Where are all the timeslips at? (Camaro vs Mustang)

[1320']

I loved the logic a few Camaro true believers are spewing now...

"Who needs to see up? Are you flying a plane?"..

Well dumbass, it's kind of useful to see what's above you to read signs, lights and other things...ya know, spatial awareness.

Pretty soon it's going to turn into.."who needs to see behind you? All you need is this highly designed 25 degree field of view out the front!" ...okay that last bit is hyperbole but you get the joke.

The latest tactic is saying "Yeah well you can't see that well out of a Lambo or Ferrari either!"...while a valid point, they're designed for extreme performance and the bodies are generally designed with aerodynamics first, styling second. In this case it turned into styling first and then kind of worrying about aerodynamics and performance.

Another new one is "the visibility issue is just XYZ fanboys needing something to bash the Camaro over, it's THAT GOOD". Number 3, someone who actually has automotive design and production experience, has been a fair but vocal critic of the visibility of the Gen 6 and more than a few people have tried to say that he doesn't know what he's talking about (LOL)...I guess you get onto the Corvette team by being a moron?

Sponsored

 

[DiMaio90]

In all seriousness, while not optimal, if you don't feel safe driving a Camaro because of the visibility, you don't know how to set up your mirrors.

 

[1320']

Not optimal? Try not even desirable.

The mirrors and sensors are supposed to compliment your ability to see outside, not REPLACE your ability to see outside. In drivers education you're told NOT to rely on your mirrors, but to always physically look and confirm that there is not anything hiding in unavoidable blind spots or other areas.

Remove all the mirrors from a S550 and a 6th Gen Camaro and put someone out on the road for 4 hours and tell them to navigate only with the visibility their Mk1 eyeballs give them and the car allows, and see who has the better time.

 

[DiMaio90]

Not optimal? Try not even desirable.

The mirrors and sensors are supposed to compliment your ability to see outside, not REPLACE your ability to see outside. In drivers education you're told NOT to rely on your mirrors, but to always physically look and confirm that there is not anything hiding in unavoidable blind spots or other areas.

Remove all the mirrors from a S550 and a 6th Gen Camaro and put someone out on the road for 4 hours and tell them to navigate only with the visibility their Mk1 eyeballs give them and the car allows, and see who has the better time.

You're also told not to exceed the speed limit, slow down at yellow lights, turn around any time you reverse, keep your hands at 10 and 2 and a bunch of other stuff that most people never obey. The visibility isn't desired, but for some the styling is. It's a trade off, styling for visibility. You think its not worth it. Some do. There are millions of accident free miles driven in Camaros.

 

[cosmo]

You're also told not to exceed the speed limit, slow down at yellow lights, turn around any time you reverse, keep your hands at 10 and 2 and a bunch of other stuff that most people never obey. The visibility isn't desired, but for some the styling is. It's a trade off, styling for visibility. You think its not worth it. Some do. There are millions of accident free miles driven in Camaros.

To add onto your point, the thing I hate seeing more than anything is people straining and looking around their blindspots. Physically turning their bodies to look. They always lean on their steering wheel while doing so, and coast in the direction they're looking sometimes into other lanes.

Set up the mirrors correctly and you're fine. Your visibility should be 90% from the mirrors, 10% from quick glances to check if a vehicle is right next to you or not.

 

[ZaneWayne]

If you feel unsafe driving a 5th or 6th gen Camaro due to visibility, then I guess that is big problem. One that I do not see what so ever. I came from a CTS-V with great visibility and this car took me 30 minutes of driving to get used to it, and I have had zero issue with it. That does not mean that I think its got good visibility lol. Just means I do not feel unsafe driving it.

 

[ZaneWayne]

You're also told not to exceed the speed limit, slow down at yellow lights, turn around any time you reverse, keep your hands at 10 and 2 and a bunch of other stuff that most people never obey. The visibility isn't desired, but for some the styling is. It's a trade off, styling for visibility. You think its not worth it. Some do. There are millions of accident free miles driven in Camaros.

nailed it. Is it good? Hell no. But there are other important things to some.

 

[1mic]

I agree. When there was no competition the Mustang suffered significantly. I couldn't get myself to buy a Mustang from 1995-2010.

Not even a 03-04 cobra?

I've been thinking of swooping up a sonic blue cobra in my quest to get a 2015 viper. Should tide me over till I get v10 snake. Don't really have room to have 3 cars tho and a bike.

