kain01

This article is short and sweet, but considering the press saying it I think it's a nice win for us Camaro lover's.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/..._review/8.html

Sax1031

I want to see all the autos ran and numbers posted.

V8s and V6s.

But I do feel that ford dropped the ball with the autos in the Stang. Definitely the v6 which seems to be set for MPG. They should have at least offered a sport mode. I think they should offer paddle shifting also.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Maybe...but I'm just happy that they decided to go to 6 speeds all around (just like GM) at least.

ThisBlood147

I think the problem with the auto V6 Stangs is the really tall gearing (3.15's if I recall). Takes alot of the zip out of the car.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Yes but don't forget the really short gearing inside of the transmission itself that adds a lot of that zip right back into it.
My Corvette has what many would call a pathetic rear axle ratio (2.56 ) but it's 6 speed automatic's 4.02 first gear REALLY wakes it up (cut a best of 1.52 sixty foot on it's way to a 10.9 second quarter mile time (on a 1.54 sixty foot) with just bolt ons).
I believe the automatic Mustangs (especially the V8) will see some amazing track times once they're modified because they too have a very steep first gear (4.08 I think it is?) and when combined with those 3.15s should really move it out.

ThisBlood147

Maybe the way the drivetrain is tuned for the auto sixxers is really tame from the factory. Probably something that could be easily rectified with a handheld tuner. It's not something I'd place great importance on if I'm buying an automatic base model. If I want the economy/price of a base model combined with the best performance possible.........I'd go for a stick without hesitation.

assasinator

the auto transmissions take torque managment to a rediculous level.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

True story.

Irunelevens

Not really understanding here... don't the V6 Mustangs run ~.5s quicker in the 1/4 than the Camaro V6s?

kain01

Yup but I guess you didn't take time to read why that was an issue.

z_speedfreak

iTrader: (3)

I find it funny that they tout 29mph highway for the v6 camaro and 30-31mpg for the v6 mustang I've gotten 32mpg in my 15year old V8 camaro, granted I was going 80 and not 60which is what I believe they use for the highway mpg tests

ThisBlood147

Mileage ratings are averages.......not maximum capabilities. Most cars are able to achieve better mileage than what they are rated at on the highway. Your car may have been rated at 22-23mpg.....but makes 8 to 9 more than that on the highway. I'd suspect that both the new Camaro and Mustang sixxers are probably capable of mileage in the 34-37 mpg range. Maybe some actual owners can chime in here...

kain01

Huge difference in EPA mileage and actual mileage. 95% of all car's that are tested can get above their EPA rating. About the only one's that I see that don't regularly are Toyota's. And that's not a knock against Toyota, just that they know how to manipulate the EPA to show their real mileage.

Irunelevens

Sure did... but I don't drive automatics, so it's a non-issue for me. But I'm sure a decent tune would make the A6 in the Mustang better for "enthusiastic" drivers.

kain01

Then go back and read it again, you failed the first time.

It'llrun

It would seem, however, that all the Camaro actually won in this comparison is the "feeling" category. Idonno... I'm just sayin'... Performance was not its strong suite. If they liked it better, great. It's their opinion. They're entitled to it.

Irunelevens

Oh I read it just fine, and seeing quotes like this, "Despite being close in size, the Mustang feels like a smaller car than the Camaro and, by weight, it is. The Mustang is about 340 pounds lighter than the Camaro," does nothing but reinforce my opinions. And then there is this one, which goes back to my first response..."The Mustang, sadly, seems to be undone by its transmission. The V6 Mustang's six-speed automatic is too hesitant to downshift when it's called for. And calling for it requires some very unsubtle pedal smashing.
That's possibly the biggest reason that the V6 Mustang comes off feeling like a weaker car than the Camaro in real-world driving." Like I said, since I don't drive automatics and prefer lighter cars, the things that CNN says about two V6 automatic pony cars means little to me.


Yep.

kain01

Then don't comment on the topic when the subject is two automatic cars. If you don't care about them, then your opinion is irrelevant. The quote you used (in bold above), answer's your original post about the Mustang being faster. In everday driving the Camaro V6 feel's faster. That appeal's to everyf&$#*!^ person driving a Honda or Acura on planet Earth. There is no such thing as a FAST Honda or Acura from the factory, yet they sell because of their "sportscar" reputation.

Bleh sorry, long day end of rant.

Irunelevens

Depends on your definition of fast. If you consider your car to be fast, then your logic is flawed. If you think your car isn't fast, then you're right.

It'llrun

So is your point that this story will be good for sales, since the youngsters(typically) want a car that feels quick or fast? I think maybe that's true, but those kids also tend to want a car from which they can see what's outside all the way around... Can't say anything to help sales based on that opinion. I mean, you can, but not for the Camaro, because those little foreign jobbers offer easy view to the outside. They're usually smaller too, like Civic and S2000.

Most Honda drivers, particularly younger ones, have little to no interest in owning a pony car. I think the market for the new Camaro is for people over 25 and it will do well. But if those same people want performance, most will pass on the V6 anyway. And, perhaps sadly, most of those who don't want added V8 performance and also test drive a Mustang... have a good possibility of buying the Mustang. It's cheaper, quicker, more efficient, and supposedly larger inside(neither is large inside)... Plus the interior "feels" better... Well, so they say. My point is, the Mustang may not "feel" quicker, but it evidently IS quicker and any kid into performance will probably already know it. Though it has an issue I don't like... More in a moment.

I know my nephews all know about it. They range from 23(or so) to 18 and while none drives a Honda(all 5 of them drive American branded vehicles), they all read magazines and have friends with various cars. What those kids DON'T know, and most of us probably don't(I didn't till today- even though it's been in print) is that the Mustang V6 has one "minor" problem, which I personally detest to the point, I WILL NOT buy one... Top speed, governed to just 113mph. That's insanity. I suspect that can be remedied with a proper tune, but it shouldn't exist and until it doesn't, I don't want one.

Btw, the Honda S2000 can reach 148mph and is drag limited, not governed. Other's may be nearly as fast, but I seriously don't care as I won't be buying one. Not because they suck or anything... I just don't want one. The Acura TL(I believe) AWD manual will supposedly cover the 1/4 in under 14 seconds and I believe it is capable of nearly 140, though I admit, Idonno...