2024 Mustang GT (7th gen) vs. 2023 Camaro SS (6th gen) -- Specs Comparison

[Ace]

Wow, lots of Chevy people in the Mustang 7G forums.

I get so annoyed by Alpha chassis nonsense. The Mustang chassis is slightly better than the failed Camaro's chassis. Mustang times were slower when the Mustang was equipped with less sticky tires, but once both cars had similar tires the Mustang was slightly faster.

It's the same kind of thing Ford did everywhere on the car - made the Mustang easier to live with and a better driver. Yes, huge sticky tires make good track times, but they are a waste of money for real driving.

The 15 GT drove horrible. Wheel hopping, bodyroll, below 3.5k rpm the engine delivered barely any power, the horrible Getrag MT82, the slow ass 6 speed automatic. And don't even get me started on the Pirelli Pzero, the worst and unsecure tire I ever had on any car. I never had a car before were I really felt unsafe driving above 130 mph on the Autobahn because of how wobbly it steered and how strong the hood began to shake. The 16 SS was the way better car in every measurement regarding driving the car compared to the GT, it felt much more like driving german coupe. It has a reason they pretty much threw all parts out for the GT350 to make it perform good. Ford improved the S550 with the refresh to be on par.

The Mustang 6 was a good car for the money, but it's because of how good the Camaro was that Ford invested so much into making the Mustang drive better in every way with the refresh. And sadly we already know that Ford cancelled their original idea of a Alpha-chassis competitor since the Camaro failed, so we end up with the S650 being more like another refreshed S550

Regarding the Lightning Lap comparisons: Just don't compare regular cars with track variants that have Cup 2, full Aero Kits and suspension tuning for that. Just look at the Corvette for that:
2017 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport, 2:47.1
2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, 2:53.8
That's 6.7 seconds advantage just though adjustments between road and track variant. So saying a track build Mach 1 is quite close to a street version ZL1, yeah of course the Mach 1 will corner way faster and VIR East Course isn't really the track where pure horsepower numbers save you. Take an even smaller course that is all about cornering like Laguna Seca and track ready cars will outperform every power advantaged street cars easily. But what's the point here? If you prefer cornering go for a performane variant, if you want acceleration power go for a street car with bigger engine. It's all up to preference. But honestly, with the Dark Horse obviously being more expansive than the Mach 1, I would always recommond going for a C8 Z51 if you don't need the rear seats.

I think the more interesting thing in the Lightning Laps is this:
2021 Ford Mustang Mach 1, 2:51.4
2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R, 2:51.8
2018 Ford Mustang GT Performance Package Level 2, 2:53.8
So no matter how hard Ford tried to make a performance variant on the S550, it pretty much always ended quite close to each other. For the Dark Horse with full handling package, I would predict a time around high 2:49 / low 2:50. Remember that the DH is not lighter, uses the same transmission and only has 20hp more than the Mach 1. So I don't think there is much room for improvements like the jump from C7 to C8. The Stingrays differ 4.8s and the Z06 with Z07 package jumped from an already great 2:44.6 to a mindblowing 2:38.6.

Sponsored

 

[shogun32]

A fair number of Mustang people use the S3s rather than Cups even if the S3s don't come in the exact right sizes.

because the S3 last longer, have better feedback, better stability under braking. When lapping on a budget absolute grip is not the only, or first criteria.

Not so much here. I come to a Ford forum for a reason, you know.

so you're just want to hang out in an echo chamber of same voices? I'm on Camaro5/6 as well, and if the Mustang, esp the Mach1 was superlative, I'd expect my fellow members to be able to admit (grudgingly perhaps) that maybe there is a better car out there in the same space.

 

[Hack]

because the S3 last longer, have better feedback, better stability under braking. When lapping on a budget absolute grip is not the only, or first criteria.

so you're just want to hang out in an echo chamber of same voices? I'm on Camaro5/6 as well, and if the Mustang, esp the Mach1 was superlative, I'd expect my fellow members to be able to admit (grudgingly perhaps) that maybe there is a better car out there in the same space.

I will admit if there's a better car out there. There are lots of better cars out there, depending on your budget and what you want to use the car for. The 911 is a much better car than the Mustang. So is the Cayman. Just two examples.

I do tend to prefer front engine rear drive cars, though. I'm sure there's something out there that I would prefer over a Mustang if budget were not a factor. Probably I would pay someone to drop a V8 into a 944 or something. That sounds like a dream car to me.

The Camaro is roughly equal in performance to the Mustang and not as good in usability. And the newer Camaros are ugly. And they are not a good deal as far as pricing, either. They are DI only, which is a factor to me. If they cost less I would probably own one even though they aren't as good as Mustang - just for the variety of owning something different for a while. But IMO they cost too much for what they are.

