Camaro regains sales lead in August 2010
#21
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say equal drivers/conditions, the new 5.0 should beat an LS3 Camaro. It's very similar to the Mach 1/LS1 F-body comparison, except the trap speeds are closer.
#22
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the grand scheme of things, even if the mustang wins 8 out of 10 races by a 10th, it's still an even match, or "driver's race" as we call it. All the Mustang driver would have to do is hesitate on a shift, or the Camaro driver could pull off a very slightly faster 1-2 shift, and the outcome would be the opposite. So while the majority of tests have the Mustang winning by a ballhair, it's still considered a driver's race because it's just too close. GM could stop offering a spare tire with the SS and that would make it faster than the Mustang. It's that close.
#24
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as both cars are selling reasonably well, and as long as public opinion is overwhelmingly positive on both cars (and i'd say it definitely is), these vehicles are considered a success.
#25
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
In the grand scheme of things, even if the mustang wins 8 out of 10 races by a 10th, it's still an even match, or "driver's race" as we call it. All the Mustang driver would have to do is hesitate on a shift, or the Camaro driver could pull off a very slightly faster 1-2 shift, and the outcome would be the opposite. So while the majority of tests have the Mustang winning by a ballhair, it's still considered a driver's race because it's just too close. GM could stop offering a spare tire with the SS and that would make it faster than the Mustang. It's that close.
Reputations are made mostly on the street. In a street fight, that 1 tenth difference won't be noticeable.
I can't understand how anyone can say that either car is a clear cut/easy winner. It's just too close.
#26
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know that either company plans to really make money off of these cars. They are both built and sold as a kind of marketing tool that commands attention and interest in their respective brands. These cars are kinda like the sacrificial team members...their individual sales performances are not great, but just having them "out on the field" brings people to the game so to speak, and allows the company to profit on sales of their other, more utilitarian vehicles.
As long as both cars are selling reasonably well, and as long as public opinion is overwhelmingly positive on both cars (and i'd say it definitely is), these vehicles are considered a success.
As long as both cars are selling reasonably well, and as long as public opinion is overwhelmingly positive on both cars (and i'd say it definitely is), these vehicles are considered a success.
My guess is that once the stigma of doom and gloom start to lift again you're going to see a surge in Mustang and Camaro sales. I work with about 8 or 9 guys that are heavily eyeballing these two cars, but are waiting to see how their 401K's do in the next year or so before pulling the trigger.
#27
A B4C/stripper Camaro 5.7L or a low-option Formula 350 wasn't that heavy. They were an excellent match 1/4 mile-wise for the 5.0, even the notch.
Just like today, it's really a driver's race. You're kidding yourself if you think that the new 5.0 is "easily" faster than the new SS (same goes for a '92 notch vs a '92 stripper TPI 350).
Just like today, it's really a driver's race. You're kidding yourself if you think that the new 5.0 is "easily" faster than the new SS (same goes for a '92 notch vs a '92 stripper TPI 350).
#28
Restricted User
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fleetwood, PA
Posts: 1,398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without some sort of test data to back up either side, this particular argument is going nowhere. You're talking about two cars that niether company gave a **** about at the time...both manufacturers were hard at work on the next gen cars.
#29
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
There were still a lot of these cars around in stock form back in the mid '90s when I was racing them. My experiance was that most of the light weight F-bodies with 350s and the 5.0 notch 5-speeds were running low 14s stock.
#30
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the grand scheme of things, even if the mustang wins 8 out of 10 races by a 10th, it's still an even match, or "driver's race" as we call it. All the Mustang driver would have to do is hesitate on a shift, or the Camaro driver could pull off a very slightly faster 1-2 shift, and the outcome would be the opposite. So while the majority of tests have the Mustang winning by a ballhair, it's still considered a driver's race because it's just too close. GM could stop offering a spare tire with the SS and that would make it faster than the Mustang. It's that close.
#31
as early as 87' Tony Defeo ran a 13.7(january iirc)
#32
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
LOL! You can't quote a few select factory freaks as the norm/most/average.
Exmaple: In 1999, Evan Smith ran a 12.89 in a bone stock '99 Z28. There have been other cases of 100% stock LS1 F-bodies running in the 12.9x range (I myself saw a 100% stock '02 WS6 run a 12.98). But nobody says that "most/many LS1 F-bodies run high 12s stock".
Same goes for any car, it's what they run on average that really matters, since few people will be blessed with a factory freak (or the abilities of your top 1% of drivers). A handful of cars does not create a "norm".
Exmaple: In 1999, Evan Smith ran a 12.89 in a bone stock '99 Z28. There have been other cases of 100% stock LS1 F-bodies running in the 12.9x range (I myself saw a 100% stock '02 WS6 run a 12.98). But nobody says that "most/many LS1 F-bodies run high 12s stock".
Same goes for any car, it's what they run on average that really matters, since few people will be blessed with a factory freak (or the abilities of your top 1% of drivers). A handful of cars does not create a "norm".
#33
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, but what's the point of throwing in that douche that runs a 15.1 in his 6spd WS6? I know that some LS1 F-bodies can run 12s, and that quite a few of them run low 13s. So to me, they are low 13s cars for the most part... but I know that I might run into one of the ones that runs 12.9 @ 110mph.
