Motor Trend Mustang GT vs Camaro SS vs Challenger SRT

[Nethead]

Not only are the new Mustang and Camaro both more powerful then the original Viper and ZR-1 of the same era, but they are also quite a bit faster then both cars.

SVT666: HemiDude, then you might be interested in this from Motor Trend, referring to a dragstrip performance of an oh-eleven Mustang GT that Evolution Performance obtained after having their new 5.0 for nine days:

"NEW NUMBERS...11.82 @ 118MPH with a 1.63 60ft! This is with the following bolt ons:  Off road X-pipe, cat back exhaust, upper and lower control arms, drag radials and a new computer tune! Evolution Perfomance are [sic] the first to run in the 11's with the Coyote..."

While that sounds awesome for 302 cubic inches, that is still only a second quicker than a stock oh-eleven Mustang GT.  And I credit most of that to the drag radials.

'Found this on www.mustangblog.com on May 13th:

Evolution Performance claims first 2011 Mustang GT 5.0 in the 11's
By Matt Rigney May 12, 2010

A leader in Ford Mustang performance over the past couple years has to be Evolution Performance with their mind boggling performance numbers from the GT500 among other cars.  This time is no different as they got their hands on one of the first 2011 Mustang GT's and took it straight to the track with one goal in mind.  That goal was to get the new 5.0 Mustang into the 11's and be the first to do it.  They started by making a few runs on the stock tires which resulted in mid 12-second quarter mile runs.  Next EP stepped it up with a set of Bogart racing wheels and Mickey Thompson ET Street tires giving them the results they were looking for, an 11-second run with no modifications to the motor.  Their best pass was an 11.82 @ 118 MPH.  Check out the video below for a baseline dyno run and all the quarter-mile passes.

[Nethead]

Likely below the Challenger SRT8 and above the Camaro SS--that would be fourth, the position currently occupied by the Mustang V6.  That would be a real contest, since the SRT8 got two votes for second, one vote for third, and three votes for fourth.  The Mustang V6 got three votes for third and two votes for fourth.
 
The SRT8 took it six votes to five, so would the lesser-than-an-SRT8 Challenger R/T still offer enough to get at least the five votes needed to tie the Mustang for fourth?  This would be really hard to say--evidently the Mustang V6 finished just a little behind the SRT8 so the R/T would have to be breathing hard down the SRT8's neck to squeeze into that narrow gap between the SRT8's third overall finish and the Mustang V6's fourth overall.  As a sheer guess I suspect that there is a difference of more subtance between the SRT8 and the lesser R/T than there is between the SRT8 and the Mustang V6--but that's just a guess.  There's certainly a difference of a LOT of subtance between the SRT8 in third and the SE in seventh!  More likely, I think, would be the R/T battling it out with the Camaro SS for fifth overall.  In fact, has anyone seen a comparo of the Challenger R/T and the Camaro SS head-to-head?  That's probably a pretty close match...  

Motor Trend reduces the conjecture level.  On page 48 of the June, 2010 issue is a paragraph in the "(first test) ford mustang v-6" article that shows how roughly the Challenger R/T would be treated by a 2011 Mustang V6:

"Not that the Blue Oval's new six-cylinder musclecar needs more power.  Yep, you read right: We called the new 3.7 Mustang a musclecar.  Now if you're reeling from the idea of a Mustang V-6 ever being labeled with that word,...chew on this: 0 to 60 in 5.1 seconds and the quarter mile in 13.7 at 102.0 mph.  The Hemi-powered 376-horse Dodge Challenger R/T isn't any quicker to 60 and is just a tenth ahead at the quarter.  Moreover, the new 3.7 is nearly as quick as last year's V-8 powered GT, which put down 4.9 and 13.5 at 104.2."

My earlier "More likely, I think, would be the R/T battling it out with the Camaro SS for fifth overall." is now officially revised to "Definitely the R/T would be battling it out with the Camaro SS for fifth overall."  In light of those performance figures for the R/T, the Mustang V6 retains its fourth place ranking by a comfortable margin.

