Car and Driver 2018 Mustang GT instrument test

I'm really wondering how they ran the same 0-60 as the 15-17 (with stickier tires and better gearing) yet managed to run a faster 1/4 mile... is it me, or do those times seem a little fudged?

This gen of camaro is ugly and the space inside is a joke. Those two things alone mean I can't bring myself to buy one, marginal performance differences aside. My car is my daily driver so I have to be able to use it for everything and in the Camaro that just isn't possible. Bad trunk space, bad elbow room, bad visibility... maybe if it was just a track car and I never drove it for anything else. Besides, the local Chevy dealer is overstocked with them, and they are all ugly. It's not the car for me.

SpeedLu said:

This gen of camaro is ugly and the space inside is a joke. Those two things alone mean I can't bring myself to buy one, marginal performance differences aside. My car is my daily driver so I have to be able to use it for everything and in the Camaro that just isn't possible. Bad trunk space, bad elbow room, bad visibility... maybe if it was just a track car and I never drove it for anything else. Besides, the local Chevy dealer is overstocked with them, and they are all ugly. It's not the car for me.

Click to expand...

The way I look at it, is that the reason I buy a mustang is because I want a good grand tourer... something that's quick, yet fairly comfortable, spacious with enough room for the wife and kids, and enough trunk space to fit mine and my wife's luggage when we drive cross country. The camaro really doesn't offer that as well as the mustang does, and if I wanted a car that had a cramped interior, very little trunk space, and marginally better performance, I'd buy a corvette

Wow,by 150 mph it was 2.4 seconds faster.
Makes me love my 15 GT even more,especially the front end.

I also find it curious that the Summer Performance MPS4s only put down .02 more Gs WITH magride than the POS P-zero all seasons with conventional dampers... there has to be more to the story here

I am happy, more so now with my 2016 GT, at $30,000.00 OTD 0% Ford Credit, the performance is great. Just add BMR suspension goodies and next year coil over's & the 2018 GT at $40,000 plus can't get my attention. I 80 mile commute my GT 3 days a week and enjoy every twisty mile of the road.

SpeedLu said:

This gen of camaro is ugly and the space inside is a joke. Those two things alone mean I can't bring myself to buy one, marginal performance differences aside. My car is my daily driver so I have to be able to use it for everything and in the Camaro that just isn't possible. Bad trunk space, bad elbow room, bad visibility... maybe if it was just a track car and I never drove it for anything else. Besides, the local Chevy dealer is overstocked with them, and they are all ugly. It's not the car for me.

Click to expand...

Looks are subjective...I think both the mustang and camaro look great! The ZL1 and gt350 are works of art to me.

Ive owned both and there definitely isn’t just a marginal performance difference between the 15-17 gt and 6gen, especially in the turns. I’m assuming you were talking about the 18gt and 6gen.

I can a agree the premium gt stang is the more practical grand tourer; however, the base gt seat were very uncomfortable to me. I daily commute my 2ss 400 miles a week and actually find it very comfortable.

I really don’t get the blind hate for mustangs on the camaro forums or hate for camaros on the stang forums.:shrug:

Good lord! One small quick test and people are losing it.

I want to see long term test and head to head compares before I trash the Mustang like the camaro forums.

The positivity in this forum is heart warming.

jake_zx2 said:

I'm really wondering how they ran the same 0-60 as the 15-17 (with stickier tires and better gearing) yet managed to run a faster 1/4 mile... is it me, or do those times seem a little fudged?

Click to expand...

Most likely the rubber is not enough to put that much torque down for the first two short gears. If they had put drag radials on both cars with prep surface we could have actually seen the real deal. So to answer your question, the car roasted some rubber for the first two gears but once hooked up it was game over. That is why the 0-60 is the same last gen but trap speed and quarter mile times are better. In reality, the old 15-17 gtpp's had to use 3rd gear to reach 60 mph but this gen should do it on the second gear with 7400 rpm limit. So it should be faster in right hands and right conditions.

jake_zx2 said:

I also find it curious that the Summer Performance MPS4s only put down .02 more Gs WITH magride than the POS P-zero all seasons with conventional dampers... there has to be more to the story here

Click to expand...

But wait there is more . . .

The previous GTPP tires are not all seasons and apparently aren't as bad as some people think . The better shocks don't make much difference on a smooth skid pad since shocks are about transitions and road holding over bumps. The previous road test probably was on a different skid pad with different grip.

nrc said:

Yeah, I don't like not seeing at least part of my car in the mirror as a point of reference. I adjust them as noted and then pull them back until I see at least of a bit of my car. I check it against objects at stoplights. By the time a car moves forward enough to not be in my mirror they're far enough that I can see them in my peripheral vision when I check the mirror.

Click to expand...

The cool thing about the way I mentioned above is that if you "need" that reference, you just lean your head over and it's there. It gives you such better coverage around your car, it really is the way to go. Even on cars with BLIS and other electronic help, it works better for me to see the car next to me. The old way of adjusting mirrors leaves you with horrible blind spots right next to you, this other way eliminates. Give it a try. Once you get used to it, it makes total sense.

15GTBEN said:

I really don’t get the blind hate for mustangs on the camaro forums or hate for camaros on the stang forums.:shrug:

Click to expand...

What do you expect from "the ricers of the Muscle Cars".

If you look at what Car and Driver calls their "In Depth" reviews they measure the unobstructed view(s) of the tested vehicle. There is a significant difference between the Camaro: https://www.caranddriver.com/review...-camaro-interior-review-car-and-driver-page-5
and the Mustang: https://www.caranddriver.com/review...mustang-interior-review-car-and-driver-page-5
I almost bought a CPO 2015 SS2 1LE that was perfect for me- Recaros but no hole in the roof. It was a riot to drive as well. The size and the visibility issues caused me to pass.

I've never been a big fan of the Helen Keller "Driver Assistance" options with the exception of the systems that show how close you are to other cars and objects at low speeds. None of my vehicles have "blind spots" because their mirrors are properly adjusted.

thehunterooo said:

What do you expect from "the ricers of the Muscle Cars".

Click to expand...

True car enthusiasts can generally recognize and appreciate cars for what they are no matter the make or manufacture. Which car is “better” is entirely subjective.

15GTBEN said:

True car enthusiasts can generally recognize and appreciate cars for what they are no matter the make or manufacture. Which car is “better” is entirely subjective.

Click to expand...

Exactly; as I mentioned in another thread, before I bought my CPO M235i in January 2016 I also considered a 2015 Camaro SS 1LE, a 2014 Challenger SRT8, a 2013 Boss 302, a 2015 Mustang GT Premium PP, a Lotus Elise, a 2015 370Z NISMO, a 2014 Cayman S, and a 2015 WRX STI. There wasn't a bad car in the entire group, but the 2 Series did the best job of meeting my requirements. As I like to say, your mileage may vary...