SS performance vs the 6.1l SRT Challenger? Thinking of swapping.. - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

rpaulg87 · 05-20-2014, 08:03 PM

Okay, so I've had an SRT-8 Challenger for 4 years now, I love it, but it was a first year so lots of issues. Newer ones seem more stout, but SRT's are expensive, and to me getting one does not make sense when next year the R\T will be offered the 6.4l HEMI along side the 5.7l, with the incredible 8-Speed auto.

I've driven the Camaro SS two times, to me the ONLY way I could buy the car is if it was a convertible, as the visibility is horrific, and rear-seats anyway are pretty useless, and not much trunk space (kinda like a Corvette) but convertibles are FUN. And the Camaro just has a flat out far better\neater interior (Though that will change with the Mustang\Challengers refresh for 2015, plus both are getting HP bumps and transmission upgrades))

First time I drove the SS hard-top to me it really felt sluggish, I mean it is a smaller car with less space inside, though the heads up display is just amazing to me. I've raced plenty with my 08 SRT, and have never had a problem beating an SS even though mine is about 200lbs heavier than a stock one (have done a few mods, nothing special).

Today I drove a 2013 with 4k miles being sold for just 35k, loaded out, BEAUTIFUL interior, convertible as well (I will say the convertible top takes forever to close\open vs the Mustang, but a plus is you don't have to reach into the passenger area to clank down the Mustang's top)

Anyway, in convertible, for sure a more fun car, and to me looks so much better, but the weight added is still weight.

I on avg pull 4.6-4.9 0-60's in my SRT, and it is a conversation bringer everywhere, I am not sure the SS will do that as they are so common where I live, but what are the real 0-60 times of the SS Convertible?

I was just stunned at the performance with both I drove...it really did NOT feel that powerful at all, is there a trick to the SS or something? The 5.0 GT Convertible I drove pulled a lot harder to me, and the top closed way faster. Issue is, 5.0 GT has annoying plus and minus buttons on the shifter, rather than paddles or anything remotely sporty.

Mustang convertible of course had a beyond boring dash, that is going away in 2015 with the new incredible interior + push to start + 200lb weight drop as well as a convertible top that closes and opens in just 15 seconds, vs the almost 1 min+ time of the Camaro, the Challenger for 2015 is getting an INCREDIBLE refresh and the option of the 475HP\475TQ HEMI which would eat an SS up any-day

Sadly, I don't think I can wait that long.

What are the REAL 0-60's of the convertibles, and hard-tops? The FIRST V-8 car I drove prior to my Toyota FJ Cruiser was the brand new Camaro SS, and it blew me away. Then I drove the R\T, blew me away, now I am USED to the power and torque, and the SS to me just feels like it needs MORE, it just feels sluggish to me with a cramped inside, but with a beautiful interior and a convertible feature which relieves the cramped problem.

As I was so in-love with the car though it is a first year and I have had a LOT of problems, I did do a quick video (of course with Breaking Bad as the intro)

I love the Challenger, never planned to sell it, but I have had a LOT of problems, and I really want a reliable platform to build on, which the LS motor seems very stout, as well as the transmisson\rear end (My father drives the CTS-V) and I know GM has had a lot of recalls, but are there any major issues with the Camaro SS?

I love the convertible, the styling is sleek, but I could ONLY buy it in a convertible format as the inside is so...compact..I'd have to always have the top down.

Here was my best 0-60, though I can't imagine that is right, though no wheel-spin or anything, perfect weather and drags, http://youtu.be/Y-7M-sAzejI 4.2 makes no logical sense. Even with 295's on the back.

Anyway, how reliable are the Camaros? The Mustang to me isn't even an option unless I get it in manual, and the 392 SRT's are quite expensive. I know Chevy is under-fire for other issues, are any related to the Camaro SS?

And how fast are these? As I said prior, mine is 200lbs more than your typical SRT-8 6.1l, but the Camaro SS to me just...it didn't feel POWERFUL, damn good looking but I always thought the Camaro would smoke a 08 Challenger?

