(Motor Trend) 2016 Chevrolet Camaro RS (2.0T) vs. 2016 Ford Mustang EcoBoost

http://www.motortrend.com/news/comparison-2016-chevrolet-camaro-rs-vs-2016-ford-mustang-ecoboost/

If you guys thought the Car and Driver article with the Sixer Camaro vs the Ecoboost was bad, just wait till you see this totally unbiased comparison courtesy of Motortrend! ;)
It's hilarious to see how bad the "Track Weapon" 2.0l Camaro gets rekd around a track by a handicapped 87 octane Ecoboost.

Yeah, I don't get why Motortrend gets slow straight line times on the Ecoboost. They must really want the Camaro to win no matter what, especially with running 87 in the Mustang. I know most people don't buy cars based on who's faster in a magazine test, but it's still a mind boggling thing.

This last paragraph is absolutely hilarious. The put summer rubber on the Camaro like the Mustang PP Ecoboost had and it increased performance a lot.

Remember those funhouse mirrors that made you look wildly fat or super tall? That’s what the Camaro’s and Mustang’s speed graphs remind me of, with the Chevrolet’s virtually being a stretched-tall version of the Ford’s. Let’s start at the left edge of that plot. The Camaro clearly pulls the Mustang down the front straight, building a lead that it holds until Turn 3. But by that point, the exaggerated slowness of the Camaro in Turns 2 and 3 has completely squandered the gap; the Chevrolet faster-then-slower roller coaster is repeated during the remainder of its lap, but it’s a losing hand. The Mustang finishes 90 feet ahead. Then we swap the Camaro onto performance summer tires. Not surprisingly, the Camaro in Mustang shoes suddenly matches the Ford’s cornering pace. But it does even more: Those hastened exit speeds also carry onto the straights, adding 2 mph to its peak speed along Streets’ twin high-speed runs. Suddenly, the funhouse mirror is stretching the Camaro’s speed trace only up, which rewards it with a lap time of 1:25.75. The gap at the finish line? The deficit has turned into a 165-foot win. Maybe Chevy needs to make a call to Tire Rack like we did. — Kim Reynolds



Funny....How much did we ask for MT to do this with the GTPP vs 1LE JUST to see what the improvements would be against those sticky tires the 5G 1LE had?

Mortrend get paid to drive mustang slow.
Let see if it help camaro sales next month.

Even when the Mustang was the inarguable winner..MT HAD to find a way to spin it so that the Camaro was really the better car.

The stock for stock comparison was so obvious that the Mustang had to win, but in order to keep those sponsor and advertising dollars flowing, they had to find a way to spin it into a "Camaro positive" story..by putting on the Summer performance tires.

So they did another test where they threw Goodyear F1 Asym 3 on the Camaro and it gained 1.5 sec per lap. I'm going to guess those are also better than the P-zeros. Put them both on the same tires if you're going to pull something like this, MT.

Also, do the same like Todd mentioned, and put the GT PP on some better rubber and stack it up against the SS or last gen 1LE.

Who the F was driving that only could manage a 6.3 0-60? Seems like they wanted it to fail at something objective...

BmacIL said:

So they did another test where they threw Goodyear F1 Asym 3 on the Camaro and it gained 1.5 sec per lap. I'm going to guess those are also better than the P-zeros. Put them both on the same tires if you're going to pull something like this, MT.

Also, do the same like Todd mentioned, and put the GT PP on some better rubber and stack it up against the SS or last gen 1LE.

Who the F was driving that only could manage a 6.3 0-60? Seems like they wanted it to fail at something objective...

Click to expand...

Exactly! Putting in 87 octane which screwed the pooch on the performance numbers.

Remember how the Camaro fan boys cried when the Mustang folks requested that equal tires be put on the Mustang? Funny how MT did this for the Camaro after it lost by over a second to the Ecoboost. Now MT switched out the rubber...It is funny, for sure.

Todd15Fastback said:

Exactly! Putting in 87 octane which screwed the pooch on the performance numbers.

Remember how the Camaro fan boys cried when the Mustang folks requested that equal tires be put on the Mustang? Funny how MT did this for the Camaro after it lost by over a second to the Ecoboost. Now MT switched out the rubber...It is funny, for sure.

Click to expand...

They don't call it Chevytrend for nothing lol

Some of the Chevy diehards over on Camaro6 are calling shenanigans on this one..in a miracle stroke.

1320' said:

Some of the Chevy diehards over on Camaro6 are calling shenanigans on this one..in a miracle stroke.

Click to expand...

Anyone capable of thinking would look to call this shenanigans. I mean hell, when MT tested a EB PP before, they got 5.6 seconds to 60. Why didn't they mention that??? Memory loss?

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost-takes-to-the-track-on-ignition/

I think what happened is MT, from previous experience, knew the EB Mustang was going to come out a very clear victor and tried to pull a bait and switch...and it backfired. Just quietly run the Mustang with 87 and report 93 numbers and talk about how it was "curiously pulling power" and such.

TL;DR, MT tried to rig the test and got caught.

I am shocked that they ran the Mustang with 87. You would think when doing a performance test they would fill the car with 91. I can't remember which magazine it was, but that used to be something they would do with all the cars was fill them with the same fuel at the same station.