Camaro 2SSRS VS Challenger RT (time sensitive)

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

2011 GT hasn't been tested yet. 250 lb difference and 14 less horsepower 30 less torque. Doesn't sound like a easy win to me. Well unless its got the pixie dust mod like the 6.1 and 5.7 hemis....which im sure it will.

Dont get me wrong I respect and love all american muscle/sports cars. Im just not going to accept times/claims I happen to disagree with.

I take it that you will accept all Camaro claims, just not any others?

[ULTRAZLS1]

I will accept claims that abide by the laws of physics and common sense.

Ill never in all my life, even if someone has a gun to my head, accept that a 4200lb 425 hp stock automatic car will run faster than a 3800 lb 426 hp manual transmission car.
SORRY

Im not sure why this is so hard to comprehend for some people.

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I will accept claims that abide by the laws of physics and common sense.

Just not experience or first hand knowledge.

[ULTRAZLS1]

ha...ok dude. Now you know me personally.

You are a challenger guy.

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Its funny how power to weight doesnt apply to the mopar fans. Going back to what we said before.

Found him...name is blufin....do a search. Hes got his time slip posted of the 12.6 but it was a red light. 3 in less than a year....SOLID

That's so true. Camaro and Mustang guys understand the power/weight ratio, but for some reason the die-hard Dodge guys just look at hp.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Once again the rules dont apply? is 13.3 the norm for this car? I dont think so.

Can the rules apply to both sides for once? well than ok....moderncamaro stock l99 record is 12.8 and i think 12.9 on here. Not even close...blows the door off of an RT and it should looking at power to weight if you want to get technical.

Exactly. The Challenger guys find all sorts of ways to deny the documented 12 second runs by Camaros guys, but they still swear the SRT8 is a 12 second car despite NOT ONE documented case of a bone stock Challenger pulling it off. And the SRT has been around since MY 2008, while the Camaro has only been around since MY 2010.

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I will accept claims that abide by the laws of physics and common sense.

Ill never in all my life, even if someone has a gun to my head, accept that a 4200lb 425 hp stock automatic car will run faster than a 3800 lb 426 hp manual transmission car.
SORRY

Im not sure why this is so hard to comprehend for some people.

I also can't fathom why certain people cannot grasp this.

Originally Posted by AZ MSCL

Just not experience or first hand knowledge.

Do you have first hand knowledge of a 12-second SRT running 12s? Do you own a bone stock 12 second SRT? I notice not one of those who says it's true has first hand knowledge or has done it themselves.

It's also funny that the magazines said the 2005-2009 Mustangs ran ~13.8 bone stock, and real world drivers found this to be close. They said the Camaro SS ran 12.9 quarter miles, and again real world drivers found this to be close. But when they said the R/T was a ~13.8 car and the SRT was a 13.2 car, suddenly the excuses came out. You know the typical Dodge excuses, biased testing, bribery, and my favorite the 'Well the rag drivers don't know how to drive HEMIs'.

Bottom line, exeryone except the die-hard Dodge guys will openly admit from a strictly performance standpoint, the Camaro SS is head and shoulders above the Challenger R/T.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

2011 GT hasn't been tested yet. 250 lb difference and 14 less horsepower 30 less torque. Doesn't sound like a easy win to me. Well unless its got the pixie dust mod like the 6.1 and 5.7 hemis....which im sure it will.

Dont get me wrong I respect and love all american muscle/sports cars. Im just not going to accept times/claims I happen to disagree with.

Going back to my earlier post where some people on certain car sites think their cars are gods and can't be beat, you certainly fit that bill......

I believe the GT will be a bit quicker, especially when optioned with the 3.55 or 3.73 rears. it is lighter, only slightly short on HP, with its shorter tires, the transmission gearing is more aggressive than the SS, the 11 GMustang GT is going to be the hos cat here.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I will accept claims that abide by the laws of physics and common sense.

Ill never in all my life, even if someone has a gun to my head, accept that a 4200lb 425 hp stock automatic car will run faster than a 3800 lb 426 hp manual transmission car.
SORRY

Im not sure why this is so hard to comprehend for some people.

It's simple, like the 5.7 which is more realistically making 390-400 HP, the SRT8s have dynoed at RWHP numbers showing the some came with a t4rue crank HP of 450+. It's not that hard, you are just so blinded by the Bowtie it's not even funny. Now what about those 305 HP LS1s, by your logic they should have NEVER ran what they did, but everyone knows the HP was really closer to 350 (I'll LMAO because I am sure it being a Camaro you accept it, but not for any other manufacturer.). Do you believe the Terminators really only put down 390 HP at the crank too?

[Stew]

Originally Posted by 1bad65

That's so true. Camaro and Mustang guys understand the power/weight ratio, but for some reason the die-hard Dodge guys just look at hp.



Exactly. The Challenger guys find all sorts of ways to deny the documented 12 second runs by Camaros guys, but they still swear the SRT8 is a 12 second car despite NOT ONE documented case of a bone stock Challenger pulling it off. And the SRT has been around since MY 2008, while the Camaro has only been around since MY 2010.



I also can't fathom why certain people cannot grasp this.



Do you have first hand knowledge of a 12-second SRT running 12s? Do you own a bone stock 12 second SRT? I notice not one of those who says it's true has first hand knowledge or has done it themselves.

