Comparative test drive of Chevrolet Camaro SS vs Ford Mustang GT. From dawn to dusk: getting to know the pony cars Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro Which is faster: a Ford Mustang or a Chevrolet Camaro
You again: the greatest confrontation in the world of cars.
I'll never forget the moment the fourth-generation Camaro SS pulled up next to my 2000 Mustang GT. Late evening. Empty roads. Roar of engines. Adrenaline rush. The light turned green. The Camaro took off, and I, a fresh-out-of-college kid, was left gulping smoke from under its wheels.
Since the birth of the Chevrolet Camaro in 1966, the confrontation between it and the Ford Mustang has continued. For example, we at Motor Trend alone have pitted them against each other more than 20 times. To call this standoff lengthy is an understatement. The Mustang and Camaro are two legendary rivals. It's like Celtics vs. Lakers in basketball or Rangers vs. Devils in hockey. Ford and Chevy did not miss the chance to add fuel to the fire, making each subsequent car even more powerful and faster. Last year, the fifth-generation Camaro SS 1LE was a major upset in our comparison test with the then-new Mustang GT Performance Package. The Camaro subjectively and objectively delighted us with its dynamics. Now that the new Camaro is on the horizon, Ford must try to uphold its honor.
The differences between our 2016 Mustang GT Performance Package and the 2015 model we tested before are minimal, even the same Triple Yellow Tri-Coat paint. The Mustang S550 is one of the most powerful cars in the world. Under its long, sleek hood is a wild five-liter V8 with 435 hp. and 542 Nm of torque. Power is sent to a six-speed manual transmission and then sent to the rear axle. Classic of the genre. But this is not the entire arsenal adopted by the Mustang. The Performance Package adds six-piston Brembo front brakes, a 3.73:1 Torsen limited-slip differential, stiffer front springs and 19-inch wheels with Pirelli P Zero tires.
Chevy's changes are more noticeable. Much more compact than before, the Alpha platform, borrowed from the Cadillac ATS, is on a strict “diet”, and now the sixth generation Camaro is the lightest representative of the segment (1666 kg), while the Mustang pulls out at 1735 kg. The Camaro's weight advantage is complemented by solid power, with its 6.2-liter LT1 V8 producing 455 hp. and 617 Nm of torque. Like the Mustang, power is sent to the rear axle through a six-speed manual transmission, and grippy Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3 tires round out the mix.
“Late evening. Empty roads. Roar of engines. Adrenaline rush. The light turned green. The Camaro took off, and I was left breathing smoke from under its wheels.”
If I could go back in time with the new Mustang to that Camaro run, I could do a lot more. True to its drag racing roots, the modern Ford makes getting off the ground extremely easy and quick. Forget about launch control, it will only slow you down, just rev the engine to 3000 rpm, release the clutch and engage the gear. It will accelerate to 60 mph (96 km/h) in 4.6 seconds in just second gear, and the quarter will fly by in 12.9 seconds, finishing at 177 km/h. While this performance looks phenomenal from the perspective of my 2000 Mustang GT, it will struggle to match the weight-to-power ratio of the new Chevrolet. The easiest way to get the Chevy from 0 to 60 mph as quickly as possible is to start at high revs, and it will do it in a phenomenal four seconds (0.4 seconds faster than the 2015 Camaro SS 1LE) and hit the quarter mile in 12.4 seconds, accelerating at the finish line to 184.4 km/h.
Only in past generations did the Mustang and Camaro finally please us with more or less distinct handling, which has not disappeared anywhere. The Camaro is faster, completing the figure eight in 24.1 seconds with an average lateral acceleration of 0.85g. Now even a child can cope with this task. The Camaro's steering is light and precise, the big brakes allow you to slow down much later, and the wide torque plate and long transmission allow you to do this maneuver in second gear. The stability and traction control systems work seamlessly, so there's no need to turn them off. However, if you don't turn it off, you risk missing the very essence of a pony car. The Camaro is a superbly tractable drifting machine without the need for electronic nannies, with all adjustments to the wobbling rear being accomplished by lightly pressing the accelerator pedal.
The Mustang isn't as agile, and making it work is a more difficult task. The Ford laps the figure eight in 24.4 seconds with an average lateral acceleration of 0.82g, but it's hard to ignore the fact that it shares a lot in common with its predecessor. “It feels like an old Mustang,” says Kim Reynolds, our test drive guru. - It seems heavy. The body reacts nervously to potholes and rolls noticeably.” In other words, the car wobbles a lot. And you will have to change speeds very often, going to third before a turn, and then returning to second. Make no mistake, we love choosing the right gear ourselves, but doing it so often while driving a Ford is... annoying. The gearbox is twitchy and has a narrow range, and doesn't like to be pushed. As for slow cornering, say, with smoke coming from under the wheels and drifting off the stern, the Mustang will do it, but getting it back on track will be very, very difficult. You walk on the edge of a blade, and if you make the slightest mistake, the car will immediately turn around.
