RX-8 and BMW 328i both > 07' shelby GT

[-The Stig-]

There will be a V6 Camaro, there will always be a base model. It's what sold the most. The V6 Mustang is a big seller. I see more V6 Mustangs on the road than GT's.

And with the price of gas these days, I don't blame them.

[Mr. Luos]

That is the funny part.
M6 LS1 F-Body got as good or better gas mileage than the V6 model of the same year.

Not really a fan of the new Camaro either.

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by Gotian

It's not the fact that the car has 400 hp that makes it cost more, GM sid it that the reason is because of other things such as the suspension system and the drive train system is the reason why the car costs more than a mustang

ummm, yeah... that must be why the last gen fbodies had such a great suspension and drivetrain system. oh wait, the mustangs drive train was better, nevermind. the suspensions... well they both sucked for turning, but the mustangs was better for launching. so there goes that argument...

[Mr. Luos]

The mustang didn't have a better drivetrain.
Base LS1/T56 > Base 4.6/5-speed


Or are we thinking different drivetrains??

[GForce957]

Originally Posted by BlackGT2000

Thats good, but they don't make that SRT4 any more. It was certainly a bargain priced performer. I wont take that away from it, but there really is no other car out there that gives you the acceleration that the mustang does for the price. 5 years ago who would say "ONLY 300 HP" I think its great that a number that respectable is so common. I don't think that its completely necessary for anybody who can spend 300 a month on a car to have a 13 second car with a 5-10 year warranty though. As for a 350 hp Mustang being outdated, I doubt it. The mustang is going to last. Its already proven itself. I am sure if you have a 350 HP GT that it will be running mid and low 13s reliably and that will be all you can ask of a car with a base price of 25000. If GM or chrysler puts a 400+ hp motor in a car its going to start well into the 30000 range. I am sure I will love what ever the car ends up being, but I doubt that it will be as affordable as the mustang, or that you will see as many of them on the streets.

But then look at the replacement, the caliber srt-4 has 300 hp as well, and prob will be cheaper. Granted its fwd, but it has the power.

Originally Posted by Gotian

...which is basically one reason why GM decided against a V6 model for the new camaro coming up...

I believe you are thinking about the challenger, not the camaro.

The fact is, mustangs have usually been weaker then their competition. And yet look at the sales. It's the only one that has continued for 40+ years straight. the LT1 had more power, didnt sell as well. The LS1 had even more power, didnt sell as well. Like Stig said, most people buy the v6 model, the gt is alot less common.

[-The Stig-]

Originally Posted by Mr. Luos

The mustang didn't have a better drivetrain.
Base LS1/T56 > Base 4.6/5-speed


Or are we thinking different drivetrains??

My thoughts exactly.

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by Mr. Luos

The mustang didn't have a better drivetrain.
Base LS1/T56 > Base 4.6/5-speed


Or are we thinking different drivetrains??

that may be true, and i admittedly didnt think of that like i should have. but id still rather have the mustang drive train. one simple reason why i still hold to my comment, and why i made it in the first place. the rear end on the fbody is shit. the mustangs 8.8 basically isnt going to break, the 10 bolt 7.5" on the fbody, as stig well knows sucks balls. so yeah, id rather have a 5 speed with a rear that wont grenade on me. and i also wasnt including the engines in that comparison either, obviously that changes things. gotian was saying that the hp doesnt make the car more expensive but the superior drivetrain and suspension do. it seems to me in that thought that the engine is being considered separately.

[Mr. Luos]

I agree. The 10 bolt is a weak spot on the F-Body.
But it isn't as bad as it is made out to be. Just can't run a sticky tire with it. Of course...some are just worse than others.

Arguements for both sides. The 4.6 is a good motor. Just needs more power. The LS1 makes good power, but needed to put it to the ground better.

[TheStang00]

i will say though, while the the suspension argument wasnt very good for the last generation it does hold a little more water for the new ones with the independent rear.

[BlackGT2000]

Come on Gotian you can't argue gas mileage agains the GT. Its right on par with all the Japanese cars in its class even with their smaller motors. I just think its commendable that GM gets that mileage with their larger and more powerful motors. And Gforce, the caliber will have the power, but uggg look at it. It is outclassed in looks alone. Even people who don't like the mustangs look will favor the stang over the Caliber in when it comes to looks. I am only saying that the Mustang has certainly made its mark when it comes to performance and price. I am afraid that the new camaro will be superior to the GT, but price its self into extinction from the beginning.

[TheStang00]

from what ive read, the caliber srt is no faster than the old srt-4 despite the power increase

[Gotian]

Originally Posted by BlackGT2000

Come on Gotian you can't argue gas mileage agains the GT. Its right on par with all the Japanese cars in its class even with their smaller motors. I just think its commendable that GM gets that mileage with their larger and more powerful motors. And Gforce, the caliber will have the power, but uggg look at it. It is outclassed in looks alone. Even people who don't like the mustangs look will favor the stang over the Caliber in when it comes to looks. I am only saying that the Mustang has certainly made its mark when it comes to performance and price. I am afraid that the new camaro will be superior to the GT, but price its self into extinction from the beginning.

im not arguing gas milage, im saying in the minds of most americans smaller engine means better gas.

[Mr. Luos]

I can agree with that.



But get this...with catback and lid my Trans Am got 31MPG on the highway.
Making 376RWHP with bolt-ons and a cam it got 27.5MPG.

All about gearing and efficiency.

[-The Stig-]

Originally Posted by Mr. Luos

I can agree with that.



But get this...with catback and lid my Trans Am got 31MPG on the highway.
Making 376RWHP with bolt-ons and a cam it got 27.5MPG.

All about gearing and efficiency.

You know, I've often wondered how it is a F-body can get those figures. I know it's possible. Mine got a best of 28mpg, but I had to really really baby it and that was an average over 350+miles on the highway only. And people from other states that I've talked to told me they'd get 17-18mpg city with a 6-speed LS1 where as I'd fight to get 16mpg by really babying it, like never getting past 1400-1500rpm.

I suspect that yours got the 31mpg due to the fact that you're higher up in elevation. Less oxygen, so the ecu tunes the car to use less fuel to keep it properly mixed. There for... they get better mileage. Also, I think in your neck of the woods it might be cooler on average than it is here in southern california.

Any thoughts to that Hybridman?

[Mr. Luos]

Cammed it got 27.5MPG driving through Iowa.

I have heard of guys getting 30+ MPG in California. It may just depend on the fuel, the car, the driver.

At this point....I can milk about 19-20MPG on the highway.
About 14-15 around town.