Camaro vs Challenger vs Mustang

[Jaime]

Terra confronted the Camaros SS convertible vs the Challenger 392 vs Mustang GT.
Click here to see 86 pictures and the video comparison (Spanish).

[Murph0408]

for those unaware, this video is not in english

mustang doesn't even belong in that video, so tiny/feminine compared to the alpha challenger and beast camaro

[Lazerbrainz2k3]

Originally Posted by Murph0408

mustang doesn't even belong in that video, so tiny/feminine compared to the alpha challenger and beast camaro

It's smaller, lighter, has good power and is still a pony car. And it outperforms the Camaro (the Challenger is another matter, but SRT is more equivalent to our ZL1 and the GT500 anyway). I think it belongs just fine.

[2quick]

Said that the srt out performed all of them.

[c-dub]

wait...the SRT belongs with the GT500?! whaaaaa? The 392 BARELY outperforms a stock SS. Lets be real here guys. Comon now.

[Devryn17]

Originally Posted by c-dub

wait...the SRT belongs with the GT500?! whaaaaa? The 392 BARELY outperforms a stock SS. Lets be real here guys. Comon now.

Strictly on level of performance, you are correct.

However...

The ZL1, GT500, and SRT8 are all similarly priced. (around $50K)

[c-dub]

You are right, PRICE wise they are on the same level. Performance is another story. DOn't get me wrong, if I had the plata (money) I'd have em both, that 392 is nice!

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by Devryn17

Strictly on level of performance, you are correct.

However...

The ZL1, GT500, and SRT8 are all similarly priced. (around $50K)

I suppose it depends on where you buy the car. If it's a dealer that inflates prices on their SRTs, possibly. With proper negotiation (or a good broker), the new SRT (392) can be had for $42,000 - 44,000. Maybe less. Same goes for the GT500 (I haven't seen a ZL1 on a lot yet, so I have no idea what they are going for).

Performance wise, agreed, the 392 does not belong with supercharged vehicles. Arbitrarily sticking the new SRT in with these cars just because of the price makes no sense unless you are only defining these vehicles by their cost and not their performance. Can't have it both ways. If you want performance vs. value, the 5.0 Mustang wins that contest.

[GEN-IV]

If you want performance versus cost, the Mustang takes it, if you want performance versus value, the Camaro SS is the winner. The SS comes standard with items that are optional on the Mustang, similarly equipped, the Camaro is the winner.

[8cd03gro]

OK, so they said the 392 did the 1/8th in 7.0s @ 111mph. . . Neither figure is even remotely close to possible. How did none of you notice that?

Not only that, but they had different drivers in each car for the tests and she had the top down on the camaro for the road course. Probably the worst comparo test I have ever seen.

At least the girl was hot.

Originally Posted by GEN-IV

If you want performance versus cost, the Mustang takes it, if you want performance versus value, the Camaro SS is the winner. The SS comes standard with items that are optional on the Mustang, similarly equipped, the Camaro is the winner.

The SS also costs $2,000 more at base price than the GT. IMO, after driving both and whatnot, they're super equal. It's pretty much based solely on preference and what specific features you want. The challenger on the other hand. . . I'll reserve my comments on the challenger other than the fact that all these reviewers comparing the srt, rather than the equally priced R/T, to the GT and SS speaks worlds for how Dodge is doing with the challenger's performance imo.

[Shadowsong]

Dodge has really placed the SRT in an awkward spot.. performance wise it belongs with the SS and the 5.0, but price wise, it belongs with the GT500 and (possibly) ZL1... If you have enough money to buy an SRT, but want the best performance, you aren't even going to bother looking at it, you'll go right to the Ford dealership (pre-ZL1, post Zl1 it's a toss up). If you want the performance of the SRT, but can't afford to spend more than say mid 30s... you ain't getting a Dodge.. because the R/T doesn't measure up (from my experience). So, IMO the SRT is mostly for die-hard dodge guys, or people that have money and think it looks the best...

[dragon2368]

Plus why was the Camaro a convertible and the Mustang and Challenger not?? More weight of course.

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by Shadowsong

Dodge has really placed the SRT in an awkward spot.. performance wise it belongs with the SS and the 5.0, but price wise, it belongs with the GT500 and (possibly) ZL1... ...

Actually, Dodge smartly placed the 392 SRT8 in a niche spot. At the $44K Base Price it splits the GT500 ($50k), and the comparably equipped SS or GT ($38k). It is faster than the GT or SS, slower than the GT500, but has more comfort and everyday live-ability than the others. For a daily driver or for those with families, it is a compelling value.