Mustang GT500 vs Camaro SS

[DrewskiSS]

Originally Posted by 67Fastback

I love how people like to compare the "KR" just to bloat the price, when the base GT500 is basically the same car but cheaper. The KR gets like 40hp - big deal. Compare the GT500 to the same Z06 and the results will be almost identical to the KR - now your talking about a $47ishk GT500 vs. a $76k Z06. Who's complaining about apples to oranges??

Motortrend = lol

How about we deal with published facts when it comes to weight.

Camaro
3750 / 1705 - LT automatic
3741 / 1700 - LT manual
3769 / 1713 - LS automatic
3780 / 1718 - LS manual
3913 / 1779 - SS automatic
3860 / 1755 - SS manual

GT500
3820 (This is the iron-block version, 2011 gets aluminum)

the KR was created more for collecting purposes not becuase the gt500 was too slow or did not compete with Corvettes.

im not on either side here i love the SS with a passion, but again, for the money- is the SS worth it right now? i wouldnt be surprised if those things lose 50% of their value in 4-5 years. the gt500's barely depreciate..

[BBC69Camaro]

Originally Posted by JohnnyGMachine

The new Camaro isn't running circles around a GT500. Just because it has IRS doesn't automatically make it handle better than the Mustang with it's solid rear axle. Currently the new 2010+ Mustang GT (not the GT500) is superior to the new Camaro SS in both handling AND braking. Again this is just the GT we're talking about. I think the GT500s are comparable if not exactly the same as the SS since the GT500s are heavy too. Matter of fact according to Road and Track test Data the 2010 Mustang GT scores better in the slalom than both the GT500 and the SS. Be interesting to see how much better the GT500 is in 2011 when it debuts with it's all aluminum block!

Road and Track test data:

2010 Camaro SS
Braking from 60 mph, ft: 121 ft.
Braking from 80 mph, ft: 212 ft.
Skidpad, g: 0.89 g
Slalom, mph: 66.4 mph

2010 Mustang GT
Braking from 60 mph, ft: 115 ft.
Braking from 80 mph, ft: 202 ft.
Skidpad, g: 0.93 g
Slalom, mph: 69.1 mph

Every magazine I have read that has done a comparison so far has handed the lead to the Camaro in almost every category.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4309423.html

Popular Mechanics:
2010 Camaro SS (3900lbs) - ~$35,000
0-60 4.9
1/4 13.0 @111mph
60-0 107.8ft

2010 Mustang GT (3500lbs) - $35,626
0-60 5.6
1/4 13.9 @102mph
60-0 110.8ft

Car and Driver ratings:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
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

And I think the skid pad will only get better as people figure out how to drive the Camaro *harder*.

So yes the Camaro is less fat than the Mustang despite weighing more and costing less.

[DrewskiSS]

Originally Posted by BBC69Camaro

Every magazine I have read that has done a comparison so far has handed the lead to the Camaro in almost every category.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4309423.html

Popular Mechanics:
2010 Camaro SS (3900lbs) - ~$35,000
0-60 4.9
1/4 13.0 @111mph
60-0 107.8ft

2010 Mustang GT (3500lbs) - $35,626
0-60 5.6
1/4 13.9 @102mph
60-0 110.8ft

Car and Driver ratings:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
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

And I think the skid pad will only get better as people figure out how to drive the Camaro *harder*.

So yes the Camaro is less fat than the Mustang despite weighing more and costing less.

thats the gt though we're talking about the gt500

[JKnight]

This is the epitome of bench racing. Go build something, all of you!

[CreepinDeth]

Originally Posted by DrewskiSS

im not on either side here i love the SS with a passion, but again, for the money- is the SS worth it right now? i wouldnt be surprised if those things lose 50% of their value in 4-5 years. the gt500's barely depreciate..

Just to comment on this part.
If the GT500 held it's value so well, you wouldn't be getting a 3 year old one for almost half it's sticker price plus dealer markup prices we all know they added.
I've seen the Roush 427R with only 435hp going for around $50K at some dealers. Just something to consider.

The OP was claiming $30,000 for a 3 year old GT500 with only 2,000 on the clock......I think that's really bad depreciation on a "collector car" personally.
I'm sure the Camaro will depreciate as well.

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

Except the stock Z06 would destroy the GT500 on any road track.. How did we get to comparing to a Vette???

True, and how is by the price range of Chevy VS Ford performance.
Ford fanatics complained you can't pit a Mustang GT up against a 2010 SS because it was obviously lacking.
So they pit it against a GT500 , which as tested was nearly $20,000 more. It's an unfair comparison......yet close results.
If anything you should compare PRICE for performance. That's where the KR vs the Z06 came into play.

Can't quite compare an $86,000 Mustang to a ~$32,000 Camaro SS.
2011 will be a good year to pit the regular pony cars up against each other once again.
Ford finally got some good powerplants for their GT and base Mustangs.

[70rs]

Originally Posted by JKnight

This is the epitome of bench racing. Go build something, all of you!

Just buy SOMETHING and drive the piss out of it!

[DrewskiSS]

Originally Posted by CreepinDeth

Just to comment on this part.
If the GT500 held it's value so well, you wouldn't be getting a 3 year old one for almost half it's sticker price plus dealer markup prices we all know they added.
I've seen the Roush 427R with only 435hp going for around $50K at some dealers. Just something to consider.

The OP was claiming $30,000 for a 3 year old GT500 with only 2,000 on the clock......I think that's really bad depreciation on a "collector car" personally.
I'm sure the Camaro will depreciate as well.



True, and how is by the price range of Chevy VS Ford performance.
Ford fanatics complained you can't pit a Mustang GT up against a 2010 SS because it was obviously lacking.
So they pit it against a GT500 , which as tested was nearly $20,000 more. It's an unfair comparison......yet close results.
If anything you should compare PRICE for performance. That's where the KR vs the Z06 came into play.

Can't quite compare an $86,000 Mustang to a ~$32,000 Camaro SS.
2011 will be a good year to pit the regular pony cars up against each other once again.
Ford finally got some good powerplants for their GT and base Mustangs.

half the sticker price? the msrp on a 2007-08 GT500 is not $86000, its $41,000. the GT500KR is $86,000. the kr is the one more for collectors IMO. so therefore I'd say that the gt500 does hold its value pretty good and its not a comparison of an $86,000 car to a $32,000 car.

on another note, i am really excited to see the new pony cars get put up against eachother

[lil427z]

.
rick k

[JohnnyGMachine]

Ultimately just buy what you like...really what it comes down to. Just go drive 'em - then compare. Best way to go. Then make up your mind.

[Vegas69]

Since they are as common as bikinis in the strip clubs around here, I ran into a couple this afternoon. A black one was coming the opposite way and gave me the thumbs up. I gave him the thumbs down. Then I saw a mustang and challenger after that. My favorite to date is when I pulled up to a stop light and was a two lanes over from a new Challenger. The wife looks over and looks back and her head snaps back at me. Holy cow, a real muscle car. We took off and he go on it. I laughed and then I got on mine. They tucked their tail between their legs and headed home. I love it. As you can tell, I'm not into every tom dick and harry thinking they have a muscle car.