Drove Camaro V6 vs Challenger V6 I drove

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by GMRULZ

Track tests don`t lie... The Challenger 6 gets smoked by the Camaro 6 in the 1/4...

I believe that all the track test show the Camaro to be at least a full second faster in the 1/4 mile.

[REEFBLUE93]

Due to the fact they are hauling around 4,000 plus lbs, the Challenger SE is poor at launching because of the pwr/tqe to weight ratio. I don't know what the gear ratio is on either car but a V6 mated to an auto transmission in a 4,000 lb car wasn't designed to go down the track fast. I have heard about and seen them having pretty good acceleration from about 40 mph though.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by REEFBLUE93

Due to the fact they are hauling around 4,000 plus lbs, the Challenger SE is poor at launching because of the pwr/tqe to weight ratio. I don't know what the gear ratio is on either car but a V6 mated to an auto transmission in a 4,000 lb car wasn't designed to go down the track fast. I have heard about and seen them having pretty good acceleration from about 40 mph though.

Exactly! It was a dog down low as I said and most people didn't read, but in the higher RPMs when moving it felt more than acceptable. Really, 90% of the V6s are not bought for accelertion, but for the look and mpg. If I was getting one or the other right now I'd definatly have to get an R/T, SRT, or SS, no doubt. Also no one to my knowledge has tested the V6 with the 5 speed auto yet (more ratios, tighter gearing). The power delivery being smooth was also not what made it feel sluggish, rather the gears seemed space so damned far apart in the Camaros 6 speed. The auto is what, more like a 14.8 car? The good times are coming from the 6 speeds. I am sure I would have a bit different feeling with the manual transmission, but the auto definatly felt geared more towards the best MPG than the best acceleration. Heck, Motorweek tested a V6 auto Genesis angainst a v6 auto Camaro and the Genesis was about .6-.8 seconds faster in the quarter mile (but listed at like 5 MPG less, it's a tradeoff).

[mjf6866]

has anyone test driven the challenger se with the new(well, new to the challenger se) 5 speed auto? i heard that it helps some with a bit with better overall gearing, but is still a dog. just not as much as before. anyone?

[Stew]

Originally Posted by GMRULZ

Track tests don`t lie... The Challenger 6 gets smoked by the Camaro 6 in the 1/4... It may not feel like it since the Camaro`s power delivery is so smooth. But its a massive difference. IMO. As a case in point My 96 LT1 Trans Am when stock felt faster than my bud`s stock 1999 LS1 Trans am, but at the track he was 7 tenths faster.... ET doesn`t lie. Most buttmeters aren`t that well calibrated...You may want to take yours in for recalibration...

As above, please note the tests have been with 6 speed manual Camaros and 4 speed automatic challengers. The only test I have seen for the auto Camaro is a 14.8 or 15.0 (not 100% sure, been a while) and the tests of the Challenger have all been with the older 4 speed automatic and not the 5 speed auto found in the 09 Rallyes and all 2010s. The 4 speed autos according to Motor Trend took it to a 15.6, the 5 speed auto with it's much lower first gear should knock 2 or 3 tenths off of that.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by mjf6866

has anyone test driven the challenger se with the new(well, new to the challenger se) 5 speed auto? i heard that it helps some with a bit with better overall gearing, but is still a dog. just not as much as before. anyone?

I might have to do that, I am on the search for one LOL.

[Sleeper]

I drove both and I liked the camaro better

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Sleeper

I drove both and I liked the camaro better

Hey, it's all a matter of opinion, different strokes for different strokes, how much would life be if we all liked and bought the same cars, what could we bitch about? LOL

[Meeper]

Originally Posted by Stew

It had a sunroof, which made the headroom tight, my head was scraping the roof the whole time with the seat lowered and in decently comfortable driving position. The seats were rather comfy, much better than I had expected. Knee room was too tight, while I was in a comfy seating position, my knees felt like they were squeezed between the door and center console.

I think that this is definitely a sunroof thing. I own a 1LT RS no sunroof, and I've rented a 2SS w/ sunroof.

The car with the sunroof had seats that didn't go down as low or as far back as the seats in my 1LT leading me to feel the exact way that you described. I don't have that issue at all in the 1LT. Not everyone will notice this however depending on how they fit in the seat.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Meeper

I think that this is definitely a sunroof thing. I own a 1LT RS no sunroof, and I've rented a 2SS w/ sunroof.

The car with the sunroof had seats that didn't go down as low or as far back as the seats in my 1LT leading me to feel the exact way that you described. I don't have that issue at all in the 1LT. Not everyone will notice this however depending on how they fit in the seat.

You are probably right, I think would skip the sunroof anyways because the imho the reverse Mohawk is one of the Camaros most distinctive design features.