It's easy to tell when someone is trying to troll on here. Like saying that the new Mustang looks like a Camaro. It's total crap and just done to be irritating. And all the tired BS about Alpha chassis. It's not enough better to impact track times in a meaningful way. Tires do and stiff suspension does. Ford does put soft suspension in Mustangs, but that isn't "chassis". That's springs and shocks and when you put a decent set in a Mustang the car turns great. IE GT350 and Mach 1.

 

[Hack]

The 15 GT drove horrible. Wheel hopping, bodyroll, below 3.5k rpm the engine delivered barely any power, the horrible Getrag MT82, the slow ass 6 speed automatic. And don't even get me started on the Pirelli Pzero, the worst and unsecure tire I ever had on any car. I never had a car before were I really felt unsafe driving above 130 mph on the Autobahn because of how wobbly it steered and how strong the hood began to shake. The 16 SS was the way better car in every measurement regarding driving the car compared to the GT, it felt much more like driving german coupe. It has a reason they pretty much threw all parts out for the GT350 to make it perform good. Ford improved the S550 with the refresh to be on par.

The Mustang 6 was a good car for the money, but it's because of how good the Camaro was that Ford invested so much into making the Mustang drive better in every way with the refresh. And sadly we already know that Ford cancelled their original idea of a Alpha-chassis competitor since the Camaro failed, so we end up with the S650 being more like another refreshed S550

Regarding the Lightning Lap comparisons: Just don't compare regular cars with track variants that have Cup 2, full Aero Kits and suspension tuning for that. Just look at the Corvette for that:
2017 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport, 2:47.1
2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, 2:53.8
That's 6.7 seconds advantage just though adjustments between road and track variant. So saying a track build Mach 1 is quite close to a street version ZL1, yeah of course the Mach 1 will corner way faster and VIR East Course isn't really the track where pure horsepower numbers save you. Take an even smaller course that is all about cornering like Laguna Seca and track ready cars will outperform every power advantaged street cars easily. But what's the point here? If you prefer cornering go for a performane variant, if you want acceleration power go for a street car with bigger engine. It's all up to preference. But honestly, with the Dark Horse obviously being more expansive than the Mach 1, I would always recommond going for a C8 Z51 if you don't need the rear seats.

I think the more interesting thing in the Lightning Laps is this:
2021 Ford Mustang Mach 1, 2:51.4
2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R, 2:51.8
2018 Ford Mustang GT Performance Package Level 2, 2:53.8
So no matter how hard Ford tried to make a performance variant on the S550, it pretty much always ended quite close to each other. For the Dark Horse with full handling package, I would predict a time around high 2:49 / low 2:50. Remember that the DH is not lighter, uses the same transmission and only has 20hp more than the Mach 1. So I don't think there is much room for improvements like the jump from C7 to C8. The Stingrays differ 4.8s and the Z06 with Z07 package jumped from an already great 2:44.6 to a mindblowing 2:38.6.

I agree with a lot of what you said. Ford tends to build the Mustang with comfort as top priority. Even the GT350 I owned was very soft and comfortable on the road as a daily. I put the track handling suspension from FP in my 2017 and it's still significantly softer than my GR86 stock suspension.

I agree the Dark Horse might be a second or two quicker, but it will be in the ballpark of the current Mustang. I remember when I was on track with the GT350 and there were a couple guys in PP1 Mustangs there. It was not a night and day difference between those cars from my perspective. Was the GT350 faster? Yes, but not a ton faster. A 2015 PP1 GT is fast on track - even though the Pirellis are not that great compared to a newer, wider Michelin 4S or PSS tire that would come on a car more handling oriented Mustang and the suspension is very soft, the brakes are not as good and the engine doesn't make as much power. Those differences are relatively small, and a good driver will be fast in either.

 

[Zcarmenb28]

I will admit if there's a better car out there. There are lots of better cars out there, depending on your budget and what you want to use the car for. The 911 is a much better car than the Mustang. So is the Cayman. Just two examples.

I do tend to prefer front engine rear drive cars, though. I'm sure there's something out there that I would prefer over a Mustang if budget were not a factor. Probably I would pay someone to drop a V8 into a 944 or something. That sounds like a dream car to me.

The Camaro is roughly equal in performance to the Mustang and not as good in usability. And the newer Camaros are ugly. And they are not a good deal as far as pricing, either. They are DI only, which is a factor to me. If they cost less I would probably own one even though they aren't as good as Mustang - just for the variety of owning something different for a while. But IMO they cost too much for what they are.

It's easy to tell when someone is trying to troll on here. Like saying that the new Mustang looks like a Camaro. It's total crap and just done to be irritating. And all the tired BS about Alpha chassis. It's not enough better to impact track times in a meaningful way. Tires do and stiff suspension does. Ford does put soft suspension in Mustangs, but that isn't "chassis". That's springs and shocks and when you put a decent set in a Mustang the car turns great. IE GT350 and Mach 1.