Ruebernard · 05-20-2014, 08:09 PM

The only issue I've had with my SS is that people pay more attention to it than me ;-)

BigBlock69RS · 05-20-2014, 08:12 PM

My guess is you test drove an automatic with 87 octane gas in it from the dealer.

drive an m6 and it would probably be a different animal.

Q'smuscle · 05-20-2014, 08:16 PM

I thought that the SRT would have a faster time than that because that's SS numbers! So the SS shouldn't seem slow to you with those numbers! But I felt the same way about the SS not having enough power!Like I expected! But the problem most likely was the lower than recommended gas! A lot of dealers do not put premium in these! So you definitely won't get all that SS power!

PoorMansCamaro · 05-20-2014, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBlock69RS

My guess is you test drove an automatic with 87 octane gas in it from the dealer.

drive an m6 and it would probably be a different animal.

Pretty sure the 87 octane in any SS, will drastically make the car slower. Doesn't matter if an auto or manual. Need to put premium in and do the fuse pull.

E.T. · 05-20-2014, 08:34 PM

Aside from the 87 octane problem, I hear there is quite a bit of difference between the L99 (auto) and LS3 (manual). The L99 is no slouch, but in its stock form, it is a little sluggish. One problem, IMO, is the gears are only 3.27 or something. That, and the stock tune sucks, and there is TQ management and cylinder deactivation. A good tune makes a world of difference, and switching to the 3.70 gears was awesome.

One other thing I noticed is that you don't feel like you're going fast in these cars, but you really are. Doing 60 mph on the freeway feels more like 45.

rpaulg87 · 05-20-2014, 08:35 PM

Seriously? The dealers are putting 87 in a motor that requires 93? O.O that would make sense as it would retard timing....remember, the SRT weighs in @ 4200+lbs, Camaro is a lot smaller and lighter. Heck I could stuff 8 mexicans in the trunk if I tried. Now you say M6....see, with the Challenger, the automatic always KILLS the ma..I don't see how unless Chevy put a horrific auto transmission in this it is slower than a manual, you can't beat a computer tuned to precise shiftingnual (Tremec TR6060, same transmission as in the Camaro AND the Challenger). I do not want a manual Camaro. Is there a big power difference? I've heard a different motor is used for the 6-Speed Manual (LS3?), but to me manuals to me are ancient......is the 6-speed auto just more sluggish vs the ancient 5-speed NAG-1 AMG auto trans in the Challenger?

I don't know how to figure out the gas issue without just renting one for a day and draining the tank then filling it with 93...I didn't think dealers were that stupid to pull that...all I know is it really felt under-powered..I guess renting one for a day and putting in my own gas isn't a bad idea vs the long-run of owning one.

rpaulg87 · 05-20-2014, 08:45 PM

Wait wait, there is cylinder deactivation in these cars? That is the ONE thing that was driving me away from the 6.4l Challenger...the Camaro ALSO shuts off cylinders so I can't use the exhaust I use on my 6.1l HEMI? I had no idea the Camaro SS de-activated cylinders like the 6.4l Hemi... that was what killed the 392 HEMI deal for me as I have to tune it just to turn MDS off...I have NO clue the Camaro was pulling that as well in the auto, let alone the weaker L99....that kills proper v-8 exhaust options that get loud

My gear ratios for the 5-speed are as follows. 1st. 3.59, 2nd, 2.19, 3rd, 1.41, 4th, 1.00, and 5th, 0.83

Does the automatic really have cylinder deactivation stock? Please SS owners chime in.