#34
LOL! You can't quote a few select factory freaks as the norm/most/average.
Exmaple: In 1999, Evan Smith ran a 12.89 in a bone stock '99 Z28. There have been other cases of 100% stock LS1 F-bodies running in the 12.9x range (I myself saw a 100% stock '02 WS6 run a 12.98). But nobody says that "most/many LS1 F-bodies run high 12s stock".
Same goes for any car, it's what they run on average that really matters, since few people will be blessed with a factory freak (or the abilities of your top 1% of drivers). A handful of cars does not create a "norm".
Exmaple: In 1999, Evan Smith ran a 12.89 in a bone stock '99 Z28. There have been other cases of 100% stock LS1 F-bodies running in the 12.9x range (I myself saw a 100% stock '02 WS6 run a 12.98). But nobody says that "most/many LS1 F-bodies run high 12s stock".
Same goes for any car, it's what they run on average that really matters, since few people will be blessed with a factory freak (or the abilities of your top 1% of drivers). A handful of cars does not create a "norm".
#35
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
No problem, I'll remind you:
"a good amount" would = norm to most people. 13s were certainly not the norm, or a good amount, or many, or most, or any other word/phrase you care to use. Those were factory freaks.
The average times were nearly the same, 350ci vs 5.0, comparing the notches to a stripper Camaro & Formula, and the fully loaded GT to a GTA & hightly optioned Z28. And that's only when the 5.0 had a 5-speed. With an AOD, even the notch would get slapped by a TPI 350 car. Stock for stock.
The average times were nearly the same, 350ci vs 5.0, comparing the notches to a stripper Camaro & Formula, and the fully loaded GT to a GTA & hightly optioned Z28. And that's only when the 5.0 had a 5-speed. With an AOD, even the notch would get slapped by a TPI 350 car. Stock for stock.
#36
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
Yes, but what's the point of throwing in that douche that runs a 15.1 in his 6spd WS6? I know that some LS1 F-bodies can run 12s, and that quite a few of them run low 13s. So to me, they are low 13s cars for the most part... but I know that I might run into one of the ones that runs 12.9 @ 110mph.
Saying that fox body 5.0 5-speed Mustangs were high 13 second cars stock is the same as saying that LS1 F-bodies are high 12 second cars stock.
Toss out the freaks and the turds. Draw your conclusions and make your comparasions based on the averages.
#37
My definition of a good amount is about the same as ls1 cars that have broken into the 12s; not the norm but it happened more than a handful of times.
#38
I guess you are trying to tell us they could equal or best an lt-1 car? No...it was game over when they came out. Yet the lt-1 was a high 13 second car on average.
here is some info on the mythical 13 second runs by the 5.0 cars.
http://forums.mustangworks.com/f8/stock-no-more-24905/
The great Tony Defeo who sold mustangs to a bunch of tools if they thought they could equal this.
He advanced the timing. He removed the air cleaner. It was in the dead of winter. It was in new jersey. They paid for hours of track time.
Give me an effing break man. If you dont think that legit 14.4 at motor trend by the 1990 iroc could get to the 13's by going negative DA in the dead of winter and advancing the timing and removing the air filter with hours of track time you are in la la land.
Funny how history can get foggy.
#39
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,375
Likes: 0
Received 1,806 Likes
on
1,287 Posts
Disagree completely. They were within a couple tenths on both counts.
I guess you are trying to tell us they could equal or best an lt-1 car.
here is some info on the mythical 13 second runs by the 5.0 cars.
http://forums.mustangworks.com/f8/stock-no-more-24905/
The great Tony Defeo who sold mustangs to a bunch of tools if they thought they could equal this.
He advanced the timing. He removed the air cleaner. It was in the dead of winter. It was in new jersey. They paid for hours of track time.
Give me an effing break man. If you dont think that legit 14.4 at motor trend by the 1990 iroc could get to the 13's by going negative DA in the dead of winter and advancing the timing and removing the air filter with hours of track time you are in la la land.
Funny how history can get foggy.
I guess you are trying to tell us they could equal or best an lt-1 car.
here is some info on the mythical 13 second runs by the 5.0 cars.
http://forums.mustangworks.com/f8/stock-no-more-24905/
The great Tony Defeo who sold mustangs to a bunch of tools if they thought they could equal this.
He advanced the timing. He removed the air cleaner. It was in the dead of winter. It was in new jersey. They paid for hours of track time.
Give me an effing break man. If you dont think that legit 14.4 at motor trend by the 1990 iroc could get to the 13's by going negative DA in the dead of winter and advancing the timing and removing the air filter with hours of track time you are in la la land.
Funny how history can get foggy.
#40
***Repost Police***
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, you totally missed my point.
Saying that fox body 5.0 5-speed Mustangs were high 13 second cars stock is the same as saying that LS1 F-bodies are high 12 second cars stock.
Toss out the freaks and the turds. Draw your conclusions and make your comparasions based on the averages.
Saying that fox body 5.0 5-speed Mustangs were high 13 second cars stock is the same as saying that LS1 F-bodies are high 12 second cars stock.
Toss out the freaks and the turds. Draw your conclusions and make your comparasions based on the averages.