You sure make up a lot of stuff. Camaro too expensive? Again, you're the only one that thinks a 1SS 1LE is too much money for what you get, or a ZL1 being too expensive for the performance. There is nothing out there for the same price that performs as well as the Camaro, dollar for dollar.

Case in point:
A base '23 Mustang GT with destination and 18" wheels is $39,720. A base '23 Camaro LT1 with 20" wheels is $37,295. The LT1 will perform better in every metric than the Mustang GT. It's been proven the M6 Camaro V8 is quicker than the M6 Mustang GT. Auto, advantage goes very slightly (by a tenth or two at best) to the GT, but it's still thousands more than the comparable Camaro. Then again, you also get an awesome ~4" screen in the GT.

Moving on up...the Camaro 2SS M6 is $46,190 (with $500 customer cash being offered right now), whereas a Mustang GT Premium M6 with PP1 is $51,440. There is nothing performance-wise that the PP1 M6 does better than the SS M6, and the GT is $5,300 more.

A 1SS 1LE is $47,795. Performance bargain, no doubt. Nothing else at that price point is even close.

You can get a 335 hp V6 base Camaro for $29,390 while the base Ecoboost Mustang is $29,720.

The ZL1 is $69k and outperforms the GT500 in every performance metric except acceleration above 60 mph (all the while cooling your bum with seat ventilation in the standard Recaros). And how much is a base GT500?

Tell me again that the Camaro is too expensive?

Edited to say that I get it if someone doesn't like the Camaro styling, or the lower redline of the engine (6500 rpm isn't that low), or the visibility, etc., but to say it's too expensive for the performance you get is not really accurate.

 

[DarkHorsepower]

Making ALL KINDA stuff up!

 

[MustangMac67]

Making ALL KINDA stuff up!

He is right about perf for the cost. It is a couple thousand less to a compartmental mustang.

 

[shogun32]

Like saying that the new Mustang looks like a Camaro. It's total crap and just done to be irritating

actually it's not. I took one look at S650 and thought, damn Ford grabbed the styling department from Camaro. I wasn't trying to see it, I didn't go in WANTing to see it, it just leapt off the page.

As far as affordability, 47K MSRP for SS/1LE vs 58K for Mach1 for essentially identically equipped cars. I don't know but 11K cheaper is nothing to sniff at. Mustang trim prices have inflated out of control. Of the 2 GM has been keeping true to the ethos of good value.

And yes the Mustang cabin and controls are definitely more natural and approachable, no question.

 

[MustangMac67]

And price wars here we go!

 

[Hack]

You sure make up a lot of stuff. Camaro too expensive? Again, you're the only one that thinks a 1SS 1LE is too much money for what you get, or a ZL1 being too expensive for the performance. There is nothing out there for the same price that performs as well as the Camaro, dollar for dollar.

Case in point:
A base '23 Mustang GT with destination and 18" wheels is $39,720. A base '23 Camaro LT1 with 20" wheels is $37,295. The LT1 will perform better in every metric than the Mustang GT. It's been proven the M6 Camaro V8 is quicker than the M6 Mustang GT. Auto, advantage goes very slightly (by a tenth or two at best) to the GT, but it's still thousands more than the comparable Camaro. Then again, you also get an awesome ~4" screen in the GT.

Moving on up...the Camaro 2SS M6 is $46,190 (with $500 customer cash being offered right now), whereas a Mustang GT Premium M6 with PP1 is $51,440. There is nothing performance-wise that the PP1 M6 does better than the SS M6, and the GT is $5,300 more.

A 1SS 1LE is $47,795. Performance bargain, no doubt. Nothing else at that price point is even close.

You can get a 335 hp V6 base Camaro for $29,390 while the base Ecoboost Mustang is $29,720.

The ZL1 is $69k and outperforms the GT500 in every performance metric except acceleration above 60 mph (all the while cooling your bum with seat ventilation in the standard Recaros). And how much is a base GT500?

Tell me again that the Camaro is too expensive?

Edited to say that I get it if someone doesn't like the Camaro styling, or the lower redline of the engine (6500 rpm isn't that low), or the visibility, etc., but to say it's too expensive for the performance you get is not really accurate.

What I said was "Camaro is too expensive for what you get". I didn't say it was too expensive. And I think sales figures show that I'm 100% correct in my opinion.

There's something a little off about anyone who prefers a Camaro to a Mustang.

actually it's not. I took one look at S650 and thought, damn Ford grabbed the styling department from Camaro. I wasn't trying to see it, I didn't go in WANTing to see it, it just leapt off the page.

