This is why I say that Ford doesn't know how to build a world class AFFORDABLE performance car. Every car manufacturer does what what you explained above. Hell, even Audi/Lamborghini do it

 

I'd argue thats a modern phenomena, but your right, I wish Ford would get a clue and spend some time at Nurburgring. GM has used the ring to help tune the vette, cobalt and the HHR that I'm aware of while I think maybe Ford took the GT there (and I'm not talking about the GT Mustang or GT500). Cruising around detriot and going in circles on the home test track will only get you so far.

 

Yes, I'm talking rumors and when it comes to the Camaro...so are you. For all we know at this point every V8 Camaro is going to be a 3,999lb sloth. Granted that is unlikely, but what the Camaro will or wont do or be is no more or less conjecture at this point than is the upcoming 5.0L V8 from Ford. We more or less know what the Camaro is bringing to the table and, in terms of power, we more or less know what the 2011 Mustang GT is going to be packing as well. If for whatever reason you want to act like we don't then that is your prerogative, but don't choose this course opnly when it suits your argument.

As for fuel economy. The G8 had to skip the LS3 in GT trim to avoid a gas guzzler tax and that car is the best indication we have of what the Camaro is going to knock down in terms of fuel economy. Put simply, the epa highway rating is probably going to say 23mpg or something very close to it even for a base Camaro. At the moment that isn't going to garner GM any awards for being ahead of the game. As for which engine I would choose? Given the likelihood that the 5.0L DI V8 is going to have something close to a 7k redline and make phenomenal low end torque (a common feature of DI engines) while knocking down better fuel economy than the outgoing 4.6L 3-valve (which means better than the LS3) I'll take the engine which has an obvious advantage in every area but displacement.

Your the one who came out making statements about the obvious superiority of the upcoming Camaro, but now we can't make value judgements because we don't know specifics? You can't have it both ways. You can't speculate and then complain when others do if you want to be taken seriously.

Running a pre-production car at a test track and gleaning tricks from actual racing experience are two entirely different things. And the reality is that Ford's Grand Am Cup racing experience with the Mustang has certainly done more to teach engineers at Ford about what does and doesn't work on the Mustang than anything GM is going to learn about the Camaro at the Nurb. In fact we've already seen tangible results from Fords GAC experience, and we'll see more in 2010, and in cars that don't cost 70k.

IMO true enthusiasts are the one who understand that numbers aren't everything. A base Porsche 911 can't beat a standard C6 Vette either strictly by the numbers, but the German does just fine among enthusiasts and this enthusiast would gladly pay the difference to get the 911. Why? Because numbers are the only area where the Vette is better. If numbers were all that mattered Lotus could drop a LS3 behind the firewall of the Exige and rule the world. And if numbers were all that mattered Z06 Vettes wouldn't have been all over the used market within a year of their debut, or be packing rebates within that same amount of time.

I am a Ford guy at heart, but I would love to have a 911 or even a 328i.....I can't imagine every buying a Corvette as it is now. IMO the Vette is a car for guys who care only for numbers and looks, which is much like what Ferrari had moved to in the early to mid 90's. If GM has the same kind of revival that transformed the 348 into the 355 then count me interested, until then IMO the Vette is just another fast, pretty car that, for the money asked, isn't particularly good at anything else.

 

How are we talking rumors in terms of engines. GM already has the LS3, LS7, and LS9 in production. We both already know what they are capable of. Ford has nothing to match any of those engines. I believe that the Camaro will come in at around 3,700-3,800 lbs, but that's my guess. My point about the rumors is that Ford currently has released no official specs on the new GDI engine. It's all internet rumors. For all we know, the output could be closer to 350hp. Ford's only hope in matching GM in terms of power was forced induction in the past.

I don't know one person who buys a Mustang, Challanger, or Camaro for gas mileage. If you want fuel efficiency, buy a Honda Civic. Again, we cannot say which engine has the advantage because there are rumors that GM might be releasing VVT, Direct Injection, and Active Fuel Management with the Camaro. Ford's engine does sound great, but it better have the grunt too. I will say without a doubt that the Camaro will have more hp and tq. I am 100% sure of this.


