[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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

 

[Night Wolf]

SWEET!

 

[Blackout]

 

[I~LUV~Caddys8792]

Why am I not surprised that Blackout and Rick are having a field day with this? LOL

 

[AMGoff]

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]

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]

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.

 

[72186]

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.

 

[gary88]

 

[thebigjimsho]

Was behind a Challenger today. Who designed the rear quarter panels? Stevie Wonder? It's slab-sided and hideous...

 

[Aron9000]

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]

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 "*******" exhaust.

 

[dirt_cheap_fleetwood]

^ 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]

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]

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]

Mustang....:yawn: