Musclecar wars have begun!

[dinomoparman]

Ok here you go check this out and let me know what you all think. Yea I know it's Edmunds but it's good to see we have some competition now.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=as2er...eature=related

[Mag Dr]

Good video, would like to see the wars come on just one more time, with the technology today we should be able to have some light weight vehicles and the Maxi HP....



Dave

[robertg74]

I notice that they put the SS up against R/T and then they say the SS has "the power to back it up"... ummm the SRT has a 6.1 in it and has the 425hp to back it up...so the camero has 426 hp... impressive, but the biggest gain is the fact that it is lighter than the Challenger. I am not saying it is not worth the run. the camero has the guts to give a good war, but as far as looks go... ehhh, I like the look of the Challenger better and the interior is MUCH better in the Challenger than the camero... Square instrument clusters in a round car with round vents... and on top of that LOW mounted oil, water, amps, etc.... why would I want to have to look WAY DOWN there to see how things are running?!?!?!? I wish the Challenger had a heads up display... but these are just my opinions... they are like something else, everyone has one

oh yeah, the mustang....still looks like every mustang out there....except the did something funky to the rear end.... from bad to worse IMHO....

[lieu910]

Interesting that they did not use an SRT8 to compare. Nonetheless, each car seems to have it's strengths and weaknesses, and it all boils down to which suits the individual buyer best.

Relative to the Camaro, there isn't much that impresses me about it. It may be the quickest, but the Challenger and in particular the Mustang can be made as fast as the owner likes.

Styling wise the Challenger looks the best to my eyes since Ford went with the 2010 Mustang. The 2005-2009 Mustangs were great looking cars, and the 2010 looks overstyled to me. Still the best bang for the buck though in my opinion.

As an aside, I wish Dodge would offer a handling package on the R/T much in the same way Ford does with the GT.

[Challenger370]

The camaro looks nice except Not sure about the front grill, the inside to me is horible. Chevy has pulled out the stops when it comes to technology for max power, max gas milage, and cheap price, but it is a different car. Sets low and is a smaller sports car.

The challenger is a full size car that rides nice, cruses nice, is like a buic, or Lincoln, but also has a hot engine that can go fast. 95% of the speed, withouth compermising any of the luxery. Not to mention it looks great inside and out. The mustang and Camaro looks horible on the inside.

[dinomoparman]

Well they seem to be really biased toward the Camaro but what did you expect, it's new. I agree that they should have paired the SRT instead of the RT but I think they were comparing it pricewise. Only problem I see with that is the Camaro can run up to the $40k arena with the right options. Plus those guys can't drive I mean 0-60 in 5.5 sec for the Challenger?? I can do that in mine and I'm not a pro. Just interesting to see how they compare but look around and you'll see that the Camaro compares well to the SRT in performance and we know that the RT can be modded to run with both of them. Of course then they can always mod thiers and make it faster but oh well. It's good to see all 3 competing again.

[09r/t]

I find it funny that Edmunds can get a 13.0 in the Camaro (which equals MT), the Mustang in 13.5 (also equalling MT), but the Challenger in 13.9?? LOL. I have burned off 13.2 in my R/T with a 5.05 0-60. Since then I have managed a few 4.8x 0-60's....What did they do, put amateurs in the Dodge?

As for the slalom....well the new Mustang GT comes with Pirelli P-Zero UHP summer tires, the Camaro SS comes with Summer tires.....and the Challenger comes with the worst tires made....the Goodyear All-seasons dont hold a candle....throw some half-decent tires on the Challenger and will be even with the other 2.

[mrjoecool]

not only was it an ss but it was the ss/rs with all the options they did not compare apples to apples
in that case they should have used the srt challenger and the gt 500 then we could have a comparrison

[novawagonmaster]

My opinion if similar models were compared...
The Camaro is the fastest. The Challenger looks the best. The Mustang fits oddly between the two.

Personality of the buyer vs. personality of the car has everything to do with who is going to buy which one. I really don't think anyone should say one is "better" than the other. They all have ups & downs.

I was hooked on the looks. I was not out to buy a track car. I am not a fan of Fords. I think the Camaro is...well...ugly.

[ProfeZZor X]

I notice that they put the SS up against R/T and then they say the SS has "the power to back it up"... ummm the SRT has a 6.1 in it and has the 425hp to back it up...so the camero has 426 hp... impressive, but the biggest gain is the fact that it is lighter than the Challenger. I am not saying it is not worth the run. the camero has the guts to give a good war, but as far as looks go... ehhh, I like the look of the Challenger better and the interior is MUCH better in the Challenger than the camero... Square instrument clusters in a round car with round vents... and on top of that LOW mounted oil, water, amps, etc.... why would I want to have to look WAY DOWN there to see how things are running?!?!?!? I wish the Challenger had a heads up display... but these are just my opinions... they are like something else, everyone has one

oh yeah, the mustang....still looks like every mustang out there....except the did something funky to the rear end.... from bad to worse IMHO....

There was a video where Motor Trend or Edmunds tried to pull that same crap, comparing a bone stock Nissan GT-R to a Z06 Corvette. What the hell... If they'd wait until the VSPEC version to come out, then it'd be a fair fight. Otherwise, I hate when companies do that comparison crap and pick a modified version of a car and compare it to a stock NA version of another company's car.

[spedly]

I think they went based on price. They said the r/t cost more then either of the other cars. If you threw a srt in there you'd have a car that was way overpriced compared to the other 2. If you used the gt500 and the srt the camaro looks like an even bigger bang for the buck. I love the challengers but Chrysler killed it when they burdened it with carrying around the extra weight and extra big price tag(compared to similar cars).

[MuscleMan305]

I find it funny that Edmunds can get a 13.0 in the Camaro (which equals MT), the Mustang in 13.5 (also equalling MT), but the Challenger in 13.9?? LOL. I have burned off 13.2 in my R/T with a 5.05 0-60. Since then I have managed a few 4.8x 0-60's....What did they do, put amateurs in the Dodge?

As for the slalom....well the new Mustang GT comes with Pirelli P-Zero UHP summer tires, the Camaro SS comes with Summer tires.....and the Challenger comes with the worst tires made....the Goodyear All-seasons dont hold a candle....throw some half-decent tires on the Challenger and will be even with the other 2.

Blame Chrysler for putting bad skinny tires on a 4,100lb muscle car and on top of that its still the most expensive of the 3. Imagine if GM put 255's on the zr1 to save a few bucks.

[Rt's RT]

for what its worth
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...cle-Car-Wars-/

[Challenger370]

That is awesome news. IF the suppliers could just make enough quality parts, Chrysler could make money. Stupid 6 month wating list.

[Steve HR Hooligan]

My opinion if similar models were compared...
The Camaro is the fastest. The Challenger looks the best. The Mustang fits oddly between the two.

Personality of the buyer vs. persoanlity of the car has everything to do with who is going to buy which one. I really don't think anyone should say one is "better" than the other. They all have ups & downs.

I was hooked on the looks. I was not out to buy a track car. I am not a fan of Fords. I think the Camaro is...well...ugly.

I agree