2018 Chevrolet Camaro SS vs. 2018 Ford Mustang GT | Comparison Test | Edmunds

[Nomadic]

If you don't understood that corvettes are in a different league. I don't know what to tell you.

It's funny b/c I test drove a '17 base 1LT manual Vette before getting my used GT.
The discounts on the Vette were awesome for '17s. 1LT had the NPP exhaust and was $50K OTD.

It's a beast of the car but I didn't like the shifter much at all. Rubbery, notchy and a bit of chore to maneuver. I was not liking the tall gearing on the base either. 6 and 7th are pure overdrive. 5th is a bit tall too.

These 2 things made me pass on it.

Sponsored

 

[1320']

FYI, the 18 GT Premium comes with the same 235/50R18's . Not sure where you guys are getting that they come with 255's are if you choose a 19" or and 265 for 20" wheel option upgrade and staggered for PP

The tested Mustang had the black appearance package with the 19" wheels, thus 255 all seasons

 

[Lonmon]

Just FYI the base 18 GT with 10spd and black accent package stickered at 38k and I was quoted 34k from my dealer. Pretty good performance for the money. I want a car that can comfortably be dailyed but still tear it up at the track on the weekend. Perfect for my wants/needs. When I bought my 15 I thought I might try Summit Point but never made it there in 3 yrs. The extra money for the PP was wasted, the only thing I enjoyed was the bigger brakes. I paid 30k for that car but it was a base manual with PP.

 

[Kurac]

Why wasn't the Camaro compared with the A8? I want to see a head to head with the autos. Tests where both cars don't have the same transmission always seem flawed to me.

 

[Twin Turbo]

Thread tidied.

Any more of that and you'll receive an Infraction.


Thank you.

 

[w3rkn]

Why wasn't the Camaro compared with the A8? I want to see a head to head with the autos. Tests where both cars don't have the same transmission always seem flawed to me.

Right^..? :headbonk:


4 cars.
2 automatics, 2 manuals and compare them side-by-side on the same day. That will give everyone an idea of these car's capabilities, and how those capabilities relate to each other.

People can view that as unbiased and inform themselves accordingly.

:gossip:

 

[Marino]

Mustang GT A10
0-60 (w/ rollout): 4.4s
1/4 mile: 12.6 @ 115.4mph
60-0 braking: 118ft
Skidpad: 0.90g

Camaro SS M6:
0-60 (w/ rollout): 4.3s
1/4 mile: 12.6 @ 113.7mph
60-0 braking: 105ft
Skidpad: 0.98g

I like how you failed to mention that they went 4.6 0-60 in the Mustang instead of the 4.7 to 60 they got in the Camaro in spite of the fact that the Camaro had better tires. Not a huge time difference but don't try to cherry pick.

 

[thehunterooo]

Right^..? :headbonk:


4 cars.
2 automatics, 2 manuals and compare them side-by-side on the same day. That will give everyone an idea of these car's capabilities, and how those capabilities relate to each other.

People can view that as unbiased and inform themselves accordingly.

:gossip:

I think part of the problem is these “major” publications like edmunds will pretty much take any press car they can get. They may not have a choice when it comes to transmissions.

 

[TheLion]

No it didn’t. I have every motor trend and Car and Driver mag from that time period.
Motor trend had two 11’gt tests: 12.8@110(first test) and 12.7@ 111 (test against m3)

We all know both these cars run low-mid 12’s, the whole point here is they were run on the same day/track.

Car and Driver long term 16’ SS manual at 4.0 0-60, 12.4 @118, and 1.01 skidpad but you can’t compare because testing completed on a different day/track..

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-long-term-test-review

C&D always tests the bloated premium GT's. Makes no sense. Ford's own website states 3705 lbs for a base manual GT. Throw in a Performance Package only to keep the car as light as possible and it's about 3750 lbs. K-brace + strut tower brace are added in which increases weight by 17 lbs. PP 19" wheels are about 7lbs heavier per a wheel than the 18's. Rest of the PP upgrades are swap out parts that have nearly identical weight such as the 3.73 torsen diff, forged links with spherical bearings and slightly thicker radiator. Even the base has all the basics most of us use, AC, cruise, back up camera and a decent stereo.

Nothing wrong with a premium, but if you want to know the real performance of the cars, you need to compare the most performance oriented trim levels of each, not a bloated premium of one and the base performance package of another....I could throw sand bags in the Camaro's trunk and viola, it will be slower....

