The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS. - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2015 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 10-31-2015, 06:46 PM   #1
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS.

Well, of course the new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover.................Camaro 207 points, Mustang 205. Mustang 11 category wins, Camaro 12......................BUT the Camaro has an automatic trans, and the Mustang the manual. So, in all of the acceleration tests, the Camaro got to downshift significantly, while the Mustang is locked in 6th. This skewed the results a LOT when it comes to "acceleration in top gear!" as well as, perhaps the mpg ratings win for the SS...............
I call foul!
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-11-2015, 04:02 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
Road Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: St Petersburg
Region: Florida
Posts: 137
I thought the article leaned too far in its attempt to paint the New Camaro as superior when at the same time the honest numbers showed very little performance difference. But then as test results they reported the top gear 30-50 time as 9.1 sec and 50-70 time as 8.6 sec for the manual transmission Mustang while the 8spd Auto Camaro ran 2.3 sec and 2.7 sec.

Mind you the gear ratio in top gear for both cars is .65 and the Camaro rear is 2.77 vs the 3.73 Mustang.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2016 GT Vert, SB, AT, 3:55s Weathertech, JLT, Steeda, Colgan, Velossa Tech, Coyote Spacers, Diode Dynamics, Shelby GT350 SW, Curt, Goodridge, aFe, MRT, BMR, Kooks, Mishimoto
Road Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 04:16 PM   #3
Registered Member

Regular
 
natestang07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Soap Lake
Region: Washington
Posts: 5,321
Car and driver is always a bit gm biased, aren't they?

Sent from my VS985 4G using Mustang Evolution mobile app
natestang07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-11-2015, 04:23 PM   #4
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
I know how quickly and easily, with only a gear or two kickdown, our A6 Mustang accelerates from 50 to 90. The test results should have made more of the A6/Manual handicap for the Mustang.
I too thought that the Mustang did itself proud overall.
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 04:25 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS.

Those test results don't make sense to me not that I really care anyway. 30-50 in 9 seconds???If it goes 0-60 in 4.4 seconds how could it take 9 seconds to go 30-50


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 04:29 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS.

Double post
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 04:40 PM   #7
Registered Member

Regular
 
natestang07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Soap Lake
Region: Washington
Posts: 5,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave73 View Post
Those test results don't make sense to me not that I really care anyway. 30-50 in 9 seconds???If it goes 0-60 in 4.4 seconds how could it take 9 seconds to go 30-50


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
I believe that is locked into its highest gear

Sent from my VS985 4G using Mustang Evolution mobile app
natestang07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 05:38 PM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by natestang07 View Post
I believe that is locked into its highest gear

Sent from my VS985 4G using Mustang Evolution mobile app

Ok that would explain it but seems like a stupid test me. If I'm evaluating a car I'm going to optimize the cars functions (choose the right gear) to get the best time with whatever vehicle I'm driving.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 05:51 PM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,253
The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS.

Stop winning GM is on top yet again. I have said it b4 all you "Bolton" coyotes are about to get your a$$ drug by GM again.

Going to need some real tunes for your coyotes now.

🍼and 🌽 fed coyote.
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 05:56 PM   #10
Registered Member

Regular
 
natestang07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Soap Lake
Region: Washington
Posts: 5,321
Just praying they fix their visibility issue by 2020

Sent from my VS985 4G using Mustang Evolution mobile app
natestang07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 05:56 PM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapinator126 View Post
Stop winning GM is on top yet again. I have said it b4 all you "Bolton" coyotes are about to get your a$$ drug by GM again.


🍼and 🌽 fed coyote.

I could care less I was just wondering what kind of test that was. My car is plenty fast I have enough. What's stock numbers anyway mean? Make a few changes spend a few bucks you change them. Either platform will work


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 06:13 PM   #12
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave73 View Post
Ok that would explain it but seems like a stupid test me. If I'm evaluating a car I'm going to optimize the cars functions (choose the right gear) to get the best time with whatever vehicle I'm driving.
Flooring a manual transmission in 6th gear at 50 mph -- vs -- flooring an automatic 6 speed and then timing both to any speed is going to massively favor the automatic and its ability to kick down two or three gears.
It was kind of rediculous for them to test these two cars against each other for those speed tests, as well as the mpg test, which the Mustang might have won with the A6 in it.
Put the manual GT in 2nd or 3rd gear, and lets see how fast it gets from 50 to 70!
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 06:16 PM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guard 5.0 View Post
Flooring a manual transmission in 6th gear at 50 mph -- vs -- flooring an automatic 6 speed and then timing both to any speed is going to massively favor the automatic and its ability to kick down two or three gears.

It was kind of rediculous for them to test these two cars against each other for those speed tests, as well as the mpg test, which the Mustang might have won with the A6 in it.

Well yes that seems to be what they have done and that's stupid. You would have to lock the automatic in 6th to have comparable results!


