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

[UCF w00t]

Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash

Unfair review in my opinion. Lets compare it to a srt8, ss, and whatever the highest model of the new mustang is. this isn't the 60's here this is a new century . get all the high models in on it

The R/T was already the most expensive in the bunch. The SRT is considered to be on the level of the GT500. There is no Camaro equivalent (until a z28). Even if you throw in the much more expensive SRT8, the Camaro will still win. It's still heavier, we've seen the drag times... Camaro still wins. And although it add's brembos and better tires, those are things the SS already has. I don't see how that would change much of anything. It would still be bringing up the rear but with less of a gap.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by Icewinds

I don't get why Ford won't ditch the archaic rear axle. With up-to-date architecture that car could kick major butt, and not just in the muscle car segment. I definitely like where they're going with the 2010 model, but rear axle in 21st century is just a big NO for me.

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.

[Icewinds]

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.

A horse worked just fine for transportation for more than few thousand years.

Keeping the costs down is another thing, though. However, if the manufacturer is gunning for high performance, saving on vital parts like suspension is not the best approach, IMO.

[Moose]

Folks, I've already chosen to delete a few posts, as had one of the Admins..

I'll ask this once; KEEP THE POSTS RESPECTFUL.

In light of the recent "atmosphere" on the site, the leash is very short.

[RudySRT8]

why is the camaro ss being compared to the challenger r/t ? isn't the SS's rival the GT500 and the SRT8's ?

[MarkSS]

One reason, $$$.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Bawt

The Hemi is a 5.7l and the LS3 is a 6.2l...


Am I misunderstanding something?

OHC's take up more space than cam in block designs. So the engine itself tends to be larger, regardless of its displacement.

Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash

Unfair review in my opinion. Lets compare it to a srt8, ss, and whatever the highest model of the new mustang is. this isn't the 60's here this is a new century . get all the high models in on it

Originally Posted by fdjizm

can't compare them it's out of price range... thats the rule on these here forums.

Well since the average buyer goes by price it seems a pretty reasonable way to compare for me. If I have an out the door budget of $40 000, including tax, title, license, etc the GT500 and SRT8 are beyond my reach. The R/T, GT, and SS aren't.

Originally Posted by GLBL WMR

Stop talking, troll. You risk infecting us with your stupidity.

And miss guided comments like that are infecting this site. Let moderators deal with trolls, you can simply ignore them.

[kevin2323]

why did they option out the rt so much ....rediculous

and no the challenger isnt plain stupid and just a style statement. wow the opinions some people have....are just that opinions.

[KatarHol]

Originally Posted by RudySRT8

why is the camaro ss being compared to the challenger r/t ? isn't the SS's rival the GT500 and the SRT8's ?

Because the SRT8 is WAYYYYYY too much money to offer zero gains and in cases,less performance than the bargain priced SS. The GT500 has no pony car rival and it costs wayyyyy more than a SS,but at least it offers more performance.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash

Unfair review in my opinion. Lets compare it to a srt8, ss, and whatever the highest model of the new mustang is. this isn't the 60's here this is a new century . get all the high models in on it

Are you kidding.. They compared muscle cars of the same price range..

You want to go as high as a GT500 in price, then you compare that to a Corvette. The SRT8 is more than $10,000 more than a base SS, add $10,000 more in mods to the base Camaro SS and it can clobber a stock GT500 leaving it in the dust..

[GrnMchin]

I say go ahead compare the SS to SRT8 and GT500, but $ may be end up being a big factor.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by kevin2323

why did they option out the rt so much ....rediculous

and no the challenger isnt plain stupid and just a style statement. wow the opinions some people have....are just that opinions.

Same reason they optioned the Camaro so much . . . they have a base price within a few hundred dollars.

[Georgie]

Originally Posted by Icewinds

A horse worked just fine for transportation for more than few thousand years.

that's not an accurate comparison and with all the results demonstrating otherwise that statement is just cliche. SRA can be made to handle twisties just as well as an IRS. the difference is in real world driving going over non perfect roads, but to say its archaic although it can match the track performance of independent rear suspension is to completely ignore facts

[kevin2323]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Same reason they optioned the Camaro so much . . . they have a base price within a few hundred dollars.

no I agree about base price...but they clearly stated in this article or the motortrend one that the challengers price was why it was 3rd. which is bs they all have the same base price.