[Nethead]

From www.roadandtrack.com:

2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS vs. 2011 Ford Mustang GT - Comparison Test
Good ol' 'Merican muscle, flexed in decidedly different V-8 configurations.
By Shaun Bailey / Photos by Brian Blades

June 14, 2010

Nothing in life seems as sure as the fact that history will repeat itself. And so here we are again, just one year from when we drove the Mustang, Challenger and then all-new Camaro across the country (?The Pony Express Rides Again,? October 2009). Then, the 2010 Mustang GT had 315 bhp, not exactly a fair fight, what with the Camaro SS and Challenger R/T having a healthy dose more?426 and 376 bhp, respectively.

That?s no longer the case. The 2011 Mustang GT now has 97 more galloping ponies under its muscular hood for a total of 412 bhp. That the 2010 car, even with its power disadvantage, won our last comparison test should portend its absolute domination of the Camaro SS, but we?re not taking these cars on a cruise across the country this time. We?re taking them to the back roads, the drags, the beach and the racetrack. Free range for these two to strut their stuff, and we?ve left the Challenger at home because the Camaro and Mustang are natural rivals that are perfectly suited for the hard driving that Managing Editor Andrew Bornhop and I will be doing this time.

2nd Place - 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS
Photos: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS >>
Points: 384.4
Lap Time: 1:37.7

There is nary a difference between the last Camaro we tested and this one, and Chevrolet isn?t making any significant changes for the 2011 model year. The SS we have here is as sporting as it gets, complete with the RS appearance package and 20-in. wheels, and its 6.2-liter V-8 taken from the heart of a Corvette. Until the new 5.0-liter Mustang came about, the SS was the absolute king of the V-8 pony cars at the drag strip. And no, the specialty models from the likes of Dodge (SRT) and Ford (SVT) don?t count. If you must compare them, wait for the Camaro Z28 to arrive.

From the friendly side of the Camaro?s gunsight the driver finds himself in a simple yet modern interior. Ambient blue lighting abounds over vast expanses of barren dash and door panels. The deep-dish steering wheel is pretty to look at, but pretty frustrating to grab onto when in pursuit of the Ford. Bornhop found the Camaro a bit cramped for his 6-ft. 4-in. frame. The headrests that protrude outward from the seatback couldn?t be adjusted not to touch his shoulder blades. I had no trouble with them, and preferred them to the Mustang?s that cant forward a little too much.

Unlike the complicated rear transaxle arrangement of the Corvette, the Camaro SS uses a conventional transmission mated to the aluminum block of its pushrod V-8. And as simple or old-tech as you might consider this engine, it?s not. See our review of the engine technology on page 59 for some insight. Also not old-tech is the suspension. The Camaro forgoes its live-axle past with fully independent suspension fore and aft. No getting saddle butt from a long ride in the SS. Unfortunately, there isn?t a performance suspension option from the factory to improve handling further; it is what it is. And that?s actually quite good, but not as sporting as we?d like it to be. Ford, on the other hand, has given us the option with its Brembo performance package that includes big brakes (taken off the Shelby GT500), and stiffer springs, shocks and anti-roll bars. The Camaro SS has excellent brakes already; but it seems that little was done in the way of offering a performance package upgrade while GM reorganized itself in bankruptcy.

Equipped with near-equal-compound Pirelli P Zero tires, the two are close in cornering grip. The Camaro, however, goes for that muscle-car look with staggered widths offering 8-in.-wide wheels up front and 9-in.-wide rears, while the Mustang runs the same size front and rear. The Camaro?s under-tired front is noticeable in our slalom and skidpad tests where a moderate push is found. On the back roads this wasn?t so noticeable?that is, until it tried keeping up with the Mustang. There?s nothing like the taillights of a Ford to get a Camaro driver to dig his spurs in. Where the Mustang will clip a corner apex with a rear tire, sometimes throwing bits of vegetation and dirt back to mock the Camaro, the Chevy would gracefully arc past the same apex running a tad wide. Stability on, off or in competition mode made no difference. Well, that?s not completely true. Turn off the electronic neuter and the Camaro can be coerced into stable oversteer bliss. Yee-haw! But it still can?t catch the Mustang in the corners.