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 06:31 PM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
I haven't seen the article but on the Mustang side, isn't the manual Mustang faster than the auto, stock for stock? It was in the S197.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 07:26 PM   #15
ME Bloodhound
Staff
 
Soccerluvr4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacramento/Bay Area
Region: California
Posts: 14,672
Looking at the specs of the new Camaro. I don't doubt it will be faster than the Mustang. Weighs like 150lbs less. And puts down around 410/420 bone stock.


Bullitts are better than Bullets
__________________

Bullitt build paused pending graduation

HID end all thread
Soccerluvr4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 08:09 PM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
Road Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: St Petersburg
Region: Florida
Posts: 137
Soccer
Correction, the car they had was only 57 lbs lighter. Plus they spec it at 455hp only 20 Hp advantage. Where the Camaro has the real advantage is in the use of the magnetorheological shocks that provides instant suspension tuning while in motion.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2016 GT Vert, SB, AT, 3:55s Weathertech, JLT, Steeda, Colgan, Velossa Tech, Coyote Spacers, Diode Dynamics, Shelby GT350 SW, Curt, Goodridge, aFe, MRT, BMR, Kooks, Mishimoto
Road Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 08:12 PM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Magnahecktawhat shocks? Is that really what they call them?


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 08:35 PM   #18
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Road Dog View Post
Soccer
Correction, the car they had was only 57 lbs lighter. Plus they spec it at 455hp only 20 Hp advantage. Where the Camaro has the real advantage is in the use of the magnetorheological shocks that provides instant suspension tuning while in motion.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Torque ... you forgot that.

The 2016 Camaro makes more torque at the wheels, at just 1750 RPM (360 wtq) ... than the 2015+ Coyote makes at any RPM (358 peak).

Again .. this is stock for stock.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 08:38 PM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
It's also a 6.2 liter Motor vs 5.0...


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 09:01 PM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave73 View Post
It's also a 6.2 liter Motor vs 5.0...


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
You are looking at 3 wtq per liter difference between the two cars. That is nothing.

The fact that the new GM LT1 makes more torque at just 1750 RPM and carries it (and more) from there to 6500 RPM is an absolutely impressive powerband.

If you want to go the per liter route, the mighty Mustang 5.0 makes less torque per liter than a 2.4L Honda Accord (174 wtq) ... at the tires.

See how silly your argument is?
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 09:40 PM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish416 View Post
You are looking at 3 wtq per liter difference between the two cars. That is nothing.



The fact that the new GM LT1 makes more torque at just 1750 RPM and carries it (and more) from there to 6500 RPM is an absolutely impressive powerband.



If you want to go the per liter route, the mighty Mustang 5.0 makes less torque per liter than a 2.4L Honda Accord (174 wtq) ... at the tires.



See how silly your argument is?

Did I argue? all I'm saying is GM has always had to put more cubes for similar results. I could give 2 craps less on the torque rating of a Honda Accord I'm still not driving one. So if you guys want put Camaro's or Hondas on a pedestal have at it! Go buy one buy em both. Me and my Mustang have a deeper relationship than that I'm sticking with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2015, 10:51 PM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
JOberlander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Region: California
Posts: 245
Manual vs automatic. Stoppped reading right there.
JOberlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2015, 06:31 AM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
Road Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: St Petersburg
Region: Florida
Posts: 137
I had not bought that magazine for the past 30 years. After reading that article I remembered why.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2016 GT Vert, SB, AT, 3:55s Weathertech, JLT, Steeda, Colgan, Velossa Tech, Coyote Spacers, Diode Dynamics, Shelby GT350 SW, Curt, Goodridge, aFe, MRT, BMR, Kooks, Mishimoto
Road Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2015, 06:42 AM   #24
Staff

Regular
Staff
 
Strange Mud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Small Town
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 5,020
C&D is mostly about performance and the new Camaro is somewhat better. I'd be happy to own either, but, w/o having driven the new models I believe the Mustang would get my vote again as at 6'3"+ I'm sure the Camaro wouldn't work for me.

I've said it before "it's another Golden Age of automobiles"
__________________
2012 V6 with suspension, shifting, stopping and sound mods.
Strange Mud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 11:55 AM   #25
Registered Member
Regular
 
VTECLol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 48
Ok the new camaro is faster. So what. Is it really that impressive when gm had to use the corvette motor and Cadillac chassis to beat the mustang? Outstanding work Chevy.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2015 Race Red GT 6MT
VTECLol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 12:12 PM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
Ish416's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Winchester
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTECLol View Post
Ok the new camaro is faster. So what. Is it really that impressive when gm had to use the corvette motor and Cadillac chassis to beat the mustang? Outstanding work Chevy.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
A better engine and a better chassis generally makes a better car.

The chassis was designed from the beginning to be used for the 6th gen Camaro along with the shorter wheelbase ATS. Ford does this also.

