HorsePower

LV51FER · Jun 23, 2007

This will be an even bigger disappointment then....

This is probably very provisional but a supercharged 6.2 with 525hp out of the box looks good. The Z06's hand-built LS7 is obviously too expensive for mass production so the new LS3 steps in - which is the new 6.2 replacing the 6.0 LS2 in the Vette this year. If it's true, the V6 has more power than the Stang's V8 (sounds like it should be 210?) Ford need to up their game if this is correct.

Base V6 Camaro
MSRP* $ 21,750.00 (base price) to $ 31,560.00 (fully optioned)

Standard Options:
• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability w/ IRS
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Engine: 310 hp 3.9L 3900 V6 HF
• Tires: front and rear, P235/40-17,
• Wheels: 17- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar

Optional Base V6:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL $195
• Automatic Transmission $850
• XM Satellite Radio $200
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 17- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Convertible $4000
• Power Sunroof $1200
• Floor mats: carpeted $75
• RALLY SPORT PACKAGE- 18" aluminum polished wheels with P245/40ZR-18
tires, RS badges, fog lamps, body-color grille inserts, front and rear fascia extensions, chrome tail pipes $2000

Super Sport Camaro (SS)
MSRP* $ 28,145.00 (base price) to $ 38,485.00 (fully optioned)

• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability w/ IRS
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Engine: 430 hp 6.2L 6200 V8 LS3 with DOD
• Duel exhaust
• Tires: front and rear, P245/40ZR-18,
• Wheels: 18- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar
• XM Satellite Radio
• Fog lamps
• SS grille
• SS hood with scoop
• SS front and rear fascia
• SS Spoiler
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL
• Floor mats: carpeted

Optional SS:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• PERFORMANCE PACKAGE- performance handling suspension with stiffer springs, stabilizer bars, performance axle ratio, chrome tail pipes $2000
• RALLY SPORT PACKAGE(RS/SS)- 18" aluminum polished wheels with P245/40ZR-18 tires, RS badges, body-color grille inserts, front and rear fascia extensions, chrome tail pipes $1000
• 6-speed Automatic Transmission $850
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 18- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Convertible $4000
• Power Sunroof $1200

Z28 Camaro (Limited Production)
MSRP* $ 39,250.00 (base price) to $ 43,740.00 (fully optioned)

• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Performance large cross drilled rotors
• performance handling suspension with stiffer springs, stabilizer bars, performance axle ratio
• Engine: 525 hp Supercharged 6.2L 6200 V8 LS9
• Special Z28 exhaust outlets, polished, four-inch stainless-steel tips
• Tires: front, P275/40ZR-19,
• Tires: rear, P295/40ZR-19,
• Wheels: 19- x 9.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar
• XM Satellite Radio
• Fog lamps
• Z28 grille
• Z28 hood with scoop
• Z28 front and rear fascia
• Z28 Spoiler
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL
• Floor mats: carpeted

Optional Z28:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• XM Satellite Radio $200
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 19- x 9.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Power Sunroof $1200

07BLKSTANG-GT · Jun 23, 2007

LV51FER said:
This will be an even bigger disappointment then....

This is probably very provisional but a supercharged 6.2 with 525hp out of the box looks good. The Z06's hand-built LS7 is obviously too expensive for mass production so the new LS3 steps in - which is the new 6.2 replacing the 6.0 LS2 in the Vette this year. If it's true, the V6 has more power than the Stang's V8 (sounds like it should be 210?) Ford need to up their game if this is correct.

Base V6 Camaro
MSRP* $ 21,750.00 (base price) to $ 31,560.00 (fully optioned)

Standard Options:
• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability w/ IRS
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Engine: 310 hp 3.9L 3900 V6 HF
• Tires: front and rear, P235/40-17,
• Wheels: 17- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar

Optional Base V6:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL $195
• Automatic Transmission $850
• XM Satellite Radio $200
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 17- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Convertible $4000
• Power Sunroof $1200
• Floor mats: carpeted $75
• RALLY SPORT PACKAGE- 18" aluminum polished wheels with P245/40ZR-18
tires, RS badges, fog lamps, body-color grille inserts, front and rear fascia extensions, chrome tail pipes $2000