Down the straights is a different matter. The Camaro beats the Mustang by 2/10ths in the quarter, even offering launch control to help the novice. We defeated the system for our fast runs, though. The tall gearing of the Camaro allows for an ultra-lazy freeway cruise at 1400 rpm, but drop to 3rd for that hard acceleration from 75?110 mph, which is the perfect sweet spot for passing. The Mustang?s tighter-ratio transmission and optional final drive of 3.73:1 require a 3?4 shift in the middle of that same passing maneuver.


1st Place - 2011 Ford Mustang GT
Photos: 2011 Ford Mustang GT >>
Points: 397.5
Lap Time: 1:37.6

Yes, it's still lacking an independent rear suspension. Nobody expects Ford to change that anytime soon. Why would they when it works this well? This is particularly true when talking about performance on a smooth road, as we had for the majority of our test. As such, our 5.0 GT equipped with its new 6-speed manual, quad-cam aluminum V-8 and optional Brembo Brake Package was in heaven. The 3-link live rear axle compromises some ride comfort on bumpy stuff, but gives up little to none out at the track. Drag racers prefer this setup for its robust nature and lack of wheel hop on launch, the latter in stark contrast to the Camaro.

An all-new 6-speed transmission is fully utilized with gear ratios neatly spaced so that the electronically limited top speed of 145 mph is reached in 6th, unlike the Camaro, which can do it in 4th, 5th and 6th. Mustang GT drivers will enjoy shifting this close-ratio box. Like the Camaro, there is now a skip-shift feature, an EPA mileage Band-Aid that forces the driver to shift from 1st?4th under moderate acceleration. Interestingly, it is far more of a nuisance in the Camaro because 1st gear is so much taller.

Where the Mustang really shines, though, is in its relatively low weight. Our test car gained just 80 lb. over the previous version. The majority of that extra weight can be chalked up to the optional glass roof panel and bigger brakes. But all said, it?s still more than 200 lb. (6 percent) lighter than the Camaro. Unfortunately, it remains nose-heavy in its balance, although you?d never know it by its crisp turn-in and ability to clip apexes.

The electric-assist power steering on all 2011 Mustangs is superb, equal or better than the hydraulic assist of the Camaro. It features drift-pull compensation to help the car go straight on crowned roads and in crosswinds, and can even remove the effects of tire nibble over rain grooves. Put the stability control in sport mode or turn it off, and the steering effort becomes heavier and the aids are removed. This was most noticeable under braking for the Omega complex (Turns 3?5) at Big Willow where there?s some braking chatter produced by the track surface that generates some oscillation in the steering wheel. Leave stability control on and it?s not noticed, but turn it off and you?ll want both hands on the wheel (of course, both should be there anyway).

That steering wheel is about perfect, with its thick round rim nicely wrapped in leather. It?s considerably more ergonomic than the Camaro?s, but the column lacks the telescope feature, making it a little more challenging to get comfortable. And unlike the Camaro with its tall sills and narrow bunkerlike window openings, the Mustang is open with good sightlines all around. It has improved side-view mirrors and our GT was equipped with an optional backup camera that displays in the rearview mirror when in reverse.

Headrests for the rear passengers are hard to see around, but can be flipped down with the press of a button. It seems that every year now the Mustang is being improved, and it?s hard to count all the little revisions. As a whole, it?s clear the Mustang has far more options than the Camaro, whose upgrade list is comparatively barren.

We could have done without the $1995 glass roof and the weight it brings, but from an aesthetic point of view, it?s very nice. Particularly for rear passengers at night when the stars are out. The rear seats in both these 2+2s are adequate for short trips, but don?t allow for much breathing room. Claustrophobic types should avoid the cramped darkness that is the Camaro?s rear seating area.

And The Winner Is...
The Mustang. It wins again, improving its rating scores to the point where it is almost a clean sweep. It loses in only two categories: ?-mile and ride. It also runs a quicker lap, and is more fun on the track. Yes, it is more expensive with all the options, but you can build one minus the glass roof, backup camera and comfort package. The performance will be the same if not better and cost less than the Camaro SS. The base prices for both pony cars are very competitive, starting at $29,645 for the Mustang GT and $30,945 for the Camaro SS.  Are we advocating that live axles are the way of the future? No. We just know Ford has made it work?kind of like Porsche sticking with a rear-engine design for its 911. It?s just a part of the car?s character.