IRS rear, LSx engine, 6 speed manual. Those are all confirmed. You were speculating on the cost and weight. Let's stick to what we know. The next gen Mustang is most likely going to stick with a SRA and I haven't read of an upgrade to a 6 speed manual.

Again, GM's engineers take data learned from racing and apply this to their production cars. A great example is the Z06. It was developed alongside the C6R. GAC is like NASCAR, in fact the France family runs the series. GAC has helped Ford, but Ford would have learned more from a series such as American LeMans which allows further innovation.

Ford is stupid to NOT test their cars at the Ring. It provides arguably the best testbed for suspension and vehicle dynamics in the world. GM has learned a ton testing there. There is a reason why every European manufacturer tests there. Ford is just late to the party. Nissan spent weeks tuning the GTR there to get it right.

Okay you lost me here. We went from comparing similarly priced vehicles in regards to the Camaro and Mustang. A C6 and 911 are almost 30K apart. Both buyers are buying the cars for performance. Both buyers are paying for an experience. I know many people that like the brute force of the Vette and some like the precision of a Porsche. In the end, they are buying the car because of the percieved performance value to them. FYI, I'd take a GT3 over a Z06 anyday of the week.

I could tell that you are a Ford guy by your responses. I love all cars. Saying that the Vette is just "just another fast, pretty car that, for the money asked, isn't particularly good at anything else" shows that you are posting with blinders on. Gotta love the Ford faithful!

 

Were talking rumors in terms of the Camaro because we

a: Still have no official confirmation from GM on which V8 will power the base V8 model.

and b: Still have no idea how much the car will actually weigh

Any assumption you might make regarding performance therefore must employ rumor and speculation as well since both of those items affect performance and neither has been confirmed by GM. For all we know the Camaro will come standard with the same 36xhp V8 the G8 GT uses and weigh 3,999lbs. That car wouldn't even be as fast as the last gen GTO and certainly wouldn't pose a threat to a 400hp mustang GT 5.0L or otherwise. You think the Camaro will easily trump the Mustang while I do not, the difference is you want to use a different standard for your argument than you apply to mine. I find it hard to believe you are oblivious to the double standard your employing here, particularly since you are attempting to use it to your benefit. Your argument is starting to feel a little bit like the ricer logic I would expect from a year old here....and that is disappointing

If you think the price of fuel doesn't affect the decision of most people buying a 25k dollar or even a 30k dollar car then I would argue you are out of touch with reality here. And here you are again saying 'without a doubt' that Camaro will have more hp and torque than the 2011 Mustang GT in the very same thread where you claim we can't make sweeping statements about the 5.0L DI V8 at this point because it would be nothing more than speculation. When I say a 5.0L DI 2011 Mustang GT will easily have the heavier Camaro covered it's groundless speculation but when you say the Camaro will have more hp and torque than that car it's suddenly definitive? You're trying to have it both ways again, which is it? Either we don't know enough to make these kinds of statements or we do. If you want to have a serious conversation these things can't be decided simply by what suits your argument at the moment.

Mustang is definitely sticking with SRA, but we have no confirmation from GM that the base Camaro engine will be the LS3 just rumors and speculation. We have a lot of folks saying this is confirmed but that is as far as their evidence goes. The base V8 Camaro engine could still just as easily be the unit used in the G8 GT and not the LS3 by the standards you are using, and that is a big difference. Once again if you are going to get fussy about confirmation of these things then you need to practice what you preach.

That is simply your opinion. One could just as easily argue that the more open nature of the LeMans rules means that lessons gleaned there, particularly as it relates to chassis tuning, are less pertinent since the cars are further removed from the production units the consumer actually buys.

