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

[charts.1]

Originally Posted by T'Cal

I really like the current Mustang, especially the look of the V6 model with the Pony Package (Loaded: $25K coupe/$30k convt.). The Challenger is beautiful but I'm guessing an RT coupe will be priced in the about $10k more ($5k more than a GT). I'm guessing the Camaro will be closer to the Dodge in price than the Ford and it's unlikely that Chevy and Dodge will have to deal on them for a while. The real advantage for me is that the Dodge is bigger than both and seats five; it's really a midsize muscle car and not a compact pony car like the other two. But $10-15k more?? I don't know if I can justify that.

Back in the day the old SCCA racing that became the Trans-Am racing series (that really put pony cars on the map) the Dodge Challenger was in the same league as the Camaro Z28, Boss 302 Mustang, Pontiac Trans-Am and even the AMC Javelin.

If someone is going to lay down over $30,000+ for a new Camaro SS it better be competitive. Dodge has just announced it is offering through Dodge dealers a Super Charged package for its hemi challenger starting in November 2008, and will also offer a drag racing package for the street scene. Don't want to get caught at a stop light in a 2010 Camaro SS if a hemi challenger is going to pull up beside me. If chevy needs to be competitive they better get their act together NOW! Second best doesn't mean anything if performance is what this Camaro is suppose to be about.

[Eric77TA]

Challenger pricing has already been announced. $21,995 for the SE and $29,995 for the R/T. I'd guess that's pretty close to where Camaro V6 and Camaro SS will start, though I'd expect most to average higher than that - espeically the SS.

However, the Camaro SS should have performance comparable to the $39,995 SRT-8 rather than the 5.7 R/T. So I wouldn't worry too much about pulling up next to a stock one. And from what I hear Chevy is working on plenty of behind the counter goodies for Camaro.

[TriShield]

Originally Posted by charts.1

Dodge has just announced it is offering through Dodge dealers a Super Charged package for its hemi challenger starting in November 2008, and will also offer a drag racing package for the street scene.

The Mopar supercharger and the Dodge Challenger Drag Car are both affordable. Depending on what engine you spec the Drag Car with it starts at $30k. It's nearly 700lbs lighter than the Camaro as well.

The Challenger R/T also starts at $29,995 and it's far shy of the L99's numbers and it offers a six-speed too.

Chrysler has done a fantastic job with the Challenger, just as GM has done with the Camaro. If I could own both I would.

[thehemi]

Originally Posted by Eric77TA

However, the Camaro SS should have performance comparable to the $39,995 SRT-8 rather than the 5.7 R/T.

In 6-speed stick, we're talking 425-hp (Dodge) to 422-hp (Chevy).
And the SS weighs about 200# less. So I would put $$ on the SS.
Although the SRT8 is due for an engine bump in another year or 2.

I'm with TriShield, in an ideal world I would own BOTH of the cars!!

[E. Haskell]

Originally Posted by charts.1

Here are some facts issued today by Leftlane and Edmunds. The 2010 Camaro SS lapped Nurburgring at a lap time of 8:20........The 2008 Cobalt
V6 260 hp lapped the track at 8:22, just 2 seconds less then the heavy weight camaro.....those are facts not speculation that you girls keep pulling each others hair over.

So are you giving props to the Cobalt or dissing the Camaro? Maybe the Cobalt SS is just VERY good (it does hold the FWD record after all) - that doesn't mean the Camaro isn't good too.

The Camaro 'Ring time you speak of wasn't a GM "official time" and the Cobalt SS actually ran 8:22.85, so that's closer to a 3 second difference.

Oh, and what kind of time do you think the Mustang GT would run? I remember in Car and Driver's lightning lap where the OLD (non turbo) Cobalt SS ran faster than the GT. I'd say the Mustang GT would probably be in the 8:30s at the 'Ring.

[big swede]

Originally Posted by TriShield

The Mopar supercharger and the Dodge Challenger Drag Car are both affordable. Depending on what engine you spec the Drag Car with it starts at $30k. It's nearly 700lbs lighter than the Camaro as well.

The Challenger R/T also starts at $29,995 and it's far shy of the L99's numbers and it offers a six-speed too.

Chrysler has done a fantastic job with the Challenger, just as GM has done with the Camaro. If I could own both I would.

