yeh
>>15353332
>Goes out of his way to validate the fact he was too poor for a V8 and just bought his piece of shit for attention
>n-no u mad
Just because intelligent people view you as a complete idiot doesn't mean anybody but you is mad.
>>15353332
Whats there to be mad about?
>>15353366
If he got the Premium with the PP, then he spent more than a base model GT.
>>15353341
>ugliest focus
what a turd
>>15353640
unless his dad bought it for him.
post yfw millennials thinking v6 is acceptable
>>15353783
how old are you? do you know what qualifies as millennial?
>>15353783
That's not the V6.
>>15353332
How does it feel knowing that the 4cylinder, 6cylinder, and 8 cylinder camaro are ALL faster than the ecoboost?
>>15353880
if it doesn't have 5.0 badges and a spoiler then it's probably definitely a v6 or ecoboost
>>15353332
Having trouble figuring out why I should be mad
>>15353783
>V6 Camaro 2016
>Runs 0-60 in 5.1
>Quartermile in 13.5
>Faster than all pre-2011 V8 GT muscle
>EPA city/highway driving: 20/29 mpg
>No Premium fuel required
>Engine redlines at 7200rpm so it's fun as fuck
>Priced at 27,000 USD
>10,000$ cheaper than the V8's
V6 is the better option, at least with the 2016+ camaro's. Better bang for your buck, if you're going to spend 40,000$ on a car you might as well get something else.
>>15357976
>V8 Camaro 2015
>0-60 in 4.6
>1/4 mile in 12.9
>15/24MPG
>implying redline is the only thing that that can make an engine fun
Also,2016 V6's cost about 28K in stripper form, an I4 is 27K though. Meanwhile, you can get a lightly used 2015 with more power, better performance, and a lot more options already included, for less than 25K, which more than makes up for the MPG difference and premium fuel. Hell, I'm seeing some convertibles for 25K, which definitely is more fun per dollar than a V6 2016.
>>15357976
>0-60 in 5.1
Youll hardly ever see this. Remember this was done under ideal conditions(cool temp, no headwind) on a certain track with wide sticky tires, and probably was the best out of 100 test runs.
They claimed high 5's for the 2013 mustang I had, but I remember getting in the low 7's once. Granted it had the base economy tires but still, take those 0-60 figures with a grain of salt.
the new camaro in all its forms can outhandle a v6 mustang and the ecoboost mustang. but a PP ecoboost is probably even with the 4 & 6 cylinder new camaros. Looks are subjective too, the mustang looks better i think.
I don't get why I would be mad?
>>15357694
It's the Ecoboost. You can tell because those are the PP wheels not available on the V6.
>>15355046
Sure buddy
>>15358733
>>15359139
BTFO!!!
Why they sell a mustang why a 4cylinder turbo when the v6 is pretty same thing without the crap that turbos give you.
Why don't they use the ecoboost on a "light" sportcar. A gt86 competitor with a proper engine would be great.
>inb4 ford already got a lot of sportcars for an economy brand
>>15357694
My gt had a factory spoiler delete, no idea why but I was happy about it.
>>15359565
ecobeast makes more torque than the v6, better fuel economy, and a bit more horsepower. Also takes better to tunes. You can get that thing to beat stock GTs with very minor mods. Cant say the same about the v6
>>15358015
the 2015 camaro is fucking shit though
>>15359565
Ford went 100% Jew on the turbo and stock intercooler. But full bolt-on's and 93 is 400/400 whp/tq. E30 you can get an extra 50 tq and a lil more HP depending on tuner. Full bolt on's and tune for the v6 you might be scraping 300whp if that, torque would probably be more around 250-270.
>>15357976
>2011 V6 Mustang PP
0 to 60 5.1 seconds
Quarter Mile 13.7
Camaro cucks finally getting with the times.
>>15360591
You are right, you have to turbo boost the v6 to reach its maximum potential. Although a tune and some minors mods really helps with acceleration (specially changing the rear end axle radius).
Fastest 4cyl and v6 mustangs are around 10 secs.
>>15360681
what is the joke there about the interior?
This is my first time on /o/, but my old neighbor was the head of the interior design team for the mustang. I even have a concept he drew on my wall
>>15362711
The shifter looks funny but i posted that image because i feel like that when I'm driving it.
I actually like the 2011 interior a lot.
>yfw with e85 my car will be faster than stock V8 camero and mustangs
>>15363095
>Camaro V8
0 to 60 3.9
Quarter mile 12.2
I don't think so tim.
>>15353640
>wanting that extra weight
>deluding yourself into thinking anything other than a v8 pony car isn't an embarrassment
simply envisioning that level of cuckoldry is mesmerizing.
>>15353792
>do you know what qualifies as millennial
So much this. nearly all of /o/ are millennials (myself included) yet there are so many posts complaining about millennials
>>15357710
ffs, put some magic tire shine on those rubbers..
>>15363095
So i hurd you liek understeeer
>>15365378
The poster could be a millennial and the statement could still be valid.
Nearly all of /o/ (myself excluded) lack basic reading comprehension skills.
>>15353332
I don't understand V8 fags. If size matters, why not going for V12? A turbo 4 makes much more sense than a V8, it's lighter and much cheaper to buy and maintain. Why be a brute when you can be smart?
>>15365502
How does an economy engine in a 3700bub coupe smart?
and they don't make v12 mustoongs
>>15353332
I dont care what size the engine is, so long as the power NEEDED is there.
but I do prefer the sound of a v8 over anything else.