Super Sport Camaro (SS)
MSRP* $ 28,145.00 (base price) to $ 38,485.00 (fully optioned)

• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability w/ IRS
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Engine: 430 hp 6.2L 6200 V8 LS3 with DOD
• Duel exhaust
• Tires: front and rear, P245/40ZR-18,
• Wheels: 18- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar
• XM Satellite Radio
• Fog lamps
• SS grille
• SS hood with scoop
• SS front and rear fascia
• SS Spoiler
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL
• Floor mats: carpeted

Optional SS:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• PERFORMANCE PACKAGE- performance handling suspension with stiffer springs, stabilizer bars, performance axle ratio, chrome tail pipes $2000
• RALLY SPORT PACKAGE(RS/SS)- 18" aluminum polished wheels with P245/40ZR-18 tires, RS badges, body-color grille inserts, front and rear fascia extensions, chrome tail pipes $1000
• 6-speed Automatic Transmission $850
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 18- x 8.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Convertible $4000
• Power Sunroof $1200

Z28 Camaro (Limited Production)
MSRP* $ 39,250.00 (base price) to $ 43,740.00 (fully optioned)

• Active Handling System: improves traction and enhances vehicle stability
• Brakes: four-wheel antilock disc standard
• Performance large cross drilled rotors
• performance handling suspension with stiffer springs, stabilizer bars, performance axle ratio
• Engine: 525 hp Supercharged 6.2L 6200 V8 LS9
• Special Z28 exhaust outlets, polished, four-inch stainless-steel tips
• Tires: front, P275/40ZR-19,
• Tires: rear, P295/40ZR-19,
• Wheels: 19- x 9.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, silver-painted, aluminum
• Six-speed manual transmission
• Air conditioning
• Power windows
• Remote Keyless Entry
• Cruise control
• Cloth bucket seats
• CD player
• OnStar
• XM Satellite Radio
• Fog lamps
• Z28 grille
• Z28 hood with scoop
• Z28 front and rear fascia
• Z28 Spoiler
• LIMITED SLIP REAR DIFFERENTIAL
• Floor mats: carpeted

Optional Z28:
• PREMIUM PACKAGE- includes dual-zone air conditioning, automatic power seating and Head-Up Display with on-board computer (MPG, outside temp, compass etc.) $875
• Leather seating with heated 6-way power driver seat $1015
• XM Satellite Radio $200
• Bose Monsoon Premium sound system with in-dash 6 CD changer and MP3 connection $600
• Wheels: 19- x 9.5-inch front and rear, five-spoke, polished, aluminum $600
• Power Sunroof $1200

Are you sure about those specs? Did that come from GM?

stanmckinney · Jun 23, 2007

Let's also not forget that the Mustang has been made continuously for more than 40 years. The Mustan was, is and will continue to be popular with the masses. It is, and some won't like this, the V6 that keeps the breed alive.
Chevy killed the Camaro, rembember that, because sales weren't where they should be. Chevy focused on high performance instead of the V6 where most of the sales were.
Will Chevy make that mistake again especially during the time of high gasoline prices? Ford's people aren't the smartest in the world and I could give you many examples of why I think that, mostly small trivial things that added together show you they just are out of touch. But Ford corporate at least recognizes you must build a car for the masses in order to also produce the high performance versions.
The pony car wars all over should be interesting. Perhaps some of the inflated dealer prices will disappear.

LV51FER · Jun 23, 2007

I got the specs off a UK forum that took that off one of the US Mustang or Camaro forums/blogs. The V6 output seems high I confess at 310 and it seems that 210 might be more likely. As for the 6.2 puttting out 430hp, that's probably right as that's what it puts out in the Holden and Corvette. I know that traditionally GM have detuned the V8 for the Camaro but it was pretty much an open secret that they under-rated the LS1 and it put out nearer the Corvette's figure so perhaps they are sparing us the BS this time.

The Holden (think you got the GTO) put out 400, the ame as the Vette and the performance difference between the Camaro and the Vette will be preserved with the weight difference.

