If you've come here for a new instrument head-to-head test, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. Although, for the sake of those who do want numbers, here they are from the most recent Car and Driver comparison test: 2016 Camaro SS 2016 Mustang GT 0-30 mph 1.6 s 1.7 s 0-60 mph 3.9 s 4.4 s 0-100 mph 8.9 s 10.5 s 1/4 mile 12.3 s @ 116 mph 13.0 s @ 112 mph braking 70-0 mph 147 ft 157 ft 300-ft dia.skidpad 0.98 g 0.94 g 610-ft slalom 43.9 mph 43.3 mph For some reason, Car and Driver tested an 8-speed auto Camaro and a 6-speed manual Mustang, so figure you'll lose a tenth or two with a manual; the gap is still clear. The new Camaro SS out accelerates, out brakes, and out grips the new (now almost two years old) Mustang. And I'm not here to tell you otherwise. If you're reading this, chances are, you'v...
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 ...