Q'smuscle · 05-20-2014, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpaulg87

Seriously? The dealers are putting 87 in a motor that requires 93? O.O that would make sense as it would retard timing....remember, the SRT weighs in @ 4200+lbs, Camaro is a lot smaller and lighter. Heck I could stuff 8 mexicans in the trunk if I tried. Now you say M6....see, with the Challenger, the automatic always KILLS the ma..I don't see how unless Chevy put a horrific auto transmission in this it is slower than a manual, you can't beat a computer tuned to precise shiftingnual (Tremec TR6060, same transmission as in the Camaro AND the Challenger). I do not want a manual Camaro. Is there a big power difference? I've heard a different motor is used for the 6-Speed Manual (LS3?), but to me manuals to me are ancient......is the 6-speed auto just more sluggish vs the ancient 5-speed NAG-1 AMG auto trans in the Challenger?

I don't know how to figure out the gas issue without just renting one for a day and draining the tank then filling it with 93...I didn't think dealers were that stupid to pull that...all I know is it really felt under-powered..I guess renting one for a day and putting in my own gas isn't a bad idea vs the long-run of owning one.

Don't forget the fuse pull ! That's the first thing SS owners do to feel the SS power along with draining all the gas and putting in premium!

randomjoe · 05-20-2014, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpaulg87

Does the automatic really have cylinder deactivation stock? Please SS owners chime in.

Yeah. I have had one of these for a few days and it works: http://www.amazon.com/Range-Technolo...pr_product_top

68vert · 05-20-2014, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpaulg87

Wait wait, there is cylinder deactivation in these cars? That is the ONE thing that was driving me away from the 6.4l Challenger...the Camaro ALSO shuts off cylinders so I can't use the exhaust I use on my 6.1l HEMI? I had no idea the Camaro SS de-activated cylinders like the 6.4l Hemi... that was what killed the 392 HEMI deal for me as I have to tune it just to turn MDS off...I have NO clue the Camaro was pulling that as well in the auto, let alone the weaker L99....that kills proper v-8 exhaust options that get loud

My gear ratios for the 5-speed are as follows. 1st. 3.59, 2nd, 2.19, 3rd, 1.41, 4th, 1.00, and 5th, 0.83

Does the automatic really have cylinder deactivation stock? Please SS owners chime in.

Yep, the SS auto does have the cylinder deactivation (or DOD). Easily tuned out though.

Squillo · 05-20-2014, 08:55 PM

My personal best 0-60 has been consistently 4.8 seconds with bolt ons (LT headers, cat delete, ported throttle body and CAI) and a tune. I still get a little wheel spin, so I think I can probably do better, but I'm no expert.

I haven't done any runs since I installed new sway bars and springs though. I'm hoping to shave off 0.1 or 0.2 seconds.

ChocoTaco369 · 05-20-2014, 09:11 PM

I disagree with a lot in the OP.

The visibility is rough the first few times you drive it, but you get used to it really quickly. Mirror placement is CRITICAL. If you properly orient your sideview mirrors - this will take some work and this car desperately needs a "memory" button for the sideviews - you will be just fine. I am coming from a 4th gen Firebird, so I'm used to poor visibility and this is perfectly comfortable to drive for me.

The back seats are great versus any other two door vehicle. These are some of the most comfortable seats I've ever sat in in my life, and I expect the back seats to be similar. I've fit 5 people in my car - myself, three girls and one guy. None of us are big, but it can be done. Besides, if you're considering a two door car, you probably won't be using the back seats much in general.

The trunk IMO is excellent. Yes, it looks small, but it holds a lot of stuff. The issue with the trunk is the roof is low. You can't fit anything tall in it, but the depth is great. Considering the aesthetics of the car, it's remarkably functional. It makes little sense to me how you can complain about trunk space on one hand, then consider a convertible. That eliminates a lot more trunk space!

Driving a Camaro is a very unique experience. These are not very fast cars. This is the first time ever the Camaro wasn't designed for straight-line performance, though. The handling is excellent, they drive like a Cadillac, the seats are amazingly comfortable, the backseats are surprisingly useful, and so is the trunk. Like I said, considering how bold the aesthetics are, it's remarkable how functional this car is. You can take it to the track and beat the balls off it - quarter mile or twisties - then on the way home pick up your grandma and go grocery shopping. Yes, you will have to get used to driving it, but it's a hell of a lot easier than driving a truck or most SUV's in terms of visibility and maneuverability.

