Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
MPD1
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Chevy Camaro vs...

Chevy Camaro vs... Comparison of Chevy Camaro versus its competition. *NO STREET RACING STORIES*

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-19-2008, 10:32 AM   #1
KatarHol
 
Drives: '04 Mustang GT
Join Date: May 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 313
Camaro RS vs Challenger R/T

Edmunds has a fat Challenger R/T hitting 60 in 5.9 and the quarter at 14.1......hmmmm,quite lame for a 375HP car. I'm thinking this will have its hands full with a RS or a Genesis V6 coupe. The Challenger SE doesn't even come into the conversation,guys in Aveos will be picking on those things.
KatarHol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 11:24 AM   #2
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by KatarHol View Post
Edmunds has a fat Challenger R/T hitting 60 in 5.9 and the quarter at 14.1......hmmmm,quite lame for a 375HP car. I'm thinking this will have its hands full with a RS or a Genesis V6 coupe. The Challenger SE doesn't even come into the conversation,guys in Aveos will be picking on those things.
edmunds is bias and has always been with dodge cars. THE OLD RT ENGINE DOES 0-60 IN 5.6 SEC. this new one should do it in 5.4-5.3. Well here is the killer, they got 5.5 out of an srt8 manual and said it took them 3 gears to get to 60. Shows you that none of these bias morons at edmunds know what they're doing. Wait for car and drivers numbers, they got 4.8 out of the srt8 auto.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 11:38 AM   #3
nester7929
Rice Harvester
 
nester7929's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Waco, Texas
Posts: 1,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin2323 View Post
edmunds is bias and has always been with dodge cars. THE OLD RT ENGINE DOES 0-60 IN 5.6 SEC. this new one should do it in 5.4-5.3. Well here is the killer, they got 5.5 out of an srt8 manual and said it took them 3 gears to get to 60. Shows you that none of these bias morons at edmunds know what they're doing. Wait for car and drivers numbers, they got 4.8 out of the srt8 auto.



Here's what I've found about the R/T:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Car&Driver
And after driving them back to back on road and track, we’ve decided the Challenger R/T is where it’s at, offering as it does about 90 percent of the fun with a claimed 5.5-second 0-to-60 time, a 14.0-second quarter-mile, and a 138-mph top speed (versus 4.9 seconds to 60, 13.3 to the quarter-mile, and a 172-mph top end for the SRT8). The case for the R/T is made more solid when fuel economy is considered. The R/T delivers 16 mpg in the city and 23 mpg on the highway with the automatic and 15/23 for the manual. The SRT8 languishes with 13/19 and 14/22 in automatic and manual forms, respectively.
They also said that the automatic sucks in the Challengers (has a tendency to upshift even in manual mode), with the manual having more than a clear advantage.
nester7929 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 11:44 AM   #4
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
yea it is funny too when they tested the 08s they got 4.8 for the srt8s. Guess the crappy automatic is faster than the average driver. I am guessing the best numbers for the rt will be 5.4-5.5(5.1-5.3 w/ a tune and some bolt-ons.). They have got to find some better drivers at edmunds lol.


also I think they were quoting dodge numbers I don't think that they have tested the 09s yet.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 12:08 PM   #5
Jamestwilliams
junior member
 
Drives: Grand Am
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: canada
Posts: 534
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin2323 View Post
edmunds is bias and has always been with dodge cars. THE OLD RT ENGINE DOES 0-60 IN 5.6 SEC. this new one should do it in 5.4-5.3. Well here is the killer, they got 5.5 out of an srt8 manual and said it took them 3 gears to get to 60. Shows you that none of these bias morons at edmunds know what they're doing. Wait for car and drivers numbers, they got 4.8 out of the srt8 auto.
EVERY car mag sucks period. I remember when they introduced the C6 Z06, gm specifically geared the car so that you don't have to shift out of first till after 60 mph, yet the car mags still shifted and purposely slowed the times, every one of them did it.
Jamestwilliams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 12:14 PM   #6
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamestwilliams View Post
EVERY car mag sucks period. I remember when they introduced the C6 Z06, gm specifically geared the car so that you don't have to shift out of first till after 60 mph, yet the car mags still shifted and purposely slowed the times, every one of them did it.
That is why I love forums like these so you can get real times.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 12:56 PM   #7
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
I've seen better runs in my shorts...
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 02:47 PM   #8
The_Blur
Moderator, USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 6.2L of AWESOME! 2011 L99 2SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NAS Pensacola
Posts: 14,190
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamestwilliams View Post
EVERY car mag sucks period. I remember when they introduced the C6 Z06, gm specifically geared the car so that you don't have to shift out of first till after 60 mph, yet the car mags still shifted and purposely slowed the times, every one of them did it.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 03:10 PM   #9
Shadowsong
 
