Dimensional difference between 2016 Camaro & Mustang

[02gtnh]

I bet he was referring to the 6th gen Gt vs 6th gen SS. The media embargo lifts in 2 weeks.

Sponsored

 

[02gtnh]

Oh, there is certainly an optimal ratio for a front engine, rear drive vehicle. There is even a mathematical equation and there is an actual number.

In Geometery it's called "The Golden Ratio". But, you are correct, there are variables that work against the Golden Ratio BUT, an optimal ratio does exist and the Mustang and Corvette are the closest front engine, rear drive vehicles of the modern age. The GT350 and Z06 have increase the track width to take advantage of the base vehicles near optimal foot print. The GT350 and Z06 have nearly achieved an optimal footprint... they are fine examples of this very topic....


Edit: The optimal wheelbase and track ratio is 1.618 btw.

The Golden ratio has nothing to do with how a car is built or handles. There is no authority that says the Golden ratio is the best thing for cars, or reflect that it makes a good race car.:cheers:

 

[thePill]

The Golden ratio has nothing to do with how a car is built or handles. There is no authority that says the Golden ratio is the best thing for cars, or reflect that it makes a good race car.:cheers:

No, it is just simply a number ALL Sports Cars and Sports Coupes strive for. It represents a geometrically perfect balance and applies to ALL things in the Universe.

 

[Wareaglea5]

No, it is just simply a number ALL Sports Cars and Sports Coupes strive for. It represents a geometrically perfect balance and applies to ALL things in the Universe.

Dude just no lol
Please go take a look at an F1 car and tell us again about the golden ratio or even an optimal "footprint". The camaro needs to be longer than the vette because it has a higher center of gravity, they do it for weight transfer. Why do you think the Mustang GT PP has such a poor showing on the road course.
There are some incredibly simple formulas that can tell you these things instead of coming up with the golden ratio or trying to copy a vette that has a much lower CG height than the Mustang or camaro. If you look at the formula for weight transfer you will understand why the vette can dominate so many more expensive and exotic vehicles with the magical wheelbase you talk about. Just going off the numbers the camaro will be more stable than the Mustang and have a higher corner speed. The Mustang will suffer because of its higher CG height. Can you kind of understand why a rally car is short and an f1 car is long while keeping in mind the speeds they race at and the way they take corners. Can you also understand that when you start considering other variables that there is no magic ratio, an F1 car has a 120 inch+ wheel base for many reasons, including aero, stability, oversteer elimination, and the fact that they race on tracks with long high speed corners. It would do terrible on a rally course or a short track with tight corners autox course for example.
The penalty for a higher center of gravity is much worse than any make believe numbers you want to come up with for the camaro, go ahead and do the math, or go re-watch those mustang gt track videos, you can see what that high CG and tall engine do for you.
The Mustang is cheaper and so far looks better so I would drive it, but there's no reason to try and spin things and hang onto some numbers that don't mean anything when you aren't considering the entire picture. That high CG isn't good anyway you look at it. For all the crap people talk about the pushrod engine they don't realize it's a huge part of why a vette can destroy much more expensive and exotic cars built by companies that participate in the fastest road going motorsports.

 

[thePill]

Dude just no lol
Please go take a look at an F1 car and tell us again about the golden ratio or even an optimal "footprint". The camaro needs to be longer than the vette because it has a higher center of gravity, they do it for weight transfer. Why do you think the Mustang GT PP has such a poor showing on the road course.
There are some incredibly simple formulas that can tell you these things instead of coming up with the golden ratio or trying to copy a vette that has a much lower CG height than the Mustang or camaro. If you look at the formula for weight transfer you will understand why the vette can dominate so many more expensive and exotic vehicles with the magical wheelbase you talk about. Just going off the numbers the camaro will be more stable than the Mustang and have a higher corner speed. The Mustang will suffer because of its higher CG height. Can you kind of understand why a rally car is short and an f1 car is long while keeping in mind the speeds they race at and the way they take corners. Can you also understand that when you start considering other variables that there is no magic ratio, an F1 car has a 120 inch+ wheel base for many reasons, including aero, stability, oversteer elimination, and the fact that they race on tracks with long high speed corners. It would do terrible on a rally course or a short track with tight corners autox course for example.
The penalty for a higher center of gravity is much worse than any make believe numbers you want to come up with for the camaro, go ahead and do the math, or go re-watch those mustang gt track videos, you can see what that high CG and tall engine do for you.
The Mustang is cheaper and so far looks better so I would drive it, but there's no reason to try and spin things and hang onto some numbers that don't mean anything when you aren't considering the entire picture. That high CG isn't good anyway you look at it. For all the crap people talk about the pushrod engine they don't realize it's a huge part of why a vette can destroy much more expensive and exotic cars built by companies that participate in the fastest road going motorsports.

Sorry, it's Geometry... You literally can't argue with Geometry...

So dude, sorry, no...


The GTPP does poorly at a Road Course? What comic book are you reading :lol:



Be a dear and look up an F1 cars wheelbase and track ratio would ya... I want to see if you know what you just did... FYI, F1 cars run between 1.6 and 1.7 depending on the wheelbase selection (short/long). The "Golden Ratio" that doesn't exist is 1.618.


Simply put, the Mustang is a far better setup than the Alpha Camaro. With a shorter wheelbase, wider track an a 1.65/1.70 WB:T ratio... the Mustang has the advantage.


Untrained and uneducated consumers will compare the two and see no difference. They are the same in length, width and height. People who know better can obviously see they are two completely different class of vehicle.

105-109 inches is a Medium Class, 110-114 is Full Size. The Mustang sits on a 62.9fr/64.9rr Track with a 1.65fr/1.70rr WB:T ratio (GT). The Camaro sits on a 63.1 fr/rr Track with a 1.75 ratio.

Two COMPLETELY different cars...

 

[thePill]

For anyone that is following the Mustang or Camaro in SCCA, the 2015 Run-Off's are over.

Any 1LE fans out there???


Anyone follow the 1LE in SCCA T2? It is the closest to stock road racing you are going to get. Similar to the '66-'71 SCCA Trans Am Series.


https://www.scca.com/pages/2015-runoffs-results

Mustang also captured the American Sedan title as well as bumped the Corvette from T1 with a Championship there in a Boss 302.


Most don't believe this because a magazine article said differently BUT, the S197 GT was just downright faster than ANY 1LE used today. We were simply led to believe something that isn't true. The 1LE was only marginally faster than the FE3 SS to be honest. Yet there are some tracks and courses the SS is better.

For 3 seasons now, I have witnessed the 1LE get tossed at both track and solo. The 1LE DOES NOT dominate a Coyote GT AT ALL. I don't care what you read, the S197 GT is just a faster car and more consistent than a 5th Gen SS and 1LE... PERIOD.


The next thing I am about to say is going to really shock you. The S550 GTPP is FASTER than a Coyote S197. We have already seen some new owners beat the Boss 302 in some venues. I will take it a step further...

I believe the GTPP is competitive with the Boss 302 Laguna Seca. It appears to be in the same ballpark looking at some of this seasons performances.


I know, I know... Randy said...

 

[Shakooza]

I think we've beat the racing series deal to death...The mods that show a clear advantage in the magazine tests are the mods the SCCA rules/mods evens out.

As a stock car the 1le is a better performing car and anyone that has spent significant amounts of time behind the wheel knows it. A significant amount of the performance gains are due to the tires. Even if the cars were 100% equal the tires would set the 1LE off. There is almost no way the Mustang can compete with the 1le based off of tires alone. The 1le is sporting what are basically racing tires and 1les arent even sold in the winter...Any honest reviewer thats just reviewing track performance is going to give the nod to the Camaro, unless they are an idiot.

