2015 Ford Mustang vs. 2014 Chevrolet Camaro

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,316
edited September 2014 in Chevrolet

image2015 Ford Mustang vs. 2014 Chevrolet Camaro

We break down the 2015 Ford Mustang and 2014 Chevrolet Camaro to see how they stack up.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • nukedetroitnukedetroit Member Posts: 108
    "The current Camaro SS is rated at 426 hp, so don't be surprised if the 5.0-liter V8 delivers more than 330 horses to make sure it stays ahead."

    "Where the Camaro has an advantage is its V6. Rated at 323 hp and 278 lb-ft of torque, it easily tops the Mustang's base engine ... Official horsepower figures haven't been released yet, but Ford estimates that the new four-cylinder will deliver at least 305 hp and 300 lb-ft of torque. That would put the Mustang squarely above the base Camaro in terms of both horsepower and torque, not to mention the weight advantage of the small engine."

    Would someone please proofread these articles before posting... or buy the writer a f*cking calculator?
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Member Posts: 1,021
    "...Ford estimates that the new four-cylinder will deliver at least 305 hp and 300 lb-ft of torque. That would put the Mustang squarely above the base Camaro in terms of both horsepower and torque..." I don't know about Southern California, but here in Chicago 323 horsepower > 305 horsepower
  • ajac03ajac03 Member Posts: 37
    Am I the only one who thinks Ford needs to stop putting turbo 4's in EVERY damn vehicle? I can't wait until a few years down the line when these things start breaking down. It seems so wrong to put a 4 cylinder in a mustang, powerful or not.
  • engineer_mbaengineer_mba Member Posts: 11
    It would have been nice if this article mentioned the Dodge Challenger. I realize that the Challenger lags behind the Mustang and Camaro (both great cars) in performance and handling (and sales), but it is still a good overall effort from Dodge. What it lacks in performance, it makes up for with roominess, a bigger more usable backseat and competitive pricing.
  • myboramybora Member Posts: 2
    @engineer_mba: "What it lacks in performance, it makes up for with roominess, a bigger more usable backseat and competitive pricing."
    So does an Nissan Altima.
  • patinthecitypatinthecity Member Posts: 40
    Everyone on here seems to have misread the article getting all bent out of shape that Ford's base engine is more powerful than Chevy's.

    The 2.3 is mid-level engine; the V6 is the base engine.

    Therefore, Chevy's base engine is more powerful than Ford's base engine.
    You want to win the pissing match? Then expect to pay more for the mid-level 2.3 4-cyl in the Ford versus the base level V6.
  • engineer_mbaengineer_mba Member Posts: 11
    mybora - Last time I checked, the Nissan Altima was not available with a V-8 engine, manual transmission and rear wheel drive.
  • joefrompajoefrompa Member Posts: 64
    Was pretty excited to hear the Mustang is getting again a 2.3 liter turbocharged, intercooled 4-cylinder.

    In ~1983-1984, the there was a super rare Mustang SVO equipped with a 2.3 liter turbo engine. That engine continued on into the ford thunderbird "turbo coupe". I owned a 1988 thunderbird turbo coupe and that engine, despite being in a very heavy car, was just a ton of fun.

    This new 2.3 liter harkens back very nicely to that limited time in the 1980s when ford was cranking out one of the world's best 4-cylinder turbo engines - way ahead of it's time.
  • engineer_mbaengineer_mba Member Posts: 11
    I remember the Mustang SVO from the early 1980s. In addition to the turbocharged 2.3 liter engine, it had its own unique styling which set it apart from other Mustangs. It looked beautiful and futuristic.
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Member Posts: 1,021
    I have no issues at all with the Mustang getting a turbo 4 as an option. It's not like we are talking about the wussy NA 2.3 that was available for years in the early Fox bodies. As long as Ford continues to offer a kick [non-permissible content removed] V8 I have no issues at all with it also offering a nice turbo 4 for the people that want one.
  • fordson1fordson1 Unconfirmed Posts: 1,512
    "Where the Camaro has an advantage is its V6. Rated at 323 hp and 278 lb-ft of torque, it easily tops the Mustang's base engine. Ford knew that, of course, so it added one more option for the Mustang: a midrange 2.3-liter turbocharged four-cylinder." But the Camaro - even the base model - still weighs 200 lbs. more than the Mustang, so with V6s, the Mustang still has a better power-to-weight ratio. How is that an advantage for the Camaro? The current version V6 Mustang has 306 hp compared to 323 for the V6 Camaro...but the Mustang is still faster in every acceleration test that anyone's ever conducted. With the lightweight turbo 4 in the nose, giving great low-end torque accelerating out of corners, coupled with the new IRS, that version of the Mustang will be a great road-course car. The new 5.0 Coyote will make more hp than the SB in the Chevy, plus IRS. I don't think the Camaro will compare, model-for-model.
  • shriker66shriker66 Member Posts: 7
    You guys are off on the weight comparo. Mustang GT/Boss weighs in around 3600-3650 and Camaro SS/1LE around 3850 .....only about 200lbs . IF Mustang gains 100lbs it will be only around 100lbs lighter than the Camaro.
  • lions208487lions208487 Member Posts: 240
    Though the Camaro has more HP than the current Mustang, the 2013/14 Mustang has outperformed the Camaro in many head to head comparisons. My preference is the 2015 Mustang, because even without sitting in it yet, the current Camaro has poor visibility, and a very cheap interior. With IRS, the Mustang will further separate itself from the Camaro, and vastly separate itself from the Challenger. Since the Camaro tips the scales at over 4K lbs, I just do not see it performing as well as this 2015 Mustang. Again, I will have to test drive one when it finally arrives at the local dealer to make my final judgement.
  • lions208487lions208487 Member Posts: 240
    @bankerdanny- Just because the stat sheet shows the Camaro has 323 HP and the Mustang has 305, doesn't necessarily mean it's quicker. The Camaro is over 4000 lbs, which is the reason why the base Camaro and SS can't beat the current live axle Mustang with
  • shriker66shriker66 Member Posts: 7
    You guys are off on the weight comparo. Mustang GT/Boss weighs in around 3600-3650 and Camaro SS/1LE around 3850 .....only about 200lbs . IF Mustang gains 100lbs it will be only around 100lbs lighter than the Camaro.
  • greenponygreenpony Member Posts: 531
    It wasn't that long ago that the Mustang had a V8 churning out a whopping 260-315 hp. If a turbo-four can meet or beat that, while delivering vastly superior fuel economy, then what does anyone have against that?
  • thedream32thedream32 Member Posts: 5
    @ajoc03...yes..because anemic, underpowered, truck based 6 cylinder motors are SO much better. Oh wait, Ford did that in the 90s and 2000s and how did that work out for performance and the Mustang image?

