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

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

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

How would a Mustang 3.5L EcoBoost compare to the 5.0L V8?

Ever wonder how a 3.5 litre EcoBoost might fair against the 5.0 litre V8 in the Mustang? Of course you have. Ever since Ford dropped it in the F150 (and perhaps well before), everyone has been wondering how it would perform. There are basically two camps; those who think it would be awesome because of tuneability and power potential and those who think it means the death of the V8 in the Mustang. If you are in the latter group, we seem to be good so far with continuous upgrades to the 5.0 litre Coyote and the brand new Shelby GT500 which still uses a supercharged V8 as it has been for over a decade and multiple iterations. But what if... Well, it seems we are closer than ever to finding out the answer to that question. American Trucks recently got together two crew cab, short box, 4x4 F150's but one has the 5.0 litre V8 and the other has the 3.5 litre EcoBoost V6. There has been a few comparisons between 5.0 litre and 3.5 litre EB F150's, but this seems to be the most di

Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R Track Review

2012 Boss 302 on square 305/30/19 RE-71R's at AMP - Graham MacNeil © For better or for worse, I have heard and read so much about RE-71R's. Everyone swears by the grip but complains about the wear. Generally speaking, the pros are: 1. They grip as well or better than most R comps. 2. They don't wear as quickly as R comps if driven occasionally on the street. 3. They work better in the rain than R comps. The cons were limited to overheating quickly when used on track (being an autocross tire) and wearing too fast on heavy cars like mine. In the popular 200 TW category, they are faster than the popular Hankook RS-4's and BFGoodrich Rival S's according to published Tire Rack Tests. According to plenty of reviews, they are also faster than well established R comps like R888R's (which don't seem to work too well on heavy cars anyway) and the venerable NT01's. But I was still hesitant for a while until I talked to a tire tech support gentleman