The LT1 engine is just a performance version of their truck engines, same basic thing that Ford does.
__________________
99 Chevrolet Camaro Z28 M6 - 6.676 @ 103 in 1/8, 10.512 @ 130.2 on street tires, H/C/I
93 Eagle Talon TSI AWD 5spd - Built 6 Bolt, 16G Evo3, HKS 272 Cams - under construction
Ish416 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 05:01 PM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
None of those stock test results mean ****. You can make any platform you like fast just spend money. They have a Pinto down at the track that runs 9's does that mean the Pinto is the better car? I would rather have the 5.0 over the 6.2 and it has all the potential I'll ever need.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 05:20 PM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
Rapinator126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Texas
Posts: 9,253
I like when people get all but hurt defending the mustang. It's funny


🍼and 🌽 fed coyote.
Rapinator126 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 05:34 PM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
NewMtang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Indianapolis
Region: Indiana
Posts: 1,951
No Christmas Cards for You...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapinator126 View Post
I like when people get all but hurt defending the mustang. It's funny


🍼and 🌽 fed coyote.
________________

Keep it up Rap, the Mustang Whiners will take your name off of their Christmas Card List.
__________________
2013 Silver V6 Premium, Ford Racing Handling Package, MGP Black Caliper Covers, Airaid CAI, Bama Tuner, BBK Catted X-Pipes, Corsa Sport Axle-Back Exhaust, Alum One Piece Driveshaft, BBK Ceramic Shorties, Whiteline Adj. UCA, Whiteling ADJ. Lower Control Arms, Whiteline Adj. Pan Hard Bar, Upgraded Rotors (Cross Cut and Drilled), Ceramic Pads, J&M Stainless Steel Brake Lines (Front and Back), 18" Staggered Chrome Bullitts, MMD Eleanor Side Scoops, Side Scoops, Roush Front and Lower Grilles and Super Snake Stripes.
NewMtang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 05:46 PM   #30
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
I used to be a big fan of GM and I would never buy another one the newer stuff is junk. They are not reliable my 09 Silverado was crap. I had tons of problems with it. I had a 99 Firebird it had electrical problems I had a 2002 Camaro it caught on fire because of an electrical issue. My Silverado had to be towed at least 4 times for various issues. What sold me on Ford was the company vehicles I drove were Fords and were dependable as hell. I like the older GM stuff that's it. Even when I raced and I owned the Camaro it seemed like the Fords would take more punishment and responded to mods better. If you want a Camaro or Corvette buy one your not going to hurt my feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 06:00 PM   #31
ME Bloodhound
Staff
 
Soccerluvr4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacramento/Bay Area
Region: California
Posts: 14,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Road Dog View Post
Soccer
Correction, the car they had was only 57 lbs lighter. Plus they spec it at 455hp only 20 Hp advantage. Where the Camaro has the real advantage is in the use of the magnetorheological shocks that provides instant suspension tuning while in motion.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Depends on manual or automatic and base or fully loaded for the weight.

As for the power, the number i said was the test to the wheels. It looks like Chevy under-rated the engine as it puts down more than it should to the wheels, i didn't pull that number out of thin air.
__________________

Bullitt build paused pending graduation

HID end all thread
Soccerluvr4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 06:00 PM   #32
Registered Member

Regular
 
Recon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Hopkinsville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 6,518
The new Car and Driver has THE test on its cover -- GT vs SS.

All my GMs were/are very dependable. I guess some have luck with them and some don't.


Pick your poison.
__________________
Mustangalley.com
Mustang of the day,
July 12, 2015
Recon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 06:14 PM   #33
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Recon View Post
All my GMs were/are very dependable. I guess some have luck with them and some don't.


Pick your poison.

I used to have luck with them but the bad taste left in my mouth from that 09 truck was pretty bad. It was officially the WORST vehicle I have ever owned. I had better luck with 1000 dollar clunkers off the side of the road than that $45,000 new truck.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 06:17 PM   #34
Registered Member

Regular
 
Recon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Hopkinsville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 6,518
Hm, that's unfortunate.


Pick your poison.
__________________
Mustangalley.com
Mustang of the day,
July 12, 2015
Recon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2015, 06:24 PM   #35
Registered Member
Regular
 
dave73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Mechanicsville
Region: Maryland
Posts: 1,058
It had 88,000 miles on it when I got rid of it and the rear end, transmission, 2 alternators, 3 batteries, water pump, 2 throttle bodies, and it had a tick that sounded like a collapsed lifter. It burned a quart of oil about every 10 days which they said was normal for that engine. About once a week the check engine and stabilitrac light would come on and it would go in limp mode and if have to pull over and reset it and nobody could figure that out. I was glad to get rid of that


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
dave73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2015 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bolt on test 5.0 Mustangs & FF Mag test Oct 2012 thoughts & questions Spiney General Mustang Discussion 0 09-05-2012 12:23 AM
Its all about the driver Texasstang General Mustang Discussion 3 04-30-2012 04:29 PM
Will i be able to trade my 2011 mustang in after it has been in a wreck and now has a car fax? Sior General Mustang Discussion 5 07-19-2011 07:40 AM
Is a1986 Ford Mustang LX a good car? its my first real car and im worried. its had 2 owners.? annawan 1979-1995 Mustang GT 5 03-25-2010 07:53 AM
WTB: driver's side valve cover, 01+ tire Mustang Parts for Sale and Wanted 0 02-16-2004 10:00 AM

» Like Us On Facebook



06:26 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.