At the Drags...
Nothing is more appropriate than these ponies appearing at a local run-what-you-brung drag night. The 1/8-mile grudge match drag event at Willow Springs was the perfect venue to burn rubber and practice hitting that third yellow on the Christmas tree start lights. Run after run, the modern muscle cars did their thing with perfection. The V-8s never lost to the locals who challenged them, and it was always a toss-up on which V-8 would win. We did, however, avoid confrontation with that Mercedes-Benz CLS AMG, for obvious reasons.

At the Track...
The words ?Fastest Track in the West? are emblazoned on the wall around the daunting 2.5-mile 9-turn circuit, commonly referred to as Big Willow. The large-radius high-speed turns at Willow Springs Raceway let the cars stretch their legs and minimize the understeer that can be found on tighter tracks. Perfect for our high-powered ponies.

We assumed from the Camaro SS?s comfortable ride and docile understeer behavior that it would fall apart at the racetrack. And that the Mustang GT with its upgraded suspension would destroy the Camaro. We were wrong, as only the slightest margin separates the two. A tighter track might give the Mustang a bigger advantage, but out here the Camaro puts its power and independent suspension to good use in order to stay within 0.1 sec. of the Ford. The Mustang gains time in each corner by pulling just slightly more mid-corner speed, but the Camaro gathers it back up down each straight, starting at corner exit where the Mustang takes a gentle touch to keep its rear end from drifting wide. The Camaro, with its tendency to push, can be hammered on with the confidence that it will just squat and go. A rise at Turn 6 is nearly a jump for a fast car, but the Camaro sucks it up at full throttle, keeping all four wheels on the ground. The Mustang goes flat as well, but requires a line change to keep the front wheels on the tarmac. Into Turns 8 and 9, the Camaro loses time as it scrubs its front tires hard and has to pull itself out of the hole down the straight. Which it does, eventually hitting 130 mph, just 0.7 mph faster than the Mustang and enough to bring their laps to within a single tenth of a second. Much closer than we?d have guessed.

In My Opinion...
In my world, ?Mustang? and ?5.0? are a natural fit, like ?Porsche? and ?flat-6.? But truth be told, I wish the new 4-cammer in the Mustang, which makes good power all the way to redline, had the immediate lowend grunt I savored in the sleeper pushrod LX 5.0-liter models of the early 1990s. Nevertheless, the new Mustang GT wins this battle.
? Andrew Bornhop, Managing Editor

Stock is awesome. I?ve long said that the car which meets one?s
needs unmodified is best. Before the 5.0, that was the Camaro SS.
Today, I switch camps and proclaim the Mustang the better car. Not just for
its engine, that wouldn?t be enough, but for the Mustang GT as a whole?a car that
drives right, stick-axle or not.
? Shaun Bailey, Detroit Editor

[Schadenfreude]

From www.roadandtrack.com:

2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS vs. 2011 Ford Mustang GT - Comparison Test
Good ol' 'Merican muscle, flexed in decidedly different V-8 configurations.
By Shaun Bailey / Photos by Brian Blades

June 14, 2010

Nothing in life seems as sure as the fact that history will repeat itself. And so here we are again, just one year from when we drove the Mustang, Challenger and then all-new Camaro across the country (?The Pony Express Rides Again,? October 2009). Then, the 2010 Mustang GT had 315 bhp, not exactly a fair fight, what with the Camaro SS and Challenger R/T having a healthy dose more?426 and 376 bhp, respectively.

That?s no longer the case. The 2011 Mustang GT now has 97 more galloping ponies under its muscular hood for a total of 412 bhp. That the 2010 car, even with its power disadvantage, won our last comparison test should portend its absolute domination of the Camaro SS, but we?re not taking these cars on a cruise across the country this time. We?re taking them to the back roads, the drags, the beach and the racetrack. Free range for these two to strut their stuff, and we?ve left the Challenger at home because the Camaro and Mustang are natural rivals that are perfectly suited for the hard driving that Managing Editor Andrew Bornhop and I will be doing this time.

