6th gen SS vs GT PP

[Spartan]

Q: Why is the SS "track ready" with all the extra coolers?

A: Because it has to be. C7's with the A8 transmission (before the cooling revision) were overheating and going into limp mode when wrung out on the track. Without the additional coolers the Gen 6 with the A8 wouldn't likely have even been able to handle spirited driving on the streets. It's not that they wanted to make it "track capable" out of the box, it's because they couldn't figure out a way to keep the drivetrain effective otherwise.

GM literally cannot remove all the coolers and "track ready" components without basically rendering the A8 SS impotent. What GM could have done is not make the RS package standard, that would have reduced the price of the SS by about $1,000.

Frankly it would have made for a more attractive pricing point and feature list for someone who wants the lightest Camaro SS possible (a 1SS) and true performance oriented tires and wheels (19") since the rotors and calipers are smaller now, you don't need 20"'s to fit over them, you can run 19".

They could also have made the HUD, larger center screen and reconfigurable gauge screen optional on the 1SS to cut the price another $700 or so.

Those alone would have put the 1SS at around $35,700 to start..and right about $37,000 with the auto.

Agreed...they really need 19" wheels options and some less track ready stuff on the SS and they could drop the entry price by a few grand.

Sponsored

 

[ZaneWayne]

You neglect the 98% of the general public who buy a V8 to buy a V8 sports car, not to track it like the 1-2% of forum enthusiasts. They'll take $4k cheaper rather than brakes and rims.

Id venture to guess if you saw the trim breakdowns from sales in 2015 that the non-PP outsold the PP 2 or 3 to 1.

I'd (and Im sure a lot of the population) rather have the option to add those items on rather than be forced into the big price increase.

Ford got it right. Offer a true base model and then add to it, not a jacked up price base model (not a few hundred bucks more negligible, but $4,000 more) with more on it than a good percent of people will care about as daily drivers.

I didn't neglect that. I have constantly have Ford their deserved props on the packaging. But to say that the two cars are even base to base is crazy. A base SS will run rings around a base GT. And it should for 4K more.

 

[1320']

It's not so much the track ready components that need to be removed or made optional...they need those to keep the SS running cool and it's cheaper to have them common to both the M6 and A8 cars.

Other non-critical stuff..like the RS stuff, the reconfigurable dash, the larger infotainment screen...that all could have been optional on a 1SS.

 

[Socalmustang]

I didn't neglect that. I have constantly have Ford their deserved props on the packaging. But to say that the two cars are even base to base is crazy. A base SS will run rings around a base GT. And it should for 4K more.

Source?

 

[ZaneWayne]

Source?

Bro come on haha. A base GT stands no chance against a base SS. Straight line or track. But like most have said, people who track make up about 2 percent of buyers at the most. So it's good that Ford has taken the sensible approach.

 

[Emt1581]

Bro come on haha. A base GT stands no chance against a base SS. Straight line or track. .

What about on the highway? When engaging in "spirited driving"...will the GT be able to easily cat/mouse with the SS or will the SS pass the GT like it's standing still and be out of site within a minute or so?...not that I'm advocating 150mph+ on the highway. Just curious about the capability of both.

Thanks

-Emt1581

 

[1320']

What about on the highway? When engaging in "spirited driving"...will the GT be able to easily cat/mouse with the SS or will the SS pass the GT like it's standing still and be out of site within a minute or so?...not that I'm advocating 150mph+ on the highway. Just curious about the capability of both.

Thanks

-Emt1581

If it's the A8....it'll kick down and blast away, they're reaaaaally quick.

Manual to manual....advantage still to the Camaro.

 

[Emt1581]

If it's the A8....it'll kick down and blast away, they're reaaaaally quick.

Manual to manual....advantage still to the Camaro.

The A8...is that the one that they are only making 69 of and it comes supercharged?

I meant base GT vs. base SS.

Thanks

-Emt1581

 

[Von Bek]

Speaking to the price differential, I got my 15 GT/PP out the door for ~$32k. That was with buying the extended warranty and service plan. So it could have been down to right around ~$30k if I hadn't bought those. And take off another $2k if I didn't feel I needed the PP. For all of the Camaros performance advantages, I don't know if it can get past a ~$5k price premium per trim level.

 

[1320']

The A8...is that the one that they are only making 69 of and it comes supercharged?

I meant base GT vs. base SS.

