Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

2015 Ford Mustang GT vs 2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS - A Closer Look




Well, this comparison was bound to happen. A 2015 Mustang GT equipped with the Performance Package vs a 2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS equipped with the 1LE package. Before we get to the numbers, let's look at how these performance oriented packages improve on the regular spec models.

The Mustang Performance Package ($2,495 USD/$3,700 CAD) adds the following:

  • Chassis stiffening through a Strut-tower Brace and a K-Brace
  • A Larger Radiator
  • Unique Chassis Tuning
  • Upsized Rear Sway Bar
  • Heavy-Duty Front Springs
  • K-Brace
  • Brembo 6-Piston Front Brake Callipers with Larger Rotors (15")
  • 19" x 9" front and 19" x 9.5" rear wheels (Gloss Black Aluminum)
  • Unique Stability Control, EPAS (Electronic Power Assisted Steering) & ABS Tuning
  • 3.73 TORSEN Rear Axle (differential)
The rear wheel size is 0.5" wider than those on the outgoing Mustang with the Track Pack which used 19" x 9" wheels front and rear. It also gets 255/40/19 front and 275/40/19 rear Pirelli P Zero tires as opposed to the outgoing Track Pack which brought 255/40/19 P Zero tires front and rear. The pack also adds non-performance-enhancing features like a Gauge Pack showing oil pressure and vacuum.

The Camaro, on the other hand, gets the following improvements through the 1LE package which, interestingly, is called the Performance Package on Chevrolet Canada website ($3,500 USD/$3,675 CAD):


  • 20" x 10" front & 20" x 11" rear forged aluminum wheels (Black Aluminum)
  • Tires: P285/35ZR20 BW Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar
  • 3.91 Axle Ratio with a limited slip diff (LSD) which is a TORSEN unit, according to the video.
  • Performance Ride & Handling Suspension (unique shocks, springs, and anti-roll bars plus a strut tower brace)
  • Transmission: 6 Speed Manual w/unique gear ratios
  • Sueded Microfibre-Wrapped Shift Knob
  • Sueded Microfibre-Wrapped Flat-bottom Steering Wheel
  • Sport End Rear Spoiler

According to Motor Trend, the package also brings upgraded wheel bearings, toe links, shock mounts and fuel pump from the ZL1.

The results? well, both cars are tied in the runs to 60 mph taking just 4.4 seconds while the Mustang pulls ahead slightly by the 1/4 mile finishing in 12.8 s to the Camaro's 12.9 s run. The Mustang should continue to pull away, though, going past the traps at 112.2 mph while the Camaro manages "only" 110.5 mph. This should mean that, in stock form, the Mustang still has a slight edge in a straight line but this is almost irrelevant because both cars are rarely left stock by those who race them and they respond well to modifications so who is going to win is probably going to come down to modifications, a good tune and a good driver.

Things are reversed on a road course though. At Streets of Willow, the Camaro laid down a lap time of 1:22.7 while the Mustang did a 1:24.32 which represents a 1.62 second advantage to the Camaro. That is significant in a 1-minute-20-second lap.

Many Mustang fans are now probably either angry at Ford or blaming the driver or a host of other factors but there are a couple of things to consider. Ford probably knows the wide demographic of Mustang buyers and it didn't want to scare anyone away with an overly stiff ride. Some people are blaming the fact that the chassis is still new and cars improve with age and while that is very true, I think that Ford wanted the launch model year to be soft and comfortable for the average driver. Let's face it, car enthusiasts are not your average driver and there are more average buyers looking for something fast and sporty than enthusiasts looking for certain balance at the limit and lap times. It would also be easier to convince someone who is disappointed by the numbers to come back to a Mustang by putting a much more aggressive package rather than someone who found the launch model overly stiff to come back by softening the ride.

I'll be the first to admit that my car, a 2012 Boss 302, is underdamped from the factory. You can tell from the body motions. You won't get in the car and mistake it for an old Cadillac. It is stiffly sprung but the body motions aren't as well controlled as they can be, especially given what the chassis is capable of with a good set of dampers. Don't get me wrong, it's an extremely capable package but a food set of dampers go a long way. I have no doubt that with a really good set of dampers, the Performance Pack could really transform the 2015 Mustang GT into something else.

Finally, the wheel and tire package. One thing that is easy to notice is how much wider the wheels on the Camaro are compared to the Mustang. A wider wheels reduces tire squirm and increases stability, something that probably hurt the Mustang and was mentioned in the video. Combine the better footprint of the Camaro with better controlled body motions and you've got a winning combination.

The Mustang still made a great showing, it was simply a little overshadowed by the now aging Camaro. It was still 1.5 seconds faster than the outgoing 2014 Mustang GT with the Track Pack, but it wasn't enough to beat the 1LE. Now while that may seem like a failure considering the age of the current Camaro, I think there is some positive in the outcome. Ford benchmarked the E92 BMW M3 with the Boss 302 and it handily beat it. It took a huge leap in the power wars with the last Shelby GT500, producing 662 hp. The 1LE package is a few years now and it has already beaten the 2014 Mustang GT Track Pack. I think if Ford wanted the new Mustang to beat the Camaro, it would have. Nevertheless, a win is a win and if you want the best pony car to take to the track without modifications and want to worry only about tires, brake pads and fluids, the SS 1LE is the better car. Since it appears that Ford left the job of beating lap times to the upcoming GT350, this one is bound to be a beast. Here's hoping we won't have to wait much longer for the reveal and testing!


Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Kawasaki Ninja H2R - 300 hp and Supercharged

Okay, this isn't a car but there's a reason why I'm writing about it. It has a supercharged 1.0 litre engine makes 296 hp. 296 hp may not be too impressive in a car but one has to remember that this isn't a car. It's a bike and it weighs just 476 lb in full trim and a 90% full tank. That's a weight to power ratio of 1.6 lb/hp. I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around that number. To put that number into perspective, a 2013 Mustang GT500 has 5.9 lb/hp. A C6 Corvette ZR1 has 5.3 lb/hp. A 2015 Porsche 918 has 4.2 lb/hp and that's with the electric motors running at full song. The insane Hennessey Venom GT with its twin-turbo LS7 7.0 litre engine has 2.2 lb/hp. I can't even begin to imagine what 1.6 lb/hp would feel like. I would also be curious about how fast you'd have to be going to be able to use that power. I used to have an 09 Cobalt SS. It had GM Stage 1 and a few bolt ons which would put it at very close to that 296 ...

2004 Audi TT 3.2 Quattro DSG Track Review

Before getting into this, I have to confess something... I had never driven an Audi TT before. Not until this one, anyway. But that hasn't stopped me from forming an opinion about it from the comforts of my own couch while reading and watching reviews online. After all, if you've never done that, do you even know what the point of the internet is? Now, we all interpret reviews differently. Call it confirmation bias if you will, but if you like a car, you'll read a review and look at the positives as what makes the car great and the negatives are but a few quibbles you have to live with. If you don't like a car, the positives are a few things the manufacturer got right while screwing up everything else. It's a bit harsh to put the TT in the latter category, but that's where it ended up for me... I never took the TT seriously. The problem with the TT for me isn't that it's a Golf underneath, per se. There is nothing wrong with a performance car sharing a...

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity. Grip is noticeably l...

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would ...