Yeah but your talking about two cars with no warranty. When it get's to that point it's all about who wants to spend the most money so we should keep the discussion to stock offerings.

The Mopar supercharger has to be installed at the dealer and the boost must be kept under 6lbs to keep the warrenty which no one will do because the dealer will gouge you and why spend that much on a supercharger and only use 6 lbs of boost. The Drag car is not even street legal so there is no need for a comparison there.

You're right though, both cars are awesome!

[charts.1]

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

So are you giving props to the Cobalt or dissing the Camaro? Maybe the Cobalt SS is just VERY good (it does hold the FWD record after all) - that doesn't mean the Camaro isn't good too.

The Camaro 'Ring time you speak of wasn't a GM "official time" and the Cobalt SS actually ran 8:22.85, so that's closer to a 3 second difference.

Oh, and what kind of time do you think the Mustang GT would run? I remember in Car and Driver's lightning lap where the OLD (non turbo) Cobalt SS ran faster than the GT. I'd say the Mustang GT would probably be in the 8:30s at the 'Ring.

Nobody is dissing the camaro, or saying the camaro isn't good. For a FWD chevy cobalt competitive to the new Camaro is a credit to the Cobalt. 2 seconds or 3 seconds over an 8 minute course for these cars is practically negligable.

Chevy has done a great job on this new camaro. No doubt about it. But looks alone done sell cars today year after year. Hopefully its not too late with most everyones interest now shifting to cars that have high mpg figures. Sure the first year purists and some of the fence sitting camaro fans will opt for this car but after year 1 or 2 it will be hard to keep the momentum going. Die hard Mustang or Challenger fams will not be opting over in large numbers to buy a Camaro, or die hard Camaro fans will not be opting for a challenger. Chevy says they need to sell 100,000 camaros every year to make a profit. That might be a tall order after the second year or 3rd year. By far the bulk of car buyers today in the USA are families looking for a roomy 4 or 6 cylinder car, and they have dozens to pick from foreign and domestic. I don't know how many families will be interested in a 300 hp base car (camaro) with rear seating for 8 year olds today when most are buying roomy 4 cylinder Cobalts, Malibus, Camrys, Accords, and 6 cylinder Impalas. I don't know where the 100,000 Camaro people market will come from year after year. General Motors top selling car the Impala/Cobalt is selling this year at a rate of about 250,000.

Back in the early days Camaro, Mustang, Challenger sold in large numbers, one reason they had little foreign competition, and gas mileage wasn't a real issue until the early 70s, that only lasted a short time. That was then and this is now and things are a lot different today.

Good luck to chevy on this new camaro. They are going to need it to sell the quota they need to make money. Making a profit for GM today is priority #1!

[Dukeboy01]

I can't wait to see the first comparison test in Car and Driver or Motor Trend between the Camaro SS, the Challenger R/T, and the Mustang GT with all of the cars equipped with manual trannies and the option boxes checked to make the cars as light and cheap as possible.

However, right after that, ideally in the same issue, I'd like to see an article comparing the V-6 Camaro RS, the Challenger SE, and a Mustang with the "V-6 Pony package" in which all the cars have automatic trannies. Heck, if they really want to make my day, they could add the Hyundai Genesis coupe, a Honda Accord Coupe, an Altima Coupe, and maybe even a BMW 128i. They could make it a FWD vs RWD mini comparo within the larger test.

I'm looking for the Camaro to win both contests, but I really want to see some actual independent track numbers. Enough bench racing. Let's get it on!!

[eb110americana]

Originally Posted by Dukeboy01

I can't wait to see the first comparison test in Car and Driver or Motor Trend between the Camaro SS, the Challenger R/T, and the Mustang GT with all of the cars equipped with manual trannies and the option boxes checked to make the cars as light and cheap as possible.

However, right after that, ideally in the same issue, I'd like to see an article comparing the V-6 Camaro RS, the Challenger SE, and a Mustang with the "V-6 Pony package" in which all the cars have automatic trannies. Heck, if they really want to make my day, they could add the Hyundai Genesis coupe, a Honda Accord Coupe, an Altima Coupe, and maybe even a BMW 128i. They could make it a FWD vs RWD mini comparo within the larger test.

I'm looking for the Camaro to win both contests, but I really want to see some actual independent track numbers.

That's some solid reading material right there!

Originally Posted by Dukeboy01

Enough bench racing. Let's get it on!!

