: So before anyone else makes a thread about this..



I~LUV~Caddys8792
05-26-09, 09:11 PM
In the new issue of Car and Driver (received today), they have a shootout between the Camaro SS, Challenger R/T and Mustang GT.

The Mustang won, even though it was down 111 hp over the Camaro and 61 from the Challenger.


Discuss.

Night Wolf
05-26-09, 09:17 PM
OH NO YOU DIT-ENT!!1111!!!!

It's wrong! it must be wrong, a typo, they were paid off, is it supercharged?.... Ford misclaimed it's power output?.... SOMETHING HAS TO BE WRONG!!!!

Ah.... sorry.... thought I was in the Lincoln MKS thread backing up GM for a second....

Blackout
05-26-09, 10:34 PM
Sad, very sad. Once the new 5.0 V8 gets dropped into the new Mustang then you would have to be stupid to even bother looking at the Camaro.

Night Wolf
05-26-09, 10:39 PM
Sad, very sad. Once the new 5.0 V8 gets dropped into the new Mustang then you would have to be stupid to even bother looking at the Camaro.

Well..... it LOOKS kinda cool....

Blackout
05-26-09, 10:46 PM
Well..... it LOOKS kinda cool....

Well at least you can get the Bumblebee Edition!:yup:

Night Wolf
05-26-09, 11:08 PM
SWEET!

http://www.uberreview.com/wp-content/uploads/ultimate-bumblebee.jpg

Blackout
05-26-09, 11:46 PM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_tRg73iZIquM/SMPjOSN_3RI/AAAAAAAASRI/_mxSnQXVMNE/s320/pointer+sisters+i%27m+so+excited.jpg

I~LUV~Caddys8792
05-26-09, 11:57 PM
Why am I not surprised that Blackout and Rick are having a field day with this? LOL

AMGoff
05-27-09, 12:05 AM
Very true, but it seems the field of automotive journalists are split... Since Motor Trend conducted the same challenge with the Camaro coming out squarely on top as a result.

There only seems to be one real point of consensus amongst everyone... That being the Challenger clearly comes in third out of the trio - despite the almost universal praise of it being the best looking out of the three.

Night Wolf
05-27-09, 12:10 AM
Why am I not surprised that Blackout and Rick are having a field day with this? LOL

Sad part is, normally it wouldn't be a bother at all, as I like both GM and Ford, nor do I particularly prefer one over the other and both make great products. I guess the absurb comparisons and crazy reasoning against Ford in the Lincoln MKS thread sorta sparked the "take and run with it" in me...

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
05-27-09, 01:24 AM
Does the Ford have higher gearing? That is the only way I can think it would have better acceleration.

IMO, none of the "new" muscle cars come close to their ancestors. The new cars a too refined. Ever been next to a new Challenger with a stock exhaust system? You can barely hear any exhaust note at all. Hell, my '88 has more grumble than a new Challenger. Ever had to drive an F-body with t-tops in the rain? Chances are you got wet, but who cared, you had a badass car. The new ones are just not right. They are too tall and have massively oversized wheels. That being said though, the Challenger is by far the best looking of the three.

Rodya234
05-27-09, 01:45 AM
Now I usually don't partake in discussions that encourage faction in our little community (:halo:) and I generally don't like any pony car (I have my reasons) but I will pop in to say that at least we can all agree that the Challenger is clearly a misnomer. :D

gary88
05-27-09, 02:08 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v222/gheb88/nocanhas.jpg

thebigjimsho
05-27-09, 02:22 AM
Was behind a Challenger today. Who designed the rear quarter panels? Stevie Wonder? It's slab-sided and hideous...

Aron9000
05-27-09, 02:23 AM
I really don't get the "new" Ford Mustang. If I'm going to drop $30k on a new car, why would I buy one that looks and performs about the same as the one that came out 4 years ago. It might have 15 more hp, the handling might be a little bit more refined, it might be a tenth or two quicker than the 2005 model, but from my view its the same damn car.

I know why Ford kept the design the same, to appease the current fan base. But they aren't going to buy the same design forever, hell Ford radiacally changed the styling three times during the 90's. Along with a meaningful bump in HP for the 1999 GT models.

