Mustang vs. Camaro

[theogt]

 

[MetalHead]

Pure testosterone...

 

[arglebargle]

My first car was a '69 Camaro SS 350.

The Mustang was created first as an economy sports car for females.

Bo-Gus!

Well, if you are talking about the original, anyway.

 

[theogt]

Bo-Gus!

Well, if you are talking about the original, anyway.

Ask Lee Iacocca.

The Mustang was made for girls, which is why so many drive them.

 

[CowboyMike]

All of the new american muscle cars are so disappointing. All engine and nothing else. My main complaint are the interiors - i sat in several of these bad boys at a recent auto show here and was disgusted by the idiotic design and choice of materials on the inside.

Um... that's what American Muscle is.

 

[Kevinicus]

Congratulations, you finally made a good post! Well played.

 

[arglebargle]

Ask Lee Iacocca.

The Mustang was made for girls, which is why so many drive them.

Mustang is just a body style on top of a Ford Falcon. And a Ford Falcon was a performance car made so that they were affordable for working men. Just ask Robert McNamara....

Mustangs really were fancied up with snazzy looks, and better materials. While it may have been attractive for gals, it was more made for making girls....if ya get my drift.

 

[Route 66]

The Challenger is nice looking but is a bit too heavy on the road and the pocket book. $43k or $5k more for similar features as my Camaro just isnt worth it for a car that doesnt handle as well and isnt as fast as my Camaro. They are way over priced for what you get that is why the Camaro and Mustang are both outselling it by a 2 to 1 margin.

The Camaro ZL1 is going to start at that price and will have 550 HP.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I've seen plenty of instances where an SRT8 has stayed ahead of an SS and vice-versa. This is even noted in the camaro5 forums. You'd also have to have the stick to have the max hp rating the Camaro has.

 

[Route 66]

I used to judge cars by whether or not they beat another car in a straight line. I guess it's age, but nowadays I drive smarter and safer and realize that there is so much more to a car than just how fast it is.

Before I bought my Challenger SRT8, I had it narrowed down to a Corvette, Camaro, Challenger and the Mustang.

Corvette-still can't swing a two-seater right now.

Camaro-didn't care for the dash and the exterior seems too cartoony.

Mustang-too small and too many out there. This was my second choice.

Challenger-Best retro styling of any modern car IMO hands down. A lot of people put down the cost of this car but that and lower production means less on the road. I wont pay sticker for such exclusivity so I bought a new one with a good deal. I actually like the large size of the Challenger-great for cruising, seats 5 and I love Mopar.

There are plenty of SS owners out there that see Challengers and want to race. Even if I did race one, it would have to probably be the 6 speed in order to beat me and if it did, it would be around a tenth difference. In the real world, the kick in the pants on regular street driving is so close that I could care less losing in a street race that I'll probably never try anymore simply because I like my 0 point driving record. I simply cannot see a car as labeled better or superior when performance numbers are fairly close. The Challenger isn't a sports car-it's a muscle car.

Sure the Challenger isn't perfect but given the right deal made for one, it's been one of the best vehicles if not the best I've ever had a pleasure of owning.

 

[Doomsday]

Rowdy, no offense but you are a bit bias about the racing stuff. There are just as many Challenger guys out there who want to race. As a matter of fact one tried wanted to race me yesterday in a 35 mph zone with his kid in the car. Not too bright. I just laughed as he took off as fast as he could when the light turned green. Too bad there weren't any cops around to bust him. Not to mention that my SS is blown so I would of humiliated him.

The SS has more torque and weighs quite a bit less. In reality it is probably close enough to be a drivers race but that doesn't mean the Camaro isn't a faster vehicle.

Either way its a great car and I could see how people would prefer it but I still think it is over priced in comparison to the Mustang and Camaro feature to feature by about $5k. If that wasnt the case you wouldnt see 1/2 as many on the road because it is good looking vehicle that would be cool to own. That is just my opinion, Im not saying the Mustang or Camaro are superior I just think they are better values and to me the Camaro looks better then both. Obviously that is just my opinion.

Congrats on the purchase and enjoy!

 

[Doomsday]

All of the new american muscle cars are so disappointing. All engine and nothing else. My main complaint are the interiors - i sat in several of these bad boys at a recent auto show here and was disgusted by the idiotic design and choice of materials on the inside.

I guess it personal preference, because I think the interior of the Camaro is great and get compliments on it all the time. It incorporates a lot of the classic features in a modern way.

 

[Route 66]

Rowdy, no offense but you are a bit bias about the racing stuff. There are just as many Challenger guys out there who want to race. As a matter of fact one tried wanted to race me yesterday in a 35 mph zone with his kid in the car. Not too bright. I just laughed as he took off as fast as he could when the light turned green. Too bad there weren't any cops around to bust him. Not to mention that my SS is blown so I would of humiliated him.

The SS has more torque and weighs quite a bit less. In reality it is probably close enough to be a drivers race but that doesn't mean the Camaro isn't a faster vehicle.

