Thanks for noticing! and that's without my high heels btw. Lol

 

Oh wow they have improved ..but wait..the Mustang didn't get those numbers till 2012... 0.94 is dam close to 80's Camaro numbers ..great job Ford, finally caught up with the 80's Camaro handling benchmarks. I guess that why they charge $60-80 k for those models.
Really if they don't fix the Stang and put it back on top like it was sales will remain in the crapper like they have been and probably decline.

 

It outsold the camaro this month and is outselling for the year as well.

 

Why did you join this forum? You do nothing but crack on the Mustang. Makes no sense...

My guess is you work for GM, typing away in your cubicle, and intentionally planting seeds of doubt for the 2015. The 2015 will crush the competition. If you don't believe me, ask Bumblebee. Lol

 

I'd like to see some (magazine bench racing) stats of an '80s Camaro with "close" to .94. Seeing as a '93 Z/28 hit .87 vs .86 for a Cobra of same model year. And is was much the same in '97, .89 vs .88 . . . again just magazine test numbers.

 

Edited for language. TMS does not allow derogatory remarks towards other members.

 

If that's the case, then the "in a league of its own" Corvette puts up some paltry numbers, too. The "touring centric" Grand Sport achieved "only" 0.96g, referencing the same Road and Track article I posted several days ago. By the way, the GT500 it was compared to was capable of 1.00g.

If 1980's era Camaros were, in fact, capable of achieving 0.90+g in terms of lateral acceleration, the General's pony car definitely lost its significant handling edge in the late '90's. From Car and Driver's review of the 2001 Mustang Cobra:

"Our last Z28SS (a particularly quick model we tested in October 1998) hit 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and did the quarter in 13.5 seconds at 107 mph.

It's quick, it stops from 70 mph in 179 feet, and it claws at the pavement with 0.86 g of lateral grip (the Camaro Z28SS stops in 174 feet and pulls 0.85 g on the skidpad)."

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ad-test-review

 

But we're they motortrend numbers????

 

Duh!! First ones that showed up on Google.com!

 

It's funny, he speaks so lowly of the mustang, all the while the GT and v6 destroy the camaro in every category imaginable, for less money. What's next, compare the focus ST to a vette with 150k miles that you can get for the same price?

 

So you quote the numbers for the IROC 1LE package as if they apply to the whole range? That was for racing, you are aware, right?

 

He's probably lost his red Swingline stapler and he's so upset he got on this forum and started putting down the Mustang.
At the end of the day, he'll crawl up out of his now-basement office, get in his Chevette, and go home to an apartment where he'll be greeted by 8 cats.

They should just "fix the glitch" and see if he gets the point and stop coming in for work.

 

If Camaros are so good, and I'm not saying they are not, why do you seldom see a Camaro at a track event. Subaru WRXs, Nissan GTRs, Porsches of all stripes and Corvettes, along with a multitude of Mustangs but seldom, if ever, is there a Camaro present. I guess the owners like the safety of stats and bench racing.

 

They're afraid of their airbags blowing up

 

You don't see many Camaro owners these days because they are usually out Fightin', drankin', locked up, home at Mommas washin dishes, combin their mullets, gettin nekkid and skinny-dippin, or havin a hootin nanny doe-see-doe good time! Lol

 

That is funny

You may not know this but here in Australia we have the same kind of (GM) Holden syndrome. We call them bogans.

What has 32 legs and 17 teeth?
The front row of the Holden cheer-leading squad at Baffurst.

 

Where's thePill? He's going to love this. He's been saying all along that Chevrolet isn't genuine about Camaro for the real track enthusiasts.

 

Good point, without digging the info up that was my guess as well.

Not well known I think but worth considering when comparing the performance of older high performance tires.

Back in the 80's and early 90's when wide low profile tires were coming into popular use, tire manufacturers were using designs that placed a priority on lateral grip in much the same way competition tires do compared to street performance tires do today. It was fantastic for generating high lateral acceleration numbers but really bad for communicating when those limits were reached.

The issue was bad enough ( probably with some prodding from insurance and safety watchdogs) that high performance tire manufacturers in the US started changing the profile of the tire to what they called a ''euro'' profile going away from a square edge to a rounded edge ( put simply) so that the tire was more communicative and would progressively loose grip as the limits of adhesion were approached. The downside being lower lateral limits.

 

Well, since we're quoting numbers achieved by race-spec vehicles, Motor Trend tested the 1995 Cobra R at 0.96g on the skidpad. The 2001 Cobra R? 1.01g.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...r/viewall.html

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...m/viewall.html

 

Handling, especially real world handling, is about far more than hero test (track) numbers.