2nd Place - 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS
Photos: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS >>
Points: 384.4
Lap Time: 1:37.7

There is nary a difference between the last Camaro we tested and this one, and Chevrolet isn?t making any significant changes for the 2011 model year. The SS we have here is as sporting as it gets, complete with the RS appearance package and 20-in. wheels, and its 6.2-liter V-8 taken from the heart of a Corvette. Until the new 5.0-liter Mustang came about, the SS was the absolute king of the V-8 pony cars at the drag strip. And no, the specialty models from the likes of Dodge (SRT) and Ford (SVT) don?t count. If you must compare them, wait for the Camaro Z28 to arrive.

From the friendly side of the Camaro?s gunsight the driver finds himself in a simple yet modern interior. Ambient blue lighting abounds over vast expanses of barren dash and door panels. The deep-dish steering wheel is pretty to look at, but pretty frustrating to grab onto when in pursuit of the Ford. Bornhop found the Camaro a bit cramped for his 6-ft. 4-in. frame. The headrests that protrude outward from the seatback couldn?t be adjusted not to touch his shoulder blades. I had no trouble with them, and preferred them to the Mustang?s that cant forward a little too much.

Unlike the complicated rear transaxle arrangement of the Corvette, the Camaro SS uses a conventional transmission mated to the aluminum block of its pushrod V-8. And as simple or old-tech as you might consider this engine, it?s not. See our review of the engine technology on page 59 for some insight. Also not old-tech is the suspension. The Camaro forgoes its live-axle past with fully independent suspension fore and aft. No getting saddle butt from a long ride in the SS. Unfortunately, there isn?t a performance suspension option from the factory to improve handling further; it is what it is. And that?s actually quite good, but not as sporting as we?d like it to be. Ford, on the other hand, has given us the option with its Brembo performance package that includes big brakes (taken off the Shelby GT500), and stiffer springs, shocks and anti-roll bars. The Camaro SS has excellent brakes already; but it seems that little was done in the way of offering a performance package upgrade while GM reorganized itself in bankruptcy.

Equipped with near-equal-compound Pirelli P Zero tires, the two are close in cornering grip. The Camaro, however, goes for that muscle-car look with staggered widths offering 8-in.-wide wheels up front and 9-in.-wide rears, while the Mustang runs the same size front and rear. The Camaro?s under-tired front is noticeable in our slalom and skidpad tests where a moderate push is found. On the back roads this wasn?t so noticeable?that is, until it tried keeping up with the Mustang. There?s nothing like the taillights of a Ford to get a Camaro driver to dig his spurs in. Where the Mustang will clip a corner apex with a rear tire, sometimes throwing bits of vegetation and dirt back to mock the Camaro, the Chevy would gracefully arc past the same apex running a tad wide. Stability on, off or in competition mode made no difference. Well, that?s not completely true. Turn off the electronic neuter and the Camaro can be coerced into stable oversteer bliss. Yee-haw! But it still can?t catch the Mustang in the corners.

Down the straights is a different matter. The Camaro beats the Mustang by 2/10ths in the quarter, even offering launch control to help the novice. We defeated the system for our fast runs, though. The tall gearing of the Camaro allows for an ultra-lazy freeway cruise at 1400 rpm, but drop to 3rd for that hard acceleration from 75?110 mph, which is the perfect sweet spot for passing. The Mustang?s tighter-ratio transmission and optional final drive of 3.73:1 require a 3?4 shift in the middle of that same passing maneuver.


1st Place - 2011 Ford Mustang GT
Photos: 2011 Ford Mustang GT >>
Points: 397.5
Lap Time: 1:37.6

Yes, it's still lacking an independent rear suspension. Nobody expects Ford to change that anytime soon. Why would they when it works this well? This is particularly true when talking about performance on a smooth road, as we had for the majority of our test. As such, our 5.0 GT equipped with its new 6-speed manual, quad-cam aluminum V-8 and optional Brembo Brake Package was in heaven. The 3-link live rear axle compromises some ride comfort on bumpy stuff, but gives up little to none out at the track. Drag racers prefer this setup for its robust nature and lack of wheel hop on launch, the latter in stark contrast to the Camaro.