Canyon Climbers: There was a time when you wouldn't want to be on a twisty track like this in a Camaro or Mustang. We are pleased to inform you that those days are a thing of the past.
Meanwhile, the Mustang itself cannot be said to be as sharp as a blade. The badge on the boot lid claims that this is a GT (Gran Turismo) and at that it really succeeds. It all starts from the salon. “It's got Moray Callum's signature touch here and his team have worked hard this time,” says Ed Law. “The soft-touch front and door panels with body-color contrast stitching are subtle design touches.” We also appreciated the optional Recaro buckets: they are comfortable, with excellent support, helping the driver to rise slightly above the road. On the highway, the Mustang moves relaxed and imposing. Muttering softly at 2000rpm in sixth gear (120km/h), it seems to pass any slow traffic without changing gears. The steering stays in the right direction, road noise is at an acceptable level, and overall the car drives very smoothly. Taking a leisurely drive in the Mustang lets you appreciate the nice little details you might not notice at first glance: the cockpit-style switches, the metal panels, the new Sync 3 infotainment system. Add to that the roomy trunk, and you can easily imagine the details of a trip from New York to Los Angeles in a Ford.
It's extremely difficult to do anything against the Chevy with its weight-to-power ratio.
The impressiveness disappears without a trace as soon as you start pushing the Mustang into a turn. Driving fast on narrow secondary roads forces the driver to work hard. The rolls, nods, drifts and jumps that we felt when passing the figure eight only intensify on the imperfect road surface of ordinary routes, and, despite the generally good information content of the steering wheel, sometimes it is clearly not enough. In fact, not everything is so bad: for example, the engine sounds great at high speeds. The gearbox's short pairing gives a sense of speed and ensures you get all the nuances of that V8's voice.
The Camaro, true to the Super Sport badge emblazoned proudly on its rear, is better off-road capable than the Ford. The Camaro loves aggression and speed, and is equally at home on the straights as it is in the corners. The responsiveness of the compact, canted-bottom steering wheel is exceptional, and the transmission is so responsive that it feels like you're driving the latest Corvette without the seventh gear. The Camaro SS is what the Cadillac ATS-V should have been. Law really liked the Chevy engine on the serpentine. “The Camaro's speed is exactly how I like it. It spins up to the desired speed more readily, which brings to mind racing cars. The Camaro accelerates to almost 130 km/h in second gear, and at the same time the engine roars against the redline. The Mustang needs an overdrive for this, which Sebo thinks gives it an extra sense of speed, even though it doesn't."
At a speed of 120 km/h at 2000 rpm, the Mustang is imposing and relaxed.
On the highway, the Chevy feels a little stiffer. Headwind and tire noise are more noticeable, and the suspension is decidedly more uncompromising. Visibility, a major complaint about the Camaro, continues to be a bit of an issue. In the Ford the driver sits high, whereas in the Camaro you sit very low and your view is partially blocked by the high instrument panel. “It’s improved compared to its predecessors, but Ford’s progress is still sad,” says Law. “But this is what gives the SS that unique hooliganism that we actually buy pony cars for.”
Visibility aside, the new Camaro's interior is a huge improvement over the previous generation. While it's not as rich as the Mustang's interior, the parts you touch the most, namely the steering wheel and shifter, are very, very nice. The simplified front fascia also helps give the Camaro's cabin a restrained, well-built feel. I liked the high-resolution display with a stylish bezel, well-positioned and easy to use (powered by Apple CarPlay). Law was delighted with the vents: “Not only do they look like jet engines, but the corrugated metal rings surrounding them allow you to control the temperature of the air received and the speed of the fans. Unobtrusive and intuitive."
But choosing a winner from this pair turned out to be difficult. “They are so similar in terms of ergonomics, visibility and engine sound that any of the parameters can bring one of them into the lead,” Lo notes. “But when it comes to performance at the limit, the Camaro takes the lead. Everything is in accordance with their badges: SS for the dynamic Supersport-style Camaro, and GT for the imposing Mustang.”
Ford Mustang GT is high class, a real American in a classic suit. Yes, it can handle tight turns if necessary, but it's much more comfortable on straights between intersections and on highways. And you will like it precisely in such conditions.
We want a car with the soul of a pony car, one that can provide an adrenaline rush.
The Camaro SS is the 2004 Red Sox: beards, muscles and pure testosterone. Want to make a dramatic exit from the next traffic light in your sports sedan? Want to drift at an intersection? Do you want passers-by to turn around after you? Then your choice is the Camaro SS.
As for us, Ed Law summed it up best. “If we talk about a more spectacular option that would make a lasting impression on my friends, then it’s definitely the Camaro. He is faster, sharper and at the same time more complex, a kind of self-confident nerd. Mustang growls. The Camaro roars."