The ring is, and long has been, somewhat over-rated as a tuning tool for street cars. There is nothing wrong with it if you understand and accept it for what it is, but you wont learn significant lessons there which couldn't be learned on a combination of testing facilities that aren't half a world away. Further, the Ring has always had far too much in the way of very high sustained speeds to really be a good indicator of what you car can expect on the street or even most race tracks for that matter. For example, both 289 and 427 Cobra roadsters always did terrible there because their aerodynamics weren't up to par.

But on most other tracks and on virtually any curvy piece of two lane those same Cobra's would destroy many of the same cars they couldn't hope to catch on the Ring. Sustained stability at 125mph is a wonderful thing to have in a car but the reality is that very few of us will experience this even if we do frequent the local road courses or twisty two lanes. If your going to make statements like this it would help to support it with some history or knowledge of strong and weak points of the particular track.

Do us all a favor, before you reiterate the relevance of the Ring at least attempt to explain away the utter failure of what was arguably the fastest and most dominant production-based race car of the 1960's at this same venue.

This isn't complicated. You made a value statement about the Vette based on performance, specifically numbers performance, and I stated that simple numbers aren't all that matters and used the 911 as an example of how a car can both be slower and cost more than the Vette yet still be a better car for the money. Same applies to the GT500 and C6. I find the GT500 to be much better at it's grand touring role than is the C6 at it's role as a 'usable' sports car.

I love this logic, If you don't like the Vette you must be a fan boy. Because, the reason couldn't possibly be the Vette's cheap interior, terrible seats, amazingly bad steering feel, poor build quality, or tiresome ride....nope you have to love it anyway. I don't love all cars I love good cars, whatever badge they may wear. If you felt the need to sink to this level to try and bolster your argument then my job is done.

 

Double Standard? We do know that GM has 4 engines that they can use. The L76 will most likely be the standard engine. It curently makes 361/385 in the G8. The LS3 will most likely be used as well. Maybe even an LS7 in the SS model. My point is that we know what to expect of these engines. You are throwing numbers in the air and guessing what Ford's 5.0L is going to make. I am sure Ford doesn't know what the final numbers will be as of yet until it SAE tested. In my honest opinion, 400 hp seems optimistic from a mass produced affordable Ford N/A motor.

If we are taking about a 25K family sedan, yes fuel economy does matter. You are picking at straws here to battle GM. Fuel economy in muscle cars is a joke. If you think that the buyer of a Camaro is looking for amazing fuel economy, well you my friend don't know the market. What next, are you going to compare insurance premiums? As for hp, see my post above. GM has the LS3, LS7, and LS9. Please look up their specs and tell me that GM doesn't have more hp on tap. Your Blue Oval blinders are working against you here.

Base engine will be a V6. We know that. The base engine will most likely be the L76 or LS3. Either way, both engines produce more power than any N/A engine Ford currently has to offer.

No it's not an opinion, it's a fact. Technology from series that allow innovation trickle down to production cars. Formula One for years has done been a test bed of modern technology.


How many cars have you tuned/engineered? BMW and Porsche must not know something that you know. Come on now! Your blinders are further hampering you.

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/08/n...stun-observers
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/08/n...stun-observers

Could it happen to be that the Cobra had **** poor aero? Could it be that we are comparing a car that didn't incorporate modern aerodynamice priciples? You are living in the past. Today, cars are tested for aero. Ford actually spent considerable time with the GT500 reducing lift. Ever consider that the Ring could be a good place to test aerodynamics in a real world enviroment?

FYI, I can easily reach 125 mph at Road America and I'd prefer an stable platform..

Yes, I made a value statement on a GT500 and C6. They cost the same amount of money and get cross shopped. What's incorrect about that. The Vette is a much better performance platform.

Stating that a car is "beter for the money" is purely subjective. Anyone can rationalize their purchase, let's stick to data.