So lets stop using the SCCA because they arent stock cars. When mods are done to make up for the deficiencies of the stock Mustang the Mustang is just as good of a car....and how many of us arent modding our cars?

 

[thePill]

I think we've beat the racing series deal to death...The mods that show a clear advantage in the magazine tests are the mods the SCCA rules/mods evens out.

As a stock car the 1le is a better performing car and anyone that has spent significant amounts of time behind the wheel knows it. A significant amount of the performance gains are due to the tires. Even if the cars were 100% equal the tires would set the 1LE off. There is almost no way the Mustang can compete with the 1le based off of tires alone. The 1le is sporting what are basically racing tires and 1les arent even sold in the winter...Any honest reviewer thats just reviewing track performance is going to give the nod to the Camaro, unless they are an idiot.

So lets stop using the SCCA because they arent stock cars. When mods are done to make up for the deficiencies of the stock Mustang the Mustang is just as good of a car....and how many of us arent modding our cars?

Nah, I think I will continue to use the SCCA as a benchmark for Road Racing and Solo.

You simply cannot get the cars any more stock than SCCA T2. Only one 1LE made it to the Run-Offs and that 1LE got slaughtered. Zero SS's made it but I'm not even sure they are allowed in T2 :lol:

Facts are facts, for 3 seasons the 1LE has struggled in T2. The vehicles in T2 don't change much... If we try and use a stock class example, nobody wants to talk about Solo. If the 1LE isn't dominating Solo and it doesn't do well in Road Racing, how the hell are we suppose to check their claims.

Point is, the 1LE dominated it's Head to Head comparisons. However, when it counts, the 1LE has no distinct advantage whatsoever.

Fact: The S197 Coyote GT can easily handle a 1LE. There was never any problem beating them. There never has been, never will be, even with a factory driver like '13 and '14... When I see people regurgitating media garbage and present it as if they witnessed it happen 1st hand, I lose a great deal of attention to the poster. It immediately makes it perfectly clear who is who.


Did you read the Blog about the Z06 that someone posted on here? Is it so far fetched to believe that GM possibly markets things that cannot or could never be repeated? If this is happening at the Corvette level, the Camaro is in extreme danger. Are you willing to spend $40,000 on faith alone? Are you willing to bet against thePill's fair warning, even as issues arise as we speak? Do you not understand that I am in fact NOT trying to mislead you. The things I said a few months ago made no sense... today however, most of the very things thePill brought to light are under heavy discussion on nearly EVERY GM associated forum.

I am not trying to mislead you... I have also presented 3 seasons of failed results too. Why would anyone think any different now? Just so they don't have to admit I was right? "Entusiast" are willing to let other "Entusiast" be sold short or taken advantage of just to swell their pride... It is such a pity they would support a company through all of this... because they can't swallow their pride.

Do you actually think the 2016 Convertible only weighs 55lbs more than the Coupe? Do you still believe it's a 3685lbs car that is faster than a 1LE... even though the ATS-V just sorta barely kept up with a Boss 302 at Laguna? Was the C7 and Z06 Track Ready or the most capable track Vette ever made???

Do you think that is air you are breathing now?

 

[02gtnh]

Nah, I think I will continue to use the SCCA as a benchmark for Road Racing and Solo.

You simply cannot get the cars any more stock than SCCA T2. Only one 1LE made it to the Run-Offs and that 1LE got slaughtered. Zero SS's made it but I'm not even sure they are allowed in T2 :lol:

Facts are facts, for 3 seasons the 1LE has struggled in T2. The vehicles in T2 don't change much... If we try and use a stock class example, nobody wants to talk about Solo. If the 1LE isn't dominating Solo and it doesn't do well in Road Racing, how the hell are we suppose to check their claims.

Point is, the 1LE dominated it's Head to Head comparisons. However, when it counts, the 1LE has no distinct advantage whatsoever.

