Yep, it took 305s out back just to get the camaro to "match" our straight line performance, give me some 305s!!!!

 

---
Your posts are very good, BTW, and I agree with most of them. I like your objectivity. However, with regard to 'Base Price' vs. 'Price as Tested', the car mags don't always get it right. Because in reality you CANNOT get a 1LE for less than $40k, and more likely higher still. The Camaro 2SS version is $37k TO START WITH. The 1LE is a $3500 option on top of that. The math does not add up. REALITY is close to $45k for a 1LE, like it or not. And some dealers may add a $ premium, too.
Try a 'Build Your Own' here: http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro-perf...chevy%20camaro
It's like when the car mags test a BMW 3 series against others, they lump them into the same 'Base Price' segment. So cars actually costing $35k are being compared to a BMW that actually costs $45k, it's ridiculous.

 

Actually 1LE has steeper rear gears and different trans gearing to go along with the stickier 285's out back. So it took a fair amount just to match it.

 

It's ok, they'll just get a number of the suppliers they 'spun-off' to use their gov't loans to make the difference.

Exactly - different day. I'd like to also see a different driver and track setup but then again declarative statements are almost never wrong right?

 

285s up front, 305s out back; a lot moar meat on the bone.

 

So, you think 3/4 of an inch per tire is a lot more meat?

 

My principal reservation with regard to comparative automobile tests by magazines has to do with where the cars come from: "Ford loaned us a Mustang Firebreather 5.3 for this test; Chevrolet sent a SphereCracker 5.299..."

You reckon the factory and/dealer folks didn't massage those cars before turning them over to the testers? You can get the tire manufacturers to put any DOT labeling you want on a set of tires, if they think the payback would be worth it. You reckon the magazine guys used a durometer on those "stock" tires and didn't say so in the article.

The whole idea of comparo-tests is to sell magazines. I don't believe them for a minute. I don't even read them any more. Freaking waste of time.

Plus which, "brand loyalty" in consumer goods is a weird place to invest any energy. I know it's winter and a lot of Mustang users can't think of anything better to do than slaver over a slick magazine's questionable science, but sheesh!

 

Quite a bit bigger than a 255, I mean how much bigger could you go?

 

You can't go much but 3/4 of inch per corner ain't doing much is my point.

 

According to Chevy they have 285's on all 4 corners. The ZL1 has the staggered 285f, 305r

 

Oh yeah,I remember now, them saying it actually helped the handling to narrow the rear tires.

 

---
^ This is NOT correct. The 2013 GT 500 uses 265/40 19 Front, and 285/35 20 Rear. The 2013 ZL1 uses 285/35 20 Front, and 305/35 20 Rear.
-----------------------------
---
^ This is correct.
The bottom line is fairly obvious, more rubber & wider wheels generally equal better acceleration, braking, and handling. Not always, but generally, yes.

 

Not an opinion when they did performance tests that the mustang beat the challenger in every test. Why bother doing performance tests to see which is going to win then give the win to the car that lost all of the tests? That is extremely biased. They state the winner is the car that performs better then contradicts themselfs and says the challenger won based on looks. That is extremely biased and at that point why bother doing the performance tests and then giving the win to the car that performs worse because of looks. They tested how the two compared and which was better. Saying something is better based of of looks is opinion which is biased. Having a unbiased result would be giving the win to the car that performed better. But what ever I guess choosing based on looks isn't biased at all and that opinions aren't biased in something that's testing hard numbers and not looks.

 

In the end they are all great cars. From the base v6 models to the top end Gt500 and zl1. I would honestly happily own all of these cars. However when it comes to spending my own money. Give me the gt500

 

Well, I will say that just because something is winning in every performance category should not guarantee it an overall win. There may be other factors one may consider. I remember how the Z06 was praised by its track performance, but reviewers thought it was horrible on everyday road conditions. The Magna-ride suspension, later offered to it as an option, pretty much fixed those criticisms. The Camaro SS was getting spanked, test-after-test, once the 5.0 came out. GT with Brembo Package... GT Convertible with Brembos... GT Automatic... no answer for the Boss 302... Even the V6 put the smack down on the 'maro 6'er! I still stand by my opinion that they still do not have a Boss 302 competitor. I do not care what C&D has to say. The Chevy camp should be commended for offering this neat package, though.

Let me be clear, to compare a Mustang GT to the Camaro SS, the GT has to have the Brembo Brake Package and maybe 3.55 to 3.73 gears(manuals). The SS comes pretty well equipped, but costs more, right out the gate... where one can buy a GT for significantly less with smaller wheels, all-season rubber, smaller front brakes, smaller sways, differently valved shocks, and rear gears. What makes getting the Mustang in a "stripped-down" form so cool is that one can take it from there and create your own weapon! What we may lack in the aftermarket, to some extent, is the inability to reengineer the ABS/Traction Control program done by the factory to our changes. The Brembo Brake Package dampers is its weakest link... it's been noted. You don't have to wait for Ford to fix it, get some better ones. Bean-counters, be damned, upgrade the rear brakes. Throw some Pilot Super Sport, Eagle F1 Super Car:G-whatever, or Potenza S-04's on a wider set of wheels... rears, at least.

It's hard to be unbiased. Do you think a bow-tie fan cared at all that their reintroduced pony car was getting spanked when in 2010 the 5.0 came out? Not in the very least.

 

At what point is the difference in tire width / contact patch significant? 3/4" (19.05mm) is pretty noticeable to me, though I'm not sure I can quantify its significance. Further, that's 3/4" per side; a total of 1.5" (38.1mm). Is that significant?

 

And the Goodyear's the 1LE is wearing is a much better performing tire than the Pirelli's. I don't think tire alone will close the gap, but is prob worth atleast a second or more in lap time. The rest is just the Camaro 1LE has better suspension from the factory. Ford is busy with the 2015, and if you haven't noticed, Chevy has lost it's sales lead over the Mustang as well.

 

Yes but they were only testing it's performance on their test track not the roads they weren't a factor. The whole comparison was solely on performance. Also how a car feels is individualistic and is a matter of opinion to a point and is biased. Also seeing as they specifically said it wins because of it's "styling" is extremely biased. Any verdict made on opinion and not fact is biased.

 

Absolutely correct. That's why I referenced the past comments stated about the Z06's reported road manners. Styling preference is definitely an opinion. If they felt it was a partial factor in their outcome, good for them. I understand where you're coming from, though.

 

Meh even ride quality is subjective. Some people like a firm suspension and some people like is loose. Hence that's why most old people don't buy a sports car that's rock solid. They buy a luxury car with a nice soft suspension.