OFFICIAL 2010 CAMARO STATS & SPECS released! 300hp / 422hp!

[JBsZ06]

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Does anyone honestly expect a BRAND NEW car with 422hp/408lb-ft and a price tag near $30k to weigh much less than 3860lbs?!?!? The car isn't priced at $70k so they can't use carbon fiber everywhere. GM is good, but they aren't exactly magical.

Lets check out the curb weights of some other cars:

EVO X MR = ~3600lbs - 291hp
G37 = ~3700lbs - 330hp/270lb-ft
M3 = ~3700lbs - 414hp/295lb-ft
335i = ~3600lbs - 300hp/300lb-ft
Genesis = ~3550lbs - ~300hp
Mustang Bullitt = ~3600lbs - 315hp/325lb-ft

Comparing the Mustang GT and Camaro SS....the Camaro has a stronger 6spd transmission, independent rear suspension, 122 more HP, bigger wheels (20" vs 17"), bigger tires (245 vs 235), bigger rotors (14" roters vs 12"), bigger calipers (4 piston vs 2 piston) and a bigger fuel tank (16 vs 19 gallon). ALL that stuff adds weight. It's also a much newer car with a new platform. Isn't the Mustang's D2C platform based on a platform that dates back to the '00 Lincoln LS???

This is one of the best posts I've seen..

The EVO X is 3600 lbs? MORE IMPORTANTLY THE M3 weighs in at 3700 lbs and only has 414hp and 295 lb/ft of torque...but no one cries....TOO HEAVY? The 335 is 3600 lbs and has 300 hp?

Those are great drivers cars all of them....

The camaro V8 rolls in at what? 3800 lbs has 422 hp and 400 lb/ft of torque...
with independant rear suspension ?

This is going to be an awesome machine.

I just wish they offered a Dual clutch sequential tranny. It would up the performance and increase fuel economy another 8 PERCENT. (according to volvo's recent data release)

I'd pay another 1200 bucks for DSG in the Corvette or Camaro..

The new camaro SS kicks @SS..

IMO

[big swede]

Do we still know the whole V8 story?

V8 power 420hp with manual 400hp with auto. So is the SS going to be the base V8 because they cannot only have the SS mentioned above and have it be mid $30,000's like so many are thinking. Will the V8's only have the SS and eventually a Z28. To me the SS must stay as close to $30,000 as possible nicely equiped and then make the Z28 as nasty as you want it to be. Without a low $30,000 V8 it will be trouble.

[E. Haskell]

According to the guys at SVTPerformance, when put on a scale, the '03/'04 Cobra's [weak] IRS is around 150lbs heavier than the GT's live axle. That might give an idea of where some of the Camaro's extra weight comes from compared to the Mustang.

Load up the current Mustang with 20" wheels, 245 tires, IRS, 6-speed, 422hp engine, bigger brakes and the supporting strengthening modifications and I bet you're looking at every bit of 3700+ lbs (and that's using a chassis that's 5 years older).

[syr74]

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Show me the spec sheet.

Typical fanbois response whenever they know they are going to get owned. I'm used to it by now

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Where have been little one? In the same post that I mentioned the Bullitt's curb weight, I said: "Does anyone honestly expect a BRAND NEW car with 422hp/408lb-ft and a price tag near $30k to weigh much less than 3860lbs?!?!?" I did NOT compare it to base model Camaro - 3860lbs is the weight of the SS. Get your facts straight.

Feel free to pull out some deductive reasoning at some point during this thread. Otherwise, explaining everything to you in excruciating detail is going
to get old pretty quick. You took the heaviest, production figure for a Mustang GT and compared it to what a base V8 model Camaro is purported to weigh according to an estimate you know is a low.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

The only reason I brought up the Bullitt is because it's the Mustang closest in performance to the SS. Granted, it's still nowhere close.

