Car and driver Camaro vs Mustant GTPP numbers

[02gtnh]

A company just dynoed as SS and a Vette same day same Dyno and same gas. The SS put down a little more then 4hp and 8ft tq over the Vette.
[ame]

Sponsored

 

[DAGO GT]

Good for the Camaro fans but it is not good to have the vette and camaro this close in performance or a video like this on the Internet for GM from a sales perspective.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

The difference is actually higher than that, as the vette should have 2-3% less drive-train loss, vette guys are going to have some heartache.

 

[Davy_Baby9]

It's like the 98+ 4th gen F-body and C5 all over again.

 

[dcasandman]

Vette still had a window sticker just off dealer lot. How many miles on the SS? Vette vs SS Weight?

 

[02gtnh]

Vette still had a window sticker just off dealer lot. How many miles on the SS? Vette vs SS Weight?

Both cars were brand new. They said the numbers were SAE corrected also.

 

[Sasuketr]

Good for the Camaro fans but it is not good to have the vette and camaro this close in performance or a video like this on the Internet for GM from a sales perspective.

No worries, the vette with a starting curb weight of 3298 lbs is more than enough for the sales! That gap might even increase with time!

 

[ZaneWayne]

Vette still had a window sticker just off dealer lot. How many miles on the SS? Vette vs SS Weight?

I don't think anyone is saying the SS will be faster. Just that it puts down similar power, if not more than the vette.

 

[Falc'man]

Ford's overhaul of the 5.0, along with the ten speed box, will allow the GT to claw it's way back.

 

[deven2015GT]

Ford's overhaul of the 5.0, along with the ten speed box, will allow the GT to claw it's way back.

I see it as more of a weight issue at the moment. The Camaro actually LOST weight like GM promised. The Mustang was supposed to but actually gained weight, opposite of what Ford promised. I am in love with my '15 GT, but I'm just being honest.

 

[1320']

I see it as more of a weight issue at the moment. The Camaro actually LOST weight like GM promised. The Mustang was supposed to but actually gained weight, opposite of what Ford promised. I am in love with my '15 GT, but I'm just being honest.

Okay...so...this has oft been repeated..and it's a 50/50 mix of truth and misunderstanding.

While true the 2015 GT base did pick up 86lbs over the 2014 GT base..it's not quite that cut and dry.

The 2014 base obviously had a SRA vs the IRS. A shop over at S V T Perf's forums weighed the 2014 GT track pack's SRA assembly over the 2015 GT PP's IRS assembly and found the entire IRS assembly (Subframe, pumpkin, axles, etc) and found the entire IRS unit was roughly 125lbs (or something like that) over the SRA from the 2014 GT's rear end.

The base GT has brakes that are the size and weight (roughly) of the 2014's Brembo brake package (14" rotors, 4 pot calipers)

The 2014 base GT had a manual drivers and passenger seat, the 2015 GT driver seat is power, not sure on the passenger.

Now lets just assume the 2015 Mustang had kept the SRA, manual seats and smaller brakes, but kept the rest of the upgraded car...

3,704
-125lbs (SRA vs IRS)
-15lbs (Manual seat vs Power)
-25lbs (2014 GT brakes vs 2015 GT brakes)

= 3,539 full fuel curb.

or a 79lb weight loss

I recall reading that the 2015 Mustang "body in white" aka the bare unibody and platform structure did lose weight and gain rigidity over the 2014 Mustang BIW, however it lost those savings in content and the new IRS vs the SRA.

 

[cosmo]

Okay...so...this has oft been repeated..and it's a 50/50 mix of truth and misunderstanding.

While true the 2015 GT base did pick up 86lbs over the 2014 GT base..it's not quite that cut and dry.

The 2014 base obviously had a SRA vs the IRS. A shop over at S V T Perf's forums weighed the 2014 GT track pack's SRA assembly over the 2015 GT PP's IRS assembly and found the entire IRS assembly (Subframe, pumpkin, axles, etc) and found the entire IRS unit was roughly 125lbs (or something like that) over the SRA from the 2014 GT's rear end.

The base GT has brakes that are the size and weight (roughly) of the 2014's Brembo brake package (14" rotors, 4 pot calipers)

The 2014 base GT had a manual drivers and passenger seat, the 2015 GT driver seat is power, not sure on the passenger.

Now lets just assume the 2015 Mustang had kept the SRA, manual seats and smaller brakes, but kept the rest of the upgraded car...

3,704
-125lbs (SRA vs IRS)
-15lbs (Manual seat vs Power)
-25lbs (2014 GT brakes vs 2015 GT brakes)

= 3,539 full fuel curb.

or a 79lb weight loss

I recall reading that the 2015 Mustang "body in white" aka the bare unibody and platform structure did lose weight and gain rigidity over the 2014 Mustang BIW, however it lost those savings in content and the new IRS vs the SRA.

It still gained weight overall when a direct competitor lost weight. A shit ton of weight was lost by the Camaro. It also lost vs the last gen 1LE in a track test. That was my biggest disappointment. It doesn't matter about if you still kept the SRA. That's an excuse. Competitors are doing it and are lighter, Ford should strive to meet that.

And whether people like to acknowledge it or not, Ford did have the goal of weight loss 2+ years ago when Dave Pericak came out with that in an interview. Idk why that goal was lost.

 

[1320']

It still gained weight overall when a direct competitor lost weight. A shit ton of weight was lost by the Camaro. It also lost vs the last gen 1LE in a track test. That was my biggest disappointment. It doesn't matter about if you still kept the SRA. That's an excuse. Competitors are doing it and are lighter, Ford should strive to meet that.

And whether people like to acknowledge it or not, Ford did have the goal of weight loss 2+ years ago when Dave Pericak came out with that in an interview. Idk why that goal was lost.

Have you looked under a 2015 Mustang and evaluated how much steel is under there vs how much of that is aluminum in the Gen 6 Camaro? Answer: the majority of the Camaro is either aluminum or very thin steel, vs mostly steel with the Mustang.

The Camaro went from a heavy, sedan based platform (Zeta) down to a brand new, lighter platform (Alpha). The Mustang went from an already *very light* coupe platform in the S197 to an *even lighter* and more rigid platform in the S550.

The Mustang has the bracing for the convertible and GT350 built into it from the start, the Camaro uses bolt on bracing for the convertible or HiPo models.

You can't get all worked up about "the Camaro lost weight, period" without explaining HOW it lost more weight in comparison to the S550.

 

[1BadAss16CS]

Isn't bench racing grand? :lol:

 

[ZaneWayne]

Have you looked under a 2015 Mustang and evaluated how much steel is under there vs how much of that is aluminum in the Gen 6 Camaro? Answer: the majority of the Camaro is either aluminum or very thin steel, vs mostly steel with the Mustang.

The Camaro went from a heavy, sedan based platform (Zeta) down to a brand new, lighter platform (Alpha). The Mustang went from an already *very light* coupe platform in the S197 to an *even lighter* and more rigid platform in the S550.

The Mustang has the bracing for the convertible and GT350 built into it from the start, the Camaro uses bolt on bracing for the convertible or HiPo models.

You can't get all worked up about "the Camaro lost weight, period" without explaining HOW it lost more weight in comparison to the S550.

This is why the Camro is most expensive too. Using more expensive materials, makes for a more expensive cars. Who would have thunk it haha. But seriously the wright between the two is very negligible now. They're so similar. The real advantage is the alpha, LT1 and A8 in the Camaro, though I do think that Ford will up the power and provide a better trans shortly.

Sponsored