Drives: 2005 Mustang
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Conroe, Texas
Posts: 644
Another thing that has to be taken into consideration, the R/T Has Close to 400 ft/lbs of tq. A v6 camaro might be able to give it a run, if they were going from a roll, but from a dig, that tq would KILL us.
Shadowsong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 07:06 PM   #10
Congoman775

 
Congoman775's Avatar
 
Drives: Muscle
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,315
well I am not sure. How much does the rt weigh? It will probaly be competative with the v6 but win of course. I mean this car probaly costs as much as the ss. Why is it being compared to the v6?
Congoman775 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2008, 11:08 PM   #11
Jak
 
Jak's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Dodge Dakota
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 627
On the weight question I found the R/T to come in at 3947, a little over thirty pounds more then the Camaro at 3913



Quote:
Originally Posted by Congoman775 View Post
well I am not sure. How much does the rt weigh? It will probaly be competative with the v6 but win of course. I mean this car probaly costs as much as the ss. Why is it being compared to the v6?
Jak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:16 AM   #12
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
Ouch, almost 4000 lbs.? Eek! Well, if the SRT is another 100 lbs. or so, that almost makes sense. Hey, that car was pretty big back in the day, so it's not much of a suprise.
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 08:28 AM   #13
96CAMaro
 
96CAMaro's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 Impreza 2.5RS
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post
I've seen better runs in my shorts...
. . .
96CAMaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 08:33 AM   #14
Jak
 
Jak's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Dodge Dakota
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 627
Sorry my bad, I checked Dodge's site again and see they've changed the weights on the Challengers. The R/T comes in at 4041 and the SRT comes in at 4140. Wonder why the weight change on the R/T? That's now a 128 pound diff between the Camaro an the Challenger.
Jak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 08:48 AM   #15
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,040
I would be willing to be most of the weight is to account for stronger parts in powertrain and chassis. I'm sure the tranny is built stronger, and that 6.1 block is probably a bit heavier, among other things. The bigger the spread in weight, the bette
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 08:52 AM   #16
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
the 6.1 block is heavier than the 5.7small block. either way it won't matter when I stroke my 6.1 to a 426.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 10:36 AM   #17
GOT PSI
 
GOT PSI's Avatar
 
Drives: SRT-4
Join Date: May 2008
Location: El Paso
Posts: 122
I don't think there will be any competition for the r/t coming from the v6 camaro.
__________________
I am a power junkie,
and forced induction is my fix.
GOT PSI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 10:45 AM   #18
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOT PSI View Post
I don't think there will be any competition for the r/t coming from the v6 camaro.
On the other hand I will admit the v6 challenger will not compete with anything until it changes to the phoenix engine in 2010.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 11:29 AM   #19
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOT PSI View Post
I don't think there will be any competition for the r/t coming from the v6 camaro.
Why not? The challenger is 400 pounds heaver than the V6 camaro. Car and Driver got the CTS to 60 in 5.8 seconds -
Quote:
Our 304-hp manual ran 0 to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds and blew through the quarter-mile in 14.6 at 97 mph...
- and it weighs 200 pounds more than the camaro and has thinner tires (comparing FE3 caddy to RS camaro - 235 rear on the caddy, 275 on the camaro). So yes, the Camaro will be faster than the CTS (I'm expecting about 5.6 - 5.7 and 14.4-14.5 in the 1/4) and a little slower than the R/T - but it will get better fuel economy, have better styling, and cost easily 7,000 dollars less (the Chally R/T MSRPs at 29,995, base - 30,990 with the manual). So, yes, I think the R/T has much to worry about coming from the V6 camaro.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:17 PM   #20
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
Why not? The challenger is 400 pounds heaver than the V6 camaro. Car and Driver got the CTS to 60 in 5.8 seconds -