Thanks

-Emt1581

A8= 8 speed automatic transmission SS

 

[Blk2015GT]

The F150 went from all steel body to all aluminum, there was nothing but weight to lose.

The Mustang already has aluminum fenders and an aluminum hood. Going to ALL aluminum might only save around 115lbs, not 225+. That would still take a GT base down to 3,595lbs curb, a GTPP to 3,630 and a GT auto to 3,605. Essentially going back to S197 weights.

Well I meant is that there are other areas to shave weight beyond going full aluminum body. They could get close to 150-200 pound loss range total honestly. Id be happy if they took it down 120 pounds and they would still undercut the Camaro weight.

Source?

None of course. Remember everyone here is pretending to try to be Vin Diesel racing around comparing time slips all day rather than out on the city streets daily evidently enjoying the car for what it is. No one cares about the $4k more, poor visibility, or still chintzy weird looking interior; it's all about that 20hp/20lbs and .3 sec faster 0-60.

 

[Emt1581]

A8= 8 speed automatic transmission SS

So with only 15-20 additional horsepower, a base level SS with the auto (which I've seen several places report how much faster it shifts...kinda reminds me of the GT-R's super computerized shifting)...will lose a GT pretty quick on the highway?

Never seen a Mustang and a Camaro square off around here...but it's interesting (and slightly disheartening) to know.

EDIT: Something else interesting...while the GT is 435 hp and puts down 400 with torque, I think the SS is 450 and puts 450 down...that could explain the massive differences being claimed.

Thanks

-Emt1581

 

[Blk2015GT]

So with only 15-20 additional horsepower, a base level SS with the auto (which I've seen several places report how much faster it shifts...kinda reminds me of the GT-R's super computerized shifting)...will lose a GT pretty quick on the highway?

Never seen a Mustang and a Camaro square off around here...but it's interesting (and slightly disheartening) to know.

EDIT: Something else interesting...while the GT is 435 hp and puts down 400 with torque, I think the SS is 450 and puts 450 down...that could explain the massive differences being claimed.

Thanks

-Emt1581

Quickly? No. And torque is really shown off the line from a stop.

But again if you're daily driving the car there should be half a dozen other important deciding factors before which is quicker at any point. Only the fanbois want you to solely focus on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile, stuff the 1%/enthusiasts care about, to mask the much higher price and other issues like visibility with the car.

The question is what do YOU want out of the car. If its concern over performance numbers and leave it 100% bone stock forever then you pay $4k more for the Camaro, or use that $4k to beef up the Mustang to something probably better. If you want a good daily driver then looks (inside and outside) and price should come before performance concerns when you're talking fractions of seconds.

 

[Emt1581]

Quickly? No. And torque is really shown off the line from a stop.

But again if you're daily driving the car there should be half a dozen other important deciding factors before which is quicker at any point. Only the fanbois want you to solely focus on the 0-60 and 1/4 mile, stuff the 1%/enthusiasts care about, to mask the much higher price and other issues like visibility with the car.

Maybe so, and realize the GT seems like the clear winner in the daily driver category. But it seems like, if the guy driving the SS wants to he can flex muscle and lose the GT...well...unless both cars are kept stock and can't go over 164mph. Then it'll just be a certain distance between the two leaving the GT comfortably behind.

Again, just the impression I'm getting. There are next to ZERO vids comparing the 2016 GT to SS with any reputable drivers/comparisons. At this point usually Randy Pobst has shared his .02. :shrug:

-Emt1581

 

[Blk2015GT]

Maybe so, and realize the GT seems like the clear winner in the daily driver category. But it seems like, if the guy driving the SS wants to he can flex muscle and lose the GT...well...unless both cars are kept stock and can't go over 164mph. Then it'll just be a certain distance between the two leaving the GT comfortably behind.

Again, just the impression I'm getting. There are next to ZERO vids comparing the 2016 GT to SS with any reputable drivers/comparisons. At this point usually Randy Pobst has shared his .02. :shrug:

-Emt1581

Idk I dont have small pecker syndrome that I care about the SS in the lane next to me and the .3 sec quicker 0-60 it does. Also not racing someone on the city streets to get in a wreck or a huge ticket that will only hurt my pocket.

Buying a car over another based on performance numbers in the literal fractions of seconds difference is flat out retarded without considering price, comfort, looks etc.

Sponsored