The supercharged 525hp seems realistic too. They'll want to beat the GT500 headline figure and the supercharged 6.2 is being developed for the new "Supervette" to produce at least 600hp thereby keeping the divide. It'll be fatser than a base Vette but it's a bout time that GM realised that the two cars don't really compete.

It would seem to be a lot of effort to make up if it didn't have some basis in reality...

This is a war I'm really looking forward to.

kooldawg6 · Jun 24, 2007

It will be very interesting to see what Ligenfelter comes up with for the new Camaro!

mikes06gt · Jun 24, 2007

i dont know why 310 seems high for a v6? my acura tls has a v6 and puts out 300hp..the s2000 has a 4 banger in it and it puts out i believe 220hp...300 for a v8 seems a bit low for me..i think if ford does not hit or come close to the 400 mark with the new mustang then they are going to feel it...i think the 5.4 should be the base level engine for the gt.i know both of my z28s (93 and 98) got great fuel mileage..i know when i am looking at a sports car i can deal with the fit and finish not being great if i feel i am getting a really good performing car for the money..unless gm does the camaro different than my previous ones that will be the case

LV51FER · Jun 24, 2007

mikes06gt said:
i dont know why 310 seems high for a v6? my acura tls has a v6 and puts out 300hp..the s2000 has a 4 banger in it and it puts out i believe 220hp...300 for a v8 seems a bit low for me..i think if ford does not hit or come close to the 400 mark with the new mustang then they are going to feel it...i think the 5.4 should be the base level engine for the gt.i know both of my z28s (93 and 98) got great fuel mileage..i know when i am looking at a sports car i can deal with the fit and finish not being great if i feel i am getting a really good performing car for the money..unless gm does the camaro different than my previous ones that will be the case

Yes but your Acura isn't the base model. The American V6s seem to be iron block low-tech engines designed to do a job, not thrill anyone too much. They also seem deliberately tuned for less power to distance them from the V8 model and to keep them cheap. The last thing GM want to do is make everyone willling to buy a V8 happy with the V6.

07gtfolife · Jun 24, 2007

The little S has crap for torque a whopping 167 lbs ft. The TL has a little more at 256. So those little motors might put out decent horse but lack the torque.

LV51FER · Jun 25, 2007

07gtfolife said:
The little S has crap for torque a whopping 167 lbs ft. The TL has a little more at 256. So those little motors might put out decent horse but lack the torque.

Not always. A UK spec 2.5 litre Focus ST puts out 236lb.ft of torque at a considerably lower 1600rpm albeit it needs a 5 cylinder Volvo engine, a turbo and variable cam timing to do it. The difference is that the Focus ST is the top of the Focus range, not the bottom so gets everything it needs to sell. If they ever made a Focus V8, they'd stop putting this engine in the car for obvious reasons. Why don't we get 4.0 engines? Because in the UK, a 2.5 litre engine is considered to be pretty huge for a daily driver. I have to confess that my 1.8 Mazda 5 isn't much more economical than my supercharged 05 Mustang GT and considerably less powerful then the Mustang V6.

At the end of the day, this is nothing to do with engine capacity or technical specifications, it's to do with marketing and making things cheaply to maximise profit.

01White5spd · Jun 28, 2007

Jenns01TA said:
One thing has also been noted, Ward's has awarded most of their "10 Best" to engine designs that yield the most HP/TQ per engine displacement. There are many automakers now that are able to meet and exceed any of our American made cars with a little Inline-4 or V-6. Some of it is forced induction, yes. But, there is also a statistical pattern shown that bigger is not always better. This reminds me of the dark days before the Oil embargo. HUGE engine displacement and Gobs of torque in an era that sees limited supplies of refined gasoline.

Larger displacement does not = lower fuel mileage. For example just look at the Corvette. It also doesn't mean that the engine is heavier. Again the chevy small block is a good example. Since it is a pushrod engine it has smaller heads and packaging w/ the cam shaft in the middle. Some would call this more technologically advanced. To me the "specific output" should not be hp per L of displacement but HP per Lb of engine weight. That is the problem w/ magazines and Wards, etc. If displacement does not correlate w/ fuel mileage or weight(which are what matter in real life) then why use it to measure performance?