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-ford-mustang-gt-manual-test-review

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 188.5 in
Width: 75.4 in Height: 54.3 in
Passenger volume: 83 cu ft
Cargo volume: 14 cu ft
Curb weight: 3878 lb

The 2016~2017 Camaro SS weight is 3686 lbs on GM's website, C&D's Camaro as optioned was only 3718, not much weight gain so a more realistic approximation of what you can expect:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-long-term-test-review

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 110.7 in
Length: 188.3 in
Width: 74.7 in Height: 53.1 in
Passenger volume: 85 cu ft
Cargo volume: 9 cu ft
Curb weight: 3718 lb

Can some one please explain how it is in any way a fair comparison to test a GT optioned that's 173lbs more than it's stated base weight but test a SS optioned that's only 33lbs heavier than it's base weight....:frusty:

http://www.chevrolet.com/byo-vc/client/en/US/chevrolet/camaro/2017/camaro/features/trims/?section=Highlights&section=Dimensions&styleOne=383628

Sounds like either some one is ignorant of the effects of mass on acceleration, made an outright boo boo or is purposely biased. 173lbs is easily worth 0.2s, putting the manual mustang GT at 12.4, so they are neck and neck, a drivers race in the real world. We all know both cars can run a tad faster under the right conditions and with a good driver / track prep, so both will run bottom of the 12's unless you get a bloated GT Premium that is full of all the goodies including a bunch of added sound dampening etc.

 

[Benjj]

C&D always tests the bloated premium GT's. Makes no sense. Ford's own website states 3705 lbs for a base manual GT. Throw in a Performance Package only to keep the car as light as possible and it's about 3750 lbs. K-brace + strut tower brace are added in which increases weight by 17 lbs. PP 19" wheels are about 7lbs heavier per a wheel than the 18's. Rest of the PP upgrades are swap out parts that have nearly identical weight such as the 3.73 torsen diff, forged links with spherical bearings and slightly thicker radiator. Even the base has all the basics most of us use, AC, cruise, back up camera and a decent stereo.

Nothing wrong with a premium, but if you want to know the real performance of the cars, you need to compare the most performance oriented trim levels of each, not a bloated premium of one and the base performance package of another....I could throw sand bags in the Camaro's trunk and viola, it will be slower....

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-ford-mustang-gt-manual-test-review

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 188.5 in
Width: 75.4 in Height: 54.3 in
Passenger volume: 83 cu ft
Cargo volume: 14 cu ft
Curb weight: 3878 lb

The 2016~2017 Camaro SS weight is 3686 lbs on GM's website, C&D's Camaro as optioned was only 3718, not much weight gain so a more realistic approximation of what you can expect:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-long-term-test-review

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 110.7 in
Length: 188.3 in
Width: 74.7 in Height: 53.1 in
Passenger volume: 85 cu ft
Cargo volume: 9 cu ft
Curb weight: 3718 lb

Can some one please explain how it is in any way a fair comparison to test a GT optioned that's 173lbs more than it's stated base weight but test a SS optioned that's only 33lbs heavier than it's base weight....:frusty:

http://www.chevrolet.com/byo-vc/client/en/US/chevrolet/camaro/2017/camaro/features/trims/?section=Highlights&section=Dimensions&styleOne=383628

Sounds like either some one is ignorant of the effects of mass on acceleration, made an outright boo boo or is purposely biased. 173lbs is easily worth 0.2s, putting the manual mustang GT at 12.4, so they are neck and neck, a drivers race in the real world. We all know both cars can run a tad faster under the right conditions and with a good driver / track prep, so both will run bottom of the 12's unless you get a bloated GT Premium that is full of all the goodies including a bunch of added sound dampening etc.

You seem confused on the definition of “base” and “optioned” when it comes to mustangs and camaros. Bluebeastsrt touched on this earlier in the thread. A “base” Camaro 1ss weighs what it does w/ bigger wheels, tires, brakes, coolers, etc. coming standard. So the reason an “optioned” Mustang’s weight goes up higher or more dramatically is because a lot of this stuff isn’t standard on the “base.” So yes, you can compare base vs. optioned but people have to option the Mustang to get to a base Camaro

I agree with bluebeast, mustangs were an attractive bargain before the price increase. The prices are a lot closer now though, the standard equipment should be closer. That phone number pad/calculator on the dash is embarrassing in a $36k car.

 

[JChors]

Some of the track video shots show a ZL1 and not an SS.

Sponsored