Camaro vs Challenger vs Mustang (2009 Edition)

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 88 comments
  • 45,843 views

Camaro vs Challenger vs Mustang

  • Total voters
    101
vwwv
The problem with these cars is they cost $30,000, are super-heavy, poorly sprung, and have NO LIMITED-SLIP DIFFERENTIALS.
Click to expand...

Take a look at the equipment lists on the 2010 models and you'll find that a wealth of "modern" technology has been applied across the board. A limited slip has been standard on performance Mustangs for decades, it was with the 4th Generation Camaros/Firebirds, and is again on the 5th Generation model as well. As someone pointed out earlier, the Challenger is a bit more of a mystery, but I believe the R/T and SRT-8 models both employ limited slip setups.

Supposedly you can get one in the special edition but most of the new buyers are going to pay less for a new WRX. The WRX gives the kids 4 doors, 0-60 in under 5 and very sophisticated springs, diffs, and turbo equipment. No way any of these cars are outlasting a subie either.
Click to expand...

Read up on the Cobalt SS sedan, which will happily give the WRX a run for its money all afternoon. For that matter, read up on the Camaro RS V6, which I'm sure will be happy to be a comparable car to the WRX as well (304 BHP, six-speed manual, specially designed wheel/tire/suspension package).

For that matter, I'd call it a draw on reliability as well. Chevrolet has been scoring in the top ten spots recently with their new cars and trucks, far above where Subaru has been as of late. The GM cars overall are built to be a little more "tough," but since the Camaro isn't out yet, its tough to make a good call.

Give me light weight, limited slip, independent rear suspension (i mean seriously people) and rear drive and sell it all standard for less than $25k. If you want to survive.
Click to expand...

Hey, guess what? Both the Camaro and Challenger come with an independent rear suspension no matter what model you choose! Holy cow! Thanks for reading about the new cars! Even then, Ford has done enough work on the LRA on the Mustang that it is beyond acceptable as a performance application. Again, reading is good!

Chevrolet will be happy to sell you a 304 BHP Camaro RS V6 for right around $25K, the Mustang GT will chime in for about $2000 more than that. Those are beyond bargains in the market, particularly when the 370Z now is checking in at $30K, and the Challenger doesn't get interesting until then either.

Otherwise, you're just going to have to settle with the alternatives: The MX-5 and Solstice/Sky.

=-=-=-=-=

EDIT:

Wow, talk about Night of the Living Thread!
 
This one's hard for me.

My right brain's is saying that the Camaro has the best specs, will be the best car. But, for some reason, after having this hammered into my head, well...I've kind of fallen out of love with it. There's only one way I'd take one...blue, yellow wheels, Sunoco on the rear fenders, and #6 on the doors. Make it an SS model without badging - I want to put Z/28 on it.

The Mustang is getting refreshed in a year. Actually, less. It'll still be the cheapest, and, unfortunately, least technically advanced, although it'll also be lightest by a fair bit. It also has the smallest capacity of any of them.

So that leaves, among the Yankees, the Challenger. The lard-ass, cheap interior Challenger. This being said, the mechanicals (Derived from a Mercedes made when Mercedes were actually reliable, and powered by one of the best V8 programs in the business...if not the most extreme,) are sound, particularly if you avoid Chrysler's typically troublesome Automatic and spring for the stick. And, from the outside, it does look good. I simply wish Chrysler had pulled what GM did with the Camaro and Nissan with the Z, and shortened the car a bit.

But, hark, what's this? An "Other" option?! Egads!!!

Okay, now I need to define "Musclecar." V8, Midsize, A little crazy, and Affordable. Since this is the 2009 edition, I need to go to vehicles made now.

Unfortunately, this leaves me with only two more cars...

The Dodge Charger...Same story as Challenger with 4 doors.
Pontiac G8...a heavier, less potent, and relatively boring-looking Camaro.

So, striking affordable and going into Luxury territory...

Lexus IS-F: Typical Japanese Electronica
Mercedes C63 AMG: One of my perennial Favorites, a.k.a. Trogdor the (Tire) Burninator.
BMW M3: Too refined, too small an engine. OUT.
Cadillac CTS-V: Fits the criteria as nicely as the C63, but is bigger.