Myponyisred · Jun 28, 2007

All I know is that when the new GM cars come out, I'm seriously going to be looking at getting a SC, so that I'm not left in the dust.

Francis · Jun 29, 2007

LV51FER said:
Super Sport Camaro (SS)
....
• Engine: 430 hp 6.2L 6200 V8 LS3 with DOD
....
• Duel exhaust
....

This can't be an official announcement. A professional PR announcement would never call them "duel exhausts"

Just look at these numbers, this has to be a complete lie. $28k for 430hp Camaro? No way GM would do that to themselves - they're still trying to sell 400hp Corvettes starting at $45k.

But to get back to the original argument, I quite like the modular 4.6L. 300hp on plain old 87 octane? For $26k? I think that ain't bad. The only thing I don't like about them is they doesn't use a timing chain/pushrods.

On a new car, stock, nothing can beat a Mustang GT's performance, for cheaper.

I'm willing to bet our 'stangs will still do us proud in '09

CANTONRACER · Jul 3, 2007

Don't get to hung up on horsepower...it is only a number and winning races involves more.

My 1996 Camaro Z28 LT1 A4 was rated at 285 hp and ran 14.08@99.16 mph a long time ago. This was after learning how to drive the car...the very best it could do.

My wife's 2006 Mustang GT M5 is rated at 300 hp and ran 13.63@102.7 mph a few months back. This was the first time at the track and it has a lot more in it.

The GT is considerably stronger even though it has less cubes and it runs on 87 octane vs. my 93 octane of my Camaro.

Ford is doing a great job....

xBreezy711x · Jul 3, 2007

I have a V6 pony package 2007. I was wondering what parts I need to give my car more horsepower. I'm trying to get at least 350 hp. Also, I was wondering how much the parts would cost.

CatmanJJ · Jul 3, 2007

scottfree said:
I agree! My cousin has 95 z28 auto and its not even a race he can beat me so bad. His car is all stock with over 100k miles and if he jumps on it at 60 it will spin tires.

Stock, equal drivers, LT1s are good races for new edge GTs, sn97 GTs should pummel LT1s. LS1 98+(I believe) Fbods are a whole other ball game.

gashog · Jul 3, 2007

I am eagerly awaiting the release of both the camaro and the challenger. I think i'm the only one who thinks the new camaro looks like ass. The challenger concept looks gorgeous, I hope dodge follows through with it and changes nothing.

Its too bad GM and Chrysler didn't have the balls to produce these cars 3 years ago when the new mustang was born. Ford didn't imitate, they took a chance and hit a home run with the new mustang. Chevy and Dodge HAVE to sell something vastly stronger than the current competition, otherwise no one but the die-hards would buy it.

Ford though, in my opinion has done nothing wrong. Sure the mustang will be underpowered sitting next to a new camaro SS or z28, dollar for dollar though I think you'll get more out of the stang. Just wait for a fully optioned camaro to tip the scales at more than 40k. what self respecting mullet man would drop 40k on a camaro???

my 2 cents.

Jenns01TA · Jul 3, 2007

01White5spd said:
1. Larger displacement does not = lower fuel mileage.

2. For example just look at the Corvette. It also doesn't mean that the engine is heavier. Again the chevy small block is a good example. Since it is a pushrod engine it has smaller heads and packaging w/ the cam shaft in the middle. Some would call this more technologically advanced.

3.To me the "specific output" should not be hp per L of displacement but HP per Lb of engine weight. That is the problem w/ magazines and Wards, etc. If displacement does not correlate w/ fuel mileage or weight(which are what matter in real life) then why use it to measure performance?

1. I have to disagree respectfully with this statement. Statistical analysis shows the law of averages hedging this one to larger displacement = lower fuel mileage.

2. 7.0L 2007 Corvette averages 16/26 / 6.0L averages 17/27. This is based on a new, but still "imaginary scenarios" of how we should drive our cars.