An all-new 6-speed transmission is fully utilized with gear ratios neatly spaced so that the electronically limited top speed of 145 mph is reached in 6th, unlike the Camaro, which can do it in 4th, 5th and 6th. Mustang GT drivers will enjoy shifting this close-ratio box. Like the Camaro, there is now a skip-shift feature, an EPA mileage Band-Aid that forces the driver to shift from 1st?4th under moderate acceleration. Interestingly, it is far more of a nuisance in the Camaro because 1st gear is so much taller.

Where the Mustang really shines, though, is in its relatively low weight. Our test car gained just 80 lb. over the previous version. The majority of that extra weight can be chalked up to the optional glass roof panel and bigger brakes. But all said, it?s still more than 200 lb. (6 percent) lighter than the Camaro. Unfortunately, it remains nose-heavy in its balance, although you?d never know it by its crisp turn-in and ability to clip apexes.

The electric-assist power steering on all 2011 Mustangs is superb, equal or better than the hydraulic assist of the Camaro. It features drift-pull compensation to help the car go straight on crowned roads and in crosswinds, and can even remove the effects of tire nibble over rain grooves. Put the stability control in sport mode or turn it off, and the steering effort becomes heavier and the aids are removed. This was most noticeable under braking for the Omega complex (Turns 3?5) at Big Willow where there?s some braking chatter produced by the track surface that generates some oscillation in the steering wheel. Leave stability control on and it?s not noticed, but turn it off and you?ll want both hands on the wheel (of course, both should be there anyway).

That steering wheel is about perfect, with its thick round rim nicely wrapped in leather. It?s considerably more ergonomic than the Camaro?s, but the column lacks the telescope feature, making it a little more challenging to get comfortable. And unlike the Camaro with its tall sills and narrow bunkerlike window openings, the Mustang is open with good sightlines all around. It has improved side-view mirrors and our GT was equipped with an optional backup camera that displays in the rearview mirror when in reverse.

Headrests for the rear passengers are hard to see around, but can be flipped down with the press of a button. It seems that every year now the Mustang is being improved, and it?s hard to count all the little revisions. As a whole, it?s clear the Mustang has far more options than the Camaro, whose upgrade list is comparatively barren.

We could have done without the $1995 glass roof and the weight it brings, but from an aesthetic point of view, it?s very nice. Particularly for rear passengers at night when the stars are out. The rear seats in both these 2+2s are adequate for short trips, but don?t allow for much breathing room. Claustrophobic types should avoid the cramped darkness that is the Camaro?s rear seating area.

And The Winner Is...
The Mustang. It wins again, improving its rating scores to the point where it is almost a clean sweep. It loses in only two categories: ?-mile and ride. It also runs a quicker lap, and is more fun on the track. Yes, it is more expensive with all the options, but you can build one minus the glass roof, backup camera and comfort package. The performance will be the same if not better and cost less than the Camaro SS. The base prices for both pony cars are very competitive, starting at $29,645 for the Mustang GT and $30,945 for the Camaro SS.  Are we advocating that live axles are the way of the future? No. We just know Ford has made it work?kind of like Porsche sticking with a rear-engine design for its 911. It?s just a part of the car?s character.

At the Drags...
Nothing is more appropriate than these ponies appearing at a local run-what-you-brung drag night. The 1/8-mile grudge match drag event at Willow Springs was the perfect venue to burn rubber and practice hitting that third yellow on the Christmas tree start lights. Run after run, the modern muscle cars did their thing with perfection. The V-8s never lost to the locals who challenged them, and it was always a toss-up on which V-8 would win. We did, however, avoid confrontation with that Mercedes-Benz CLS AMG, for obvious reasons.

At the Track...
The words ?Fastest Track in the West? are emblazoned on the wall around the daunting 2.5-mile 9-turn circuit, commonly referred to as Big Willow. The large-radius high-speed turns at Willow Springs Raceway let the cars stretch their legs and minimize the understeer that can be found on tighter tracks. Perfect for our high-powered ponies.

