As time marches on and the economy marches down, more and more we are looking for the car that has it all. someone here used to say :cheap, reliable, fast.-choose two. But nowadays the new cars we see more a jack of all trades attempt. Performance cars with luxury amenities. At least we have cup holders, radios, and something besides bench seats in our cars these days. And the whole 3 on the column is gone. I always personally hated column mounted manuals. I have worked on the new camaros. Specifically the v8 because racecar. I do agree the interior was its weakest link. I enjoyed the engine and its exhaust note, even stock. Mustang GT premiums have myfordtouch which is the best infotainment offered by americans, except maybe that found in the 300 and charger. Plus heated/cooled cup holders in a muscle car?! damn charger! if only you had a decent transmission.

Bottom line is, with more and more tech sharing between companies and advanced performance tech the choice becomes quite subjective and the biggest difference seem to stylistic, not substancial. Quite a bit like the two party system. The lack of difference in performance makes us amplify and focus on the stylistic differences.

And besides in muscle cars, I'll take a cts-v. or charger. or stang.:tiphat: but dammit, it has to have a v8. 6 cyl are the domain of japanese and german sports cars.

Currently own a 2010 Camaro 2SS 6MT and 2010 370z NISMO. Previous car was a 09 370z touring sport 6MT (RIP).

As an owner of both cars I can say they both have pros and cons to each other and really it just comes down to preference. Is the Z fit and finish better than the Camaro? Yes. Is it a huge difference? Definitely not. I never once in almost 3yrs thought "damn, I really wish this dash board felt softer" or "I wish the leather was more supple." I mean maybe it's me but I buy sports cars to enjoy their performance, not the interior. Don't get me wrong, I don't want some POS interior but the Camaro interior is just fine for my needs. Then again you are talking to a guy who doesn't think the Vette interior is as big a deal as others proclaim. I drive cars more for their performance than how soft the soft touch materials are. I mean hell, I still hop in my 1977 280z that literally has a worn 30+ year old seat and only one working radio speaker and I could care less. Interior was the last thing on my list when I first bought my 280z which is why to this day the exterior looks great with bright yellow paint, the motor runs perfect with a great sounding exhaust, and it runs 1.5 secs faster than stock. Yet the interior hasn't been touched.

Lastly I'll add this, in nearly 3 years ownership of the Camaro not a single problem, squeak, or rattle. Could the car be better, sure it could. Then again, so could the Z.

I see you noted no problems with the Camaro, what about the Z?

Factoring in the touring and nav packages and 12 and up models oil cooler you're right. 09-11 base sports and base sport autos were under 3300lbs.

Like I said, they both have pros and cons. The Camaro corners really well despite it's large size and weight. That being said you feel the weight when trying to throw it. The Z on the other hand is very tossible and more precise. Honestly for daily driving and spirited fun the Camaro gets the job done with no complaints. It's only on things like auto-x or canyon roads where the Z is the obvious winner. When driving the car on the streets it's no less fun than the Z. The suspension is also much stiffer in the Z (Nismo or regular) vs. the Camaro. This is good in that body roll is less but it can also wear on your passengers. This is more personal preference but essentially the Z is more track oriented out of the box vs. the more comfy Camaro. In auto-x the Camaro is usually right behind the Z in terms of time. Throw in better springs and/or sway bars and the Camaro will be right there with the Z. That being said it does take a better driver to get the Camaro around those cones to match the Z. The weight of the car is a hindrance.

The Z seats are better for racing as they hold you in better but the Camaro seats are better for long trips and crusing

The radio in the Camaro is better than the Z (both base and touring).

The overall ergonomics of the Z interior for the driver is better. Everything is very well positioned and intuitive. The Camaro is functional but not as driver focused.

Probably my biggest pet peeve between the two is traction. Whether new or with miles on the tires the Camaro has vastly superior traction compared to the Z. With the Camaro you can just rev and dump the clutch, the car just burns and goes. It's very easy to get a near perfect launch with the car. The Z on the other hand is very tricky to launch and typically ends up with massive wheel spin, wheel hop, or bogging. I'm actually about to change the stock tires for RE-11's and hoping this will change the way the Z drives but honestly it takes a lot of the fun out of the car. Essentially VDC always has to stay on, otherwise without VDC you have to be on top of your game at all times. The camaro is much more forgiving and easier to control. I have no problem going balls out from a light but in the Z I almost never do as I usually just spin like crazy (with VDC off). Honestly if traction is still an issue after the RE-11's I'm switching to something else. I've never driven a car that sucked so horribly with traction. I mean I've been driving RWD cars all my life and the Z is the worst. Even the C6 vette we used to have was better with it's run-flats. Maybe it's just me but I like to drive a little aggressively without having to worry about spinning out of control or VDC kicking in.