    Do you forget that one of the hidden gems way bac
  • ralphhightowerralphhightower Member Posts: 11
    Well, it still sorta looks like a Mustang. And the technology of 4 cylinder engines has improved from 1974. I owned a Mustang that should not have existed, the 1974 Ford Mustang II with the four cylinder. The 1966 Mustang with a straight six was the second car that I drove in high school.
  • ajac03ajac03 Member Posts: 37
    @thedream32 So how is a four cylinder any better? If their aim is fuel economy with performance, Ford hasn't been living up to that promise with virtually any of their vehicles (C-max, fusion etc). The mustang is a muscle car, and muscle cars just aren't
  • plindoplindo Member Posts: 1
    @ajac03, V6 and V8 engines carry heavy taxes in Europe, so since Ford has plans on selling the Mustang in Europe, the four cylinder is a MUST. Most of us here in North America will ignore the four cylinder, and Ford knows this, that is why we have options
  • garrymgarrym Member Posts: 27
    My 79 mustang Cobra had the turbocharged 2.3 litre 4 cylinder and at the time was a good engine with the usual turbo lag and not so good fuel consumption. With the TRX suspension package the car was very enjoyable on the highway. By the time the engine was refined for the Thunderbird and later the SVO Mustang, it was much better. So I would expect in the 2015 Mustang 4 banger will be terrific with more torque and horsepower than the old powerplant.
  • ajac03ajac03 Member Posts: 37
    @plindo Yeah I'll give you that. I just think Ford is going a little.. turbo crazy with all their vehicles.
  • joe_scubajoe_scuba Member Posts: 2
    The Fusion style front end on the Mustang sucks, was waiting for something really great what a let down
  • richard585richard585 Member Posts: 1
    Why not compare all dimensions of the 2015 Mustang to all the dimensions of the 2014 Mustang....that would make real sense !
  • shatnershatner Member Posts: 176
    Was pretty excited to hear the Mustang is getting again a 2.3 liter turbocharged, intercooled 4-cylinder. In ~1983-1984, the there was a super rare Mustang SVO equipped with a 2.3 liter turbo engine. That engine continued on into the ford thunderbird "turbo coupe". I owned a 1988 thunderbird turbo coupe and that engine, despite being in a very heavy car, was just a ton of fun. This new 2.3 liter harkens back very nicely to that limited time in the 1980s when ford was cranking out one of the world's best 4-cylinder turbo engines - way ahead of it's time.
    _____________

    That POS was 175 hp that came on only at the top end. Just a joke really, a few year later Honda would get 205 hp from a 1.8 liter without a turbo, and it was much smoother.
  • shatnershatner Member Posts: 176
    I used to like my Mustang 5.0 even though I knew it was a cheesy kids car. Of course I was 20, now I would not be caught dead in one.
  • shatnershatner Member Posts: 176
    I remember the Mustang SVO from the early 1980s. In addition to the turbocharged 2.3 liter engine, it had its own unique styling which set it apart from other Mustangs. It looked beautiful and futuristic.
    _______________

    It would not get out of its own way until the turbo kicked in all at once. It was not reliable and cost much more than the 5.0.
  • jukejointjimmyjukejointjimmy Member Posts: 1
    The 2014 Camaro will have the same v8 as the Corvette, detuned to 450HP. Sticker rubber and a better tuned suspension, the Mustang will again be trailing.
  • surfwagon56surfwagon56 Member Posts: 12
    Every other article that I've read (and it's a lot I must admit) has stated that the 2015 Mustang will be 200 pounds lighter than the 2014 model. For example, from TheMustangNews:
    While the final weight has not been published, the new Mustang is expected to come in at about 200 lbs lighter than before. One of the ways this was achieved was the increased use of aluminum. The hood as before is aluminum but this now extends to the front fenders.

    The rest of the body structure is stamped steel but has increased use of lighter and more expensive high-strength steels. Aluminum is used in some of the suspension components such as the control arms of the independent rear-suspension.
  • camarozonecamarozone Member Posts: 0
    Why they mess around with these V6 and 4 bangers in what is a "muscle car" is only one reason. Sales ! Mine is 426hp and yes if they pump it more I will get it ! People that buy the downgrade model will always know that is exactly what it is !
  • galaxie500xlgalaxie500xl Member Posts: 1
    It's very important to mention the critical switch to Independent Rear Suspension too ! This should easily make the '15 Horse a competitor against Camaro !

    Old Ford guy from Missouri
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles