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
04-29-2010, 04:33 PM
#61
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2011 GT will be a 12 second car in the hands of actual owners who can drive. Period. Mag drivers are generally a few tenths off of what a decent driver can pull with adequate seat time. All of this has been discussed (to death I might add). Most everyone who knows a thing or two in here has said from the very beginning that these two cars were going to be a drivers' race. That was the prediction of most, and it is pretty much reality now. Stop picking apart magazine times trying to find some sort of divine bit of information that confirms all that you which to be true. I don't recall ANYONE touting that the GT was going to trounce the SS across the board definitively (especially not in here), so I'm somewhat confused by all the reverse-conspiracy theorists that have cropped up lately because a couple of mags didn't run as fast in the GT as others.
My theory on why MT ran better times in the GT than anyone else: they probably spent more time running it down the track than most other mags did. You want to call that bias, well maybe it is. I don't know. Blame that on the MT guys, not the GT.
My theory on why MT ran better times in the GT than anyone else: they probably spent more time running it down the track than most other mags did. You want to call that bias, well maybe it is. I don't know. Blame that on the MT guys, not the GT.
Last edited by ThisBlood147; 04-29-2010 at 04:39 PM.
04-29-2010, 05:30 PM
#62
http://forums.themustangsource.com/s...84#post5855884
Not to make excuses or anything but it was just one pass, a bad 2.1 sixty foot (track was a little greasy) and only 70 miles on the car (a lot of those press cars have plenty of (but well broken in) hard miles on them when they reach the magazine testers).
04-29-2010, 06:02 PM
#63
Launching!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evolution performance just took order of a 2011 mustang GT and took it to the track. 13.2 @ 110mph 2.1 60ft. DA was like 280. GT premium with 3.73 gears and the 255 summer tires.
Not too bad I guess. But the more numbers we see the more it looks like the camaro may not be behind at all.
I dont feel like finding the link...just go to google and type in evolution performance 2011 mustang gt....you will see the link to it toward the top of the page, a mustang forum is discussing it.
Not too bad I guess. But the more numbers we see the more it looks like the camaro may not be behind at all.
I dont feel like finding the link...just go to google and type in evolution performance 2011 mustang gt....you will see the link to it toward the top of the page, a mustang forum is discussing it.
That same car put down 368rwhp/352rwtq on a Mustang Dyno with 100 miles on the Odo. Not bad at all.
04-29-2010, 06:17 PM
#64
Not bad at all.
A worthy competitor to say the least. Putting down Ls3 numbers basically.Which would add up because the camaro will probably lose another 10hp through the driveline due to IRS and 20 inch rims. The 5.0 should likely dyno right in the range of the LS3. Either way...both motors are SAE certified...so it is what it is...both are making very close to advertised numbers.
I wonder how long it will be before someone breaks the camros record of 12.58? Even though the power to weight may say it wont be too hard...the torque curve of the LS3 is very solid...it may take a little while but who knows. Seems like the mustang crowd is a little more hardcore when it comes to the strip compared to the average 5th gen driver currently.
A worthy competitor to say the least. Putting down Ls3 numbers basically.Which would add up because the camaro will probably lose another 10hp through the driveline due to IRS and 20 inch rims. The 5.0 should likely dyno right in the range of the LS3. Either way...both motors are SAE certified...so it is what it is...both are making very close to advertised numbers.
I wonder how long it will be before someone breaks the camros record of 12.58? Even though the power to weight may say it wont be too hard...the torque curve of the LS3 is very solid...it may take a little while but who knows. Seems like the mustang crowd is a little more hardcore when it comes to the strip compared to the average 5th gen driver currently.
04-29-2010, 06:34 PM
#65
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well at some point you're going to hit the limits of what you can accomplish with a 100% bonestock car. 12.58 is still pretty movin' for a 3800 lb car with just a tad over 400 hp. Me, personally, I've never been all that concerned with bonestock record holders. I think the best test of two bonestock cars at the track is to slip the same size/type DR on them and see who can get it better. Most factory tires can't put down enough of the car's power, even at stock levels.