Well said. Camaros are about stop lights, drag strips, road courses, autocrosses, canyon carving, and boulevard cruising, not endless internet bickering.

[AmericanRevolution]

OK, so lets recap some stuff here.

V6:
LT:
3750 lbs (A)
3741 lbs (M)

LS:
3769 lbs (A)
3780 lbs (M)

They get 300 HP from the DI 3.6L V6 that’s in the up-level CTS. You’re getting the same HP as with the Mustang GT. Now, yes, it’ll have less torque, and it weights more - but people see the horsepower more than weight or torque. Not to shabby.

(SS):
3913 (A)
3860 (M)

Available engines are 400 hp (L99) and 422 hp (LS3).

In addition, you have an independant rear suspension, the weight is wonderfully balanced at 52/48 front/rear, four wheel discs, a very nice interior that is much nicer in quality than the Mustang, a 300 HP V6 and a 400+ HP V8 (as opposed to 210 HP for the V6 and 300 HP for their V8) Add to this the Camaro has a 6-speed manual and 6-speed automatic (versus the 5-speed manual and 5-speed auto in the Mustang), AND add to this the fact that, even with such a huge power gain over the Mustang we STILL equal their EPA mileage (yes, imagine that, in a world of $4+/gallon gas, people look at that stuff!!! Wow!), you’ve got a pretty nice car.

Add to that that this car (in SS trim) laps the Nurburing doing an 8:20 - the 08 Cobalt SS pulled it in 8:22, same w/ the BMW E46 M3 and the last generation BMW M3, the Lotus Exige S and Porsche Cayman S im 8:25. The SS is a $30K car beating out the BMW M3’s and the Cayman S around the vaunted ’Ring. It’ll also hang with those cars at the drag, pulling away from some.

The V6, which runs the 1/4 in what is said to be a "conservative" mid 14 and with its style, quality, performance (it will still handle like the SS, possibly even better due to the weight) - and remember, it equals the Mustang GT in HP - for about $22K, and with the V8 putting out that kind of performance against cars far more expensive for about $30K (and remember, it gets about the same EPA mileage as the Mustangs with far more power), remind me why you guys are complaining? This is an absolute steal.

These cars aren’t just made for 16 year olds anymore. Hell, I’m not sure I’d want to see a 16 year old driving one of these around me, he’ll probably rap it around a lightpole before he even has insurance on the thing!

Trust me, these cars will target young AND OLD. It’ll easily outhandle, and should be able to walk away from the LS2 GTO’s that cost $33K, and even the LS2 GTO’s were a performance bargain, being able to run w/ M3’s, etc.

So, remind me why you thing this is a bad car? It beats cars like the Cayman S on one of the toughest, trickiest tracks the world over where many racers refuse to race on because its so hard, it puts out between 90 and 122 HP more than the Mustang GT while getting the same mileage, and the prices put it as one of the greatest performance buys you can ever make, all while looking sweet and having a quality build with a quality interior that’ll shame its competition at Ford and Dodge with ease.

[red_rider]

Originally Posted by I-Love-Pontiac

28 MPG is the figure AFTER being adjusted for the tougher standards. The Camaro 3800 had 31 MPG on the sticker.

So yeah. They should be compared. If GM can get 28 MPG out of a 60 year old engine, they should be able to get AT LEAST the same from a "modern" DOHC VVT V6. But apparently they can't. Freakin losers.

wrong and wrong, go and actually look up the adjusted numbers on the epa's website, the LS1/6-speed is officially corrected for 17/26, not 28 (although many people have been known to get high 20's mpg). Also F-bodies were a little lighter and more aerodynamic (probably) than the new Zeta model.

But if you're saying LS motors aren't "modern" just because they don't have OHC, you need a reality check. Maybe the 300 hp LS1 is about as fuel efficient as a 300 hp v6 because the LS1 is a good design, as opposed to being "Freakin losers".

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by charts.1

Here are some facts issued today by Leftlane and Edmunds. The 2010 Camaro SS lapped Nurburgring at a lap time of 8:20........The 2008 Cobalt
V6 260 hp lapped the track at 8:22, just 2 seconds less then the heavy weight camaro.....those are facts not speculation that you girls keep pulling each others hair over.

Yes, just like the FACT that the Cobalt SS/TC uses a 2.0L 4 CYLINDER not a V6 like you posted.