the new SS is bad ass and has grown on me very quickly....as far as the old ls1 cars, i've personally seen them trap 107-108 bone stock down to the tires and run fairly consistent 13.0's. That's a mid 12 second mph with tires and suspension. Hell, I a friend of mine went 13.6@101 in his bone stock 95 z28 (lt1 A4) for many cars that's 05+ gt territory right there
Originally posted by SS02
Post #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 12, and 13 are all comments on the Camaro. Are you even reading the posts?
You'll have to speak for yourself on that one, bro. I never thought the new Camaro looked good. It looks like Chevy tried way too hard to make it into something of the past, and "forced" the design.
As for the Challenger, it looks ridiculous from a rear view. I think it has a great side and front profile; very close to the original, but that's where it ends.
I can't recall hearing many complaints about the stance of a '99-'04 Mustang, but IMO, most cars off the factory floor have a 4x4 stance, save for the exotics.
There were a lot of people that liked the Camaro when it first showed up and some that didn't.
You must not have been reading the 2V section on this forum. There was post after post about the 4x4 look. Most people were not getting lowering springs for performance, they were getting them to get rid of the 4x4 look.
Anyway, I hope that all three can stay around. Each car provides something the other two don't which is good b/c we are all different. One thing that I am worried about and I have said this previously, they all better get the cost down or they will all go away. I personally can't believe a Mustang GT costs low to mid 30's. The Mustang and Camaro were suppose to be the working mans sports/muscle car.
A new Mustang GT (Standard) stickers for $29k. After negotations, you should be able to drive one home for around $27k.
"muscle cars"
have always been heavy and slow, with lots of HP. Do you think the muscle cars of the 60s all ran 11s and pulled 1g on the skid pad and braked with precision? No.
Most of them were 13-14 second cars with GOBS of HP, weighed a ton, had drum brakes, tremendous body roll.
Originally posted by Top Speed:
I Bought my 2007 MGT in August of 2006. It stickered for $27,500 and I was able to get it for $23k. Mustangs have always been a tremendous value. As I posted in the previous post (with the link); there's dealerships selling new MGT's for $19,xxx. Mustangs will always be the better value. Even in the last years of the Camaro/Firebird; the Mustang still outsold the GM couterparts by a 3 to 1 ratio.
While I'll agree that most of them ran in the 13s-14s and didn't handle for squat, they were not always extremely heavy. An early 70s Nova SS weighed about 3400 lbs, if that. A 1962 Nova SS weighed around 2900 lbs. An early 70s Impala SS weighed about 4200 lbs; pretty light for such a boat. A 1969 Chevelle SS weighed about 3500 lbs, while the 1970 model was the heaviest, at around 3700 lbs, and it had a 454 in it. Even look at the Fox-Body Mustangs. They weighed about 3100 lbs.
What good is a Muscle Car if it has 450 hp and weighs 4000 lbs if a Honda Civic with a motor-swap and 275 hp will eat its lunch? Kinda makes me want a Honda Civic...Ok, not really, but you get the point.
Remember the latest Mercury Marauder? I'll bet those owners were pissed to find out a V6 Honda Accord was faster than their "Muscle Car."
Originally posted by Top Speed:
I Bought my 2007 MGT in August of 2006. It stickered for $27,500 and I was able to get it for $23k. Mustangs have always been a tremendous value. As I posted in the previous post (with the link); there's dealerships selling new MGT's for $19,xxx. Mustangs will always be the better value. Even in the last years of the Camaro/Firebird; the Mustang still outsold the GM couterparts by a 3 to 1 ratio.
As reported by USA Today:
Besides being a far superior automobile to the 2010 Mustang in every single way, the new Camaro has just beat it in
something else; Sales.
In the month of June, GM has reported 9,320 Camaros went out the door, while Ford reports selling just 7,632 Mustangs. Let's not even talk about the 2010 Challenger, which sold a measly 1,369 cars.
What you must remember also is that MOST (not including the fox.....not sure how that got thrown in there) of the cars you mentioned had:
No AC
No Power Brakes
14 or 15" wheels
very basic suspension
100lbs less of wire and electronics
If you want to add the above options to cars of today, the weight would be about the same. Times change, what can I say?
Who cares what a car weighs....its about how it performs.
SS02 said:As reported by GMhightechperformance:
Besides being a far superior automobile to the 2010 Mustang in every single way, the new Camaro has just beat it in
something else; Sales. In the month of June, GM has reported 9,320 Camaros went out the door, while Ford reports selling just 7,632 Mustangs. Let's not even talk about the 2010 Challenger, which sold a measly 1,369 cars.
Who cares what a car weighs?
Um....maybe you should reread my post you quoted and look at the last line?
And, if you are going to say something, try not to contradict yourself....
Top Speed: When I found out the camaro weighed 4000lbs, I nearly lost my lunch
Top Speed: The stang, camaro, and challenger or so heavy, they shouldnt be classified as muscle cars.
Obviously "weight" was a factor in those things you said....no?
And how many millions of dollars did GM have to spend on marketing for the new camaro? I'm sure it trumps the money Ford spent on the Mustang. Also keep in mind there are more Camaros at dealerships than there are Mustangs. Ford only produced about 45,000 2009 Mustangs and shut down production early to start on the 2010s. In the meantime the new ones have literally been trickling onto dealership lots. Whereas GM spent a ton of money putting the car in 2 movies and countless ads, built up inventory and then made a "splash." I've now seen about twice the number of camaros than new mustangs on the road down here.
Question is, will the hype survive the test of time? Or the car for that matter? It's a brand new model (as anyone here knows who bought an 05 mustang, they can have problems) it took them years to finally get it to market and now GM is bankrupt, and my tax paying dollars now pay for your camaro when it breaks down.
As reported by USA Today:
Such a hot model is rare in today's global auto sales slump, and GM thinks Camaro may catch Ford's Mustang in monthly sales when it has enough available. GM sold 5,463 Camaros in May, the first month of the sporty car's revival, compared with the 8,812 Mustangs sold by Ford. Chrysler sold 2,695 of the rival Dodge Challenger it brought a year ago.
The Camaro cant reach the supply and demand either, I know guys waiting 2 months before they get their ride !!!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?