Camaro Prices & Specs

I just got information on the Camaro. I'm going to give you a comparison with the Mustang and the Challenger.

2010 Camaro: Price Range: $22,500 - $34,000 (est.)
Engines : 3.6L DOHC V6, 300 hp / 273 ft-lbs tq (LS,LT)
6.2L OHV V8, 400 hp / 395 ft-lbs tq (L99)
6.2L OHV V8, 422 hp / 408 ft-lbs tq (LS3)
Transmissions: 6-Speed Manual
6-Speed Automatic
Weight: 3750 lbs (est.) * LOOK BELOW

2009 Mustang: Price Range: $20,530 - $44,780
Engines: 4.0L SOHC V6, 210 hp / 240 ft-lbs tq (base)
4.6L SOHC V8, 300 hp / 320 ft-lbs tq (GT)
5.4L DOHC V8, 500 hp / 480 ft-lbs tq (GT 500)
Transmissions: 5-speed Manual
5-speed Automatic
Weight: 3345-3540 lbs

2009 Challenger: Price Range: $21,995 - $39,995
Engines: 3.5L SOHC V6, 250 hp / 250 ft-lbs (SE)
5.7L OHV V8, 370 hp / 398 ft-lbs (R/T)
6.1L OHV V8, 425 hp / 420 ft-lbs (SRT8)
Transmissions: 6-Speed Manual (R/T and SRT8)
5-Speed Automatic (R/T and SRT8)
4-Speed Automatic (SE only)
Weight: 3720-4170 lbs


Oh the RS package on the Camaro adds: HID head lights, darker taillight lenses, and larger painted wheels.

those are some damned heavy automobiles.

The 1969 Camaro had a 3120 lb curb weight, the 1969 Mustang had around 3300 lbs depending on the model, and the 1970 Dodge Challenger had a weight of 4100 lbs.

Ascona wrote:those are some damned heavy automobiles.

+1. Why is the camaro so much heavier than the mustang? Is that the engine?

my dad's minivan, with a diesel engine, weighs less than them sportscars . . .

Ascona wrote:my dad's minivan, with a diesel engine, weighs less than them sportscars . . .

That is a little silly. Although, technically, I guess they're GT cars. But still. Lots of horsepower, lots of weight. What kind of fuel economy are these things getting?

The Mustang gets 17 city/26 hwy for the 4.0L V6 18 city/23 Hwy for the 4.6L, 14 city/20 Hwy for the 5.4L Supercharged. All have manual trannys.

I only have specs for the SRT8 Challenger with the 6.1L which is 15 city/18 hwy and thats an automatic.

The Full specs aren't out on the Camaro yet, but the 3.6L is supposed to get 26 hwy with the manual. The 6.2L is supposed to get 23 mpg with a manual and automatic.

Ascona wrote:my dad's minivan, with a diesel engine, weighs less than them sportscars . . .

so?

there's no way it goes nearly as fast.

and those are ponycars.

TheWoerus wrote:

Ascona wrote:those are some damned heavy automobiles.

+1. Why is the camaro so much heavier than the mustang? Is that the engine?

There is probably more reinforcement, sound deadening material, the interior, and the IRS probably doesn't help. I wouldn't look at the engine as the weight for they are all aluminum engines.

The Camaro's dimensions aren't much larger than th Mustang, by about 2" in every direction.

I just found these Curb Weight specs on Chevy's website:

3750 - LT w/Automatic
3741 - LT w/Manual
3769 - LS w/Automatic
3780 - LS w/Manual
3913 - SS w/Automatic
3860 - SS w/Manual

I got them from here - Camaro Specs

Jesus....

Whatever, the Challenger is the pig in the long run.

They are ALL pigs. Well all them features and safety equipment do add up.... as long as there's a engine in it that can tow that barge in a respectable time, issallgood.

Well as far as I'm concerned they aren't much heavier than their predecessors, you are right it's all the safety equipment.

I know. I have to weigh all the crap we send back to Mazda that failed under warranty. You be suprised how much an airbag weighs, or a converter, or a radio, etc.

Benfolio wrote:I know. I have to weigh all the crap we send back to Mazda that failed under warranty. You be suprised how much an airbag weighs, or a converter, or a radio, etc.

I used to remove air bag assemblies I know how heavy they are. But also the way interiors are made now, you'd think they'd be lighter materials, but they're not.

Carpet weighs alot.