Either way its a great car and I could see how people would prefer it but I still think it is over priced in comparison to the Mustang and Camaro feature to feature by about $5k. If that wasnt the case you wouldnt see 1/2 as many on the road because it is good looking vehicle that would be cool to own. That is just my opinion, Im not saying the Mustang or Camaro are superior I just think they are better values and to me the Camaro looks better then both. Obviously that is just my opinion.

Congrats on the purchase and enjoy!

I'm not biased if I formulate an opinion based on my own experiences. If you come across Challengers and every guy wants to try and beat you, then you are entitled to thinking SRT8 owners are the same way. Out of the top three choices in this field, SRT8 owners opted for the Challenger for reasons that meant more than just buying something that crossed the "finish line" a hair faster.

You are incorrect on the facts of the torque ratings of both vehicles. The SS and the SRT8 both make 420 lb-ft. The Challenger still makes the same horsepower and torque ratings with the automatic but the SS is actually lower than the Challenger with the automatic.

The SS weighs 280 lbs less than the Challenger. Less yes, but it's not really a deciding factor to me when both will do .92 on the skidpad and for daily driving, I don't see where I'd push it on the street anyway.

You state that the Challenger is overpriced and then list value as a reason for choosing the Camaro. Sure, performance is one of the top reasons for buying any vehicle, however SRT8 owners opted for the Challenger for reasons that meant more than just buying something that crossed the "finish line" a hair faster.

Value is subjective. I personally wouldn't have found value in a Camaro if after owning for three years, I feel I wouldn't be happy getting behind the wheel every day in it. I thought the Camaro was great looking when it first came out. I just couldn't see the shape of the Camaro holding up long-term for me in the styling department.

Either way, they are all great cars and its nice to see different people have different ideas on why they purchased their ride. I would be happy owning any of these three.

 

[Kevinicus]

For me the higher quality interior and exceptional design as good reason for a higher price. It would also help the Camaro's cause if the interior wasn't made for little people.

 

[Doomsday]

I said FEATURE to FEATURE it is more expensive and that is true. For the exact same features on my car the Challenger is at least $5k more then what I paid for my car. That is more then just being a hair slower. In fact MSRP is $45k for the same features as my car which I paid $37k for or about $1k under MSRP. Big difference apples to apples in price.

It is slower in every mag review in 0 to 60 and slower in the 1/4 mile. It also didnt do nearly as well in braking or on the skid pad (handling) either.

So for a car with the same OPTIONS you get a car that is a bit slower, doesnt handle or brake as well, uses more gas (see gas gussler tax) and costs at least $5k more. Sorry if you dont like that but it is a fact. Im sure for some people the extra money is well worth it, not for me. Probably why sales have been much slower on it.

As for your theory on the looks, most people I talk to think this design is an instant classic and I get nothing but compliments. Not to mention it won the car design of the year award last year.

 

[Route 66]

I said FEATURE to FEATURE it is more expensive and that is true. For the exact same features on my car the Challenger is at least $5k more then what I paid for my car. That is more then just being a hair slower. In fact MSRP is $45k for the same features as my car which I paid $37k for or about $1k under MSRP. Big difference apples to apples in price.

It is slower in every mag review in 0 to 60 and slower in the 1/4 mile. It also didnt do nearly as well in braking or on the skid pad (handling) either.

So for a car with the same OPTIONS you get a car that is a bit slower, doesnt handle or brake as well, uses more gas (see gas gussler tax) and costs at least $5k more. Sorry if you dont like that but it is a fact. Im sure for some people the extra money is well worth it, not for me. Probably why sales have been much slower on it.

As for your theory on the looks, most people I talk to think this design is an instant classic and I get nothing but compliments. Not to mention it won the car design of the year award last year.

Feature for feature? Are you kidding me? There are $20-$30k dollar vehicles that have feature for features. Its about the total package not whether or not you can spend $35k vs $45k. Sounds like as long as you spend as little as possible and get the fastest machine possible dictates the better deal. Heck, with that train of thinking we both screwed up and should have bought a sportsbike. After all it would blow away both of our vehicles for a fraction of the price. Oh wait, it doesn't have cupholders.

On one typical road test, the Challenger had 0-60 of 4.8 vs the Camaro's 4.7. Wooptydoo! The braking was 5 ft more on the Challenger than the Camaro. Travesty there! Sales have hardly been "slow" as you have put it. Production was meant to compete with the Mustang, not the Challenger.

Go ahead and relish in some magazine racing. I had the choice to buy the Camaro and chose not to. I base my driving experience on more than just what can get me to 0-60 faster with Nav and a power sunroof.

 

[Doomsday]

I guess if you consider less handling and speed a better driving experience then knock your self out.

Like you I had a choice of any of the 3 and opted for what I believe is the better all around vehicle. If I was looking to spend as little as possible like you suggest I wouldnt of spent over $7k for a Supercharger. I have the same money in my car as a SRT-8, only I am putting down just under 550 HP at the rear wheels.

