undercut the price of the Camaro big-time since they've been making this Mustang awhile.
#15
11 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: anozirA
Posts: 1,597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would give the edge to the Mustang stock for stock no doubt about that.
Modded N/A, I have the feeling the LS3 is going to put a hurting on anything that 5.0 is going to pull out.
Boosted? Who knows. Probably the exact same ballgame we are playing right now (whoever has the deepest pockets, wins), except the mustang has a few more cubes.
Modded N/A, I have the feeling the LS3 is going to put a hurting on anything that 5.0 is going to pull out.
Boosted? Who knows. Probably the exact same ballgame we are playing right now (whoever has the deepest pockets, wins), except the mustang has a few more cubes.
#16
#17
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no problem paying for a 35k Camaro SS, but 40 large for a standard Mustang GT is a bit hard to swallow. Especially considering Ford was selling the same car with the 4.6 a few years ago for less than 30 grand.
#19
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might be a little more to get the Brembo brakes and whatnot to match to Camaro, but every Mustang test that I've seen the car has been LOADED. Glass roof, track pack, etc. So I imagine that they would be pretty close if they were equipped similarly.