2016 Camaro Official Specs!!!

[Blk2015GT]

ill be ordering the car and then immediately start working on a 1200hp car. Ripping the trans out for a tremec, axles, different brakes, built motor, blowrr blah blah. :lol: fuck warranty

I mean I don't even think to that extreme. Hell use the $1,500 from the GTPP to the SS and youll have more at the wheels and better front brakes. Sure ok you weight 100 pounds more now with the PP, but youll have 450 to the wheels instead of 415 the LS7 puts down.

I'm not sure why people are trying to use cop-out lame arguments like warranty and loan payments to justify anything else.

Dollar for dollar the GTPP is the better buy if you care about performance times. If warranty is the best thing the Camaro fanbois can use, then go ahead it means nothing in head to head numbers (plus it only matters if your tune/headers caused the failure to that part that broke to begin with which I've seen nothing anyone is having stock engine issues with mild mods like headers or tunes).

Sponsored

 

[02gtnh]

First and foremost, as I've mentioned a few times, the beefier brakes alone are worth their weight in gold to any serious motorsports enthusiast. And no, they are not even close to "even". Having 15", 6-pot rotors up front is a *HUGE* advantage if you're going to track your car. The advantage there FAR outweights the Camaro's .3" advantage in the rear. Rear brakes hardly do any of the braking on the track with a front engined car except for controlling oversteer. And if you want to upgrade the factory brakes on the 1SS to what you get in the PP, you are talking about spending $5-7K with installation. And that is a high-risk upgrade (I personally would like to avoid ****ing with brakes and get as much braking power as possible from the factory).

Secondly, bracing is pretty important as well.

Thirdly, as Blk mentioned, cooling doesn't mean anything without having other data about how the engines respond to heat.

There is more to braking then just upping the size of a rotor. Brakes are designed around the car. Weight of car, weight balance of car front to rear, wheelbase of car, and weight transfer at braking. A nose heavy car needs larger brakes in front, and a shorter WB car will transfer more then a longer WB car. Thus that's why the GTPP has 15" 6 pot fronts and only a single 13" rear. The Camaro is lighter, my guess with have better weight balance, and with the longer WB the weight transfer won't be as much. So that is why smaller in front then the GT and bigger in rear as its more balanced. And there no way it's costing $5000-$7000 to put those brakes on a 1ss. Plus the lateral G on both the PP and 1ss are .97g, so it looks like the bracing works fine. As far as coolers go, if it runs cooler, that a plus in any sports car.

 

[02gtnh]

You need to read up more on this forum. Loads of people tuning these cars already. And the people who refuse to for warranty reasons arent tracking their cars (voided warranty) which is the only place you will see any differences in performance.

Some like to gamble.:cheers:

 

[cosmo]

Just because one takes out a loan doesn't mean they're on a budget. In fact most who take out loans do so because they are on a budget- either monthly or total price. Again, otherwise at always "ONLY" a few dollars up to the next car and the next and next. Another $100/month from a $40k loan you're probably at a GT350 which will spank the GTPP and SS both by far. There's always a better car "only' $100 a month away. This is exactly the mentality how how people get their cars repo'd too.


Drop the subframe? Right there you lost credibility. The subframe is in the rear IRS, has nothing to do with changing out the headers. Watch the CJPP youtube video of the ARH header install. Literally can be done with a ratchet set and maybe 1 extra long extension.



Better said than I did. I just dont get the argument that "I care about performance side by side with another car" but want to keep my warranty. They dont go hand in hand at all. Well the best you're going to do is bone stock then on a stoplight queen.

Sorry, I was using my cost estimate from earlier. It isn't $50-100 more for he camaro in our example, it's $20 per month. Also, this debate is loosing focus going into the mod world and talking finances. $ for $ up until the base camaro pricing, they can achieve very similar 0-60 and quarter mile times, yes. However there are multiple tradeoffs involving warranty, and if warranty isn't an issue then the camaro can tune and mod, but that ups the price point, etc.

There are multiple subframes, sorry bub. There are also multiple ways to install headers, they dropped the engine instead of the front subframe in the cjpp video. Also, they had a lift. It isn't an easy task either way, and requires more than "just a ratchet set and long extension".

Mustang_guy, how did you install your friends headers? Lowering the subframe or the engine for more room?

 

[02gtnh]

I mean I don't even think to that extreme. Hell use the $1,500 from the GTPP to the SS and youll have more at the wheels and better front brakes. Sure ok you weight 100 pounds more now with the PP, but youll have 450 to the wheels instead of 415 the LS7 puts down.

I'm not sure why people are trying to use cop-out lame arguments like warranty and loan payments to justify anything else.

Dollar for dollar the GTPP is the better buy if you care about performance times. If warranty is the best thing the Camaro fanbois can use, then go ahead it means nothing in head to head numbers (plus it only matters if your tune/headers caused the failure to that part that broke to begin with which I've seen nothing anyone is having stock engine issues with mild mods like headers or tunes).

You really think the GTPP will beat the 1ss in performance? What aspect?

