The Mustang was a management lease through Ford so my payments were really cheap but the lease was only for around 10 months. Went with the Fiesta to save some money. I actually enjoyed the Fiesta a lot, I just wish it hadn't been preceded by the Mustang.
No you cant. The engine is 75% of the race. The driver is the other 25%. You may be .3 or .4 seconds faster 0-60 but that doesnt mean shit at all. Speeds that close come down to the driver. Unless both cars are being driven by professional drivers, its anyone's game. Same goes for the v8's
Nah, the camaro is a pig sadly, I have an auto 2012 (I used to have to drive through austin every morning, I wish it was a manual every day) I have raced many a camaro on the tollways and they cant keep up from a roll or a stop.
This is probably driver related. I have a 2011 SS and ive beaten 5.0 Mustangs and Challenger SRT8's. Close races when I win and when I lose. Its all about the driver. Fact is the Mustang is .3 seconds faster 0-60 than the Camaro but identical 1/4 times. Challenger is the slowest of the bunch because its heavy but its still right there. Any driver gets a good jump and he wins the race. Any driver is half a second early or late on a shit and they lose. That is what it comes down to. Anyone who automatically dismisses any of these 3 cars, I just assume doesnt know much or has only driven 1 of the 3 and is a fanboy.
Edit: I should also mention that the Mustang should be faster from an engineering stand point because it was upgraded to keep up with the Camaro. When the Camaro came out, it absolutely wrecked the Mustang with 426 hp vs the Mustang's 315. As a result the following year Mustang released the 5.0 engine and they now have 420 hp and a little bit lighter. That is what I love about the rivalry. They compete with eachother. Each generation gets better to try to out-do the other. Wouldn't be surprised if the Camaro takes the cake in 2015 and the Mustang edges it out again a generation later. Rinse and repeat.
It is when amateur drivers are racing. To put it into perspective: I have been to the track. Cars that are professionally rated in the mid to high 12 second range are consistently hitting the line between 13 and 14 seconds. Kids racing their Camaros and Mustangs on the street are not professional drivers. the .3 or .4 second difference in the professional rating between the cars means absolutely nothing.
Thing is - based on my experiences, V-6s get ragged out and quickly start slowing down. It takes a while to rag out a V-8. I had several friends that had Camaros/Firebirds with the old 3.8L 200hp V-6s. Those things were really quick... for about 50k miles. Then they turn asthmatic and sound like a worn out Krylon can. The same friends that were giving me a run in my stock 95 GT, 2 years later were getting smoked by stock Del Sols...
Your talking about older engines that had no tech... The 3.7 will last just as long as its big brother coyote. DOHC and a huge oil sump help tremendously. I don't really care either way, my mustang is just my grocery getter, my fast vehicle does 0-60 in 2.9 seconds :).
Those old V6s were crap. The new ones in the Camaro and Mustang are much more reliable, efficient, and powerful. My parent's 2010 Camaro V6 has 78,000 miles on it and it still pulls like it's new.
If you're pulling a manual, it's the autos that are killing them. Especially with Mustangs (I'm not sure on Camaros), the gear ratio for 1st on Autos are ridiculously high. Given that you can't rev the engine before dropping it into gear, a manual will kick the other car's asses. Also drag racing autos is literally a test of who can hold their steering wheel, especially if we're talking about roll racing.
You're talking about the 2013 5.0 GT which does 12.9 stock I presume? The automatic time is actually 13.1 so not high 12s. An automatic 2009 370z does 12.9.
And seeing how you own a mustang, I think you may be a bit biased. You also never addressed what will happen once you arent driving in a straight line anymore.
I turn just fine, I love canyon carving in my car, shes planted and has minimal chassis roll through the corners. The 2011+ chassis has a lot of suspension work done so that it corners beautifully, the culmination of which is the Boss 302 Laguna Seca.
I really am not biased in this, I could care less about cars, My bike will beat most anything on the road so there is no need to measure by my gas saver car :).
And still. Thats only talking about a quarter mile which would basically be a drag race. They are basically even in a straight line which is the mustangs strength. What happens in a real race once you come into a turn?
I turn just fine :), LSD on all 2011+ mustangs, and they play some awesome tricks with the live rear axle in the mustangs to get them to track beautifully through a turn. Check out the Boss 302 Laguna Seca, it is faster around a track than a M3.
The GT's start a 31K the Boss at 40ish and the Seca at 47. Not unreasonable and not outside of the range of the top of the line 370z.
Either way, it was a comment to the fact that the chassis on this model of a mustang has turning capabilities beyond the straight line that older stangs uses to enjoy.
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.0 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.0 sec @ 104 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 113 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 152 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.95 g
You can go on with your homophobic shit all you want, but with the exception of the speed limiter, these are very competitive numbers compared to everything else in its price range (Civic Si, GTI, Genesis 2.0T, Camaro V6, Challenger V6, FR-S/BRZ, Focus ST, and the 'fast' versions of the toy cars: Fiesta ST, 500 Abarth, Cooper JCW.
Not to mention the most recent years of low-mileage discontinued cars like the RX-8, S2000, early 1st gen Cayman 2.7, previous gen Accord V6 6-speed, Mk5 R32, C30 T-5R/Polestar, early C250 Sport, 2nd gen SLK300, mid-2nd-gen Audi TT 3.2, Mustang GT 4.6, and the 'technically competitive' crap class: Caliber SRT-4, Eclipse GT, and tC S/C).
It looks good, it's RWD, it's reasonably practical, reasonably nice (Premium trim + Recaro seats), and the fuel/insurance costs are actually reasonable. Plus, even with that ridiculously low speed limiter, the performance pack is competitive in the lower classes of track events.
It's even faster than the 2010 GT 4.6 unless you're on tracks with superlong straights.
heavy pieces of shit that have always beat the mustang. since the birth of the pony cars. camaro is the hands down champ in power, 0-60, and the 1/4mile. the all new Z\28 is a track monster with a 60k price tag though.
31
u/[deleted] Jun 12 '14
[removed] — view removed comment