And how much more do they cost than a Mustang GT or even a GT500? A lot more.

 

jsaylor answered this perfectly

couldnt agree more.

I've been moving into a new apartment recently, and whenever i loaded my car up i could notice a huge difference in the acceleration and handling of my car. And these are with about 200lb loads. The difference between the camaro and the mustang will probably be between 300-400 lbs. its gonna be enough to cancel out the effects of the camaros irs

 

Man I am SO with you on absolutely NOT having an IRS vs SRA, B, C or whatever debate. I was hoping that those same folk that have these close resources on all of this info could tell us something good. But I believe Ford is gonna bring it in handling dept. anyway. Stick axle and all.(Thank you) But with that 400 plus horsepower monster at the threshold, superb stopping power is a must and my 07 is mediocre on an easy day. Those who want the retina separating stuff... Aftermarket!

 

You would hardly notice the difference if the spring rates were increased along with fine tuning the shocks. Like I said earlier, suspension tuning is what counts. BMW's E60 M3 gained a good bit of weight over the previous generation, but pulls much better slalom numbers. It also posts better track times. Overall, the dyanamics of the car have improved even with the added weight.

The SS has 2 things in its corner as of right now.

1. Overall, superior suspension design
2. Better Brakes (14” Brembo)

We can argue that the track testing at the Ring is also a big advantage in setting up the spring rates, sway bars, etc. etc. Ford better step up their suspension development. Better Brakes and a Watts Link are no brainers for Ford in my opinion.

 

See but to me the difference is that's BMW making a $60K car vs. GM making a car that "supposed" to be priced competitively with the mustang. Not to say that it cant be done, because you've just proven that it can, but I just don't think GM can pull it off. And if they did I'll be curious to see at what price people will have to pay for it...

But you're right they do need better brakes and a Watts link.

 

True. The R & D for the M3 has been going for a long time since BMW has a reputation to maintain. Also the Camaro has been under development for some years now so it wouldn't be such a surprise if it out handles and out brakes it's competitors as it did with the previous generation. The one to blame for the weak suspension geometry and pick up points on Mustangs due to the crabs in their pockets is Ford and no one else. A few hundred invested in a better product would mean a few thousand in overall value.
That's what Chrysler did with the 300C, Magnum/Charger and the new Challenger. The original designer of the platform put his carer on the line for that, since the management didn't want rwd, but he insisted on the value per dollar aspect of his creation. The unlamented LHS was meant to have that set up, but management said NO, and look what happened to that car: great styling but BORING to drive.
Please Ford, Put at least a Watt's link and better shocks to the next gen Mustang, so it won't be left behind. And the GT500 brakes are a no brainer.

 

An 8:20 from the Camaro SS is a bit underwhelming given the relatively massive amount of time GM spends there these days, not to mention the new F-bodies 400hp and prodigious torque. heck, GM managed to wring an 8:22 from a Cobalt SS which, while a good handling car, shouldn't be within two seconds of a 400hp Camaro.

This has only served to convince me further that the 2011 GT wont be good news for Chevy. I was previously unaware that any lap times for the new SS had been leaked, and these are much less impressive than I would have thought. Given the knowledge that the next GT is going to be a stellar handling improvement over any existing Mustang model I am all but convinced this wont be a close race. As i said above, my only worry is over brakes.

 

The Cobalt SS is "one of the best handling FWD cars ever". The 06 Cobalt was faster than a GT around VIR during C&D's Lightning Lap. The 08 is significantly faster than the old model, due to the new engine and chassis tuning. I think you aren't giving the Cobalt SS enough credit.

8:20 isn't bad for a heavy and aerodynamicaly challenged car. Like I said, that's a faster time than a E46 M3, which ain't no slouch on the track.

Lastly, how do we know that the next GT is going to be "a stellar handling improvement"? All we know is that the GT is going to retain a SRA and that's it. I doubt that Ford does much to the suspension. We can wish though!

 

Imagine that, were finally gonna have a Mustang GT, that will actually outperform a Camaro SS. If this is indeed accurate, it's just as Jsaylor had quoted. The 2011 GT, won't be good news for Chevy.

So let's just hope that Ford really steps up to the plate, this time around.

 

The Cobalt SS is an extremely good handling car, in fact I've pointed out the same on these forums. But the hp and torque disparity between the Cobalt SS and Camaro SS is genuinely huge, and nothing about the Cobalt's layout provides a compelling reason for such close lap times despite that disparity other than a somewhat unimpressive outing by the Camaro even after taking the Cobalt's handling prowess into consideration..

It isn't bad, but it isn't great either, particularly not for a 400hp car. The E36 M3 was indeed a superb handler, but it possessed nearly a hundred fewer hp than the Chevy and the difference in torque between the Chevy and the Bimmer is astronomical.

The same insiders who told us the 2011GT would get a 400hp V8 long before leaks of the same became more prevelant have also been telling us that the 2010+GT's suspension will be an amalgam of everything good Ford has learned from the S197 program as a whole including GT500, Bullitt, and the racing programs. Of course the program will go beyond those relatively simple upgrades, but even if it didn't that alone would yield an exceptionally good handling vehicle. Like I said, my only worry is with the brakes.

 

I'd guess that Camaro SS and Cobalt SS are within .5 to .7 in the 1/4. The Cobalt SS is by no means slow. The Cobalt SS gets no credit due to being a Chevy. Magazines have praised it as the best handling FWD car ever. I was actually thinking of test driving one to see how it drives.

The E46 M3 has 333hp. It's a low 13s car stock. I've driven them on the track and they are fairly fast in stock form.

I've never heard one word about the suspension other than it being a SRA rear until the new chassis. Ford has done about all they can with the ox-cart rear, in my opinion. The next progression would be a Watts Link, but again that's inferior to a good IRS in terms of overall dynamics. A SLA front suspension would be nice too, but that would most likely require a lot of engineering work.