I'm sure. No doubt you were compelled to compare a Bullitt, and a loaded Bullitt at that, to the Camaro out of your extreme devotion to integrity.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

No, but my IQ drops 5 points every time I read your weak rebuttals.

So by now it's been cut in half?

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

More talk with little to support it. If you make claims, back them up.

Please, try using one standard for everybody in your arguments. Show me the blisteringly fast track times or acceleration runs you have no doubt been referencing when you talk about the Camaro SS' ability to outrun even the current Mustang GT. Thus far we have one set of acceleration numbers on the SS and they aren't overly impressive. Of course, we both know the car is faster than that but since you don't have a spec sheet to back it up we'll just have to assume the SS is a mid 13 second car stock if we are playing by your standards. Can't let an ability to reason interefere.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Ahh, the base Dodge Charger - the epitome of sports coupes.

Nice response. Oh, wait...no it wasn't.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

BTW - I think you're getting the words heavy and dense confused.

Spiraling ever further down the path of desperation are we?

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Your "argument" is heavy on fanboyism and weak on facts. Typical.

Nice to see that your hypocrisy truly knows no bounds.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Like I said, compared to what? What RWD coupe are you comparing it to? So far, you've brought up the base Charger and decided that scratching your butt and using rumored internet "specs" qualifies as a quality rubuttal. Sad.

In an effort to defend the brand you'll even try and downplay the significance of the Camaro proving to be as portly as a modern, full size sedan with a wheelbase nearly ten inches longer. Your arguments are ridiculous, do yourself and everybody else a favor and stop now before you squander your remaining integrity.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Where did I say just a newer chassis? Reading comprehension is your friend

.

Ah yes, once again I have to lower my argument to the lowest common denominator. That fact alone says more about the quality of your argument than I can. Yes, yes.....we know that the Camaro has IRS and big brakes too. (Frankly, the fuel tank argument was laughable, particularly since GM weighs there cars without any fuel in them) The planned IRS setup for the Mustang would have added 50lb to the cars curb weight, I'll be generous and say that larger brakes add the same. I'm not going to lend any credit for 20" rims because that was a decision GM and Funkmaster Flex made without giving much consideration to taste, cost, or performance....they certainly don;t improve the car and are only necessary in any respect because the car is overweight and oversized to begin with.

That leaves you 300lb to explain. (Actually, it's going to leave you with more like 350lb to explain, but as I mentioned earlier I'm feeling generous)

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

The Camaro has: bigger rotors, 4 piston calipers, bigger wheels, bigger tires, independent rear suspension, bigger fuel tank

Do you understand how pathetic it sounds every time you mention the fuel tank? Have you checked to see if the lug nuts add any extra weight yet?

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

But yeah, I guess I'm be illogical for bringing those things up.

illogical? No. But you are bordering on lunacy trying to act as though these items are worth 400lb. The SS weighs about what the GT500 does and the Shelby sports a cast iron engine block, a supercharger, and an intercooler, none of which the Camaro has. The GT500 also has the beefier tranny and larger brakes you wont stop rattling on about. Where does this create trouble for your argument? The heavier cast iron engine block, supercharger, and intercooler combined account for well over 200lb of the GT500's weight. The cast iron block accounts for 130lb by itself, with the intercooler and supercharger hardware doubling that number. Need it get into the heavier forged internals the 5.4L employs

So yeah, you still have 300lb to explain...and I'm being generous. Alas, I still haven't included the extra weight added by a 2 gallon larger, plastic fuel tank or the dubs which were so important to the Camaro's performance. My charity has it's limits.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

We'll cover that topic when Ford releases the specs. It's pointless to sit around and bench race future products.

Oh, we'll cover it. But I'm certain only one of us is looking forward to it.

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

So now you saying you know what kind of gas mileage the 5.0 will get?!?

We know it's a noticeable improvement over the current 4.6L powered GT.