Just cause you chose the car doesnt mean you are an expert on driving experience or value. You havent pointed out one thing that says it is a superior experience other then personal opinion. Obviously that has value to an individual as my previous post pointed out but that doesnt mean it isnt over priced compared to its competition.

I can also tell we have a VERY different definition of competing. It is a great looking car so why else arent people buying them? Unlike you, I guess we are all just idiots who dont understand what a true driving experience is.

 

[Route 66]

I guess if you consider less handling and speed a better driving experience then knock your self out.

Like you I had a choice of any of the 3 and opted for what I believe is the better all around vehicle. If I was looking to spend as little as possible like you suggest I wouldnt of spent over $7k for a Supercharger. I have the same money in my car as a SRT-8, only I am putting down just under 550 HP at the rear wheels.

Just cause you chose the car doesnt mean you are an expert on driving experience or value. You havent pointed out one thing that says it is a superior experience other then personal opinion. Obviously that has value to an individual as my previous post pointed out but that doesnt mean it isnt over priced compared to its competition.

I can also tell we have a VERY different definition of competing. It is a great looking car so why else arent people buying them? Unlike you, I guess we are all just idiots who dont understand what a true driving experience is.

"I guess if you consider less handling and speed a better driving experience then knock your self out."
There you go again talking about numbers on two vehicles that are so extremely close its pretty much pointless to argue. You really are caught up in magazine racing or you wouldn't keep bringing up the .10 difference in times. I've said this before, I didn't buy my vehicle to spout off mag numbers, I bought it because I had narrowed down the top three sports-type of vehicles that I was somewhat interested in. I already said I didn't like the Camaro's interior and the exterior to me is not something I desire to look at every day as an owner.

"Just cause you chose the car doesnt mean you are an expert on driving experience or value. You havent pointed out one thing that says it is a superior experience other then personal opinion. Obviously that has value to an individual as my previous post pointed out but that doesnt mean it isnt over priced compared to its competition."

Now I'm stating I'm an expert? Wow. Is this because you've been corrected on torque numbers you claim weren't true? Or was it the identical lateral g's? Please show me where I stated my car is superior to yours. Just because I have my own opinon on your car and why I didn't buy it doesn't dictate superiority.

You aren't the only one who feels that a Challenger is overpriced. A lot do. It's also the norm for people to think "hey, I can go faster in this car with less money" albeit a performance difference thats somewhat neglible-especially since you have a slower vehicle in the Camaro with the automatic. Nothing wrong with that. Don't get a chip on your shoulder because I don't drool over your car.

"It is a great looking car so why else arent people buying them? Unlike you, I guess we are all just idiots who dont understand what a true driving experience is."

Wow! Now it's production numbers you want to be superior in? That graph actually proves my point. I didn't want a vehicle that you see 10 of in 30 minutes of driving. Do you realize Chrysler's goal was to produce 30k Challengers only a year? If they wanted to win a mass production number, then they would have probably lowered the cost. Mustangs and Camaros are volume cars.

A lot of people aren't buying it because of the price difference. That's why you see so many Mustang owners who get a great value in the performance department. You simply can't beat the Mustang for pure performance. If that's all I wanted I would have bought one because IMO its the best value of any vehicle out there for that purpose. I simply needed more room, wanted something bigger and something more unique.

"I can also tell we have a VERY different definition of competing."

You couldn't have proven my point any more than this quote from you. Its all about competition or you wouldn't have said it. If I couldn't stand to lose a magazine number or a real street race, I wouldn't have taken the chance in buying a vehicle that might lose. I brought up numbers because you stated incorrect torque values for one and I also brought the numbers up because they are so ridiculously close.

I can tell you're not the type to buy a Porsche either because there is always something faster with less money. Although many Porsche owners bought their car for something other than a status symbol and that is for the driving experience. I'm sorry but I just can't narrow my thinking into just lookiing at a vehicle for drag race numbers only.

Excuse me while I go take a drive in my pig of a car that can't get itself out of its own way so I can make room for you to speed on by.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I'm a Ford guy, but I will take a 68' Camero SS or 85' IROC-Z over just about any Mustang. Although it would probably take me a long time to decide if I'm considering a 69' Shelby GT 500.

 

[Route 66]

For me the higher quality interior and exceptional design as good reason for a higher price. It would also help the Camaro's cause if the interior wasn't made for little people.

 

[Doomsday]

"I can also tell we have a VERY different definition of competing."

You couldn't have proven my point any more than this quote from you. Its all about competition or you wouldn't have said it.

You took the competing completely out of context. I wasnt talking about speed numbers, I was clearly referring to your comment about competing in production.

Only I am 6' 3", weight 210lbs and fit more then comfortably in my Camaro, which also has a sun roof on it.

Your biggest misconception is you think to me it is all about drag and racing numbers. Like I said I took into account ALL factors, looks, handling, speed, the fun factor, price/value, factory options etc. Most adults look at the whole picture before buying a $40k car. Its fine with me that you disagree that the Challenger is over priced, but your opinion doesnt make it a fact any more then mine does.