I think out of any car I've named, were money not an object, I'd go with the C63. Were it, I'd probably go with the Challenger: I still want to root for the underdog. The M3 is simply too handling- and Rev-focused to be considered a "Musclecar." Not sure why I brought it up.

Final rankings.

Money No Object
C63 AMG
CTS-V
Challenger (SRT-8 Manual)
Camaro (SS)
IS-F
Charger (SRT-8)
Mustang (GT500)
G8 (GT)

Money Matters
Challenger (R/T Manual)
Mustang (GT)
Charger (R/T)
Camaro (LS)
G8 (GT)
C63 AMG
CTS-V
IS-F

I'm going to vote "Other," since the one I'd most want to own is the AMG.
 
Mustang > Camaro > Challenger

I've always loved Mustangs, and I can't wait for the new one to be released. Looks amazing. I just wish they'd update the suspension.
 
I voted Dodge Challenger for this reason ,

looking at all three cars , I personally feel that the Dodge best exemplifies it's original heritage styling cues , and the fact it carries over into the engine bay - a Hemi.

the Mustang is a very very close second , it really like its GT styling with the stripes and all , the wheels are cool , nice interior.

the Camaro has a great body style stemming from it's origins , even has the dummy vents on the rear quarter panel , the thing I think that gives the Camaro a third place vote is the fact of the headlight - tailight combination , it is too off cue from it's roots , and I feel this takes away from this car.


BTW - isn't it great to see these retro cars coming out of the factory , reliving their past ?
 
vwwv
very sophisticated springs, diffs, and turbo equipment.
Click to expand...
Your beloved WRX was until recently suspended by McPherson struts on all four corners, which is akin to a live axle in cheapness, yet McPherson struts were designed for compact, FWD economy cars that got 50 mpg with 80 hp, as opposed to the LRA which was actually designed for a purpose--putting down lots of power very well. So, race-derived suspension design or economy car-derived suspension design? With the recent redesign they left the front McPherson and changed the struts to a multilink setup in the rear, which typically have about 1.5-2 degrees of static negative camber that helps the car settle in long, boring understeer. The new STi apparently handles with some of the most ludicrous understeer ever known to man.

The STi uses an electronically adjustable, clutch-type limited slip, planetary center differential, and both axles have helical-type LSDs. None of this is fancy, and all of this has been around a long time and used before.

Turbochargers are not really "sophisticated" at all. They're quite simple, and they've been around longer than just about everybody on this forum.

Give me light weight, limited slip, independent rear suspension (i mean seriously people) and rear drive and sell it all standard for less than $25k.
Click to expand...

Why waste your breath dissing these cars and raving about lightweight WRXs when WRXs weigh 3200 pounds? What you just described is this:

MX_5_Miata_2008.jpg
 
I've voted in this thread before apparently. I still think the Camaro is the best car of three. I'm somewhat biased tho. :lol:

A guy got this pic the other day

attachment.php



vwwv
The problem with these cars is they cost $30,000, are super-heavy, poorly sprung, and have NO LIMITED-SLIP DIFFERENTIALS. Supposedly you can get one in the special edition but most of the new buyers are going to pay less for a new WRX. The WRX gives the kids 4 doors, 0-60 in under 5 and very sophisticated springs, diffs, and turbo equipment. No way any of these cars are outlasting a subie either. Give me light weight, limited slip, independent rear suspension (i mean seriously people) and rear drive and sell it all standard for less than $25k. If you want to survive.
Click to expand...


Where did you get that? I have a 11 year old F-body with LSD. Read up on the cars before you go making stupid comments.
 
vwwv
The problem with these cars is they cost $30,000, are super-heavy, poorly sprung, and have NO LIMITED-SLIP DIFFERENTIALS. Supposedly you can get one in the special edition but most of the new buyers are going to pay less for a new WRX. The WRX gives the kids 4 doors, 0-60 in under 5 and very sophisticated springs, diffs, and turbo equipment. No way any of these cars are outlasting a subie either. Give me light weight, limited slip, independent rear suspension (i mean seriously people) and rear drive and sell it all standard for less than $25k. If you want to survive.
Click to expand...

hyugen_coupe_10_11_gallery_image_large.jpg


Hullo.
 
I must say that my vote is changed on the issue. After being at the Chicago show, I must say that from a looks standpoint, the Camaro has got to be one of the most "meh" looking new cars out there. It just doesn't leave any lasting impression (besides perhaps disappointment.