04-29-2010, 08:40 PM
#66
and it's of course even more than 3800 pounds with the driver on board.
but I still tend to follow those numbers quite closely just to know a particular car's capabilities in stock trim...and I also have an interest in it because even after 3+ years my own car still holds the (published/internet) bone stock record for a Corvette LS2 (well, any factory LS2 actually ).
04-29-2010, 10:09 PM
#67
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Parkville MD.
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=bww3588;13209914]for 2010, mustang gets the big loss....
this is the 2011 model and GM hasent answered back yet....[/QUOTE
GM won't respond in 2011, it's to soon. Maybe 2012,2013. If they work on the suspenion that will def give us the egde.
this is the 2011 model and GM hasent answered back yet....[/QUOTE
GM won't respond in 2011, it's to soon. Maybe 2012,2013. If they work on the suspenion that will def give us the egde.
j/k should be no contest according to power and wieght numbers.....
05-01-2010, 02:38 AM
#70
Good question, I'm thinking that the Mustang might have a slight aerodynamics advantage.
But is it equal power?
Torque (not just peak), power under the curve etc are notable factors too ya know.
I'd thought for sure for a few months now that the Mustang GT was going to put a full two tenths on the Camaro SS in the 1/4 mile but now I'm having my doubts, at least in the manual trans comparisons.
The automatics might be a real close race though.
I'm thinking that the Mustang might have a slight aerodynamics advantage.Torque (not just peak), power under the curve etc are notable factors too ya know.
I'd thought for sure for a few months now that the Mustang GT was going to put a full two tenths on the Camaro SS in the 1/4 mile but now I'm having my doubts, at least in the manual trans comparisons.
The automatics might be a real close race though.
05-01-2010, 01:42 PM
#71
11 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to remember unlike the Camaro the Mustang has three gear choices. Standard, 3:55 and 3:73 options. Plus a summer tire option. Only tests I know for a FACT that has both the 3:73's and summer tires are Motor Trends. And both of them were into the 12's with ease. The non summer tires on the Mustang are junk. And of course the 3:73 option helps too. Easily a 1/2 second to be given up with the standard gears and tires. Especially with crappy magazine drivers rowing the gears....
05-01-2010, 01:51 PM
#72
Launching!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to remember unlike the Camaro the Mustang has three gear choices. Standard, 3:55 and 3:73 options. Plus a summer tire option. Only tests I know for a FACT that has both the 3:73's and summer tires are Motor Trends. And both of them were into the 12's with ease. The non summer tires on the Mustang are junk. And of course the 3:73 option helps too. Easily a 1/2 second to be given up with the standard gears and tires. Especially with crappy magazine drivers rowing the gears....
05-01-2010, 02:07 PM
#73
11 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I read I don't think it had either. The CS wheels usually don't have the summer tires and the braking distances make me think it doesn't have the summer tires unless they tested more then one car. Plus the price as tested doesn't seem to reflect those options.
05-01-2010, 02:08 PM
#74
Launching!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could be wrong.
05-01-2010, 03:16 PM
#75
Read the car and driver article. It mentions that the mustang had 3.73 gears and the 255 summer tires..
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.
05-01-2010, 05:31 PM
#76
11 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the car and driver article. It mentions that the mustang had 3.73 gears and the 255 summer tires..
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.
05-03-2010, 12:10 AM
#79
9 Second Club
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Lake Tahoe, CA
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So basically it's a drivers race between the two with the '11 GT having an ever-so-slight advantage due to weight and gearing. But still once modding comes into play i'd be willing to bet the LS3 will reign supreme.
05-03-2010, 12:15 AM
#80
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the car and driver article. It mentions that the mustang had 3.73 gears and the 255 summer tires..
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.
Second page...they mention the mustangs gearing advantage with 3.73's compared to the camaro...
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
3rd page...they talk about the mustangs 255/40/19 pirelli p-zero tires....
Our test driver felt that the Mustang’s smaller rear footprints (255/40-19 versus 275/40-20—all four cars on Pirelli P Zeros) hampered its launch and may have held it back in the lane change, where it was slower than either Camaro
Am I the only one who noticed that the camaro beat the mustang by almost 2 seconds to 130? My god that would be bus lengths worth of spanking at that speed....bus lengths. I would guess most owners will not have to worry about 70mph highway roll races...jesus.
Must be when the short sprints are over the camaro really gets into stride...WOW.