Ford played it way too safe IMO.

I'll take my Camaro SS with 100 extra hp, IRS, better ride, an extra gear ratio, better gas mileage, and a fresh design.

Aron9000
05-27-09, 02:26 AM
Does the Ford have higher gearing? That is the only way I can think it would have better acceleration.

IMO, none of the "new" muscle cars come close to their ancestors. The new cars a too refined. Ever been next to a new Challenger with a stock exhaust system? You can barely hear any exhaust note at all. Hell, my '88 has more grumble than a new Challenger. Ever had to drive an F-body with t-tops in the rain? Chances are you got wet, but who cared, you had a badass car. The new ones are just not right. They are too tall and have massively oversized wheels. That being said though, the Challenger is by far the best looking of the three.


You can fix that "way too quiet" problem with a catback. Or you can spend $25 at your exhaust shop and have them cut out the muffler. Its loud, but not unbearable provided you keep the cat converters and stock manifolds. My friends call it the "redneck" exhaust.

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
05-27-09, 03:13 AM
^ Around here doing something like that risks failing emissions. Even if you do a catback sometimes it will set off the DTC for the downstream o2 sensor. Back in the 80's and 90's the stock F-body cars had a very pleasant sounding exhaust straight from the factory.

C&C
05-27-09, 06:46 AM
Car and Driver has been my auto magazine of choice for a lot of years (but I don't always agree with them). I'll have to read the article myself before I can pass any judgement on their pick. I'm already a little confused that they could pick a 100hp less Mustang with a live rear axle over a LS powered Camaro with independent rear suspension. (sometimes you have to look at some of their stupid subjective points, i.e. 'gotta have it factor' and or style numbers. Again, I'll have to wait and see (for myself).

Aron9000
05-27-09, 07:03 AM
Car and Driver has been my auto magazine of choice for a lot of years (but I don't always agree with them). I'll have to read the article myself before I can pass any judgement on their pick. I'm already a little confused that they could pick a 100hp less Mustang with a live rear axle over a LS powered Camaro with independent rear suspension. (sometimes you have to look at some of their stupid subjective points, i.e. 'gotta have it factor' and or style numbers. Again, I'll have to wait and see (for myself).


I mainly read that mag for their off the wall, zany articles more than anything. Their writers are far more opininated and way more talented than those fools at Motor Trend, but the way they conduct comparision tests is really dumb IMO.

The gotta have it and fun to drive factors are a crock of shit that just validates their personal favorite car, even if it doesn't score first on the rest of the objective measures. They also use the same catergories, with the same amount of weight for each catergory regardless of the type of car they are testing. Full size sport utes get the same weighted catergories for cargo volume and handling as sports coupes.

As a result, their comparison tests are more of a matter of personal taste of the editors than anything else. Hence why those idiots named the VW GTI to their 10 best list for 2009, despite the GTI finishing 2nd place to a Mazdaspeed 3 in a January 2009 comparsion test.

RightTurn
05-27-09, 08:56 AM
Mustang....:yawn:

Sandy
05-27-09, 10:35 AM
I have never (all the way back to the beginning - 1967) like Camaros. I can recall all the rusted out bodies of the 60s & 70s models and the ill fitting doors & the squeeks & rattles and water leaks in 'Verts.

I have been in a brand new Mustang & a brand new Challenger. IF IF IF I was buying, and IF I wanted a 'Vert, it would be a Mustang GT. If I was okay with a hardtop, it would only be a 6.1 Litre Challenger Hemi.
The Chllenger's interior is miles better than the other two. The leather is higher quality. the door panels are much more premium, the back seat has a fold down center armrest, the headliner is more premium material.
Perfection would be a 6.1 L Challenger Convertible. (Probably not gonna happen) :crybaby:

Sandy
05-27-09, 11:16 AM
PS / The assembly of the Mustang is a cut above the Challenger. To be fair, however, the Challenger was a prototype. The all black RT I sat in at the dealer was perfect. Anyhow, the Mustang loyality base is 10 times that of the other two, added together.