Ford blinders once again.....Cheap interior, terrible sears, poor build quality....that's what people say about Mustangs. Your arguement holds little weight and is a bit hypocritical. Judging by what you've written, it seems like you've never driven a C6 Vette and your opinion is based off of magazines. I never said you have to love it, but at least respect it. It's arguably America's best car.

All in all, good fun but you'll never go anywhere with someone that's as brand loyal as you. Ford loves folks like that. They can build an inferior product and the loyalists will buy it because of the label. Educated consumers are the reason why Ford's market share has declined and the company is performing poorly.

 

I have been reading both your arguments and I feel both of you have valid points but maybe I can join in and voice a couple of my own opinions.

As far as the Mustang and being track tuned....Ford races the Mustang in the Rolex GT Cup! These are basically stripped street cars with safety equipment and tuning, Ford actually used a lot of the data from racing the Mustang in this series including many aspects of the GT500 and the Boss motor.

I have driven both the GT500 and the C6 I would have to agree that the Vette has better quality materials in the interior compared to the Mustang but.... the seats in the Vette suck big time! To be honest both GM and Ford have improved interiors of their cars so dramatically that i'm sure the next Mustang will be on par with the Vette and Camaro (4th Gen Camaros had terrible interiors too!)

As far as speculation of the Camaro and Mustang debate go I feel that they will do what they always did trump one another with every new generation. I agree that the Camaro will likely be the more complete performance car but it will come at a price. GM has already confirmed in recent auto shows that the Camaro is being marketed as a "premium coupe" and will not be in the same class as the Mustang in performance and price.

Looks are subjective but price isn't like the earlier Corvette remark the Mustang is to the Camaro what the Corvette is to the Porsche.
just my .02 what do you guys think?

 

CAFE + Technology(GDI Engines) = Equality


Within the next couple of years, the Mustang, Camaro and Challenger will all have similar H.P.
The new Camaro is going to be a beast! But, its ugly. Let GM have their day in the sun. It won't last for long!

 

Yep, and that is just your opinion based, effectively, on nothing of substance since the 5.0L DI V8 coming is radically different than anything Ford currently has in production. Using current hp numbers for V8 engines which employ vastly different head designs and injection methods feels like a pathetic attempt to bolster your argument. Comparisons with small direct injection V8's from other auto makers would even be more accurate here since they are far closer functionally to the upcoming 5.0L DI V8 than anything Ford currently builds.

You are seriously trying to argue that people in the market for a 25k or 30k aren't directly affected by the price of gas an insurance premiums? So people buying these cars are all independently wealthy enthusiasts who just have a thing for performance cars which start below the mean price for a new car? This makes absolutely no sense on it's face.

Yes, but since the existing lineup of 4.6L V8's wont survive until even 2012 we have to compare these to the upcoming 5.0L DI V8 which, according to the only info we have given us by sources who were correct about the 3.5L V6, 3.7L V6, and now who appear to be correct about the GTDi V6, collectively say this engine produces 400hp. The amazing part here is that you are literally substituting your information and opinion effectively claiming that it is more relevant and accurate than info from people like Fourcam and Blue II, neither of whom have been wrong about a Ford engine program thus far. Good luck with that.

And once again were back to blanket statements with you avoiding the finer points. Sigh. You have no evidence to support the notion that any of these racing efforts is more relevant, or even as relevant, to the cars we drive on the street than GAC so you choose to ignore that problem altogether.

Where are BMW and Porsche located again? Oh, thats right...in the same country as the Nurb which of course wouldn't make it more practical or anything like that. As for the fact that people test at the Ring. Nissan took the GTR there long ago to prove their car was faster than the 959 which had been tested on that track for reasons which should be obvious. Rings times suddenly became a big deal after that and from there it snowballed and now the Ring has reached mythical status and everybody goes there to prove their car is faster than everybody else's. The next thing you know you've got millions of fanbois drooling that this is now the ultimate place to test a car and automakers got in line to cater to this fantasy.

Funny, you are the one going on about the wonder that is the Ring, but I am the one who actually understands the significance of that facility and who knows it's history. Should that be telling us something?

While the Cobra's lack of aero is what made the car perform so poorly at the Ring that demonstrated by proxy the problem with the Ring, which is that these cars spend a disproportionate amount of time at extremely high speeds compared to what you could expect even on most other race tracks. I had hoped that you could figure this out on your own. Were not talking about hitting 125 or 135mph here we are talking about staying there for long periods of time when you average it out around the track. If you sustain speeds that high for so long that it actually rendered a car as fast as the Cobra irrelevant then you sustain those speed far too long to be a good indicator of how fast a car is at any venue but the Ring.

And how long do you stay at those speeds and above? That is what I thought.

Better according to who? The GT500 is far more comfortable, possesses far better steering feel, and is both more predictable and linear. And road course numbers aren't that far off with Car and Driver wheeling a GT500 around a relatively high speed track and the GT500 was only a second and change behind and was, in fact, about dead even with Audi's R8. And it would be difficult to claim bias here since there is every indication that Car and Driver hates the GT500. Once again we have you ignoring every issue and aspect but those which support your argument.

So now were back to nothing but numbers? Your argument isn't going to fare any better no matter how many times you try to change the criteria.


I've driven both the C5 and C6 Vette, and didn't particularly care for either for reasons stated several times by folks both a lot more jaded and more experienced than I. For the money the Vette's build quality and seats are unacceptable as are the poor steering feel, not to mention the ride which starts out fine but always gets old after an hour or so. Fast? yes. Fast enough to overlook the issues above? Not for me, not for the price. The Mustang is by no means perfect, but a cheap interior is a lot easier to live with in a 28k GT than a 50k Vette, and while the GT500's interior is no Renoir it delivers far, far better seats than any Vette along with steering feel that doesn't feel like it's coming through an oar. (Admittedly, while I have sat in GT500 seats....the MS6 uses the same units.... I have never driven one. But given the fact that both the ride and steering feel are apparently improved over the more mundane GT model, and with the knowledge that even the GT model has better steering feel and ride characteristics than the C6 Vette, yes, thats right......this isn't a stretch. The Vette may have the worst steering feel of any sports car currently in production)

Yes, because every car I own is a Ford (Wait, I own three and only one is a Ford...how can that be?) I sing the praises of BMW, Porsche, etc...even express my desire for said cars (if I were in the market for a 80k car I'd pick up a 911 in a minute) but it's my affinity for Ford that makes me dislike the Vette because it couldn't be all the legit issues with that car causing my problem. Your argument was on life support a post ago and now your trying to paint me as a staunch fanbois to save what little is left of it.

 

It can't be said any better than that. Period.

Greg "Eights" Ates

 

You do not comprehend my argument, so let’s break it down:

As of 4/09/08:

GM: 4 V8’s ranging from 360ish to 600+. These are the L76, LS3, LS7, and LS9.
Ford: 2 V8’s; 300 and 500. Obviously these are the 4.6L 3v and 5.4L s/c 4V.

Future 2011+:

GM: 4 V8’s possibly with Direct Injection, VVT, and AFM. These are strong rumors, much like we see here on this Ford board.
Ford: 5.0L GDI 4V engine making 400hp. This is a strong rumor and is scheduled for 2011 (or 2012).

In 2009/2010, when both the Camaro and GT are competing…..GM will win the war in hp. In 2011, it’s up in the air since neither side has firm details.


My point was that most consumers go into buying a muscle car/sports car knowing that it’s a compromise on gas mileage and insurance premiums.


I’d love a 400hp 5.0L. I will believe it once I see it announced in production. Like I said, internal factors could change the program slightly. The 400hp motor won’t be out at the initial launch though, so Ford will be behind GM in hp


Name a technology and it was most likely developed in Formula One. What was developed out of GAC? Do your homework, before you post!

I provided an example of how the Corvette has used C6R technology above. Ford certainly has used Multimatic to better the S197, but my opinion is that GAC is a restrictive series and that opinion is backed up by the rules of the series.