[VMax2007]

Originally Posted by Olds88

Well I have to say that I'm disappointed in a few things. The car looks gorgeous and I love the interior BUT
1) The back seat room is comparable to the physically smaller Mustang and doesn't come close to Challenger's back seat
2) No mid-tier V8. I don't need 400hp, but I want the soundtrack. Where's the L76 (G8's engine) option for the Camaro?
3) Premium fuel. The Challenger R/T and Mustang GT burn regular.

I hope that premium recommended means premium purely optional, because if not, Dodge won my vote for a sale.

Um...YES, you DO!!!!

[Tone]

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

According to the guys at SVTPerformance, when put on a scale, the '03/'04 Cobra's [weak] IRS is around 150lbs heavier than the GT's live axle. That might give an idea of where some of the Camaro's extra weight comes from compared to the Mustang.

Load up the current Mustang with 20" wheels, 245 tires, IRS, 6-speed, 422hp engine, bigger brakes and the supporting strengthening modifications and I bet you're looking at every bit of 3700+ lbs (and that's using a chassis that's 5 years older).

Great point. While an IRS reduces unsprung weight (the moving weight the suspension has to control), the actual IRS unit tends to be a bunch heavier than a simplier SRA.

Which raises an interesting question: while an IRS offers better handling overall compared to a SRA, if the SRA-equipped car is a bunch lighter, could the overall package be a better performer?

That's really where the Mustang/Camaro divide sits right now. We won't know which is the better overall package until we see the comparison tests ... but I'm very curious!

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by syr74

Oh, we'll cover it. But I'm certain only one of us is looking forward to it.

This is pointless. In 2 years, we'll see a comparison test... Mustang GT 5.0 versus Camaro SS, and Shelby GT500 versus Camaro Z28.

Even if the Mustang DESTROYS the Camaro in all measures of performance, we WILL HEAR one or a combination of the following:

1) Mustang has SRA... that's outdated (regardless of actual performance results)

2) Mustang is ugly/boring looking

3) Mustang is a girl car

4) Mustang is a POS Ford

5) The magazine was biased

6) Shelby has ridiculous dealer markups

Hence, this arguing it just stupid, because it will never get anywhere.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by syr74

Typical fanbois response whenever they know they are going to get owned. I'm used to it by now



Feel free to pull out some deductive reasoning at some point during this thread. Otherwise, explaining everything to you in excruciating detail is going
to get old pretty quick. You took the heaviest, production figure for a Mustang GT and compared it to what a base V8 model Camaro is purported to weigh according to an estimate you know is a low.



I'm sure. No doubt you were compelled to compare a Bullitt, and a loaded Bullitt at that, to the Camaro out of your extreme devotion to integrity.



So by now it's been cut in half?



Please, try using one standard for everybody in your arguments. Show me the blisteringly fast track times or acceleration runs you have no doubt been referencing when you talk about the Camaro SS' ability to outrun even the current Mustang GT. Thus far we have one set of acceleration numbers on the SS and they aren't overly impressive. Of course, we both know the car is faster than that but since you don't have a spec sheet to back it up we'll just have to assume the SS is a mid 13 second car stock if we are playing by your standards. Can't let an ability to reason interefere.



Nice response. Oh, wait...no it wasn't.



Spiraling ever further down the path of desperation are we?



Nice to see that your hypocrisy truly knows no bounds.



In an effort to defend the brand you'll even try and downplay the significance of the Camaro proving to be as portly as a modern, full size sedan with a wheelbase nearly ten inches longer. Your arguments are ridiculous, do yourself and everybody else a favor and stop now before you squander your remaining integrity.

.

Ah yes, once again I have to lower my argument to the lowest common denominator. That fact alone says more about the quality of your argument than I can. Yes, yes.....we know that the Camaro has IRS and big brakes too. (Frankly, the fuel tank argument was laughable, particularly since GM weighs there cars without any fuel in them) The planned IRS setup for the Mustang would have added 50lb to the cars curb weight, I'll be generous and say that larger brakes add the same. I'm not going to lend any credit for 20" rims because that was a decision GM and Funkmaster Flex made without giving much consideration to taste, cost, or performance....they certainly don;t improve the car and are only necessary in any respect because the car is overweight and oversized to begin with.