It's also funny that the magazines said the 2005-2009 Mustangs ran ~13.8 bone stock, and real world drivers found this to be close. They said the Camaro SS ran 12.9 quarter miles, and again real world drivers found this to be close. But when they said the R/T was a ~13.8 car and the SRT was a 13.2 car, suddenly the excuses came out. You know the typical Dodge excuses, biased testing, bribery, and my favorite the 'Well the rag drivers don't know how to drive HEMIs'.

Bottom line, exeryone except the die-hard Dodge guys will openly admit from a strictly performance standpoint, the Camaro SS is head and shoulders above the Challenger R/T.

Actually the majority of mags got 13.0 for the Camaro SS, got 13.0-13.1 for the SRT8s, and 13.5s for the R/Ts, does sound pretty close now you mention it........

[pleigh]

Funny how the guy started the thread looking for all around opinions on both and ended up in a 1/4 mile war discussion

BOTH cars are AWESOME to look at and drive. I went with the v6 Camaro for my own reasons.. want to own the 2012 convertible version in a v8 and may STILL buy a Challenger some day.

The Mits Evo a coworker drives runs a low 13 stock.. but I'll probably NEVER own one of those...

[AZ MSCL]

Originally Posted by AZ MSCL

I modified my RT - added Corsa exhaust, a tune and a CAI. It will do 4.5 secs 0-60, maybe more with a good launch. The Challenger has a roomier interior and is more comfortable to me (6'3", 235 lbs). Sitting in the Camaro is much like sitting in a Mustang to me (not a bad thing but a little cramped). If you want a fast car that is stock, the 2011 Mustang with the 5 liter 412 HP engine will beat the Camaro or the SRT Challenger as it is much lighter. The GT 500 will drive circles around all.

I would continue to search until you find the car that speaks to you - doesn't matter which one. I will eventually add the Camaro to my garage because it is a Camaro, not because of what it might do racing someone. Remember: any of these cars can be modified up to 800-1000 hp. Get what YOU like, not what somebody TELLS you to get.

Here's my original statement - A little about my car and a little about others. Unbiased statements, I'm a fan of all. Why does it always have to turn into a pissing contest? Nature of the beast I guess.

[AmericanV8]

Just my .02,

I have a 2010 Camaro SS and a Chrysler 300 SRT8 so i'm coming from first hand experience. I test drove a Challenger SRT8 and it feels very similar to the 300 and I shall get one someday. I have both cars so i'm not biased towards Bowties or Mopars. I hate to say it but i have always beat the 300 with the SS by atleast 2-3 car lengths. My nephew was driving the 300 and he is an experienced driver. The R/T will have a much tougher time keeping up without mods. The 300 keeps up in 1st gear and thats about it. 2-3 car lenghts isn't bad though considering the 300's weight disadvantage.

As far as the 300 SRT8 hitting 12's in the 1/4 bone stock, that is very hard to believe. My nephew has a E92 M3 and that hits 12 seconds all day. He takes both my 300 and Camaro all the time. The Camaro can keep up which is ok with me because I didn't pay 75K for the camaro. Haha! Again this is just from experience. Not biased towards any brand. If the GT500 wasn't so expensive I would try and get that as well.

[squatin0n18s]

well from firsthand experience ive seen a 2009 challenger srt8 and a 2010 camaro ss line up (my girlfriends dad and his buddy) and they raced from a dead stop at a redlight and the challenger actually got ahead of the camaro at first, but only for a few seconds. rex's camaro came right on around and passed him, and didnt seem to be losing any ground before my gf's old man called it quits....im not saying this proves ANYTHING at ALL, it was just what i saw. (both were automatics, bone stock) i cant wait for them to go to the track when it gets warmer, theyve both added intakes and tunes and my gf's dad is back to saying he could whip the pants off of the camaro! btw i couldnt care less which one is faster, im no racer, its mostly about looks to me, so nobody flame me for not knowing anything about performance!!

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by Stew

It's simple, like the 5.7 which is more realistically making 390-400 HP, the SRT8s have dynoed at RWHP numbers showing the some came with a t4rue crank HP of 450+. It's not that hard, you are just so blinded by the Bowtie it's not even funny. Now what about those 305 HP LS1s, by your logic they should have NEVER ran what they did, but everyone knows the HP was really closer to 350 (I'll LMAO because I am sure it being a Camaro you accept it, but not for any other manufacturer.). Do you believe the Terminators really only put down 390 HP at the crank too?

If anyone is blinded it is you. I am trying to keep it fair and compare numbers to numbers. You are the one stuck in pixie dust land trying to make all these claims about under rated dodges and chevys that are not under rated (or they used to be and are not now....I dont get your point)etc etc. Get a hold of yourself. And yeah some ls3 cars have dynoed 390 to the wheels stock. It is simple. Dyno differences. I dont go around thinking they make more than 426 hp. I know better.

If you knew anything about current SAE ratings you would know that since 2005 all motors are SAE certified to make exactly what they make. And yes the ls1 cars were under rated. but that was before 2005 now wasnt it. Same with the 03 cobras and everything else before 2005.

Go do your homework before you start trying to lecture me.

I never said the car couldnt be beat. I am betting it will be (mustang) slightly quicker than the camaro in 2011. I said it wouldnt be an easy win. Way to take my post out of context. because I try to use some common sense and compare power to weight among other things now I am a fool.

And now I am a biased fanboy because I dont believe a 300c ran a 12.5....give me a break.

[multiSS]

Test a camero with no sunroof, more head room.Buy what ever floats your boat!