We assumed from the Camaro SS?s comfortable ride and docile understeer behavior that it would fall apart at the racetrack. And that the Mustang GT with its upgraded suspension would destroy the Camaro. We were wrong, as only the slightest margin separates the two. A tighter track might give the Mustang a bigger advantage, but out here the Camaro puts its power and independent suspension to good use in order to stay within 0.1 sec. of the Ford. The Mustang gains time in each corner by pulling just slightly more mid-corner speed, but the Camaro gathers it back up down each straight, starting at corner exit where the Mustang takes a gentle touch to keep its rear end from drifting wide. The Camaro, with its tendency to push, can be hammered on with the confidence that it will just squat and go. A rise at Turn 6 is nearly a jump for a fast car, but the Camaro sucks it up at full throttle, keeping all four wheels on the ground. The Mustang goes flat as well, but requires a line change to keep the front wheels on the tarmac. Into Turns 8 and 9, the Camaro loses time as it scrubs its front tires hard and has to pull itself out of the hole down the straight. Which it does, eventually hitting 130 mph, just 0.7 mph faster than the Mustang and enough to bring their laps to within a single tenth of a second. Much closer than we?d have guessed.

In My Opinion...
In my world, ?Mustang? and ?5.0? are a natural fit, like ?Porsche? and ?flat-6.? But truth be told, I wish the new 4-cammer in the Mustang, which makes good power all the way to redline, had the immediate lowend grunt I savored in the sleeper pushrod LX 5.0-liter models of the early 1990s. Nevertheless, the new Mustang GT wins this battle.
? Andrew Bornhop, Managing Editor

Stock is awesome. I?ve long said that the car which meets one?s
needs unmodified is best. Before the 5.0, that was the Camaro SS.
Today, I switch camps and proclaim the Mustang the better car. Not just for
its engine, that wouldn?t be enough, but for the Mustang GT as a whole?a car that
drives right, stick-axle or not.
? Shaun Bailey, Detroit Editor

So wait, let me get this straight: The Mustang weighs LESS and is only a tenth faster around the track? WTF?  Are you sure that's not a typo?

[SVT666]

This Mustang didn't live up to the times most other Mustangs have done.  Looks like it was underperforming.

[GoCougs]

So wait, let me get this straight: The Mustang weighs LESS and is only a tenth faster around the track? WTF?  Are you sure that's not a typo?

Owing to the fact that it was slower; in straight-line testing the Camaro walked the Mustang after 60 mph, which more often than not has been the case in most of these magazine tests. If you read the article the Mustang was generally the better handler (albeit at the expense of a much harsher ride) but the Camaro caught it in the straights.

[SVT666]

Owing to the fact that it was slower; in straight-line testing the Camaro walked the Mustang after 60 mph, which more often than not has been the case in most of these magazine tests. If you read the article the Mustang was generally the better handler (albeit at the expense of a much harsher ride) but the Camaro caught it in the straights.

That has not been the case in most comparos.  It's only been the case in 2 that I know of.  The Mustang was significantly slower in those tests than it has been in most.  Keep grasping at straws.

[68_427]

Awesome sounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UskMEV0Z4Ys&feature=channel

[hotrodalex]

That Challenger sounds amazing.

[sportyaccordy]

They all sound great. If there's one thing American V8s do, it's sound good for really cheap.

[hotrodalex]

The Mustang had too much supercharger whine.

[68_427]

The Mustang had too much supercharger whine.

Guarantee they were trying to mimic all those KB 'Stangs out there.

[SVT666]

The supercharger whine is cool, but the Challenger sounds the best by far.

The Super Snake is not a well engineered car.  They never live up to their potential.  Shelby doesn't know how to engineer new cars.

[68_427]

I wanna hear the Challenger with the 7.2L they wanted to bring.

[Mustangfan2003]

The Mustang had too much supercharger whine.

And where is the problem?

[hotrodalex]

And where is the problem?

A little bit of whine is cool, but there was but a faint sound of the engine. For all I known it's a blown-to-hell 4 banger.

[SVT666]

A little bit of whine is cool, but there was but a faint sound of the engine. For all I known it's a blown-to-hell 4 banger.

Well, since the hood was up you're going to hear it a lot more than normal.

[hotrodalex]

Well, since the hood was up you're going to hear it a lot more than normal.

Good point. It had no chance of sounding better than the Challenger, though.

[SVT666]

Good point. It had no chance of sounding better than the Challenger, though.

No way.  That Challenger sounded absolutely amazing.

[Raza]

It's funny...I've cooled to the Challenger compared to the new Mustang.  The Challenger looks a bit narrow and tall compared to the Mustang.  I still love it though.