That leaves you 300lb to explain. (Actually, it's going to leave you with more like 350lb to explain, but as I mentioned earlier I'm feeling generous)

Do you understand how pathetic it sounds every time you mention the fuel tank? Have you checked to see if the lug nuts add any extra weight yet?



illogical? No. But you are bordering on lunacy trying to act as though these items are worth 400lb. The SS weighs about what the GT500 does and the Shelby sports a cast iron engine block, a supercharger, and an intercooler, none of which the Camaro has. The GT500 also has the beefier tranny and larger brakes you wont stop rattling on about. Where does this create trouble for your argument? The heavier cast iron engine block, supercharger, and intercooler combined account for well over 200lb of the GT500's weight. The cast iron block accounts for 130lb by itself, with the intercooler and supercharger hardware doubling that number. Need it get into the heavier forged internals the 5.4L employs

So yeah, you still have 300lb to explain...and I'm being generous. Alas, I still haven't included the extra weight added by a 2 gallon larger, plastic fuel tank or the dubs which were so important to the Camaro's performance. My charity has it's limits.



Oh, we'll cover it. But I'm certain only one of us is looking forward to it.



We know it's a noticeable improvement over the current 4.6L powered GT.

Jesus. Who cares what it weighs? You're both right...quit being a post-whore and let it go, neither one of you will 'win' this. I am so tired of seeing the word 'owned', what are we? 15 years old? What are you gonna do next? Post an emo self-portrait as your avatar? Have an adult conversation for Pete's sake! Isn't there a Mustang forum you can troll?

[big swede]

Could you two girls go pull each others hair somewhere else instead of ruining another Camaro thread with comparison speculation on a future Mustang.

Geez, I was wanting to get a little more V8 info without having to weed through a couple of girl scouts rolling around on the ground.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by big swede

Could you two girls go pull each others hair somewhere else instead of ruining another Camaro thread with comparison speculation on a future Mustang.

Geez, I was wanting to get a little more V8 info without having to weed through a couple of girl scouts rolling around on the ground.

Okay, saying it your way was better.

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by Saturn69

Jesus. Who cares what it weighs? You're both right...quit being a post-whore and let it go, neither one of you will 'win' this. I am so tired of seeing the word 'owned', what are we? 15 years old? Have an adult conversation for Pete's sake! Isn't there a Mustang forum you can troll?

AMEN TO THAT!

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by big swede

Could you two girls go pull each others hair somewhere else instead of ruining another Camaro thread with comparison speculation on a future Mustang.

Geez, I was wanting to get a little more V8 info without having to weed through a couple of girl scouts rolling around on the ground.

It will be large displacement, produce GRATUITOUS amounts of power, and sound extremely angry.

What else REALLY matters?

[syr74]

Edited: I've made my point. Thanks for the earlier post Wescoent, you are absolutely right..

[blkwrxsti]

Originally Posted by wescoent

It will be large displacement, produce GRATUITOUS amounts of power, and sound extremely angry.

What else REALLY matters?

OK - now that that's settled, anyone hear anything about AWD? I'm not asking for corporate secrets or future plans - I just want to know if Zeta II COULD be made into AWD...

Anyone know? There's something about this car that makes me think of the AMC Eagle (in a good way).

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by blkwrxsti

OK - now that that's settled, anyone hear anything about AWD? I'm not asking for corporate secrets or future plans - I just want to know if Zeta II COULD be made into AWD...

Anyone know? There's something about this car that makes me think of the AMC Eagle (in a good way).

AWD is not in the cards... for the moment.

CTS is going to Zeta, and it NEEDS AWD, so I guess when that hits, the Camaro could theoretically go AWD.

But why...