 

@max200jp:

The question still remains as to whether GM's engineering is good enough to handle the immense weight of the camaro. You've proven that BMW can do it, but do you believe GM can do the same and at a much lesser cost?

I dont think they can

 

Did you forget about the CTS-V? It’s ~4,300 lbs, but set the factory production record at the ring running 7:59. GM’s engineering knows how to build a “handling” car much better than Ford IMO. We do know that the Camaro will cost a bit more than the current Mustang, but no official pricing has been release.

I think all of us agree that Ford needs to work on the suspension and brakes to bring it on par with the competition.

 

to answer the question in a word NO

 

I'm going to guess 1/4 mile disparity is going to be larger than that. IMO best effort Camaro SS runs are likely going to be just barely better than what we saw with the 400hp LS@ GTO, and that means we should be looking for something in the 12.7-12.8 range for genuine best efforts...which means you wont see those numbers from an auto rag. Several Cobalt SS/TC owners have posted times already and best effort runs have just barely broken into the 13's, you wont likely see those numbers from an auto rag either, and only a very few have managed that. With that in mind, even if we go the conservative route and assume the Camaro is no faster than the LS2-powered GTO we have as 12.9 second car versus a 13.9 second car.

Ultimately, in the real world, the Camaro SS is almost certainly going to be a little more than a second faster through the 1/4 mile.......and that is a rather large disparity. And again, there is no way a Cobalt SS should be close to the times set by the Camaro SS on a track like the Nurb.

I've driven them too, and while they are fun to drive and handle very well they are relatively torqueless which makes more than a little difference on tracks like the Nurb where high speeds are sustained for long periods of time including around corners. Acceleration from speeds like 50-60mph will be night and day different in a car with the Camaro's torque than in a M3. Like I said above, on a track like the Nurb a high hp, high torque car like the Camaro should run away from the M3 unless there is a rather large handling disarity

You also hadn't heard a lot of the things posted about the 400hp 5.0L until I posted them here either, so I am uncertain why this still surprises you. By this point I'm simply not inclined going to go searching for links for you anymore, it has genuinely become a waste of my time. No offense, but if you want to play devil's advocate on a Mustang forum then you should take the time to make certain you are as informed on these issues as anyone else.

As the superiority of IRS.....technically and when viewed from within a little box where the rest of the car doesn't exist, yeah. But it doesn't work that way out on the street or on the track. Like I said, the current SRA equipped S197 out-handled the IRS equipped GTO. Given the Camaro's excessive weight gain and somewhat unimpressive Nurb times I see little reason to look for a different outcome this go round.

 

MotorTrend ran 14.0 at almost 102 MPH. I bet you will see 13.6-13.7 come this fall when the weather is good. The Camaro is a low 13’s car per GM. I bet owners will run high 12s in good weather. Lastly, the GTO isn’t a 12.9 car all the time. They are capable of that time with perfect DA and a great driver. I question if you’ve ever seem them run at the track.

The Nurburgring rewards great handling and aerodynamics. Raw HP does doesn’t equal a fast time. Again, I think you are discrediting how good of a car the Cobalt is. That’s par for the course for you though. If it had a Ford badge up front, you would be praising it.



I forgot, you will never give another car credit besides the Mustang. If you are driving the car properly, the M3 will be in it’s powerband. Watch the runs at the Ring on YouTube or any track with a competent driver. A Camaro will be out of it’s powerband at the ring if not driven properly too. The Camaro and E46 M3 are pretty similar in acceleration, but the stats show that the Camaro is faster around the ring. All in All the E46 M3 is an impressive machine and GM’s new Camaro posted a similar time. Kudos for them!


Actually, you didn’t post anything. FourCam and other insiders did and you are piggybacking off their info. I’ve read FourCam’s posts on SVTperformance and he doesn’t mention anything about the suspension. I am as informed as you, since there is no reliable data. I was asking an honest question and you obviously don’t have an answer.

What would be impressive Nurburgring time for the Mustang or Camaro? When has Ford publicly posted a track time? The simple fact of the matter is GM is vocal about their testing and publishes their results like any other credible performance manufacturer.

 

I was going to ask what a Watts link was, but I did a little research... Very nice! I would love to have one of those on my ride right now. I hate getting sideways when I get on her hard and light em up even in an easy turn. (Spun out once, not happening again) Don't have those nerves of steel I once had.

 

See, again the CTS-V is A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE than a camaro should be. So even if they could do it its going to be far too expensive. And the mustang is about bang for the buck.

GM will not be able to build a camaro that can trounce the mustang in handling and still be able to compete price wise

 

will a watts link do better than irs when you line em up i dont think it will do better than sra

 

Since Ford Scrooged out on the suspension in '05 when they were rolling in money, I highly doubt they will suddenly step into the 21st century now that they're practically selling the office furniture to make ends meet. My guess with the suspension is that they will tune it a bit better than on the GT, perhaps more like the Bullitt, and leave it at that, hiding behind the notion that buyers don't care what's under the fenders (of course they don't, but they do care how, what ever that stuff is, it works).

Brakes probably will get a modest upgrade too out of necessity as the current ones are borderline adequate for the current 300hp GT for anything more than a single, simple stop at the end of a quarter mile. Certainly don't expect a nice, shiny set of GT500 style Brembos.

Drive train might, MIGHT, be the highpoint IF the 5.0 makes it online for '10. Presumably backed by a six pack of cogs and pushing 400+ ponies, this may well give the Rubenesque Camaro and portly Challenger a run for the money on the straights at least.

But a lot of ifs, ands or buts here and it really will come down as much to successful execution as much as simple spec sheet stats.