3. I understand the technology and agree that engine design will yield the most optimal end HP/TQ and not displacement alone. Since engine power is dependent on air/fuel mixture and the efficiency behind the combustion stroke, I can't simply negate the fact that when all other factors are equal, a larger displacement engine IS more powerful than a smaller. It is science and engineering. Not an opinion.

I can agree that there must be a better way of rating these and not the traditional SAE methods used; however, it took them almost 50 years to change the MPG rating methods, I do not foresee a change in HP/TQ calculations anytime soon.

CatmanJJ said:
Stock, equal drivers, LT1s are good races for new edge GTs, sn97 GTs should pummel LT1s. LS1 98+(I believe) Fbods are a whole other ball game.

gashog said:
I am eagerly awaiting the release of both the camaro and the challenger. I think i'm the only one who thinks the new camaro looks like ass. The challenger concept looks gorgeous, I hope dodge follows through with it and changes nothing.

Its too bad GM and Chrysler didn't have the balls to produce these cars 3 years ago when the new mustang was born. Ford didn't imitate, they took a chance and hit a home run with the new mustang. Chevy and Dodge HAVE to sell something vastly stronger than the current competition, otherwise no one but the die-hards would buy it.

Ford though, in my opinion has done nothing wrong. Sure the mustang will be underpowered sitting next to a new camaro SS or z28, dollar for dollar though I think you'll get more out of the stang. Just wait for a fully optioned camaro to tip the scales at more than 40k. what self respecting mullet man would drop 40k on a camaro???
my 2 cents.

I am a mullet woman and have no respect when it comes to my sickness for motor sports and cars. I buy them like sweaters.

shooterm1 · Jul 3, 2007

Jenns01TA said:
1. I have to disagree respectfully with this statement. Statistical analysis shows the law of averages hedging this one to larger displacement = lower fuel mileage.

2. 7.0L 2007 Corvette averages 16/26 / 6.0L averages 17/27. This is based on a new, but still "imaginary scenarios" of how we should drive our cars.

3. I understand the technology and agree that engine design will yield the most optimal end HP/TQ and not displacement alone. Since engine power is dependent on air/fuel mixture and the efficiency behind the combustion stroke, I can't simply negate the fact that when all other factors are equal, a larger displacement engine IS more powerful than a smaller. It is science and engineering. Not an opinion.

I can agree that there must be a better way of rating these and not the traditional SAE methods used; however, it took them almost 50 years to change the MPG rating methods, I do not foresee a change in HP/TQ calculations anytime soon.

I wont bother to debate you point by point / you make a great argument ...

However I remember something that and old racer told me that's hard to disagree with.

He said that " there's no substitute for torque " ...

and the more iron that you've got spinning, the easier it is to make torque.

GO Jenn!

Jenns01TA · Jul 3, 2007

shooterm1 said:
I wont bother to debate you point by point / you make a great argument ...

However I remember something that and old racer told me that's hard to disagree with.

He said that " there's no substitute for torque " ...

and the more iron that you've got spinning, the easier it is to make torque.

GO Jenn!

Indeed. Shelby himself said something to the affect that"

Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races.

Since I am sitting in a 6 year old vehicle that produces an underrated 310 HP and 340 TQ, I am sitting just fine, my friend. I have no argument to make when science and engineering back the comments made.

LV51FER · Jul 4, 2007

The LS1 is a great (under-rated in terms of power) engine which will run 13s all day but the LT1 has 275hp stock so I'm not sure why an SN95 with less hp would pummel it given they weigh pretty much the same. My experience at the track is very much the other way round.

HorsePower

LV51FER

New Member

07BLKSTANG-GT

New Member

stanmckinney

LV51FER

New Member

kooldawg6

mine works really well and can take a fair amount

mikes06gt

New Member

LV51FER

New Member

07gtfolife

New Member

LV51FER

New Member

01White5spd

Myponyisred

New Member

Francis

New Member

CANTONRACER

xBreezy711x

New Member

CatmanJJ

Captain Tangnet

gashog

Member

Jenns01TA

Active Member

shooterm1

New Member

Jenns01TA

Active Member

LV51FER

New Member

Similar threads

HorsePower

New Member

New Member

New Member

mine works really well and can take a fair amount

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Captain Tangnet

Member

Active Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency