2017 Ford Mustang will outperform Chevy Camaro in every way

02gtnh said:

Some info on the SS brakes for you from Brembo.


The Chevrolet Camaro Coupe is 90 kg lighter than the previous models with better aerodynamics and brakes.

The Brembo four-piston, two-piece aluminium calipers are designed specifically for weight savings and are among the stiffest available with virtually no distortion from high thermal and torque loads, even under the most demanding conditions. Brembo’s corrosion-resistant calipers in anodized aluminium offer reduced weight over traditional calipers.

On the Camaro LT, the available Brembo brakes include 12.6-inch (321x30mm) front rotors with four-piston aluminium calipers. Camaro SS employs 13.6-inch (345x30 mm) front rotors with four-piston aluminium calipers and 13.3-inch (339x26 mm) rear rotors with four-piston calipers.

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

Been gone a lot lately. What is the PP on the camaro? I didn't think Chevy was going to offer one this MY?

Click to expand...

thePill said:

Now post the ATS-V's Brembo info...

Advantage? ATS-V...




The 2016 doesn't have a PP... it probably won't have any b@lls either...

Click to expand...

thePill said:

Now post the ATS-V's Brembo info...

Advantage? ATS-V...




The 2016 doesn't have a PP... it probably won't have any b@lls either...

Click to expand...

02gtnh said:

Just showing that the base SS brakes don't suck like you think. If they suck, then what's your feeling on the base GT brakes?

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

But you said PP? Also what gives a car balls? Not being a smart ass. I want to know in your opinion.

Click to expand...

thePill said:

No, thePill never said the Camaro has a Performance Package option. Nor did I suggest there eventually will be one. The only people that said "PP" was those stating "the PP V6 Camaro Car and Driver is driving around is nearly 3700lbs".


That is all... more than likely meant the "Heavy Duty Cooling and Brake Package" at a minimum. I will most likely continue using PP because I'm not going to call it a HDCBP V6 Camaro and I'm not f@ckin' spellin' that stupid sh!t out.


What gives a car balls? Well, during a certain period of time during development, either an X or Y chromosome is dominant. So, it's pretty much determined during development...

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

Ok. First, why would you trust someone with weights that doesn't know that the Camaro doesn't have a PP. Also, cars don't have chromosomes. So again. What gives a car balls? Something specific. HP? Torque? Something.

Click to expand...

thePill said:

Because these untrustworthy people are the same ones that gave me...

The wheelbase
The track increase
The dimensions in general
The CTS suspension info (longer links)
The brake info and warning
The MSRP targets for the V6, 1SS and 2SS (even though the 2SS busted)
The Cooling info and warning
The 200lbs number (although I didn't get specific details to what they meant and still don't)
The component weight losses and gains


...and many other things...


So, were these people incorrect?

Many times I was given THESE SPECIFIC TOPICS to discuss, almost like clockwork, about 15-30 days before the official press release.

Same thing with the Mustang...

I don't know who they are, where they work, if they are males or females, Ford or GM, Human or Alien... I really don't care...


I get pieces and use my education and experience to fill in the blanks...




Example:

thePill ask: Is the '16 Camaro using a 109.3 inch wheelbase?

Mr.X says: No, it's something WE used for the Camaro before.


thePill searches for other logical Camaro wheelbase options.

Nothing under 107 was feasible and I confirmed that elsewhere. I was looking at a 109.3 to be it BUT, I questioned the ATS track width.


thePill ask: With an ATS track??? (exact words if I remember)

Mr.X says: Are you not suspension expert??? (Literally)


So, thePill used what he knows of wheelbase and track ratios, the industry standard using some fine examples and Motorsport experience to determine that the ATS track would NOT BE USED.

So, thePill took his math (and a picture of a slim rear track Prototype Camaro, the helicopter spy pics?) to a few other "experts".

My initial estimation that the Camaro had a wider front track than rear was based solely on a picture. I said it had to be 65/62 FR/rr but, it was debunked, along with the ATS suspension in a few inquiries.

So, thePill told YOU HERE... the Camaro needed at least a 63 inch track. I also settled on 110.5 because of the SCCA GTS 110.5 Camaro there. I totally missed the 2006 Concept Camaro's 110.7 :(

I returned to my "source" with the measurements and I got NO REPLY...


That means I'm correct...


However, with each piece I get closer to, I draw in bigger fish... Fish I think may be in jeopardy of losing their jobs anyway... and just want to watch GM burn...



Unfortunately, that is the truth...

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

How do these sources find you? Do they just email you? Also, what specifically gives a car balls?

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

How do these sources find you? Do they just email you? Also, what specifically gives a car balls?

Click to expand...

thePill said:

I'm sorry, that's about as far into any of these two topics that I'm comfortable to get.



Stay tuned...



...LT4...

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

How do these sources find you?

Click to expand...

ZaneWayne said:

LT4 is how a car gets balls?

Click to expand...