EDMUNDS shootout: Camaro vs. Mustang vs. Challenger!!!

[Italianwhiplash]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Italianwhiplash, Cyberfan, I was going by MSRP. And while its possible to get an SS up past 40k, a bare bones 1SS will be be several thousand less than that. As would a Challenger R/T and a Mustang GT with Track Pack. Until other options start getting added, those 3 cars will cost almost the same amount.

Indeed and I don't anyone would by a barebones car. Lets be realistic everyone wants best of the best when they go buy a car. (best in its class). I wouldn't get a bare bones camaro i would just feel like the wait was for settling for lesss.

[Italianwhiplash]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Hmmmm...one might also wonder why both GM and Chrysler have taken tax money to keep them afloat whereas Ford has not.

The track pack for the Mustang is simply an option, just like the many options that can be ordered on the Camaro. You also have to understand that adding the track pack as an option did not require any real development or production costs for Ford, as what they are using is already the standard suspension on the Shelby GT with a few parts brought over from the GT500.

I, too, want to see some of the numbers put down by a "Pedderized" Camaro.

A pedders suspension is on my charger and it cut off almost a quarter of a second (still fooling around with it of course) im sure they will dot he camaro justice.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash

Indeed and I don't anyone would by a barebones car. Lets be realistic everyone wants best of the best when they go buy a car. (best in its class). I wouldn't get a bare bones camaro i would just feel like the wait was for settling for lesss.

Here's one "bare bones" person raising his hand. I want a 1SS/RS, and I won't spend a dime over $31,000 for the car when the time comes.

Could I ask you to expand on what you mean by "less"? Because...so far as I can tell...we're getting quite a bit in a "bare bones" car: technically speaking, the 1SS interior is more of a mid-level appointment (leather wheel, shifter, etc).....This car...in any trim...is already the best, and I guess in contrast to your thoughts, I'd feel like I was getting had if I spent all that money for a few gimmicky options.

[Italianwhiplash]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Here's one "bare bones" person raising his hand. I want a 1SS/RS, and I won't spend a dime over $31,000 for the car when the time comes.

Could I ask you to expand on what you mean by "less"? Because...so far as I can tell...we're getting quite a bit in a "bare bones" car: technically speaking, the 1SS interior is more of a mid-level appointment (leather wheel, shifter, etc).....This car...in any trim...is already the best, and I guess in contrast to your thoughts, I'd feel like I was getting had if I spent all that money for a few gimmicky options.

i don't think headers, short throw shifter, better rims are gimicky

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

because it has worked for 45 years maybe? i dont get why people dont ditch the butter knife either...

sra is obviously capable of handling just fine. keeps costs down and a very reliable piece.
ask these guys if they have any issues getting around the track with their sra's
it's been proven time and time again though the SRA is old, it works just fine.

I certainly see what you're saying, but I partially disagree. Yes SRA have advantages, and under certain conditions they can also perform comparably to IRS setups like the Camaro. Ford has certainly done a good job with theirs. However, under bad conditions, like poor pavement, SRAs really are a liability. So on a good racetrack or even a well maintained road, sure, there is nothing wrong with the SRA. However, some of us live in bankrupt states where our insanely high taxes are wasted on inefficiency and stupid feel good projects and the roads haven't been updated since the 50s. For people in live in such areas, IRS is definitely a big, big plus.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash

Indeed and I don't anyone would by a barebones car. Lets be realistic everyone wants best of the best when they go buy a car. (best in its class). I wouldn't get a bare bones camaro i would just feel like the wait was for settling for lesss.

I'm buying a barebones SS and you know me..

[cam2fst4u]

seemed like a well rounded review to me... thanks for the post i must have missed the one before

[HEMI DAVE]

A bare bones SS should be the fastest due to its lighter weight.

My Challenger R/T is much lighter than the one they used and I get 4.7 zero to 60 no problem...and I am bone stock.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by HEMI DAVE

A bare bones SS should be the fastest due to its lighter weight.

I wonder how much more a 2SS weighs over the 1SS?? However it shouldn't make any noticeable difference in the times even if there was.

[HEMI DAVE]

Originally Posted by Supermans

I wonder how much more a 2SS weighs over the 1SS?? However it shouldn't make any noticeable difference in the times even if there was.

Trust me..it makes a difference.

Even how much gas you have in the car makes a difference.

Run with a 1/4 tank instead of a full tank and you will be faster.

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by HEMI DAVE

A bare bones SS should be the fastest due to its lighter weight.

My Challenger R/T is much lighter than the one they used and I get 4.7 zero to 60 no problem...and I am bone stock.

Is that 4.7 according to the car's computer? If so, I wouldn't trust that any more than computer fuel economy readouts.

[fad1]

to be honest, now im longing for a SRT vs. SS. Just want to see that shootout.

[HEMI DAVE]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Is that 4.7 according to the car's computer? If so, I wouldn't trust that any more than computer fuel economy readouts.

No...I dont have that in my car, but guys have tested the accuracy of them and they are very accurate.

I used a G-tech to get the 0 to 60 time

[yotaman96]

Anyone notice that they called the Challenger a Charger in the video?