The ‘Ring is used because it is grueling. BMW and Porsche engineers have stated why they test their and it’s not because of location. I’ve got a video from my old 3 series that shows how BMW tests their vehicles. Very interesting video BTW! They test the acoustics of the windshield wipers to make a distinct sound!

Why did Aston Martin (A Ford brand until recently) announce plans to build a shop/R&D facility at the Ring? There are plenty of track in England to test. Hmm??


You and I are on the same page, but saying it differently. The lack of Aero hindered the Cobra at the ring (and other tracks). Modern aerodynamics take affect at roughly 60ish mph. You will see that for sustained speeds at any track. The Nurburgring allows companies to test at high speeds and very low speeds. It’s honestly is a very challenging and demanding track.


Well, according to C&D. You got your numbers mixed up. The C6 spanked the GT500 on the track, beating it by 3 SECONDS PER LAP. You were correct about C&D’s opinion on the seats and steering feel. In 2008, Chevy up the hp with the LS3 and fixed the street feel. The seats are still flimsy, I will give you that.

My argument has been about performance, which enthusiasts equate to numbers.




The GT500 is the same MSRP, but you can overlook the same issues. Come on know, YOU are jaded. Again, you forget that the 08’s have improved feel, which even C&D liked and credited as a big step forward.



You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say the Vette has a poor interior than compare it to a GT500. The Vette has a nicer interior. Granted the seats need some work, but overall the Vette is more refined and uses better materials. GM has been making great strides in interior refinement.

 

Ford took the Lincoln LS to Nurburgring years before Caddy made a big stink about taking the CTS there.

 

But there are many people who have NOT purchased a Mustang because of it's poor gas mileage.

 

I agree V10, my opinion is that most V6 buyers like the look and feel of a sporty car and cross shop V6 Mustangs with Accord, Altima, Eclipse, Scion TC Coupes...... If I had any say in Ford I would put in a 150-200HP 4 banger into the base Mustang that way they can cut costs and improve overall fleet MPGs those of us who still want power will opt for the GT and SVT models. Too be honest I feel that the current V6 is way too outdated and despite a huge lack in power to the GT model it gets only slightly better MPG than the GT. Just an idea but I say Ford should go the economy car way with the base Mustang like they did in the fox body years.

 

I think 4 bangers are a possibility, but not until they are GDI. Ford seems to think that these new GDI V6's are the answer. I think that they are correct, although I believe that there will always be at least one version of the Mustang with a V8.

 

I understand what you're saying, I just don't agree.

I don't agree. First, while there are rumors regarding DI, VVT, and AFM for GM small-blocks none of these have ever even been rumored to have surpassed the skunkworks stage of development. At this point there aren't even rumors of when or if they will go into production.

Things could change with the Ford program but the reality is that we already know that Windsor is tooling up for production of these engines. Wether you believe existing info on hp and tq or not as it now stands these engines are indeed coming.

And as for the argument that things could change for the worse for Ford regaridng this V8, unlikely as that may seem, at the moment the same readily applies to GM and likely even moreso. I say this because of GM's current dilemma regarding the LS series engine you've cited in this post. We don't know much about the situation or a possible solution as yet but, not surprisingly, GM is scrambling to find a way to squeeze their smallblocks into the new reality of tighter CAFE standards and higher gas prices. The rumor mill has been abuzz with everything from GM offering to pay the US govt a 'penalty' for every LS series V8 built to buy time to a dratic pull-back of V8 production at GM. Even Lutz himself has commented on the possibility of GTDi turbo four powered G8's and Camaros.

You initially made the comment that the top line Camaro would easily trump the GT500 and I pointed out that this simply isn't so. And I will still argue that given the current climate and what we know aout future engine/vehicle development that GM is the one with their back against the wall here.

I don't disagree, but it is a compromise they are increasingly less able to make IMHO. If Ford puts out a 400hp Mustang GT that knocks down an epa rating of 26mpg highway I have no doubt sales will increase because of the serious improvements in both ratings.