Fact: The S197 Coyote GT can easily handle a 1LE. There was never any problem beating them. There never has been, never will be, even with a factory driver like '13 and '14... When I see people regurgitating media garbage and present it as if they witnessed it happen 1st hand, I lose a great deal of attention to the poster. It immediately makes it perfectly clear who is who.


Did you read the Blog about the Z06 that someone posted on here? Is it so far fetched to believe that GM possibly markets things that cannot or could never be repeated? If this is happening at the Corvette level, the Camaro is in extreme danger. Are you willing to spend $40,000 on faith alone? Are you willing to bet against thePill's fair warning, even as issues arise as we speak? Do you not understand that I am in fact NOT trying to mislead you. The things I said a few months ago made no sense... today however, most of the very things thePill brought to light are under heavy discussion on nearly EVERY GM associated forum.

I am not trying to mislead you... I have also presented 3 seasons of failed results too. Why would anyone think any different now? Just so they don't have to admit I was right? "Entusiast" are willing to let other "Entusiast" be sold short or taken advantage of just to swell their pride... It is such a pity they would support a company through all of this... because they can't swallow their pride.

Do you actually think the 2016 Convertible only weighs 55lbs more than the Coupe? Do you still believe it's a 3685lbs car that is faster than a 1LE... even though the ATS-V just sorta barely kept up with a Boss 302 at Laguna? Was the C7 and Z06 Track Ready or the most capable track Vette ever made???

Do you think that is air you are breathing now?

Ask Tom Reynolds what car is a better racer. You will be surprised by his answer.

 

[Wareaglea5]

Sorry, it's Geometry... You literally can't argue with Geometry...

So dude, sorry, no...


The GTPP does poorly at a Road Course? What comic book are you reading :lol:



Be a dear and look up an F1 cars wheelbase and track ratio would ya... I want to see if you know what you just did... FYI, F1 cars run between 1.6 and 1.7 depending on the wheelbase selection (short/long). The "Golden Ratio" that doesn't exist is 1.618.


Simply put, the Mustang is a far better setup than the Alpha Camaro. With a shorter wheelbase, wider track an a 1.65/1.70 WB:T ratio... the Mustang has the advantage.


Untrained and uneducated consumers will compare the two and see no difference. They are the same in length, width and height. People who know better can obviously see they are two completely different class of vehicle.

105-109 inches is a Medium Class, 110-114 is Full Size. The Mustang sits on a 62.9fr/64.9rr Track with a 1.65fr/1.70rr WB:T ratio (GT). The Camaro sits on a 63.1 fr/rr Track with a 1.75 ratio.

Two COMPLETELY different cars...

F1 cars have gone well over 1.7, some of them are 2+, fyi they have more in common with the Chevrolet Tahoe than any current production sports car. If you haven't noticed their wheelbase is over 120" and their track width is obviously more narrow than the Mustang or camaro. Any normal person looking at an F1 car can see this, so please stop making stuff up. You also didn't address the high CG that is going to be a much bigger penalty than being a little longer in the wheel base. The only F1 team that has run a short car since they went to the longer wheelbase was Mercedes and that ended poorly.
Again, you can find all the formula for weight transfer and the mustang's high cg will always give it the worst numbers compared to the camaro and especially the vette.

 

[9secondko]

From some guys website. But he seems to know a bit:

http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/wheel_base.html

WHEELBASE:
Distance between the center line of the front wheels and the center line of the rear wheels. Adjusting this value can influence road performance to a considerable degree. For example, the wheelbase can be altered by changing the construction of the suspension arms or by inserting a distancing piece between the engine and the gearbox.

Longer wheel base is better for straits and long fast corners. With this adjustements you can improve aerodynamics of the car. Long wheelbase car is not so suitable for fast cornering.
Shorter wheelbase car have improved drivability, can allow fast cornering, but can suffer a small aerodynamic problems. Designers have to find right compromise, as always.