- and it weighs 200 pounds more than the camaro and has thinner tires (comparing FE3 caddy to RS camaro - 235 rear on the caddy, 275 on the camaro). So yes, the Camaro will be faster than the CTS (I'm expecting about 5.6 - 5.7 and 14.4-14.5 in the 1/4) and a little slower than the R/T - but it will get better fuel economy, have better styling, and cost easily 7,000 dollars less (the Chally R/T MSRPs at 29,995, base - 30,990 with the manual). So, yes, I think the R/T has much to worry about coming from the V6 camaro.
- Xanthos
not in the styling department imo and neither in performance with almost 400 lbs of torque and 75 more horsepower it will be more than fine.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:21 PM   #21
Wm Holden
Yes, that's my real name.
 
Wm Holden's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 LS2 600hp GTO
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ventura, ca.
Posts: 996
real numbers

challenger vs gto mid 13s slow otl...


Video----V
__________________
Magnuson 112HH supercharger at 7.5 psi (Virtual 9.0 liter) 600hp 1 of 2 torrid/red int /A4/05 555r 275/40/R17's Nitto Extreme Drags 1.7 60 ft Car runs high 11's No other mods. I got the first 112HH Magnuson blower ported for a GTO. Now it appears it was also one of the last....



http://www.ribbonprinting.com http://www.personalizedawarenessribbons.com
Wm Holden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:28 PM   #22
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Yeah, but thats an SRT8 isn't it, not an R/T? The SRT8 will be significantly faster than the V6 camaro, of course - but I could get two camaros for the price.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:41 PM   #23
Congoman775

 
Congoman775's Avatar
 
Drives: Muscle
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
Why not? The challenger is 400 pounds heaver than the V6 camaro. Car and Driver got the CTS to 60 in 5.8 seconds -

- and it weighs 200 pounds more than the camaro and has thinner tires (comparing FE3 caddy to RS camaro - 235 rear on the caddy, 275 on the camaro). So yes, the Camaro will be faster than the CTS (I'm expecting about 5.6 - 5.7 and 14.4-14.5 in the 1/4) and a little slower than the R/T - but it will get better fuel economy, have better styling, and cost easily 7,000 dollars less (the Chally R/T MSRPs at 29,995, base - 30,990 with the manual). So, yes, I think the R/T has much to worry about coming from the V6 camaro.
- Xanthos




The V6 Camaro will run with the R.T. Chally just fine.

It LOOKS better. imo.

Gets MUCH better gas millage.

is significantly CHEAPER where some people who cant afford an R/T will buy RS V6.

And it's WEIGHT gives it a huge advantage. over 4000lbs? we know that the SRT feels lighter than that with the huge wheels and brembos, but that doesnt say anything about the R/T.
Congoman775 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:45 PM   #24
kevin2323


 
Drives: challenger
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: miami
Posts: 2,339
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
Yeah, but thats an SRT8 isn't it, not an R/T? The SRT8 will be significantly faster than the V6 camaro, of course - but I could get two camaros for the price.
- Xanthos
No actually it is not. The new 5.7 gets 375 hp and 398lb tq. Lol this comparison to the v6 is rediculous. Just like the v6 vs mustang gtv8 was rediculous.
kevin2323 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2008, 12:56 PM   #25
Congoman775

 
Congoman775's Avatar
 
Drives: Muscle
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin2323 View Post
No actually it is not. The new 5.7 gets 375 hp and 398lb tq. Lol this comparison to the v6 is rediculous. Just like the v6 vs mustang gtv8 was rediculous.
the V6 camaro will hang with the R/T more easily than the GT.
Congoman775 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Official Camaro Convertible CONCEPT Press Release Tran Camaro Convertible Forum 12 11-18-2009 07:05 PM
Detroit News panel wants GM to build Camaro concept Tran 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 12 03-15-2009 04:38 PM
The Camaro team at GM seeks answers ChrisL 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 148 08-28-2008 08:47 PM
Cheryl Pilcher (Fbodmother) Questions & Answers camaro5 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 2 04-19-2008 05:07 PM
Q&A with John Fitzpatrick - Camaro Marketing Manager camaro5 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 4 04-15-2008 02:28 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.