Speaking of which, VDC. The Camaro TCS is far better than the Z's VDC. With the Z, even the slightest slip causes it to kick in stopping any fun you were about to have. With the Camaro its far more forgiving and progressive. It allows you to spin the tires in a very controlled way allowing the driver to control the car instead of the TCS just shutting it down. It's only when the tires really start to slip that it kicks in hard. From my experience the Ford/GM brands have a much better TCS system compared to it's Japanese counterparts.

Like I said, both cars have pros and cons. Both cars provide a different kind of experience. In the end it's really going to come down to personal preference rather than numbers. On paper the Camaro is faster but in the hands of most people the Z will give it a good run. In higher speed rolling races my Nismo actually hangs right next to it. The Camaro is the better straight line and the Z the better corner carver, but the cars are so close to each other in both categories that it's really more about which car looks or feels better to the person buying.

Never had any problems with traction on my Z especially after i switched the rears out to Kumho ecsta's, i've dumped the clutch from about 3500-4000rpm and had very little wheel spin without VDC on. stock potenzas took a little bit to warm up and did have traction issues when cold, but have very little issue with cold traction now with the Kumhos on the rear.

Nissan, as per usual, published optimistic curb weights.

It's called all wheel drive :hello:

seriously

As someone who has good drive time behind the wheel of the camaro 2ss. I can completely agree with everything you say. A huge advantage on the camaro you didnt mention is push-pounding torque. when you smash that pedal, you get thrown so hard into the seat, you feel like part of the furniture. And even though a good driver can squeeze out as much acceleration in a z as you can from a Camaro. The Camaro feels like you are going much faster off the line due to the amount of torque pushing down from the wheels. Not even the stang which is faster feels as fast.

There's a lot of hate on Camaro SS's without people having drive time on them and falling into Stang fanboi hype. Granted, the mustang in dry well paved conditions can carve the **** out of a road with much better lap times than a Camaro or Z. But the Camaro, in spite of its size and weight is well above average. Honestly, if GM was smart enough to make this car a 3600lb beast, 2 inches closer to the ground and slightly firmer suspension. the camaro would probably be "the car".
Interior quality. It's not so much is an issue when it comes to performance. But when you're shelling out $38,000+ on a sports car, the 10-11 camaro's are disappointing. the interior just doesnt look $38000+. Upon further inspection of the newer models, i would say interior has improved greatly. I definitely like it over the stang and vette. But not over the Z.
Camaro seating. My first time renting one. I drove pretty much 10 hours in a day just cruising. The camaro seats are about as comfortable as they get. the camaros moonroof is perfectly sized and when opened halfway on a spring day. No need for A/C, it rushes cool air into the cabin like no other moonroof i've ever experienced. Open all the way and the air slipstreams over the car without much air invasion of the cockpit. Love the camaro. Just couldnt pick one over a Z. Camaro is well featured for daily use and super-long road trips for the versatile enthusiast. The z is a shorter distance aggressive drivers car.

Ahh last thing about the camaro. It definitely provides a much sportier seat positioning than both mustang and challenger. steering heft is great as well as wheel thickness. I prefer these features over the other 2 muscle cars... but if you're a track junkie. The stang is the muscle car champ and too compelling to pass up on that level of enthusiast sport driving.

I've liked the Camaro because of the way it looks. By the same token, that's mostly why I like the 370z. And the Z is many times more sexy than the Camaro.

I feel like the Z has certain aspects of 'muscle car' in its driving experience. Its sharp handling and agility IS NOT one of these aspects.

The Camaro is definitely a cool car, until you start comparing it to a car like the 370z -

this is a very non biased comaprison of the two. anddddddd

there's all sorts of reasons I'd rather have a well-sorted RWD car than one that is AWD, and there's no reason a RWD can't be setup to have plenty of grip. I want to eat my cake and have it too, like any good car guy.


Source: I own a well-sorted RWD and an AWD car.

Note: I am not dogging the Z, so please don't try to read something that isn't there.

An interesting Read! In the End, it really is ALL PERSONAL OPINION/PREFERENCE!

One driver says the Z spins like Crazy and another one doesn't.

On paper is what got me in the Dealership door so I give Chevy/Ford/Hyundai credit for that, but it's the whole package that sold me!

What saddened me was that a car with almost 100 more hp just barely beats the Z! The american muscle cars have the potential but they dropped the ball IMO. But obvisouly that does't mean much when I see 50 camaros or Stangs per day

There is a lot of good information in the thread however when referring to cars such as Camaros or Mustangs saying which ones is faster, I believe you need to reference which model. There are many models especially for Mustangs. We all know base models for these two cars suck.

Why do they suck? The V6 Mustang is a good option for someone that wants a quick, fuel efficient coupe.