This poll is messed up title says 2010 yet choice are on 2011 engines. 2010 camaro will be faster, 2011 mustang will be faster.

Hopefully Ford will bump the 4.6 for '10. Even 10-15 would be enough, for marketing, although 25-35 would be a lot better.

With the Camaro V6 @300, if the '10 4.6 is 100% carry-over, that would not be good...

Actually, I think it would be very close, perhaps a driver's race. While the Stang gives up 20 some horsepower, it'll probably be about 200lbs lighter. Presumably, well, maybe hopefully, Ford will have the good sense to back the 5.0 with 6.0 gears and a decent rear end ratio and that may win the day on the strip.

On the track, or back road, I might give the Camaro an edge by dint of its more sophisticated and presumably broadly capable suspension design. But this, as with acceleration, will really have to await a comparo test to really know for sure.

Mustang M5 I-V
2.97 x 3.55 x 320 = 3373.92/1.1358 = 2970.44 ft/lbs. - 241.39 hp/3540 = 14.66 p/w
1.78 x 3.55 x 320 = 2022.08/1.1358 = 1780.31 ft/lbs. - 241.40 hp/3540 = 14.66 p/w
1.30 x 3.55 x 320 = 1476.80/1.1358 = 1300.22 ft/lbs. - 241.40 hp/3540 = 14.66 p/w
1.00 x 3.55 x 320 = 1136.00/1.1358 = 1000.18 ft/lbs. - 241.40 hp/3540 = 14.66 p/w
0.80 x 3.55 x 320 = 908.80/1.1358 = 800.14 ft/lbs. - 241.39 hp/3540 = 14.66 p/w

Camaro A6 I-V
4.07 x 3.27 x 273 = 3633.33/1.1950 = 3040.44 ft/lbs. - 226.19 hp/3741 = 16.54 p/w
2.37 x 3.27 x 273 = 2115.72/1.1950 = 1770.48 ft/lbs. - 226.19 hp/3741 = 16.54 p/w
1.55 x 3.27 x 273 = 1383.70/1.1950 = 1157.91 ft/lbs. - 226.19 hp/3741 = 16.54 p/w
1.16 x 3.27 x 273 = 1035.54/1.1950 = 866.56 ft/lbs. - 226.19 hp/3741 = 16.54 p/w
0.85 x 3.27 x 273 = 758.80/1.1950 = 634.98 ft/lbs. - 226.19 hp/3741 = 16.54 p/w

Okay I hope I figured things correctly here ( peak torque RPM / Trans gear / final drive gear x torque / 5252 = HP) / 3741 = power to weight ratio ) This changes things a bit giving the Mustang V8 a nice advantage in HP and P/W despite the overall lower engine speed. If I've figured all this correctly its even more interesting to note the linear power produced by both the A6 and M5 in terms of HP compared to the amount of torque produced, thats just frigg'n neat! The final output also accounts for the diminishing effect of the tire radius.

Also intresting to note on the Mustang that swaping out the 3.55 gears for the 3.27's reduces torque (in 1st gear) to 2736.23, yet when you compute RPM for HP the power remains unchanged at 241.40 hp, neat-o, I also substituted 4.11's and ran through the math again, despite the increased torque provided by the 4.11 gears HP remained essentially unchanged!

So just how are the Camaro and Challenger new ??? We've all seen what both cars have looked like for over 3 years now. As very little had changed from concept to final production versions.

Although the 2010 Mustang, is just a refresh of the current S-197. It won't look outdated and stale, when compared to the Challenger and Camaro, we've been exposed to for over 3 years.


That being said, Ford did the right thing by not revealing the 2010 refresh, too soon !

In a straight line, I'm guessing a driver's race. What the Camaro has in peak HP, it gives up in extra weight. The Camaro will likely have a slightly broader, lower rpm power band than the Stang, but the presumably revvier Stang, also presuming a tight six-speed tranny, would only have to be kept a bit more on the boil, which would not be a terrible thing given a nice sharp 32V V8 sound track.

Did you know that the Camaro will be competing against the Mustang in the "Koni Challenge" next year??

I agree that Ford keeping the 10' under tight wraps was a good idea to keep the car fresh and new looking. As far as the Camaro and Challenger being three years old I get what you are saying but disagree. Seeing the car in person is very different from seeing it in pictures. The current Mustang is all over the place. From a distance you probably won't be able to tell a 05' from an 10'. I recently saw a Challenger in person and it was actually the opposite of what I thought when I saw it in person. (I actually liked the car more in photos than I did when I saw it in person). I guess the same can be said for the 10' model. Many on these forums and if i'm honest with myself like the style of the current gen more compared to the spy shots we have seen so far, but there is a good chance that will change once I see it in person and without the cammo.

I've also seen the Challenger in person, and although it resembles the original 70-74 models. IMHO it just looks way too tall, and porky.

Maybe it's just me, but the car also seems to look more like a hot wheels/cartoon caricature of the original.

Perhaps I'm being a bit biased here, but now that I've finally seen the new Challenger, and 2010 Camaro concept in person. I no longer consider my current 05 GT, as being such a huge car anymore.

In the meantime, I'll also wait for the full reveal before passing final judgment on the 2010 re-fresh.

Motor Trend just did a story on the entire Challenger lineup. Though they tried sugarcoating the results in favor of the Challenger by claiming biases like "better looking" and stating that though a GT500 outperformed the Challenger it was a whopping $2500 more...... The Mustang still pretty much outperformed the Dodge across the model lineup with MT's own calculations. Ha I love how journalists can muddy the waters with expressive writing.