I can't explain how you would think that. The S650 roof and green house are essentially identical to the S550 and look nothing like a Camaro. No mail slot windows in sight. In the rear, the tail lights look nothing like Camaro tail lights. The side still looks the same S650 to S550, just slightly smoother. The hood has the same two ridges front to rear in essentially the same positions. The front still has a big mouth S650 similar to S550. I don't know why I am even taking you seriously enough to reply. It's total horse manure saying the S650 looks like a Camaro.

As far as affordability, 47K MSRP for SS/1LE vs 58K for Mach1 for essentially identically equipped cars. I don't know but 11K cheaper is nothing to sniff at. Mustang trim prices have inflated out of control. Of the 2 GM has been keeping true to the ethos of good value.

And yes the Mustang cabin and controls are definitely more natural and approachable, no question.

If you think the Camaro is identical to the Mustang and costs less, how do you explain that people have been buying more Mustangs?

There's a reason I didn't buy a Mach 1 when I made my last buying decision. I agree they cost too much. But IMO 47K is way too much for a SS/1LE also. I'd love to have a cheaper track ready option. So, I spent 26K on an older car and some time and money on adding cooling and suspension.

 

[Hack]

I think just the fact that people on here want to argue when I say Mustang is better than Camaro makes my point for me.

 

[shogun32]

If you think the Camaro is identical to the Mustang and costs less, how do you explain that people have been buying more Mustangs?

The S650 isn't for sale yet, so it may well be they sell as many 650's as Camaros.

People buy Mustangs because they prefer the looks. I wouldn't buy any non-1LE Camaro period. There is no compelling value EXCEPT for the 1LE trim.

In the rear, the tail lights look nothing like Camaro tail lights. The side still looks the same S650 to S550, just slightly smoother. The hood has the same two ridges front to rear in essentially the same positions. The front still has a big mouth S650 similar to S550

because you (and the rest of you) actually think we're talking about certain detail parts and pieces are the same shape. My eyes work just fine - I can tell the difference between dual rectangular tail lights vs 3 wide stripes bashed into a crease.

Nope, that's NOT our point AT ALL. It's the broad strokes and proportions and style that is very similar. That one has re-introduced 2 hood ridges and the other one has a hood depression/fold that accomplishes the same thing is what we're talking about and thus look similar. Does the Mustang have a higher headline? Sure it does. Does the Camaro door sill come up higher, of course it does. Do the cars look basically the same from the side? Yup they do.

At least GM wasn't so stupid as to adopt the 2x4 smashed in rear that Kia thinks is a design element.

 

[codemanstang]

Man once you hit ignore on hacks profile this thread becomes readable again

 

[MustangMac67]

The S650 isn't for sale yet, so it may well be they sell as many 650's as Camaros.

People buy Mustangs because they prefer the looks. I wouldn't buy any non-1LE Camaro period. There is no compelling value EXCEPT for the 1LE trim.


because you (and the rest of you) actually think we're talking about certain detail parts and pieces are the same shape. My eyes work just fine - I can tell the difference between dual rectangular tail lights vs 3 wide stripes bashed into a crease.

Nope, that's NOT our point AT ALL. It's the broad strokes and proportions and style that is very similar. That one has re-introduced 2 hood ridges and the other one has a hood depression/fold that accomplishes the same thing is what we're talking about and thus look similar. Does the Mustang have a higher headline? Sure it does. Does the Camaro door sill come up higher, of course it does. Do the cars look basically the same from the side? Yup they do.

At least GM wasn't so stupid as to adopt the 2x4 smashed in rear that Kia thinks is a design element.

Can you show a pic of that "2x4 smashed in the rear that Kia thinks is a design" for reference? Just asking, no sarcasm, no negativity, no nothing. Just want to see, I can not think of a 2x4.

 

[Hack]

The S650 isn't for sale yet, so it may well be they sell as many 650's as Camaros.

People buy Mustangs because they prefer the looks. I wouldn't buy any non-1LE Camaro period. There is no compelling value EXCEPT for the 1LE trim.


because you (and the rest of you) actually think we're talking about certain detail parts and pieces are the same shape. My eyes work just fine - I can tell the difference between dual rectangular tail lights vs 3 wide stripes bashed into a crease.

Nope, that's NOT our point AT ALL. It's the broad strokes and proportions and style that is very similar. That one has re-introduced 2 hood ridges and the other one has a hood depression/fold that accomplishes the same thing is what we're talking about and thus look similar. Does the Mustang have a higher headline? Sure it does. Does the Camaro door sill come up higher, of course it does. Do the cars look basically the same from the side? Yup they do.

At least GM wasn't so stupid as to adopt the 2x4 smashed in rear that Kia thinks is a design element.

Nah, the proportions and style of the S650 and S550 are nearly identical. They use the same basic bodies with just a couple creases moved around. I used to think you posted some good content on here. Now it just seems like (bad) comedy.

Sponsored