stangfoeva

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=129496

V6: 0-60 in 6.1s, 1/4 in 14.5s auto and 14.7s stick @97mph

SS: 0-60 in 4.9s, 1/4 in 13.4s @108 stick

0-60 in 4.6s, 1/4 in 13.3s auto

Boomer

Probably see the SS in a bit lower than 13.4
That's probably average at best.

05fordgt

Yep. At that trap speed, it should almost me arond 13 flat, or maybe sub 13 range. Heck, my trap speed was 104.XX and I did a 13.3!

Knight

I would have expected higher trap speed on the V6 camaro with 300hp but i guess all that weight hurts it.

Boomer

Weight/Gearing/Torque
but still not bad for the base model...i guess...depending on its price.

Evil_Capri

I love the gearing of the TR6060. Make for a nice combo in my Mach with 4.30 or 4.56 gears!!

TR6060 six-speed manual (SS)

Gear ratios (:1):

First:
3.01
Second:
2.07
Third:
1.43
Fourth:
1.00
Fifth:
0.84
Sixth:
0.57
Reverse:
3.28
Final drive ratio:
3.45

Pwny

Those numbers were what I guessed.

I did not guess those numbers out of an auto though.

stangfoeva

they claim they "optimized the shifts"

Boomer

They are also intentionally high numbers....

Settlemire even said they were wrong (meaning conservative)
It will hit 12s with a good driver/conditions

Knight

I would not doubt 12's since the 2002 camaro ss has hit 12's stock.

titanjc

Agreed, the SS will likely be a 12 second car. What happened with the V6? Isn't it supposed to be around 300 HP? 97 MPH trap, and mid 14's? Yuck.

SuperSugeKnight

Yeah. And the '02 did it with a smaller engine and about 90 less horsepower.

SuperSugeKnight

Torque is the problem with the V6. Rated at 274ft/lbs, so that's about what? 230ft/lbs at the rear wheels pushing 3800lbs.

Boomer

I would say yes it was possible stock (we know Evan Smith did it on more than one occasion)
I wouldn't call it the norm.
Most were 13s

jsaylor

And a lot less weight too. The new SS appear likely to outweigh the 4th gen V8 models by ~500lb. That much weight is worth 50hp traction issues created by the weight disparity not considered.

Knight

man you are right 4th gen was 3400 now 3900. ouch and i was upset of the 200lbs the musatng GT gained. lol

Slims00ls1z28

The average 4th gen is around 3600. Friend of mine's fully loaded auto SS tipped the scales at 3690. Only the strippers got in the 3400's or lower (mine with SFC,s much heavier suspension components and a much heavier 9" is 3406 with a 1/4 tank with only the spare and jack removed). Mid 14's is not bad for a V6 car, it should be able to handle the 350Z's that I have seen at the track. I can remember V8's hitting 14's less than 10 years ago such as LT1 cars and SN95 GT's. I would easily say 12's (given driver and track condition) for the SS car given the weight is about the same as a GTO yet with 25 more HP and a much better IRS and there are a few out there who have tipped the 12's in LS2 GTO's. On average low 13's. 108 trap speed is easily into the 12.7/8 range 13.4@108 tells me the 60' had to be in the 2.1-2 range. 102/3 ish is 13 flat territory under ideal launch conditions.

jsaylor

I largely agree, differing only on a few relatively small items. I don't think you'll see any of the major auto rags get the Camaro out of the low 13's, and I would guess that best effort, bone stock owner's runs will be in the 12.8-12.9 range......maybe a 12.7 or two. My reasoning here being that while the car does make more power than the GTO it appears likely that the average Camaro will be a couple hundred pounds heavier which both offsets some of the power advantage and makes the car trickier to launch. Much like the GT500, if not quite to the same extent, I expect cheater slicks to help this car a lot.

GM typically cranks out platforms that make the most of their power in a straight line, but they haven't really ventured into anything quite this heavy before in terms of a coupe. I'll be curious to see how they do at the track.

bob

The weight distribution is better than the GT500 so that will help, although I see the S-197 betters the F5 by 1% fore/aft.

I cant wait to see the F5 Camaro and Challenger show up in SCCA racing. The current Mustang is doing well.

--->edit<---
While not the whole picture obviously - seems odd the Mustang should hold the F/R wgt dist advantage here since it has that swear and be damned 10 ton 3v 4.6 up front and SRA out back compared to the F5 with its super feathery LSX up front and IRS out back. Hmmmm.... how could this ever be!!!!!!!!

All kidding aside, Mr. Settlemire commented on how GM tried really hard to make sure the production car was as close to the show car as possible - one of the trade-offs was making sure the wheelbase was correct and that invovled stretching it which conversely added weight to the nose with increased structure. Combine that with the extra 20 pounds the LSx has over the 3v 4.6 and an IRS I'm more than sure isn't 100+ pounds heavier than an equivalent SRA and the poof the F5 is 52/48 vs Mustangs 51/49 for the GT.

--->edit<---
Heh, just found out the current LS motor and the 3v 4.6 are the same weight.

Slims00ls1z28

Yep the mechanisms needed to operate ohc's (much longer chains, multiple sprockets and tensioners) offset the larger internals weight wise.

Like J states unless the autorags have very good drivers, I would imagine the average you will see at the track is in the 13.2-4 range. While 4th gens have been known to dip 12's I have personally seen only one stock do it and I have been to the track hundreds of times. I expect to see a few more with the new Camaro but not much more on the average. I'd have to see how well the tires do. Judging by the high trap speed I suspect they will be subject to the problems the GTO's faced traction. I'll bet drag radials alone would pull 12.7 out of this car based on a 108 trap with the right temps.