Blackout
05-27-09, 01:10 PM
The Chllenger's interior is miles better than the other two. The leather is higher quality. the door panels are much more premium, the back seat has a fold down center armrest, the headliner is more premium material.I think you gotta get your eyes checked out there Sandy. Your probably the first person I have ever heard say that the Challengers interior is miles better then the Mustang or the Camaro.

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
05-27-09, 01:13 PM
I have never (all the way back to the beginning - 1967) like Camaros. I can recall all the rusted out bodies of the 60s & 70s models and the ill fitting doors & the squeeks & rattles and water leaks in 'Verts.

That is what makes them true muscle cars. They are crude but fast and powerful.

Blackout
05-27-09, 03:34 PM
That is what makes them true muscle cars. They are crude but fast and powerful.

Maybe for the 60's and 70's but that crap wouldn't fly today

C&C
05-27-09, 03:50 PM
The 'Pony' cars have always been viseral. When you start listing particulars, I just don't think that kind of logic flies. You could line up any of the new 'ponies' and ask me what would you choose (and if one of the choices was a '69 Z-28, new car performance or not, that would be my pick). So, by my logic (others obviously don't agree) make mine Camaro; all the way.

Kev
05-27-09, 05:10 PM
C'mon guys, srsly, c'mon ....

It really boils down to which one looks the best to you because performance is never bottom lined at the factory. It's all about the after market add ons.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
05-27-09, 07:23 PM
For right now, my choices:

1) Camaro. It looks the most fresh, it's a GM, has a nice looking interior. It's a nice balance of new design and old school themes. I like that it shares the same basic silhouette as a '69 Camaro, but isn't a direct knock off.

2) Mustang. Has the highest quality interior, the most luxury features and it looks sweet too. Much like the Camaro, they took a classic design (the '69-'70) and modernized it, and still kept a few design themes though.

3) Challenger. It looks a lot like the old one, which is nice, but it's fatter, heavier and slower. Does have the biggest interior and rides the best though.


If GM brought back the Firebird, I'd be all over that, because I generally always liked Firebirds over a similar Camaro (except for the final 4th gens...the Firebird got too many scoops and curves, the Camaro was cleaner).

Kev
05-27-09, 08:13 PM
I'm a little disappointed in the styling change of the new Mustang, mainly the shape of the tail lights. It reminds me of the changes from 88 - 93 to the redesign of 94. But that's just me.

thebigjimsho
05-28-09, 02:50 AM
I think you gotta get your eyes checked out there Sandy. Your probably the first person I have ever heard say that the Challengers interior is miles better then the Mustang or the Camaro.
Agreed.
















wait, wut?

thebigjimsho
05-28-09, 02:52 AM
I'm a little disappointed in the styling change of the new Mustang, mainly the shape of the tail lights. It reminds me of the changes from 88 - 93 to the redesign of 94. But that's just me.
Yeah, there's some shape that I like on the new Mustang but I'm not like the lights or the housings...

Blackout
05-28-09, 06:41 AM
Agreed.
















wait, wut?

We agree on something so it's official
http://imgsrv.kmbz.com/image/kmbz/UserFiles/Image/Brian%5C%27s%20Pics/hellfrozen.jpg

Destroyer
05-28-09, 08:09 AM
IMO, none of the "new" muscle cars come close to their ancestors. They are all faster than their ancestors, more comfortable, handle better, brake better and get better gas mileage. I'd say they not only "came close to their ancestors" but surpassed them by a HUGE margin. These are the glory days of the musclecar.

Destroyer
05-28-09, 08:12 AM
I really don't get the "new" Ford Mustang. If I'm going to drop $30k on a new car, why would I buy one that looks and performs about the same as the one that came out 4 years ago. It might have 15 more hp, the handling might be a little bit more refined, it might be a tenth or two quicker than the 2005 model, but from my view its the same damn car.

I know why Ford kept the design the same, to appease the current fan base. But they aren't going to buy the same design forever, hell Ford radiacally changed the styling three times during the 90's. Along with a meaningful bump in HP for the 1999 GT models.

Ford played it way too safe IMO.

I'll take my Camaro SS with 100 extra hp, IRS, better ride, an extra gear ratio, better gas mileage, and a fresh design.I agree. I would take a new Z28 over a new Mustang.