I have never driven anything made by Dodge - period - and given their history of reliability, I doubt I would ever own one. However, only you can decide. See if you can drive a Camaro a few more times. If you're looking for straight line speed, better value can be found elsewhere. I would steer you in the direction of a Mustang for that. But this car is far more functional than its competitors. It's probably one of the most well-rounded affordable muscle cars ever made. It probably is THE most well-rounded.

jp23rockstar · 05-20-2014, 09:15 PM

I drove a 2014 ss convertible a few months ago on a test drive. It was an automatic and I agree with what you said about it being sluggish and slow. Lets face it, it's a heavy weight and that contributes to the "sluggish" feeling. I would go with a stingray convertible hands down over the Camaro if money is no issue. And the exhaust was pretty weak in sound for a V8, once again because it doesn't have the performance exhaust like a manual. I would wait till the next gen Camaro because it will be on the Alpha chassis which will be lighter.

05-20-2014, 08:09 PM	#2
Ruebernard Drives: 2017 GRT 2SS/RS M6 Vert Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Oro Valley Posts: 1,200 View My Garage	The only issue I've had with my SS is that people pay more attention to it than me ;-) __________________ If it were more fun, it would be illegal!

05-20-2014, 08:12 PM	#3
BigBlock69RS Ed Drives: 2013 AGM Camaro 2SS/RS/1LE Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 951	My guess is you test drove an automatic with 87 octane gas in it from the dealer. drive an m6 and it would probably be a different animal. __________________

05-20-2014, 08:34 PM	#6
E.T. Drives: 2012 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 3,267	Aside from the 87 octane problem, I hear there is quite a bit of difference between the L99 (auto) and LS3 (manual). The L99 is no slouch, but in its stock form, it is a little sluggish. One problem, IMO, is the gears are only 3.27 or something. That, and the stock tune sucks, and there is TQ management and cylinder deactivation. A good tune makes a world of difference, and switching to the 3.70 gears was awesome. One other thing I noticed is that you don't feel like you're going fast in these cars, but you really are. Doing 60 mph on the freeway feels more like 45. __________________

05-20-2014, 09:11 PM	#13
ChocoTaco369 145lb Powerlifter Drives: 2013 Camaro 2SS RS LS3 Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Conshohocken, PA Posts: 1,146	I disagree with a lot in the OP. The visibility is rough the first few times you drive it, but you get used to it really quickly. Mirror placement is CRITICAL. If you properly orient your sideview mirrors - this will take some work and this car desperately needs a "memory" button for the sideviews - you will be just fine. I am coming from a 4th gen Firebird, so I'm used to poor visibility and this is perfectly comfortable to drive for me. The back seats are great versus any other two door vehicle. These are some of the most comfortable seats I've ever sat in in my life, and I expect the back seats to be similar. I've fit 5 people in my car - myself, three girls and one guy. None of us are big, but it can be done. Besides, if you're considering a two door car, you probably won't be using the back seats much in general. The trunk IMO is excellent. Yes, it looks small, but it holds a lot of stuff. The issue with the trunk is the roof is low. You can't fit anything tall in it, but the depth is great. Considering the aesthetics of the car, it's remarkably functional. It makes little sense to me how you can complain about trunk space on one hand, then consider a convertible. That eliminates a lot more trunk space! Driving a Camaro is a very unique experience. These are not very fast cars. This is the first time ever the Camaro wasn't designed for straight-line performance, though. The handling is excellent, they drive like a Cadillac, the seats are amazingly comfortable, the backseats are surprisingly useful, and so is the trunk. Like I said, considering how bold the aesthetics are, it's remarkable how functional this car is. You can take it to the track and beat the balls off it - quarter mile or twisties - then on the way home pick up your grandma and go grocery shopping. Yes, you will have to get used to driving it, but it's a hell of a lot easier than driving a truck or most SUV's in terms of visibility and maneuverability. I have never driven anything made by Dodge - period - and given their history of reliability, I doubt I would ever own one. However, only you can decide. See if you can drive a Camaro a few more times. If you're looking for straight line speed, better value can be found elsewhere. I would steer you in the direction of a Mustang for that. But this car is far more functional than its competitors. It's probably one of the most well-rounded affordable muscle cars ever made. It probably is THE most well-rounded. __________________

