Camaro V6 vs Challenger V6 - Page 2

Exodus · 03-26-2009, 08:49 AM

Challenger is a friggen rip-off, not to mention is the size of a friggen boat.
Camaro all the way....
Chrysler failed w/ this one

cardude007617 · 03-26-2009, 09:04 AM

this is sort of a surprise. the challenger is looked upon the car that is supposed to do well for dodge but in comparison, one is almost stupid not to go for a comparable mustang or a camaro.
i guess this news goes with chrysler's "style" over substance

Jake · 03-26-2009, 09:36 AM

Ouch.

DrFabulous · 03-26-2009, 10:04 AM

Mustang GT w/Track pack:
0 - 30 (sec): 2.1
0 - 45 (sec): 3.4
0 - 60 (sec): 5.2
0 - 75 (sec): 7.6
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 13.5 @ 102.9
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.9
30 - 0 (ft): 27
60 - 0 (ft): 107
Braking Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Very Good
Slalom (mph): 68.4
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.91
Handling Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Good

So a V6 Camaro that runs for $9k less can almost out slalom a Mustang GT that has a "track pack", despite being 200lbs heavier

I'm glad Chevy made a serious car this time.

Metallman56 · 03-26-2009, 10:47 AM

maybe its dodge's way of saying "if your going to be a p*ssy and get a muscle car in a v6, its going to be slow and dumb."

imo they shouldnt even put a v6 in muscle cars (mustang, camaro, challenger, gto, charger, trans am) it defeats the purpose. next thing you know they'll all have 4 doors (yeah like the charger) and tons of back seat room.

get the v8 or go home.

Panacea · 03-26-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metallman56

maybe its dodge's way of saying "if your going to be a p*ssy and get a muscle car in a v6, its going to be slow and dumb."

imo they shouldnt even put a v6 in muscle cars (mustang, camaro, challenger, gto, charger, trans am) it defeats the purpose. next thing you know they'll all have 4 doors (yeah like the charger) and tons of back seat room.

get the v8 or go home.

Normally I would agree, but in this case with the camaro running 14.2 in the 1/4, there's really no room to complain. Those are really respectable numbers, and quite frankly, it would out perform the stock version of it's vintage brethern in almost all cases. If the price was right, and I could trade my car in w/out shelling out hardly any money, I would definitely consider a V6 Camaro, especially knowing how well GM's V6's get on mileage.

DrFabulous · 03-26-2009, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metallman56

maybe its dodge's way of saying "if your going to be a p*ssy and get a muscle car in a v6, its going to be slow and dumb."

imo they shouldnt even put a v6 in muscle cars (mustang, camaro, challenger, gto, charger, trans am) it defeats the purpose. next thing you know they'll all have 4 doors (yeah like the charger) and tons of back seat room.

get the v8 or go home.

The new V6 Camaro will hold its own will almost all previous generation V8 "muscle cars" (with the exception of the LS1s).... it will run with LT1s, pre 05 Mustangs, 350Zs, S2000s, G35s, Charger R/Ts, SRT-4s, RX-8s, GTIs..... Not bad for a "base muscle car"

timberwoof · 03-26-2009, 01:06 PM

Put a turbo setup on it and your good.

AaronGTR · 03-26-2009, 05:12 PM

Plus they tuned the suspension on the "ring", something that Ford and Dodge did not take the time or money to do. Dodge really rushed the challenger to market. Everyone complains that GM takes too long and they miss the market and wah wah WAH.... the challenger has the exact same interior as the charger and it handles like crap. They showed the challenger as a concept long after the camaro concept, yet made it to market before the camaro did. Chevy took their time with the Camaro and it shows. It handles, it stops, it goes like stink... and it looks better too IMO.

Sleepwalkr · 03-26-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrFabulous

The Camaro V6 is in the STS that gets 26 highway/17 city

So, I'd imagine the Camaro is a bit lighter, so the mpg should be even better. Just off the top of my head, I'd pretty much garuntee the Challenger isn't getting 40mpg city.

SSRacer · 03-26-2009, 07:30 PM

That is just sad

PhantomLover007 · 03-26-2009, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ajaxus

Learn to read Mexican, I didn't say it was the best looking of the two cars, I said it was the best looking PAPERWEIGHT I've ever seen.

Yavol Mein Fuhrer...

