2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS - Comparison Tests
#1
06-19-2010, 01:08 PM
2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS - Comparison Tests
2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS - Comparison Tests
Second place: Double Jeopardy.
Pages: 1 2 3 Photos
In This Story
Highs: Earthmover torque, predict-able handling, respectable hustle, creative interior design, guttural V-8 growl.
Lows: Gun-slit side windows, limited rear and rear-quarter sightlines, sedan dimensions and mass.
The Verdict: A sports coupe with the soul of a war machine.
Visit Our Buyer's Guide »
Chevrolet Camaro
News & Reviews
Those of you old enough to remember the carefree years of the big-inch V-8 will recall the original pony-car premise—lots of power packed into a relatively lightweight coupe. The revivalist Camaro seems to have lost touch with those roots. Developed by General Motors’ Australian subsidiary, Holden, on the same foundation that supported the late (and lamented) Pontiac G8 sedan, the latest Camaro is lighter than the Brobdingnagian Dodge Challenger, but at 3860 pounds, it’s more Percheron than pinto—280 pounds heavier than the Mustang. Maybe ponies are bigger in Australia?
Whatever, mass is never an asset in a sports coupe, and it’s one of two elements that work to relegate the Camaro to second place in this rematch with the Mustang GT. This SS is 20 pounds lighter than the car we tested last summer, with more break-in miles, and it grumbled through the 0-to-60-mph and 0-to-100-mph sprints a little quicker this time: 4.6 seconds and 10.5 seconds, respectively. The revitalized Mustang was the Camaro’s equal to 60 mph, but once the 6.2-liter pushrod V-8 (426 horses, 420 pound-feet of torque) got all that metal moving past 60 mph, it was a bit quicker than the Ford.
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
On the road, particularly a mountain road, the Camaro’s mass is magnified by its dimensions. At 190.4 inches, it’s 2.3 inches longer than the Mustang, 1.6 inches wider (at 75.5 inches), with a roofline 1.6 inches lower (54.2), on a wheelbase (112.3) that’s 5.2 inches longer, and with a track that’s wider, front and rear. In its defense, this is a solid chassis that’s exemplary in terms of stability and inspires confidence as speeds build, confidence augmented by steering that’s nicely weighted, linear, and tactile throughout its range.
With its relatively forgiving suspension tuning, the Camaro is an easy car to drive fast—check the lane-change results—but it’s also a big car that drives big and feels even bigger, thanks in part to sightlines sliced thin by the styling. The faster you go, the more you want to see, but the Camaro’s views are restricted in almost every direction, particularly aft—“like the rear view from a nuclear submarine,” according to one crew member. That’s the price of the Camaro’s macho styling. It got the nod over the Mustang’s by-now familiar looks, and it turns heads, but claustrophobes need not apply.
Inside, the Camaro’s leather-clad bucket seats provide slightly better support than the Mustang’s, and it is easier to achieve an ideal driving position, owing to power adjustability and a steering column adjustable for both rake and reach.
The instrument panel won praise once again for its innovative design, although its lurid night lighting reminded one tester of a “pachinko parlor,” and the usefulness of the four gauges just ahead of the shifter—oil pressure, oil temp, transmission-oil temp, volt meter—is diminished by their position, particularly during daylight hours.
This Camaro has more extras than last summer’s test car, and it showed up with an as-tested price that was $3485 higher than the Mustang GT’s. Chevy offers a lot of car for the money here, figuratively and literally. But like Sarah Jessica Parker or a hard-tail Harley motorcycle, it’s an acquired taste.Continued...
Pages: 1 2
Second place: Double Jeopardy.
Pages: 1 2 3 Photos
In This Story- IntroductionSecond: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS
- First: 2011 Ford Mustang GT 5.0
Highs: Earthmover torque, predict-able handling, respectable hustle, creative interior design, guttural V-8 growl.
Lows: Gun-slit side windows, limited rear and rear-quarter sightlines, sedan dimensions and mass.
The Verdict: A sports coupe with the soul of a war machine.
Visit Our Buyer's Guide »
Chevrolet Camaro
News & Reviews
- 2011 Chevrolet Camaro Convertible - Feature
- 2011 Chevrolet Camaro V6 Gets Fake Power Bump - Car News
- 2010 Hennessey HPE700 Chevrolet Camaro - First Drive Review
- 2010 SMS Supercars 620 Camaro - Auto Shows
- 2010 Chevrolet Camaros for SEMA - Auto Shows
- 2010 Yenko Chevrolet Camaro Prototype - Auto Shows
- 2010 Chevrolet Camaro by WD-40 - Auto Shows
- 2010 Lingenfelter Chevrolet Camaro SS - Auto Shows
- 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS Automatic - Short Take Road Test
- 2010 Chevrolet Camaro Transformers Special Edition - Car News
Those of you old enough to remember the carefree years of the big-inch V-8 will recall the original pony-car premise—lots of power packed into a relatively lightweight coupe. The revivalist Camaro seems to have lost touch with those roots. Developed by General Motors’ Australian subsidiary, Holden, on the same foundation that supported the late (and lamented) Pontiac G8 sedan, the latest Camaro is lighter than the Brobdingnagian Dodge Challenger, but at 3860 pounds, it’s more Percheron than pinto—280 pounds heavier than the Mustang. Maybe ponies are bigger in Australia?
Whatever, mass is never an asset in a sports coupe, and it’s one of two elements that work to relegate the Camaro to second place in this rematch with the Mustang GT. This SS is 20 pounds lighter than the car we tested last summer, with more break-in miles, and it grumbled through the 0-to-60-mph and 0-to-100-mph sprints a little quicker this time: 4.6 seconds and 10.5 seconds, respectively. The revitalized Mustang was the Camaro’s equal to 60 mph, but once the 6.2-liter pushrod V-8 (426 horses, 420 pound-feet of torque) got all that metal moving past 60 mph, it was a bit quicker than the Ford.
On the other hand, with a 280-pound weight advantage and a shorter (numerically higher) rear end (3.73:1 versus 3.45), the Mustang was quicker in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear passing exercises, as well as in the 5-to-60 rolling start.
On the road, particularly a mountain road, the Camaro’s mass is magnified by its dimensions. At 190.4 inches, it’s 2.3 inches longer than the Mustang, 1.6 inches wider (at 75.5 inches), with a roofline 1.6 inches lower (54.2), on a wheelbase (112.3) that’s 5.2 inches longer, and with a track that’s wider, front and rear. In its defense, this is a solid chassis that’s exemplary in terms of stability and inspires confidence as speeds build, confidence augmented by steering that’s nicely weighted, linear, and tactile throughout its range.
With its relatively forgiving suspension tuning, the Camaro is an easy car to drive fast—check the lane-change results—but it’s also a big car that drives big and feels even bigger, thanks in part to sightlines sliced thin by the styling. The faster you go, the more you want to see, but the Camaro’s views are restricted in almost every direction, particularly aft—“like the rear view from a nuclear submarine,” according to one crew member. That’s the price of the Camaro’s macho styling. It got the nod over the Mustang’s by-now familiar looks, and it turns heads, but claustrophobes need not apply.
Inside, the Camaro’s leather-clad bucket seats provide slightly better support than the Mustang’s, and it is easier to achieve an ideal driving position, owing to power adjustability and a steering column adjustable for both rake and reach.
The instrument panel won praise once again for its innovative design, although its lurid night lighting reminded one tester of a “pachinko parlor,” and the usefulness of the four gauges just ahead of the shifter—oil pressure, oil temp, transmission-oil temp, volt meter—is diminished by their position, particularly during daylight hours.
This Camaro has more extras than last summer’s test car, and it showed up with an as-tested price that was $3485 higher than the Mustang GT’s. Chevy offers a lot of car for the money here, figuratively and literally. But like Sarah Jessica Parker or a hard-tail Harley motorcycle, it’s an acquired taste.Continued...
Pages: 1 2
Last edited by Space; 06-19-2010 at 01:14 PM.
#2
06-20-2010, 10:29 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Staten Island, New York
Posts: 1,035
I really liked the camaro when I first saw it in the first transformers, and if it was available then I woulda ran right out and bought it, but sadly it took so long to be released, wasn't out until the 2nd transformers movie...and by that time I saw so many pics and videos of it, the lust so to speak was gone...Now I see quite a bit of them, and while I still like the car, I don't think I'd buy one...I like cars ya don't see everyday...
As for the new Mustang, nice car, and with the 5.0 should give the camaro a good run for it's money
Joe
As for the new Mustang, nice car, and with the 5.0 should give the camaro a good run for it's money
Joe
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Space
Off Topic
7
03-22-2013 09:06 PM
Space
Off Topic
21
07-26-2012 10:04 PM
Space
Off Topic
0
06-10-2010 05:59 AM
LnLSS06
Off Topic
13
04-20-2010 12:01 PM