Almost certainly the 2010 Mustang will indeed have to stand up to the new Camaro with some version of the existing 4.6L under hood. But I think what is likely to be a bit less than one year will be more than tolerable for Ford.

I'm talking about technology that directly affects how your car works on the street. I'm aware of the R&D that takes place in F1 and other venues. But the reality is the suspension of the Mustangs we drive on the street has been directly influenced by the use of that same suspension in GAC. IMO that kind of influence is more important

The difference here is that I think those restrictions force the teams to improve on the basic factory setups making them more relevant to what we get on the street. obviously you hold the opposite view.

I think the Ring works just fine but remain unconvinced that it is superior to other options much closer for brands like Ford and GM.

Same reason I cited earlier. The Ring has a reputation, deserved or not, as the place top test and sort perfomance cars. You obviously think it is deserved while I do not.

Obviously we diverge here on the issue of sustained high speed and wether those speeds are sustained too long to make the track a good all around indicator of perfomance. IMO they are, and again you obviously disagree.

Your a bit off their yourself. The Corvette C6 beat the GT500 by 2.3 seconds per lap which is virtually in the middle of where you thought it was and where I thought it was. On that track that isn't getting spanked. And again, if numbers matter this much to you I suppose you can't imagine why anybody would buy an Audi R8 since the Vette beat that car around the track by over a second per lap or even the BMW Z4 M since both the GT500 and Vette trumped that car. My problem with GT500 naysayers is that they typically apply the numbers argument to the Ford in a way they don't use with say, a 911 or R8.

I would argue that genuine enthusiasts know that perfomance is about more than simple numbers.

I don't overlook them, I just don't find as many of them. For me the GT500 is pushing it a bit for the price since it could certainly use much wider rear rubber, a nicer set of threads, and an aluminum engine block. Still I think it is a good deal and I would like to have one.

For me the Vette has just a few issues too many. I might be able to live with the somewhat rough ride if the steering was good, but it isn't. (I have heard the accounts of how much improved C6.5 steering feel is, but in most cases the simply marvel over it compared to the old model which really doesn't say much IMO since almost any sports car currently built is better than the old C6. They are just saying it isn't as bad, but that doesn't mean it's good) I might be able to overlook the cheapness of the interior if the seats were good, but they aren't. Frankly I don't find the C6 to be a very good daily driver, and for me that kills it.

I vehemently disagree. the GT500 is no Audi but it is no worse than standard Vette fare.

They have, but IMO it hasn't yet hit the Vette in a way which truly changes the game.

 

If we get a 15-25hp increase in the 4.6L for 2010, consider us lucky. Ford isn't going to invest that much time & money in an engine that is going to be replaced in a year.

 

I agree, look at Ford's history with previous engines.

 

I think we should have a little more faith. Look at the power improvements over the last couple gens. We went from 225HP in 98' to 260 in 99' The 05' GT upped it to 300. I think we might get a tweaked version of the current Bullitt setup good for 340HP until we get the new 5.0

just my .02

 

GM's engine rumors are the same as Ford's....rumors. We are years out until the 2011 5.0L GDI, so we don't know what's going to happen. It sounds like Ford hasn't figured out if they are going to have DI when the 5.0 is launched. This comes straight from FourCam. The engine does sounds promising, but I will argue that Ford is about 3-5 years late to the party!

GM has been working on the technology that I mentioned for their small blocks and I almost guarantee that we will see these fuel saving technologies shortly.

Lastly, have you ever been on a road course. ~3 seconds (1.30.40 vs GT 1.33.30) PER LAP is getting spanked. This test was run by C&D in the July 2007 comparo.

Lastly, I think that the C6 is a good daily driver. The seats are very cheap. I wish that GM offered a Recaro option on the Vette like they do in the new CTS-V. Even the ZR1 has the cheap seats for 100K.