Challenger Versus Mustang Vehicle Dodge Challenger SE V-6 automatic Ford Mustang V6 5-speed automatic Dodge Challenger R/T 6-speed manual Ford Mustang Bullitt 5-speed manual Price* $24,790 $21,785 $32,340 $32,830 Engine 3.5 V-6 4.0 V-6 5.7 V-8 4.6 V-8 SAE hp 250 210 376 315 Torque, lb-ft 250 240 410 325 Curb weight, lbs 3712 3407 4154 3590 Weight dist, f/r 54/46 54/46 53/47 54/46 lb/hp 14.8 14.2 10.1 11 Acceleration to mph 0-30 2.6 sec 2.6 sec 1.9 sec 1.9 sec 0-40 3.9 3.8 2.9 2.9 0-50 5.4 5.4 3.8 3.8 0-60 7.3 7.3 5.1 5 0-70 9.6 9.6 6.5 6.6 0-80 12.2 12.3 8.1 8.4 0-90 15.5 15.2 10.2 10.3 0-100 20.1 20.2 12.4 12.8 Quarter mile 15.6 sec @ 90.3 mph 15.3 sec @ 91.7 mph 13.6 sec @ 104.9 mph 13.7 sec @ 102.7 mph Braking, 60-0 mph 130 ft 126 ft 135 ft 127 ft Lateral acceleration 0.83 g (avg) 0.81 g (avg) 0.82 g (avg) 0.87 g (avg) MT figure eight 28.4 sec @ 0.59 g (avg) 27.9 sec @ 0.61 g (avg) 27.5 sec @ 0.63 g (avg) 26.4 sec @ 0.52 g (avg)
Vehicle Ford Mustang GT 5-speed manual Dodge Challenger SRT8 6-speed manual Dodge Challenger SRT8 automatic Ford Shelby GT500 6-speed manual Price* $27,570 $42,490 $41,795 $44,780 Engine 4.6 V-8 6.1 V-8 6.1 V-8 5.4 s/c V-8 SAE hp 300 425 425 500 Torque, lb-ft 320 420 420 480 Curb weight, lbs 3523 4146 4137 3879 Weight dist, f/r 53/47 55/45 55/45 58/42 lb/hp 11 9.9 9.9 8.1 Acceleration to mph 0-30 1.9 sec 1.9 sec 1.8 sec 1.9 sec 0-40 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.5 0-50 3.9 3.6 3.5 3.5 0-60 5.1 4.6 4.7 4.4 0-70 6.7 6 5.9 5.4 0-80 8.5 7.5 7.4 6.7 0-90 10.6 9 9.3 8.1 0-100 13 11.1 11.3 9.7 Quarter mile 13.5 sec @ 103.6 mph 13.1 sec @ 108.4 mph 13.1 sec @ 108.3 mph 12.7 sec @ 114.2 mph Braking, 60-0 mph 125 ft 121 ft 117 ft 112 ft Lateral acceleration 0.87 g (avg) 0.87 g (avg) 0.87 g (avg) 0.90 g (avg) MT figure eight 26.4 sec @ 0.69 g (avg) 26.7 sec @ 0.67 g (avg) 26.4 sec @ 0.69 g (avg) 25.8 sec @ 0.72 g (avg) *Price includes performance-enhancing options.

You ain't lyin! I love how they try to fool people like that. Hey look what car has the SRA and still outperforms the IRS challenger hahaha

Then an IRS-equipped 'Stang would just kill 'em...

Exactly :nice:

I know that the base and GT models will carry on with the solid rear but is their any evidence to confirm that the GT500 will have it also? Maybe now is the time to give it an IRS that it needs to compete in it's price range. I just hope that Chevy doesn't put a 7.0 505HP in a Camaro with IRS, that may dethrone the GT500 as the current king of the muscle cars.

If the 2010 does actually get the 5.0 halfway through the model year as rumored, the Camaro will have its hands full, I think.

If GM does a 500+ HP F5, you can bet Ford will be doing a 600+ HP Mustang, if GM does a 600hp Camaro, Ford has the stuff for a 700hp Mustang.

Speaking of 500+ HP Camaros, it wont be the LS7, it will be a LS9 Derivative. the LS7 is on the way out due to the cheaper to produce S/C LSx engines.

If I recall my history correctly hasn't the Camaro almost always had more HP than the Mustang? Don't get me wrong I'm a hard core Mustang guy (I've already owned 4 in 10 years of driving) and know that the Mustang will compete well with the Camaro. My opinion is that Ford should try to exploit one of the new Camaro's few weaknesses....... Continue to offer more features and options and also keep the car as light as possible.An IRS, bigger standard breaks and 6 speed MT/AT would also help a great deal.

All base and GT models including the GT500, will carry on with the solid rear axle.

Although I agree that now is the time to offer an IRS, at least as an option. We're more than likely not going to see an IRS, until the all new GRWD platform launches in 2014 !

I doubt a V6 maro will be any where near a 3v. considering it has less torque and weigh's more. and someone ran it in the 1/4 and could only manage a 14.xx in the V6 maro.

I think if the 5.0 Gt can stay around 3500-3600 lbs and has 400 hp then it can take the camaro


* based on the camaro having 422 hp and weighing 3800 lbs

I agree that the equally expensive V6 Camaro vs 09' Mustang GT will be slower, but not by much.

As far as the SS is concerned who knows? The heavier, 6 speed auto, 360hp Pontiac G8 that it is based off of runs 13s. I have a feeling shaving off a couple hundred pounds, manual tranny and an added 80hp will put the stock SS in the 12.7-13.0 range. I hope i'm wrong but i'm thinking this car can be a true GT500 fighter, and not the joke that the SRT8 Challenger is.