gt 500 barley beats camaro ss
07-06-2009, 02:25 PM
#1
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: hammond,la
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gt 500 barley beats camaro ss http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C9za...e=channel_page
I love how the title is "crushes".
I love how the title is "crushes".
07-06-2009, 02:59 PM
#3
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Richmond, Texas
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apples to oranges, just like the SS vs GT. Powerwise there is no comparision between the two. The SS is nice for 426 hp and the GT500 is equally as nice for 540 hp but not in the same league.
07-06-2009, 03:18 PM
#5
12 Second Club
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It isn't really an apple to apple comparison IMO. With the price disparity you might as well throw in a vette instead of the camaro and I and many people I know feel that the gt500 IS Ford's answer to the vette. I don't think too many people that go pony car shopping even consider it. It sucks there won't be the supercharged z28 to compete evenly.
07-06-2009, 03:26 PM
#6
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bedford Tx
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is nothing to defend here for the camaro. Its the better deal. 15K less and runs only 1/10 slower with 110hp or so less...Cmon **** that GT500... Its the entire LS1 4th gens vs the Terminators all over...
Trending Topics
07-06-2009, 03:32 PM
#8
Administrator
That's just how it turned out. Was "crush" too strong of a word? Maybe, but that's what draws attention and sells
magazines. Either way, that's a pretty bad loss.
07-06-2009, 03:36 PM
#10
Administrator
The GT500 is way out front. Damn...can you guys not even be realistic about things if it's not in favor of a LSx car?
Stop quoting friggin' magazine ET's and open your eyes.
07-06-2009, 03:39 PM
#11
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might have to side with Unit here from the looks of it...it had to be more than 1/10th of a second difference.1/10th of a second would mean the Camaro would be 1 to 1 1/2 car lengths behind at the end of the 1/4.At least that is the rule of thumb(.1=1 car length).Looked like about 3 lengths.
07-06-2009, 03:42 PM
#12
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might get flamed for saying this but Motortrend is biased toward the Camaro.They always have been,and I admit I am Camaro biased myself saying it.How did you post that youtube image Unit?
Last edited by lovescamaros28; 07-06-2009 at 03:51 PM.
07-06-2009, 03:42 PM
#13
Administrator
I might have to side with Unit here from the looks of it...it had to be more than 1/10th of a second difference.1/10th of a second would mean the Camaro would be 1 to 1 1/2 car lengths behind at the end of the 1/4.At least that is the rule of thumb(.1=1 car length).Looked like about 3 lengths.
I'd be the first to say the Camaro raped the GT500 if that's what happened.
Is this a fair comparison? I really don't care. I'm just commenting that the
outcome wasn't "barely" a win as the OP suggested (actually, he suggested
that it was barley a win
). 
07-06-2009, 03:46 PM
#15
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bedford Tx
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eyes can easily be decieved just because it looks like a huge gap doesnt mean it wasnt a .1 second difference. Watch when they crossed the line its not a long time between the 2.... It was a 1/4 mile race and it beat the camaro by .1 of a second it dont matter how bad it looked, the FACT of the matter is it was .1 of a second not how it looked, one is factual one is opinion... And my opinion is being .1 slower for alot less money is pretty damn good....
07-06-2009, 03:50 PM
#16
Administrator
eyes can easily be decieved just because it looks like a huge gap doesnt mean it wasnt a .1 second difference. Watch when they crossed the line its not a long time between the 2.... It was a 1/4 mile race and it beat the camaro by .1 of a second it dont matter how bad it looked, the FACT of the matter is it was .1 of a second not how it looked, one is factual one is opinion... And my opinion is being .1 slower for alot less money is pretty damn good....
Regardless, the point of this post was basically to say that the word
"crushed" was misused. I guess I agree to a certain degree. A loss like
that on the street would be considered a large margin of victory. You can
cling to your tenth of a second all you'd like. It means nothing to me since
both of those cars are slow.
07-06-2009, 03:53 PM
#17
Staging Lane
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bedford Tx
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer to my question above is clearly "no" in your case.
Regardless, the point of this post was basically to say that the word
"crushed" was misused. I guess I agree to a certain degree. A loss like
that on the street would be considered a large margin of victory. You can
cling to your tenth of a second all you'd like. It means nothing to me since
both of those cars are slow.
Regardless, the point of this post was basically to say that the word
"crushed" was misused. I guess I agree to a certain degree. A loss like
that on the street would be considered a large margin of victory. You can
cling to your tenth of a second all you'd like. It means nothing to me since
both of those cars are slow.
07-06-2009, 03:56 PM
#18
TECH Regular
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe it was a 12.99 or so compared to a 12.81 or something.In reality....if you did the best out of five between these two cars...I could see the GT500 winning by a margin of at around .3 most of the time.
07-06-2009, 04:00 PM
#20
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part of me feels like the quarter mile posted in the video is not consistent with the distance shown in unit's screenshot. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit of video editing to get that result.