The cars layout (length over all) is the length of the all major components (monocoque, fuel tank, engine, gearbox) and their relationship to each other. The net total of these lengths dictates, at some extent, the cars wheelbase. Although influent to drivebility, wheel base is not a critical design factor. Shorter cars do not intrinsically have better abilities in corners. Instead wheelbase length is largely a factor driven by the aerodynamicist’s desire for shape to package the sidepods and turning vanes. Layout is critical in other respects; the fuel tank length, gearbox length and engine position all have an effect of the shape and packaging of the car as well as the weight distribution.

 

[02gtnh]

F1 cars have gone well over 1.7, some of them are 2+, fyi they have more in common with the Chevrolet Tahoe than any current production sports car. If you haven't noticed their wheelbase is over 120" and their track width is obviously more narrow than the Mustang or camaro. Any normal person looking at an F1 car can see this, so please stop making stuff up. You also didn't address the high CG that is going to be a much bigger penalty than being a little longer in the wheel base. The only F1 team that has run a short car since they went to the longer wheelbase was Mercedes and that ended poorly.
Again, you can find all the formula for weight transfer and the mustang's high cg will always give it the worst numbers compared to the camaro and especially the vette.

And NASCAR is 1.78, and we all know how terrible they are.

 

[Trackaholic]

For anyone that is following the Mustang or Camaro in SCCA, the 2015 Run-Off's are over.

Any 1LE fans out there???


Anyone follow the 1LE in SCCA T2? It is the closest to stock road racing you are going to get. Similar to the '66-'71 SCCA Trans Am Series.


https://www.scca.com/pages/2015-runoffs-results

Mustang also captured the American Sedan title as well as bumped the Corvette from T1 with a Championship there in a Boss 302.


Most don't believe this because a magazine article said differently BUT, the S197 GT was just downright faster than ANY 1LE used today. We were simply led to believe something that isn't true. The 1LE was only marginally faster than the FE3 SS to be honest. Yet there are some tracks and courses the SS is better.

For 3 seasons now, I have witnessed the 1LE get tossed at both track and solo. The 1LE DOES NOT dominate a Coyote GT AT ALL. I don't care what you read, the S197 GT is just a faster car and more consistent than a 5th Gen SS and 1LE... PERIOD.


The next thing I am about to say is going to really shock you. The S550 GTPP is FASTER than a Coyote S197. We have already seen some new owners beat the Boss 302 in some venues. I will take it a step further...

I believe the GTPP is competitive with the Boss 302 Laguna Seca. It appears to be in the same ballpark looking at some of this seasons performances.


I know, I know... Randy said...

One was a test of stock cars, while your SCCA results allow certain modifications. If I recall, the shock damping was a weakness of the stock Mustang, and all of these SCCA cars will have aftermarket shocks.

It is therefore totally possible that a magazine review will strongly favor the Camaro (because it has better shock setup off the showroom floor), while race results may favor the Mustang (lighter car with better gearing for track use, and with upgraded shocks that are now competitive).

I think us Mustang fans will need to prepare for getting our butts kicked in magazine reviews when the new Camaro arrives. At the same time we shouldn't care too much because it is pretty easy to address whatever aspects of the Mustang we don't like via the huge aftermarket.

-T

 

[aspensilver]

I think us Mustang fans will need to prepare for getting our butts kicked in magazine reviews when the new Camaro arrives. At the same time we shouldn't care too much because it is pretty easy to address whatever aspects of the Mustang we don't like via the huge aftermarket.

-T

Definitely, although I don't see what the surprise is at this point, or why these two cars have to be benchmarked vs. each other. The price increase on the 6th gen Camaro really makes it more expensive *and* faster. The $ is enough that I would assume it was faster, otherwise why would it cost so much more?

A V6 6th gen camaro is in base GT territory

 

[thePill]

And NASCAR is 1.78, and we all know how terrible they are.

Yes, 1.78 IS NOT an optimal handling ratio. Between 1.60 and 1.70 seems to be the target... That ratio is for high speed stability and LONG, high speed turns.

NASCAR is a poor example of an optimal ratio, as is the 2016 Camaro.

Sponsored