96Fleetwood
05-28-09, 09:45 AM
I have driven a 2008 SRT8 Challenger; sat in a 2010 SS Camaro; and sat in a 2010 427R Rousch Mustang. There is no way I am paying $40K+ for ANY of the three. Thank goodness for American car depreciation.

How do they expect to compete with the 6 cylinder 370Z? Not only is it $5-10K cheaper brand new, but it can outhandle and keep up with them in a straight line despite having 332hp (look up the 0-60 & 1/4 mile stats if you do not believe me). :mad:

For almost brand new ~$30K, would you rather have a 6 cylinder Mustang or Camaro... or a 370Z?

Blackout
05-28-09, 10:24 AM
I have driven a 2008 SRT8 Challenger; sat in a 2010 SS Camaro; and sat in a 2010 427R Rousch Mustang. There is no way I am paying $40K+ for ANY of the three. Thank goodness for American car depreciation.

How do they expect to compete with the 6 cylinder 370Z? Not only is it $5-10K cheaper brand new, but it can outhandle and keep up with them in a straight line despite having 332hp (look up the 0-60 & 1/4 mile stats if you do not believe me). :mad:

For almost brand new ~$30K, would you rather have a 6 cylinder Mustang or Camaro... or a 370Z?

When the new 5.0 V8 gets dropped into the Stang then the 6 cylinder version will have the Ecoboost V6 so I will wait another year or so to answer that question:thumbsup: If the MKS with it's automatic, AWD, and it's weight can run a 13.9 then the same engine in the Mustang is going to fly!

The Tony Show
05-28-09, 10:34 AM
It must be the brake caliper weights on the Camaro- it's the only logical explanation.

96Fleetwood
05-28-09, 11:03 AM
When the new 5.0 V8 gets dropped into the Stang then the 6 cylinder version will have the Ecoboost V6 so I will wait another year or so to answer that question:thumbsup: If the MKS with it's automatic, AWD, and it's weight can run a 13.9 then the same engine in the Mustang is going to fly!

But will that make the interior and handling feel like a $40K vehicle?

Blackout
05-28-09, 01:05 PM
But will that make the interior and handling feel like a $40K vehicle?

You keep on saying $40k. The track pack Mustang is their top of the line GT and that's only $35k. If your looking for a nice interior then your barking up the wrong tree with looking for a more upscale interior in a pony car no less. For a nicer interior you need to look at the luxury performance cars like the new CTS-V, S4, M3, etc. As for the handling the track pack GT pulled a .95 on the skid pad so I'd say that's damn good so I'm not sure what you mean by the handling

96Fleetwood
05-28-09, 02:03 PM
$35K has no Navigation. Why should you have to look at $60K plus cars to get a nicer interior? $35K is alot of money! The 370Z and G37S are at or under $40K with a much better layout than of the aforementioned domestic cars.

FYI, I am not sure which article you read.. but I saw 0.91g for the 2010 Track Pack Mustang. The slalom wasn't anything to brag about either..

LS1Mike
05-28-09, 02:07 PM
http://www.fquick.com/images/vehicles/full/4839254812.jpg?1241138009
That is why I am just keeping this. 13.17 at 107.04 mph bone stock when I bought it.
Now it runs 11's and I can take the T-tops out on a nice day.

Aron9000
05-28-09, 03:29 PM
I have driven a 2008 SRT8 Challenger; sat in a 2010 SS Camaro; and sat in a 2010 427R Rousch Mustang. There is no way I am paying $40K+ for ANY of the three. Thank goodness for American car depreciation.

How do they expect to compete with the 6 cylinder 370Z? Not only is it $5-10K cheaper brand new, but it can outhandle and keep up with them in a straight line despite having 332hp (look up the 0-60 & 1/4 mile stats if you do not believe me). :mad:

For almost brand new ~$30K, would you rather have a 6 cylinder Mustang or Camaro... or a 370Z?

Camaro SS starts at $31,000. The 370Z starts at $29-30k. You do get a back seat and a bigger trunk with the Camaro, and it is quite a bit bigger car. The V6 Camaro starts at 23k, which is a pretty good deal if you ask me(306hp, low 14's in the quarter, smoking good looks). Its more of a decision on which you like better, since the 370z and Camaro SS are about the same price.