We are looking for a car that most fully embodies the spirit of the pony car. We are looking for a car that would go faster, turn reluctantly, roar like crazy and at the same time look menacing. We want a Chevrolet Camaro that gets the adrenaline pumping and leaves the competition in the dust in a stoplight race. Well, if it happens that it turns out to be good on the open highway, then this is exactly the kind of car we need, this is the sweet cherry on the festive cake.
1st place: Chevrolet Camaro SS
Its superb performance on the drag strip and in the corners makes it the ultimate muscle car of your dreams.
2nd place: Ford Mustang GT Performance Package
This is the one we would choose for a leisurely trip around the USA.
2016 Chevrolet Camaro SS | 2016 Ford Mustang GT (Perf Pack) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Engine/chassis | |||
Layout | Front engine, rear wheel drive | ||
Engine type | Petrol, V8, aluminum block and head, OHV, 2 valves per cylinder | Gasoline, V8, aluminum block and head, DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder | |
Working volume, cubic meters cm | 6162 | 4951 | |
Compression ratio | 11,5:1 | 11,0:1 | |
Engine power, hp/rpm | 455/6000 | 435/6500 | |
Torque, Nm/rpm | 620/4400 | 590/4250 | |
Cut-off, rpm | 6500 | 6500 | |
Transmission | 6-speed manual transmission | 6-speed manual transmission | |
Suspension front/rear | Independent, spring/independent, spring, multi-link | ||
Steering gear ratio | 15,8:1 | 16,0:1 | |
Number of steering revolutions | 2,3 | 2,7 | |
Front/rear brakes | 13.6" ventilated disc/13.3" ventilated disc with ABS | 15.0" ventilated disc/13.0" ventilated disc with ABS | |
Wheels front/rear | Aluminum, cast, 8.5 x 20 inches / Aluminum, cast, 9.5 x 20 inches | Aluminum, cast, 9.0 x 19 inches / Aluminum, cast, 9.5 x 19 inches | |
Tires front/rear | 245/40R20 95Y; 275/35R20 98Y Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3 | 255/40R19 96Y; 275/40R19 101Y Pirelli P Zero | |
Dimensions | |||
Wheelbase, mm | 2812 | 2720 | |
Front/rear track, mm | 1600/1598 | 1582/1648 | |
Length/width/height, mm | 4783/1897/1349 | 4783/1915/1382 | |
Turning diameter, m | 11,7 | 12,2 | |
Curb weight, kg | 1666 | 54/46 | 54/46 |
Passenger capacity, persons | 4 | 4 | |
Interior height (front/rear), mm | 978/889 | 955/884 | |
Legroom (front/middle/rear), mm | 1125/759 | 1130/777 | |
Interior width (front/middle/rear), mm | 1397/1280 | 1430/1326 | |
Trunk volume, l | 255 | 382 | |
Measurement results | |||
Acceleration 0-48 km/h (0-30 mph), sec. | 1,7 | 1,7 | |
Acceleration 0-64 km/h (0-40 mph), sec. | 2,4 | 2,4 | |
Acceleration 0-80 km/h (0-50 mph), sec. | 3,1 | 3,4 | |
Acceleration 0-96 km/h (0-60 mph), sec. | 4,0 | 4,6 | |
Acceleration 0-112 km/h (0-70 mph), sec. | 5,0 | 5,8 | |
Acceleration 0-128 km/h (0-80 mph), sec. | 6,3 | 7,1 | |
Acceleration 0-144 km/h (0-90 mph), sec. | 7,7 | 8,9 | |
Acceleration 0-160 km/h (0-100 mph), sec. | 9,3 | 10,8 | |
Acceleration 0-177 km/h (0-110 mph), sec. | 11,4 | 12,9 | |
Acceleration 72-104 km/h (45-65 mph), sec. | 1,8 | 2,2 | |
Passage 402 m, sec./km/h | 12,4/184,4 | 12,9/177 | |
Braking 96-0 km/h (60-0 mph), m | 31,7 | 33,2 | |
Lateral acceleration, g | 1,0 | 0,96 | |
Engine speed at 96 km/h (60 mph), rpm | 1400 | 1700 | |
Consumer Information | |||
Base car price (in the USA), $ | 37 295 | 35 695 | |
Cost of the tested car, $ | 38 600 | 47 350 | |
Stability control/traction control | +/+ | +/+ | |
Airbags | Front, front side, window (front/rear), knee | ||
Basic warranty, years/km | 3/57,940 (36,000 miles) | 3/57,940 (36,000 miles) | |
Warranty for power unit, years/km | 5/160,900 (100,000 miles) | 5/96,560 (60,000 miles) | |
Roadside assistance, years/km | 5/160,900 (100,000 miles) | 5/96,560 (60,000 miles) | |
Fuel tank volume, l | 72 | 60 | |
Fuel consumption (city/highway/average), l/100 km | 20,2/10,9/15,7 |