![]() |
|
|
|
||||||
|
A 6.2L Camaro SS better beat a 97 4.6L Mustang. Given the 160+ hp difference... Not really even worth comparing....
|
|
|||||
|
My new Camaro did beat this mustang,I saw the owner of the mustang was embarassed beaten by a Camaro.It has power and took my employee Gregory for a ride during our lunch break.Came out and saw the look on his face.I am a Camaro fanatic and don't like the Ford Mustang anyway
|
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Centerline HotRodsAndHemis.com “I wrote to the head man at General Motors and said, "I`m gonna have to desert you if you don't stop making cars for women." - John Wayne |
|
||||||
|
Since the Challenger came up in this thread. Does the 6.1 have a different rear suspension than the smaller moter version, what 5.7???
Does the Camaro have active traction control? ETA: Congratulation on your new toy. |
|
||||||
|
Of course, all this was at the track, wasn't it?.........
__________________
Ontario Rodders |
|
||||||
|
↑Hey lt1silverhawk, you remember my comment HERE, post #4?
|
|
|||||
|
6.1 liters would not be 392 cubic inches(it would be more like 6.4 or so) I don't know what the actual displacement is on the new srt motors. I did see they were calling them 392s because I was stuck at a dodge dealership for a while last week when I took mom's car in for some recall work.
|
|
||||||
|
I believe the 6.1L (or 372.2 ci) engine is actually 370 ci and there's a 392 version labeled 6.4L.
|
|
|||||
|
I really don't know how much horse power either the camaro or mustang has(because I don't own either) but most mustang guys think they can outrun anybody or anything and when they lose there's always an excuse even when they should have known better from the start.
|
|
|||||
|
The new 392 Hemi is slightly larger (about 6.4 ltr) than last year's 6.1 ltr. I stand corrected. Interestingly enough, Dodge refers to it as the 392 on their web site and they don't even give it a "ltr" rating. Also according to Dodge the 392 cranks out 470 horsepower and 470 lb-ft of torque. That's about 50 more horses and 90 lbs more twist than the 6.1 version. The Camaro's 6.2 Ltr on the other hand cranks out 426 horsepower and 420 lb.-ft. of torque. However the OP's Camaro is an automatic and according to Chevrolet the 6 speed automatic version of the SS 6.2 ltr. Camaro only cranks out 400 horsepower.
While we're talking about the new generation of Pony cars lets not forget the new Mustang. The Boss 302 Mustang cranks out 444 horsepower and 380 lb-ft of torque and the supercharged Shelby version is even higher. Hmmmmm...... Looks like GM's new Camaro is on the short end of the horsepower stick once again. And.... I'm sure the OP was not stupid enough to street race. Everyone knows that Hotrodders.com does NOT condone any kind of illegal street racing. Centerline HotRodsAndHemis.com Never pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just shoot you. - Anonymous Last edited by Centerline; 04-06-2011 at 08:44 AM. |
|
|||||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
| Recent Hotrodders' Lounge posts with photos |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Strange thing happening with my clear "solvent pop"/"fish eyes" ? | myfamiliacc | Body - Exterior | 35 | 02-16-2013 07:18 PM |
| Covering stock "plastic" door panels with "vinyl" | csilva84 | Interior | 1 | 10-05-2007 06:30 PM |
| wiki pages: "How to rebuild an engine", "Window removal/installation" | Jon | Hotrodders' Lounge | 0 | 07-11-2006 12:44 PM |
| Hey croz look """"IMPORTS SUCK""" | 78 monte | Hotrodders' Lounge | 14 | 08-30-2002 01:13 PM |