03-26-2009, 08:49 AM	#21
Exodus Down Rodeo AKA: Minchione Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Marlboro/LBI, NJ Age: 39 Posts: 1,734 Vehicle: 12 Altima \| 08 TL/S	Challenger is a friggen rip-off, not to mention is the size of a friggen boat. Camaro all the way.... Chrysler failed w/ this one __________________ Choices always were a problem for you. What you need is someone strong to guide you. Deaf and blind and dumb and born to follow, What you need is someone strong to use you —Opiate, T O O L

03-26-2009, 09:04 AM	#22
cardude007617 mmm turbo boost AKA: Paul Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Milwaukee WI Age: 31 Posts: 4,870 Vehicle: 2005 WRX Sedan 5 Speed	this is sort of a surprise. the challenger is looked upon the car that is supposed to do well for dodge but in comparison, one is almost stupid not to go for a comparable mustang or a camaro. i guess this news goes with chrysler's "style" over substance __________________ http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2565053 -2005 World Rally Blue Subaru Impreza WRX Sedan: Tanabe Touring 3in catback, ERZ bellmouth catted downpipe, catless uppipe, SPT Pink springs, SPT short shifter, SPT intake, stereo, Cobb Accessport stage II, Prosport boost/oil temp/volt gauges, 35%, 17x8 Rota Torques, F/R strut braces It's what makes a Subaru, a Subaru.

03-26-2009, 10:04 AM	#24
DrFabulous FIGJAM AKA: Matt Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: MN Posts: 9,675 Vehicle: Acura\|Chevy\|Porsche	Mustang GT w/Track pack: 0 - 30 (sec): 2.1 0 - 45 (sec): 3.4 0 - 60 (sec): 5.2 0 - 75 (sec): 7.6 1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 13.5 @ 102.9 0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.9 30 - 0 (ft): 27 60 - 0 (ft): 107 Braking Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Very Good Slalom (mph): 68.4 Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.91 Handling Rating (Excellent, Good, Average, Poor or Very Poor): Good So a V6 Camaro that runs for $9k less can almost out slalom a Mustang GT that has a "track pack", despite being 200lbs heavier I'm glad Chevy made a serious car this time. __________________ '18 Acura MDX Kid hauler '15 Chevrolet Tahoe Toy Hauler '01 Porsche Boxster Project Last edited by DrFabulous; 03-26-2009 at 10:07 AM.

03-26-2009, 10:47 AM	#25
Metallman56 Bears Fan AKA: Metall Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Indiana Age: 36 Posts: 3,856 Vehicle: 2001 grand am gt coupe	maybe its dodge's way of saying "if your going to be a p*ssy and get a muscle car in a v6, its going to be slow and dumb." imo they shouldnt even put a v6 in muscle cars (mustang, camaro, challenger, gto, charger, trans am) it defeats the purpose. next thing you know they'll all have 4 doors (yeah like the charger) and tons of back seat room. get the v8 or go home. __________________ http://www.cardomain.com/ride/209706...am?action=demo So you proved your point about the camaro - condense your sig. - Your friendly Administration

03-26-2009, 01:06 PM	#28
timberwoof Law Dawg AKA: Cody Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Portland Tx Posts: 1,827 Vehicle: 2004 Grand Am SE1	Put a turbo setup on it and your good. __________________ Mods: Sways, F-STB, Dr. Speed Stage 2 w/ box, Rear Disk Conversion, drilled rotors, steel braided lines, 180* T-Stat.

03-26-2009, 09:36 AM	#23
Jake BRAAAPPP AKA: Jake Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Cen Cal Age: 34 Posts: 3,725 Vehicle: Hellcat Challenger	Ouch.

03-26-2009, 05:12 PM	#29
AaronGTR BlingWithBallz AKA: Aaron Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Detroit area, MI Age: 43 Posts: 12,254 Vehicle: 2000 Grand Am GT1 2dr	Plus they tuned the suspension on the "ring", something that Ford and Dodge did not take the time or money to do. Dodge really rushed the challenger to market. Everyone complains that GM takes too long and they miss the market and wah wah WAH.... the challenger has the exact same interior as the charger and it handles like crap. They showed the challenger as a concept long after the camaro concept, yet made it to market before the camaro did. Chevy took their time with the Camaro and it shows. It handles, it stops, it goes like stink... and it looks better too IMO. __________________ The few, the proud, the boosted! 13.788 @ 103.73 mph (3/2011) 320 whp and 300 ft/lbs torque. (3/2011) See it here. the total package.

03-26-2009, 07:30 PM	#31
SSRacer Speed Racer AKA: Sean Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Somewhere Age: 43 Posts: 1,440 Vehicle: 2002 Grand Am GT Sedan	That is just sad __________________ 2002 Pontiac Grand Am GT1 http://cardomain.com/id/ssgohan Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive. If it ain't broke, don't Microsoft it.