 

[mustang_guy]

Sorry, I was using my cost estimate from earlier. It isn't $50-100 more for he camaro in our example, it's $20 per month. Also, this debate is loosing focus going into the mod world and talking finances. $ for $ up until the base camaro pricing, they can achieve very similar 0-60 and quarter mile times, yes. However there are multiple tradeoffs involving warranty, and if warranty isn't an issue then the camaro can tune and mod, but that ups the price point, etc.

There are multiple subframes, sorry bub. There are also multiple ways to install headers, they dropped the engine instead of the front subframe in the cjpp video. Also, they had a lift. It isn't an easy task either way, and requires more than "just a ratchet set and long extension".

Mustang_guy, how did you install your friends headers? Lowering the subframe or the engine for more room?

take out each motor mount, tilted the engine and installed the headers from the underside

 

[cosmo]

take out each motor mount, tilted the engine and installed the headers from the underside

So you did it the same path. When I did my friends 14 GT we dropped the k members instead to give more room for us. I was under the impression the 15 was usually done the same way.

 

[mustang_guy]

So you did it the same path. When I did my friends 14 GT we dropped the k members instead to give more room for us. I was under the impression the 15 was usually done the same way.

The k member is different on the s550. On the s197 ive done both ways.

 

[RocketGuy3]

There is more to braking then just upping the size of a rotor. Brakes are designed around the car. Weight of car, weight balance of car front to rear, wheelbase of car, and weight transfer at braking. A nose heavy car needs larger brakes in front, and a shorter WB car will transfer more then a longer WB car. Thus that's why the GTPP has 15" 6 pot fronts and only a single 13" rear. The Camaro is lighter, my guess with have better weight balance, and with the longer WB the weight transfer won't be as much. So that is why smaller in front then the GT and bigger in rear as its more balanced. And there no way it's costing $5000-$7000 to put those brakes on a 1ss. Plus the lateral G on both the PP and 1ss are .97g, so it looks like the bracing works fine. As far as coolers go, if it runs cooler, that a plus in any sports car.

You are thinking small potatoes with brakes. It's not about 1-time stopping distances. It's about repeated HARD stops and how they affect brake fade. The Mustang GT PP is, what, 90 lbs heavier than the base 1SS? That is 2%. Meanwhile, it has 22% more rotor surface area to stop the car with, not to mention more braking torque so the brakes don't have to work as hard to stop the car, either. That is a HUGE difference. 13.6" rotors and 15" rotors are worlds apart. If you were a reasonably skilled driver on sticky tires, I can guarantee that brake fade will be a problem for you on the 1SS on many tracks. Significantly less so with the GT PP. Both the Mustang and Camaro are/will be nose heavy. Both will use their front brakes far more than rear brakes in emergency braking situations. So both would benefit from 15" rotors on the track.

I guarantee Chevy didn't design the base brakes around the Camaro to be able to withstand fade like the brakes on the PP. They often don't even put great brakes on performance packs. Just search google for stories with the pathetic brakes on the base C7. If you track a C7 without Z51, you are all but guaranteed to experience fade. Even if you have a Z51, it is pretty likely on many high-speed tracks with a skilled driver... And it only has 13.7" brakes, too. The same size as those on the 1SS, which is heavier and more nose heavy.

As for price, look up the cost of aftermarket brake upgrades, and you will see. You could get it done for a bit less, but why on earth would you compromise quality on something as important as brakes? Only pricier upgrades will work properly with your factory ABS and vehicle dynamics systems. And installation is something you're most likely going to want to get professionally done, too, since you don't want to **** up a brake installation. Warranty or not, that is one of the few things that I am very reluctant to mess with.

There is more to lateral acceleration than bracing. Plus, bracing affects the feel of the car as much as it does actual grip.

As for cooling ability, again, if the GT 5.0 can do track days without extra cooling, then who cares? Extra cooling is only relevant if it is necessary.

 

[Nataphen]

The gen 5 Camaro is 52/48 weight distribution. I wouldn't doubt it if they got this one to 50/50 or very near.

 

[RocketGuy3]

The gen 5 Camaro is 52/48 weight distribution. I wouldn't doubt it if they got this one to 50/50 or very near.

That's what they said about the Mustang. It was 53/47 last gen, and stayed about the same. I don't see the Camaro being any better than 51/49. And I expect the 1SS to be even more imbalanced.

Besides, even if they did balance it that well, that doesn't change the fact that the front brakes are FAR more important than the rear when it comes to performance driving. They're more important even on the street in a perfect 50/50 car. Let alone the track.

 

[02gtnh]

You are thinking small potatoes with brakes. It's not about 1-time stopping distances. It's about repeated HARD stops and how they affect brake fade. The Mustang GT PP is, what, 90 lbs heavier than the base 1SS? That is 2%. Meanwhile, it has 22% more rotor surface area to stop the car with, not to mention more braking torque so the brakes don't have to work as hard to stop the car, either. That is a HUGE difference. 13.6" rotors and 15" rotors are worlds apart. If you were a reasonably skilled driver on sticky tires, I can just about guarantee that brake fade will be a problem for you on the 1SS on many tracks. Significantly less so with the GT PP.

And both the Camaro and Mustang are nose heavy. Both will use their front brakes far more than rear brakes in emergency braking situations. So both would benefit from 15" rotors on the track.

