Repair-It

Pretty sure the Gen 5 SS was 0-60 in 4.8 or 4.9. So the 6.0 GTO was actually a tenth quicker. That is kind of funny. I get that these were the opposite to original fans as the new Challenger is to their old fans, but I am still surprised that this was basically a failure. The numbers are totally respectable, especially for then, and it isn't really that bad looking. A little plain maybe, but I wouldn't call it offensively ugly. The interior looks pretty nice too, even though I am not a huge fan of the red/orange gauges.

Gen 5 SS stats, and awesome commentary
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... nted-test/

We entered into this first test of the long-awaited 2010 Camaro with high expectations. Indeed, with a 304-hp, 3.6-liter V-6, the base Camaro is nearly as powerful as the Mustang GT, so we were champing at the bit to see what the Camaro could do in SS form with a 6.2-liter V-8 stuffed under its hood.

This is awesome every time I read it. Chevy does need to get their act together going forward though as the newest Mustangs are either right there or even better now...


ok, stats:

With the six-speed automatic, the Camaro SS can hit 60 mph in a scant 4.6 seconds, with the quarter-mile arriving in 13.1 at 109 mph. At 4.8 seconds, the Camaro with the six-speed manual takes 0.2 second longer to hit 60 but overtakes the automatic by the quarter-mile mark, clocking 13 seconds flat at 111 mph. (The L99 V-8 hooked to the automatic is rated for 400 hp and 410 lb-ft of torque; the LS3-and-manual combo is good for 426 hp and 420 lb-ft.) For comparison, the 315-hp 2010 Ford Mustang GT and the 376-hp, 5.7-liter Hemi-powered Dodge Challenger R/T do the trick in 5.1 seconds. The better-matched but pricier Challenger SRT8—with a 425-horse, 6.1-liter Hemi—hits 60 in 4.8 seconds. So until Ford gets the Mustang GT into the gym and stuffs more power under its hood, Chevy has earned bragging rights in the segment where burliness arguably counts the most.

Comaprison:
Camaro SS - Manual
Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.0 sec @ 111 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 161 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.92 g

GTO from the above MotorTrend:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 105.9 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph: 138 ft --------------Note this is 60-0 vice 70-0

2004 GTO from Car and Driver:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... road-test/
GTO pulled 0.88 g on the skidpad,

Basically, very close.
V6 Camaro again, for reference:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5 sec @ 99 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 173 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

And 2015 Camaro SS 1LE - I realized the 2013 are estimates, but within 1 tenth of these
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... st-review/
C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.2 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.1 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 11.0 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 10.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 156 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 145 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.01 g

GTOs are around 10K to 13K or more for lower mileage. High mileage for about $8500-9000 Probably worth 1 or 2 grand for a much lower mileage car. Prices are all over the place on these. Could probably get a decent deal in the 10K range.

2012-13 V6 Camaros are also right around 10K-11K but much more concentrated.

Performance is obviously better with the GTO, but if I were going to spend 15K on a 75K mile GTO, an actual data point, I'd spend 17K on a 2013 SS which there are definitely multiple available.

Makes no sense for GTOs to be anywhere near the price point of a 2012-13 SS.

50 -80K mile 2012-13 V8 Camaros seem to be solidly in the 17-18K price point for an average.

So price difference V6 to V8 - 6-8K on average. The mileage seems a little higher on the V6s though.

Magnum RT stats:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... road-test/

0 to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds, with a quarter-mile rush of 14.3

Same ballpark as the Mazdaspeed3, V6 Camaro etc.

Not easy getting Mazdaspeed6 stats. Closest I can get is:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... -review-1/

Zero to 60 mph: 6.2 sec

I also forgot it is a little older than the Mazdaspeed3.

Started looking at the Lightning lap to see if I missed anything.

Found these stats:
2008 Infiniti G37S, 3:17.5
2008 Dodge Challenger SRT8, 3:16.3
2007 Mazdaspeed 3, 3:16.0
2010 Ford Mustang GT, 3:13.3
2008 Chevrolet Cobalt SS, 3:13.0 -faster than a 2010 GT, slower than a 2011 V6...
2011 Ford Mustang V-6, 3:12.5 - This is only 3 seconds off from a Camaro SS?!
2007 Ford Shelby GT500, 3:11.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------What is
2007 BMW 335i coupe, 3:10.5 - Could be in price range
2012 Dodge Charger SRT8, 3:10.1
2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS, 3:09.5
2012 Dodge Challenger SRT8 392, 3:09.4
2011 Ford Mustang GT, 3:08.6
2011 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG, 3:06.9 - Could be in price range
2007 Ford Shelby GT500, 3:05.9 --------------------------------------------------------------------------going on here???
2009 Cadillac CTS-V, 3:04.0 - probably won't be under 10K
2016 Ford Focus RS, 3:03.9 - probably will never be under 10K
2006 Dodge Viper SRT10 Coupe, 3:01.6
2013 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE, 3:01.5
2020 Toyota Supra 3.0 Premium, 3:01.4




The BMW is 6 seconds quicker than the Mazdaspeed3, and they are both around 7-10K

Also, it is too bad they never ran the gen 5 V6 Camaro or the updated Gen 5 Camaro SS.

Stats of the 335i
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... road-test/

Paired with the standard six-speed transmission, this is sufficient to propel the 3616-pound 335i to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds, with essentially no turbo lag-the tiny hesitation between the time the driver punches the throttle and the onset of full boost. That's a tenth quicker to 60 mph than was the slightly lighter 335i coupe, an advantage the sedan held through the quarter-mile (13.5 seconds at 106 mph).

So 2007 335i
Sedan/Coupe
0-60 4.8/4.9
1/4 mile 13.5 @106 / guessing 13.6@106???

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a ... -lap-2007/

The 335i does everything remarkably well, which is why many of us at Car and Driver think it’s the best all-around car in the world.

Also kind of funny, the Mazdaspeed3 was in this same Lightning Lap - 2007.

Another weird note:
2007 BMW 335i coupe, 3:10.5
2012 BMW 335is, 3:13.8
More power, but slower...

From Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_3_Series_(E90)
335i
2006–2009 - N54B30 - twin-turbocharged inline-6 - 225 kW (302 hp)/400 N⋅m (295 lb⋅ft)
2009–2013 - N55B30 - turbocharged inline-6 - 225 kW (302 hp)/400 N⋅m (295 lb⋅ft)
335is
2011–2013 - N54B30 - twin-turbocharged inline-6 - 240 kW (322 hp)/500 N⋅m (369 lb⋅ft)

Here is the 04 GTO. This shows a $1,600 premium for a manual 05 GTO over a manual 04 GTO.

bill25 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:49 pm Stats of the 335i
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a1 ... road-test/

Paired with the standard six-speed transmission, this is sufficient to propel the 3616-pound 335i to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds, with essentially no turbo lag-the tiny hesitation between the time the driver punches the throttle and the onset of full boost. That's a tenth quicker to 60 mph than was the slightly lighter 335i coupe, an advantage the sedan held through the quarter-mile (13.5 seconds at 106 mph).

So 2007 335i
Sedan/Coupe
0-60 4.8/4.9
1/4 mile 13.5 @106 / guessing 13.6@106???

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a ... -lap-2007/

The 335i does everything remarkably well, which is why many of us at Car and Driver think it’s the best all-around car in the world.

Also kind of funny, the Mazdaspeed3 was in this same Lightning Lap - 2007.

Another weird note:
2007 BMW 335i coupe, 3:10.5
2012 BMW 335is, 3:13.8
More power, but slower...

From Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_3_Series_(E90)
335i
2006–2009 - N54B30 - twin-turbocharged inline-6 - 225 kW (302 hp)/400 N⋅m (295 lb⋅ft)
2009–2013 - N55B30 - turbocharged inline-6 - 225 kW (302 hp)/400 N⋅m (295 lb⋅ft)
335is
2011–2013 - N54B30 - twin-turbocharged inline-6 - 240 kW (322 hp)/500 N⋅m (369 lb⋅ft)

Yes, they are pretty quick. Basically equivalent to my CTS-V. However you would be absolutely insane to buy one over a V1.

I would rather buy something else...

BMW positives:
interior seems nice
more for sale/available under 10K

CTS-V Positives:
probably more reliable

Negatives:
I don't really want either as I would be fine without a luxury premium/extra stuff to break added to the price.

CTS-V:
CTS interior
CTS is probably on the more expensive side
There is 1 CTS-V in 500 miles and it is $10,000 w/142000 miles on it.
https://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sal ... pe=listing
Compared to:
2008 BMW 3 Series 335i Sedan 4D - $7999 - 78,000 miles
https://boston.craigslist.org/sob/ctd/d ... 28805.html

Granted, neither have been looked at so who knows...

BMW:
BMW cost and need to repair

Problem is that they are delivering almost Camaro SS level performance for 7-8K less money.

For the Lightning Lap stats, getting something quicker than 3.10 is looking pretty expensive.