 

[1320']

To say the Mustang was stagnant from 2003-2010 is a bit of a misnomer..

There were some developments to the Mustang during the Camaro vacuum. The last 4th Gen Camaro was built in August of 2002, and it was well known from about July of 2001 that the Camaro was going to be discontinued.

The 2003-2004 Mach 1
The 2003-2004 SVT Cobra "Terminator"
An entirely NEW generation Mustang that was a totally new, ground up, nothing carried over at all car

The most powerful standard production Mustang ever (at that time with a rip roaring 300 HP 4.6 3V)..considering the standard GT motor before that was the 260 HP 4.6 2V PI motor.

In 2007 they brought out the GT500 with no competition from anything other than the Charger SRT8.

Sure the Mustang has been forced to step up its game due to the Camaro and Challenger returning, but to say it was a "lame horse"...pun intended, during that time isn't correct.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

To say the Mustang was stagnant from 2003-2010 is a bit of a misnomer..

There were some developments to the Mustang during the Camaro vacuum. The last 4th Gen Camaro was built in August of 2002, and it was well known from about July of 2001 that the Camaro was going to be discontinued.

The 2003-2004 Mach 1
The 2003-2004 SVT Cobra "Terminator"
An entirely NEW generation Mustang that was a totally new, ground up, nothing carried over at all car

The most powerful standard production Mustang ever (at that time with a rip roaring 300 HP 4.6 3V)..considering the standard GT motor before that was the 260 HP 4.6 2V PI motor.

In 2007 they brought out the GT500 with no competition from anything other than the Charger SRT8.

Sure the Mustang has been forced to step up its game due to the Camaro and Challenger returning, but to say it was a "lame horse"...pun intended, during that time isn't correct.

It was just keeping up with the times. The same as they are doing now. The LS1 Camaros were a huge horsepower jump from the SN95 Mustang. Look how well that worked out for the Camaro back in 2002. The SRTs are always the big HP car yet they are always third in sales among the big three.

 

[Hack]

Not even a 03-04 cobra?

I've been thinking of swooping up a sonic blue cobra in my quest to get a 2015 viper. Should tide me over till I get v10 snake. Don't really have room to have 3 cars tho and a bike.

I wasn't paying that much attention to new Fords at the time. I was still driving Foxes until 2011. :doh:

I have to admit I pretty much had in my head that the 4.6 was a boat anchor and I didn't like it. If the Cobra motor would have been in every GT and it was cheap and easy to get, maybe then I would have looked at it. I know part of it was me spending as little as possible, especially on a luxury like a car.

 

[DiMaio90]

It was just keeping up with the times. The same as they are doing now. The LS1 Camaros were a huge horsepower jump from the SN95 Mustang. Look how well that worked out for the Camaro back in 2002. The SRTs are always the big HP car yet they are always third in sales among the big three.

The 4th gen didn't die because of the LS1. It died despite it. The rest of the car wasn't what (enough) people wanted. I think it is the styling that really killed it.

I actually love the early gen5 mustang's styling(pre 10' refresh). I prefer its looks to the 10-12' and 13-14'. Would love one with a fox swap.

 

[HiFi]

Not optimal? Try not even desirable.

The mirrors and sensors are supposed to compliment your ability to see outside, not REPLACE your ability to see outside. In drivers education you're told NOT to rely on your mirrors, but to always physically look and confirm that there is not anything hiding in unavoidable blind spots or other areas.

Remove all the mirrors from a S550 and a 6th Gen Camaro and put someone out on the road for 4 hours and tell them to navigate only with the visibility their Mk1 eyeballs give them and the car allows, and see who has the better time.

It's relative. If you can only see 60% out of the Gen6 Camaro, what would you rate the 2015+ Mustang...70%?

I like the new Mustang, but this visibility thing is just something for the blind fanboy faithful to harp on.

 

[Memphis]

Motor trend just posted a head to head with the Camaro vs m4.

My auto correct spelled annihilate anal hate the m4 got dogged on so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cosmo]

Motor trend just posted a head to head with the Camaro vs m4.

My auto correct spelled annihilate anal hate the m4 got dogged on so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Impressive Streets of Willow time. For reference, the GTPP did it in 1:24:29.

Camaro was a manual, reportedly without MRC.

Sponsored