As for price, look up the cost of aftermarket brake upgrades, and you will see. You could get it done for a bit less, but why on earth would you compromise quality on something as important as brakes? Only pricier upgrades will work properly with your factory ABS and vehicle dynamics systems. And installation is something you're most likely going to want to get professionally done, too, since you don't want to **** up a brake installation. Warranty or not, that is one of the few things that I am very reluctant to mess with.

There is more to lateral acceleration than bracing. Plus, bracing affects the feel of the car as much as it does actual grip.

As for cooling ability, again, if the GT 5.0 can do track days without extra cooling, then who cares? Extra cooling is only relevant if it is necessary.

The Gen5 was balanced at 51.8/48.2, so my guess the gen6 will be there also. The GTPP is 54/46, so quite a bit nose heavier and with a shorter WB makes the transfer more. The 1le was 200lbs more then the new gen6, yet it's brakes were 4pot 14" fronts and never heard issues with brakes. In fact on fastest laps the 1le is near the best in class. So IMHO both set ups in either car is about even. But we will know soon once test come out.

 

[RocketGuy3]

The Gen5 was balanced at 51.8/48.2, so my guess the gen6 will be there also. The GTPP is 54/46, so quite a bit nose heavier and with a shorter WB makes the transfer more. The 1le was 200lbs more then the new gen6, yet it's brakes were 4pot 14" fronts and never heard issues with brakes. In fact on fastest laps the 1le is near the best in class. So IMHO both set ups in either car is about even. But we will know soon once test come out.

You are disputing the laws of physics. The difference in balance between the two cars is not THAT significant. Whether you have 50% of the weight on the front wheels or 60%, the front wheels are still going to be carrying upwards of 80% of the car's weight in a full-force stop (and even more with better tires). That means that the Mustang's brake setup is far better suited to track duty than the 1SS.

And most of those best-lap-times are not done in an extended session. They're usually done within a two or three lap run (otherwise a car like the GT500 would never even be able to get a best lap since it's brakes are molten lava by the third lap).

Also, the size of the brakes *may* not become a problem until you also upgrade your tires, depending on the track. If your ABS kicks in early enough, you're not taxing your brakes too much. There are some cars that can go for a while on factory brakes with factory tires, but once you put racing slicks on there... And if you're into serious performance, you're not going to be running factory tires for long, whether you buy a Mustang or a Camaro.

As I edited into my last post: I guarantee Chevy didn't design the base brakes around the Camaro to be able to withstand fade like the brakes on the PP. They often don't even put great brakes on performance packs. Just search google for stories with the pathetic brakes on the base C7. If you track a C7 without Z51, you are all but guaranteed to experience fade. Even if you have a Z51, fade is not unlikely on many high-speed tracks with a skilled driver, especially with upgraded tires... And it only has 13.7" brakes, too. Even larger than those on the 1SS, which is heavier and more nose heavy.

I, for one, have one of the most destructive tracks for brakes near me that I plan to run soon: Circuit of the Americas. I guarantee a 1SS is going to experience fade on this track well before the GT PP does. Look at all the straights followed immediately by extremely low-speed turns:

(The ones I've run this far are not TOO bad on brakes, but they would likely still melt the 1SS base brakes after a few laps)

 

[02gtnh]

Most of those best-lap-times are not done in an extended session. They're usually done within a two or three lap run (otherwise a car like the GT500 would never even be able to get a best lap since it's brakes are molten lava by the third lap).

Also, the size of the brakes *may* not become a problem until you also upgrade your tires, depending on the track. If your ABS kicks in early enough, you're not taxing your brakes too much. There are some cars that can go for a while on factory brakes with factory tires, but once you put racing slicks on there...

As I edited into my last post: I guarantee Chevy didn't design the base brakes around the Camaro to be able to withstand fade like the brakes on the PP. They often don't even put great brakes on performance packs. Just search google for stories with the pathetic brakes on the base C7. If you track a C7 without Z51, you are all but guaranteed to experience fade. Even if you have a Z51, fade is not unlikely on many high-speed tracks with a skilled driver, especially with upgraded tires... And it only has 13.7" brakes, too. The same size as those on the 1SS, which is heavier and more nose heavy.

Can't wait to find out.:cheers:

 

[RocketGuy3]

Can't wait to find out.:cheers:

You keep replying too quickly, haha. I always edit something in afterwards because I'm OCD like that.

But yeah, no waiting necessary. You're denying basic physics. We hardly need anyone to drive either car to know that the GT PP is going to be far more fade resistant than the base 1SS.

The 1LE may be another story, though...

Anyways, to each their own. My point this whole time has been that this is not such an open and shut case in favor of the Camaro (or Mustang). On paper, I do think the Camaro has a slight advantage. More factory speed is always a big plus when you're talking about sports cars, and it has some cool luxury features to boot. But the Mustang still has a lot going for it. Better appearance that's more distinguishable from the previous gen, better visibility, better infotainment system (IMO), cheaper, and, yes, better brakes...! :cheers:

Will be interesting to see how/if Ford responds within a year or two, though.

Sponsored