2010 camaro

[BurningRubber]

GM is also not scared to use new technology, even if they haven't converted to an OHC performance engine. Example, "Displacement on Demand" (DOD) or "Variable Displacement"...whatever GM calls it...Ford has not introduced this technology in ANY vehicle that I know of, yet GM and Dodge have both been using a derivative (sp?) for several years. Dodge uses it on most Hemis (maybe a few other engines as well) and GM uses it on most V8 engines (maybe others as well)

I like the idea of dropping cylinders for economy, but does the technology have any adverse effects on cylinder wear?

So why doesn't Ford do something like that? They could potentially increase the HP output of the performance engines, but still meet or exceed CAFE mileage standards.

Thats a question I have wondered also. Ford tends to pride itself in other aspects it seems. It seems like they are going great distances to keep up their crash saftey standards, and create new and appealing vehicles.

I think it is a mistake on their part to NOT invest into these new technologies aswell.

I have also wondered about the engine wear with cylinder deactivation. I wouldn't think it would do much to the cylinder walls, but more the change in load on the rod and main bearings.

While i fully agree with your post - the only thing i would have to say is that even though the camaro and the like have had more powerful engines, been faster at the dragstrip, etc - Mustangs for the most part have outsold them. At one point 5-1 in sales both firebird AND camaro combined. For a superior car, I don't know why it was outsold by an car with sub par performance. Something about a Mustang that makes people want it.

Yeah, it's funny how the sales have worked. There is just something about a Mustang that draws people to it, even knowing it isn't the faster of the two vehicles.

add bad aero and a 6.2l engine, and forget about good gas mileage.

Not to be a jackass, but I disagree 100%.

The aerodynamics won't suck on the car, I assure you GM has done their homework with it.

GM knows how to make big motors perform like ones half their size. I expect fuel economy to be on par with what it was when the Camaro/TA was taken off the market the first time. Upper 20's to 30mpg on an open highway should be easy to get, especially once people start fine tuning the cars.

 

[BurningRubber]

honestly, the motor is awesome but the looks i dont care for. I would drive one, but given my choice id take an 02 ws6 t/a or ss camaro

If I ever picked up a second performance vehicle, it would be an '02 TransAm WS-6.

Some of them have certain LS6 parts that "made their way" under the hood, and they are beasts. A buddy of mine has a near stock '02 WS-6 T/A and it puts down VERY impressive numbers and runs like a raped ape.

 

[04YELLOWGT]

Let me just say this with the weight and power the car is going to be a low 13sec car, though a few might slip into the 12s. This is with their top dog. I think the lesser model (RS?) will be a dead even run with a 05+ GT. I would guess the SS will be close to the $40k range and if thats the case a Shelby will be a hell of a lot better performer for the money.

A car weighing in at 3600-3800lbs depending on model is going to take some power to get it moving. NTM that those weights are with no options.

As for MPG it will be less than the Vette. My buddy has a 08 that gets 26mpg on the highway at 70mph so plan on low 20s out of the Camaro.

Just my .02

 

[Winters98GT]

does your friend have his 08 vette tuned? They are the worst tuned LSX engines to date, many people are seeing 30-32mpg after having their M6's tuned.

I agree with the majority of the consensus here. However, we should remember that the LS3 is not a 420hp engine. It is more like a 450-460hp engine when it gets a decent tune. However, for 40k, your in Vette territory, if what you guys say is true. Vette vs. Camaro, thats a no brainer. Also, what do you guys think the 2010 mustang will cost, with similar options compared to the Camaro? Is the 2010 car just a new version of the 05, or is it a completely new car?

 

[mazen189]

2010 mustang???

ha, i seriously wonder how that pony is going to turn out, especially with all this hype of the 5.0 return. I honestly do not believe the GT's will go above 40K, 35K highest because of the popularity of the car, Im sure Ford would like to keep it as one of the most sold sports cars. but, thats what i think, i might be wrong.

 

[billfisher]

those heavy european c63's and such pay a gas guzzler tax. they do not get great fuel economy.

 

[billfisher]

well buddy i tune my car myself. and POWER IS MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE TO GAS MILEAGE.

i can flash a tune for gas mileage and get 25-30mpg. but i lose at least 60hp. it struggles to pull away from near stock 04 stangs.

or i can tune it for full power and premium gas and get 14mpg. and pick up over a second in the 1/8th.

i run 18:1 a/f to get near 30.

i seriously doubt they are tuning them rich from the factory. emissions and fuel economy would suffer badly. EPA ratings would cost then dearly.

i also doubt they are tuned too rich open loop. it can happen, but they arent supercharged.

420hp in a 3800lb car is a dog just like the GT500.


the aero on the late model stang is HORRIBLE. the camaro is a box. boxes arent aero.

