Mustang V6 vs Camaro V6

[T_MECO]

as seen on CNN


http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/...iew/index.html

[hair10]

I love reading the comments section.

[john2000car]

T_Meco thanks for bringing this story/opinion to our attention. I believe the writer expresses how many would evaluate and could arrive at the same conclusion that Camaro is better, all things considered. Even more, with the *WOW* looks/appearance factor! The extra weight seems to come up in many discussion. At least for me, this shows that GM did not compromise quality to achieve parity here on a slightly larger body design style. I get the impression that Ford may have hurried a bit to play catch up and may have missed a couple of things. Thanks to the Camaro production team for really executing on a well designed piece of art. So much more I could add here, but don't want to write a book. Just my somewhat biased opinion.

[ron10]

very nice.

[2010 SSRS]

Camaro

[CamaroBelarus]

Yep it is, even it should be slower a bit. 0.3-0.5 to 60 and 0.1-0.3 1/4. On some another thread told it. Camaro is cheaper. If u take base Ls and V6 base stang with gears(thats why it will be a little bit faster), the price is the same. But when u start adding some good stuff, taking 2LT vs Premium stang v6 (ul have to pay more for better rims, ul have to pay for remote start and so on), u spend like 1-1.5k less. Simply add headers and gears for this money and u are not slower anymore for the same price. Add camaro's *WOW* look and quality and its a simple decision.

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by CamaroBelarus

Yep it is, even it should be slower a bit. 0.3-0.5 to 60 and 0.1-0.3 1/4. On some another thread told it. Camaro is cheaper. If u take base Ls and V6 base stang with gears(thats why it will be a little bit faster), the price is the same. But when u start adding some good stuff, taking 2LT vs Premium stang v6 (ul have to pay more for better rims, ul have to pay for remote start and so on), u spend like 1-1.5k less. Simply add headers and gears for this money and u are not slower anymore for the same price. Add camaro's *WOW* look and quality and its a simple decision.

The mustang v6 is still considerably faster without gears than the camaro. Let me know when a stock v6 camaro can trap anywhere near 104. The SS and 5.0 are super close, but the v6 camaro and v6 mustang are not that close at all performance wise.

[CamaroBelarus]

Its close even with gears. At least for autos. The guy with intake and headers (no tune or gears) got in high 13's on auto v6. And where did u get 104 for v6 stang? The best was MT test with 102 and which is bullshit ofc, cos all another magz gets 99-101. And its juts ON PAPER. It wont get to 100 even in real life without gears.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by CamaroBelarus

Its close even with gears. At least for autos. The guy with intake and headers (no tune or gears) got in high 13's on auto v6. And where did u get 104 for v6 stang? The best was MT test with 102 and which is bullshit ofc, cos all another magz gets 99-101. And its juts ON PAPER. It wont get to 100 even in real life without gears.

Edmunds ran a 14.0 @ 104mph in the v6 stang.

Edit: Car and Driver

[8cd03gro]

Originally Posted by CamaroBelarus

Its close even with gears. At least for autos. The guy with intake and headers (no tune or gears) got in high 13's on auto v6. And where did u get 104 for v6 stang? The best was MT test with 102 and which is bullshit ofc, cos all another magz gets 99-101. And its juts ON PAPER. It wont get to 100 even in real life without gears.

Car and Driver - 14.0 @ 104

Inside Line - 13.9 @101.2

MT - 13.7@102



Bone Stock (No external or internal engine modifications, stock tires):
1. 14.829 @ 95.99 - 02pewtersix - 1LT M6
2. 14.860 @ 93.29 - BaylorAirForce - 2LT/RS A6
3. 15.671 @ 91.89 - talltom - LS M6

Bolt Ons (Modified airway, exhaust, tires, tune - no internal engine or power adders):
1. 13.959 @ 101.04 - 67 GTO - A6 - (Injen CAI, GMPP Axle Back, JBA Shorty Headers)
2. 14.047 @ 98.80 - scrming - A6 - (Injen CAI, MRT v2.0 Axle Back, JBA Shorty Headers, Trifecta Tune)
3. 14.059 @ 98.08 - Beauwulf - A6 - (Airaid CAI, MRT v1.0 Axle Back, Trifecta Tune)
4. 14.094 @ 99.70 - 67 GTO - A6 - (SLP Blackwing Intake, GMPP Axle Back, JBA Shorty Headers)
5. 14.184 @ 96.43 - Beauwulf - A6 - (Airaid CAI, MRT v1.0 Axle Back)
6. 14.302 @ 96.97 - BaylorAirForce - A6 - Airaid CAI, MRT v1.0 Axle Back, Trifecta Tune)
7. 14.323 @ 97.75 - scrming - A6 - (IAT sensor relocation, MRT Axle Back)
8. 14.447 @ 97.03 - 67 GTO - A6 - (Airaid CAI, GMPP Axle Back)
9.
10.


So there’s only one v6 on the entire forum that has trapped over 100 and the same car is the only one that has run a 13, yet every v6 mustang tested has trapped over 100 and ET as fast as 13.7.


Why would the car run slower traps and ETs in real life than every magazine did? It's almost always true that enthusiasts will get better ETs and trap speeds than magazines do. From what I have seen so far I really don't think the v6 camaro and v6 mustang are that close. It looks like almost a half-second difference in general and that's huge. The cars are making almost identical power, but the mustang is about 300 lbs lighter. That's not to say the camaro is bad. I wouldn't personally buy the v6 model of either, but it's still a good performance and overall bargain, the v6 mustang just performs better. The SS and 5.0 on the other hand are a total toss up.

[Impact]

Every article I have read or the videos I have seen state the Mustang V6 is half a second or quicker then my 2010 V6. I have no problem with that because I love my car.

The Mustang v6 without gears is still alot quicker then a 2010 V6 Camaro and a V6 with gears is even faster then a Camaro v6. Every other magazine states the Mustang is better, so just because this one says the Camaro is better everyone is rubbing their egos.

There is a V6 Mustang running a 2010 Camaro, looks like the Mustang pulls more then a little bit as someone here stated.

[Impact]

Originally Posted by CamaroBelarus

Its close even with gears. At least for autos. The guy with intake and headers (no tune or gears) got in high 13's on auto v6. And where did u get 104 for v6 stang? The best was MT test with 102 and which is bullshit ofc, cos all another magz gets 99-101. And its juts ON PAPER. It wont get to 100 even in real life without gears.

Every other magazine shows the Mustang winning, is that also bullshit? You know what's bullshit? Owners like you who think anytime their car loses is bullshit lmao.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ang_v-6_page_3
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...maro_rs_page_2


Car and Driver got the Mustang V6 0-60 in 5.4 compared to the Camaro's 5.9 and the Mustang got quarermile time of 14.00 at 104.00 miles an hour while they got the Camaro 14.5 at 99. The Mustang also hit 100 in 13.00 while the Camaro took 14.8. Half a second is a lot of car lenths and the Mustang hits a 100 in almost two seconds faster then the Camaro, so apparently the Mustang keeps pulling even harder.

Motor Trend ran the Mustang V6 0-60 in 5.1 seconds and quartermile in 13.7 102.0 mph compared to the Camaro's 5.7 and 14.3 98.9 mph

Edmonds also got the Mustang faster by about half a second.

Again half a second is prob over 4 car lenths or more.

[Sax1031]

Each tenth in a race is generally 1 car length.

[Impact]

That is what I figured.