05-20-2014, 08:16 PM	#4
Q'smuscle Account Suspended Drives: 2011 Camaro VR 2SS/RS & Impala Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Riverside,ca Posts: 5,342 View My Garage	I thought that the SRT would have a faster time than that because that's SS numbers! So the SS shouldn't seem slow to you with those numbers! But I felt the same way about the SS not having enough power!Like I expected! But the problem most likely was the lower than recommended gas! A lot of dealers do not put premium in these! So you definitely won't get all that SS power!

05-20-2014, 08:35 PM	#7
rpaulg87 Drives: Challenger SRT-8 Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: United States Posts: 4	Seriously? The dealers are putting 87 in a motor that requires 93? O.O that would make sense as it would retard timing....remember, the SRT weighs in @ 4200+lbs, Camaro is a lot smaller and lighter. Heck I could stuff 8 mexicans in the trunk if I tried. Now you say M6....see, with the Challenger, the automatic always KILLS the ma..I don't see how unless Chevy put a horrific auto transmission in this it is slower than a manual, you can't beat a computer tuned to precise shiftingnual (Tremec TR6060, same transmission as in the Camaro AND the Challenger). I do not want a manual Camaro. Is there a big power difference? I've heard a different motor is used for the 6-Speed Manual (LS3?), but to me manuals to me are ancient......is the 6-speed auto just more sluggish vs the ancient 5-speed NAG-1 AMG auto trans in the Challenger? I don't know how to figure out the gas issue without just renting one for a day and draining the tank then filling it with 93...I didn't think dealers were that stupid to pull that...all I know is it really felt under-powered..I guess renting one for a day and putting in my own gas isn't a bad idea vs the long-run of owning one.

05-20-2014, 08:45 PM	#8
rpaulg87 Drives: Challenger SRT-8 Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: United States Posts: 4	Wait wait, there is cylinder deactivation in these cars? That is the ONE thing that was driving me away from the 6.4l Challenger...the Camaro ALSO shuts off cylinders so I can't use the exhaust I use on my 6.1l HEMI? I had no idea the Camaro SS de-activated cylinders like the 6.4l Hemi... that was what killed the 392 HEMI deal for me as I have to tune it just to turn MDS off...I have NO clue the Camaro was pulling that as well in the auto, let alone the weaker L99....that kills proper v-8 exhaust options that get loud My gear ratios for the 5-speed are as follows. 1st. 3.59, 2nd, 2.19, 3rd, 1.41, 4th, 1.00, and 5th, 0.83 Does the automatic really have cylinder deactivation stock? Please SS owners chime in.

05-20-2014, 08:55 PM	#12
Squillo Drives: 2013 Camaro 2SS/RS BRM LS3 Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hawaii Posts: 1,174	My personal best 0-60 has been consistently 4.8 seconds with bolt ons (LT headers, cat delete, ported throttle body and CAI) and a tune. I still get a little wheel spin, so I think I can probably do better, but I'm no expert. I haven't done any runs since I installed new sway bars and springs though. I'm hoping to shave off 0.1 or 0.2 seconds.

05-20-2014, 09:15 PM	#14
jp23rockstar Drives: None Join Date: May 2012 Location: RI Posts: 255	I drove a 2014 ss convertible a few months ago on a test drive. It was an automatic and I agree with what you said about it being sluggish and slow. Lets face it, it's a heavy weight and that contributes to the "sluggish" feeling. I would go with a stingray convertible hands down over the Camaro if money is no issue. And the exhaust was pretty weak in sound for a V8, once again because it doesn't have the performance exhaust like a manual. I would wait till the next gen Camaro because it will be on the Alpha chassis which will be lighter.