 

[04YELLOWGT]

does your friend have his 08 vette tuned? They are the worst tuned LSX engines to date, many people are seeing 30-32mpg after having their M6's tuned.

I agree with the majority of the consensus here. However, we should remember that the LS3 is not a 420hp engine. It is more like a 450-460hp engine when it gets a decent tune. However, for 40k, your in Vette territory, if what you guys say is true. Vette vs. Camaro, thats a no brainer. Also, what do you guys think the 2010 mustang will cost, with similar options compared to the Camaro? Is the 2010 car just a new version of the 05, or is it a completely new car?

Three of my friends own 07 and 08 Vettes and none of them have seen 30mpg in them. One is fulley built (H/C/I), full exhaust, ect and hes pulled mid 20s mpg out of his at 70. Another on is an 08 bone stock and hes pulled 26mpg and the other is an 07 with tune and filter that usually pulls 26-27mpg. They all realy get the same MPG with or with out mods so I don't know.

All I do know is that the Camaro in stock form will get quite a bit less MPG as the Vette since it will be heavier by about 600lbs and less aerodynamic.

 

[Winters98GT]

Three of my friends own 07 and 08 Vettes and none of them have seen 30mpg in them. One is fulley built (H/C/I), full exhaust, ect and hes pulled mid 20s mpg out of his at 70. Another on is an 08 bone stock and hes pulled 26mpg and the other is an 07 with tune and filter that usually pulls 26-27mpg. They all realy get the same MPG with or with out mods so I don't know.

All I do know is that the Camaro in stock form will get quite a bit less MPG as the Vette since it will be heavier by about 600lbs and less aerodynamic.

thats fairly unusual for them with an m6, the auto's are a bit different. I guess it really depends on how hard you are trying to save gas, and how you drive. Most cars see around 30. I have 2 c6's in my family, both with an m6, 1 tuned, 1 untuned. 29 and 31 is what they average on the highway. The ls2's in 07 are a little better on the tune, but ls3's are fairly rich from the factory.

LSX cars with h/c/i will almost always suffer a bit on mpg, depending on the cam specs. A buddy with an frc vette (ls1) with a mti stealth cam(very mild) dropped 4mpg even with a tune.

Some see up to 32-34 mpg at 70mph on roadtrips with no AC. Hard to believe, but its been proven with the DIC. I guess you could get considerably higher mpg in a stang if you had a solid NA tune, and shifted into 5th as soon as possible.

 

[Skidzz]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Challenger running high 13's? Seems slow for a car with 425 hp. And that's the TOP MODEL. It must be heavy as hell.

 

[02nightmaregt]

Yea it looks like a small yacht going down the road

 

[BurningRubber]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Challenger running high 13's? Seems slow for a car with 425 hp. And that's the TOP MODEL. It must be heavy as hell.

The R/T's are an upper 13 second car.

The SRT-8's are alot faster.

 

[Skidzz]

The R/T's are an upper 13 second car.

The SRT-8's are alot faster.

Uh....not too sure about that

Here's the test on the '09 SRT8 with 6-speed.

Performance Tested: 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT8

 

[04YELLOWGT]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Challenger running high 13's? Seems slow for a car with 425 hp. And that's the TOP MODEL. It must be heavy as hell.

My buddy has a SRT8 and he went 13.4 with his and that wasn't in the best conditions either. He put a Procharger on it and went 12.3 blowing the tires off it. I think with exhaust and tires he would run 11s with it with out a problem.

 

[billfisher]

like i said guys. you take 425 hp and add 4000lbs and you lose to a bolt-on modded 05 mustang gt with 350hp(300rwhp).

 

[billfisher]

4000lb/425hp = 9.4117 lbs/hp

3500/350hp = 10 lbs/hp

light weight 94-98 SN = 3000lbs / 9.2 lbs/hp = 326hp.

i'd rather be ligher than hp bragging rights.



they are all too heavy. even a late model gt is a pig.

 

[Winters98GT]

lets remember that the ls3 is not a 425hp engine. It is more like 450+.

 

[Js90Lx]

I think they look badass! I think I am going to get one. I think GM is trying to keep the price competitively with the Mustang GT. So what around 33k-35k?

 

[BurningRubber]

Uh....not too sure about that

Here's the test on the '09 SRT8 with 6-speed.

Performance Tested: 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT8

I saw that article too.

I think a few other mags have clocked them around 13.1 with a 106mph trap speed or there abouts. I have seen online a few people saying they have gone low 13's stock, but no time slips to back it up.

I'll be happy to race one myself and judge...

 

[billfisher]

the ls-3 is rated at 435 for the vette. you think chevy is going to make a faster camaro?


i don't.