The Mustang, on the other hand, looks absolutely stunning in person. I'd say that it looks good enough for me to maybe even overlook the LRA setup.

Oh, and the front on that Hyundai looks very, very squashed in person.
 
Hmmmm I like the looks of the Mustang the best. And while the track numbers are impressive (loads of grip, great brakes, good slalom numbers) I would HATE to have that 4.6l. I would feel so inadequate. Not because it's smaller, but because it's so underachieving. I would never consider the Challenger. The Camaro looks decent and should have good acceleration, but even with IRS I think it's going to be too heavy to match (the numbers of) the Mustang.

But of course I'd take the 370z before the Mustang.
 
Tough choice. The lightweight of this group is a car I love to hate, and its performance variants tend to grow hundreds of pounds. The other two are dense two-doors built from big sedan platforms wrapped in the best styling to come out of Detroit in decades.

I was going to choose the Camaro because of its DI V6, but went with the Challenger because its girth better suits the personality of the car than with the Camaro.
 
CAMAROBOY69
At this point my vote still goes toward the new Challenger. I have also went for a test drive in the new Challenger. https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=109147&highlight=CHALLENGER
However the new Camaro is growing on me for sure. I like it the more I see it. I still just wish they would have went with the side body lines of the 69 Camaro instead of the 67 Camaro. Would have been a sick car.
Click to expand...


My only problem with the challenger is how slow it is. I haven't seen it run yet in person, but from what I heard from some friends last week was that non of them were running under 13.3 in the quarter and most were running high 13's and low 14's.
 
Well, its a 4300lb car (give or take) saddled with a five-speed slushbox and a rather-tall rear axle. Now that they've added the six-speed Tremec gearbox, the Challenger should sprint a bit faster, but overall, its still falling behind the (current) Mustang and (presumably) Camaro.
 
Philly
I must say that my vote is changed on the issue. After being at the Chicago show, I must say that from a looks standpoint, the Camaro has got to be one of the most "meh" looking new cars out there. It just doesn't leave any lasting impression (besides perhaps disappointment.

The Mustang, on the other hand, looks absolutely stunning in person. I'd say that it looks good enough for me to maybe even overlook the LRA setup.

Oh, and the front on that Hyundai looks very, very squashed in person.
Click to expand...

Word, I feel the same way. Camaro = biggest letdown. All the new Fords look hot in person. Ford Taurus Mustang Fusion Win. I was just so pissed that they locked all of them.
Of course, I think the Gen Coupe is stunning in person, but the 370z also looked surprisingly good.
The Nissan is a little small and a little too expensive, so I'm only interested in the Stang and the Gen Coupe at this point.
 
I voted for the Mustang, mainly because it's the only one that isn't a COMPLETE pig (exception being the super heavy GT500)...and the Challenger lost a lot of points in my book for not coming with a manual transmission from the get-go. Muscle cars without manual transmissions are pointless imo (in an oxymoron sort of way).
 
Mine would be the Mustang. With the Challenger second.

My reasoning is the plethora of options for the Mustang. The Challenger has the SE, SE G, R/T, R/T J, and the SRT 8. The Camaro has the LS, LT(1), LT(2), SS(1), SS(2) with an RS package that you can apply to the LT's and SS's. While the Mustang has the V6, V6 Premium, GT, GT Premium, and GT500directly from Ford, it's the only one availible in a convertible also, but lets not forget about Shelby's other offerings, Roush's, and Saleen's. With Shelby you got the Shelby/West Coast Customs GT, CS 6, Shelby GT/GT-H, GT500KR, GT500 Super Snake, Terlingua, and the Super Snake Prudhomme Edition. Roush has the 427R, Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage3, Sport, V6, P-51A, P-51B, BlackJack,429R, RTC, 428R, Speedster, and the 427R Trak Pak. Saleen has the H302 3V, H302 Supercharged, S281 3V, S281 Supercharged, S281 Red Flag, S302 Extreme, Stearling Edition, Parnelli Jones Edition, and the Dan Gurney Edition. Even though the Camaro and Challenger may eventually have these kind of choices, the Mustang has them now. The prices of these models range from $20,995 to $74,320, and power ranging from 210HP to 725HP, so I have a feeling that everyone can find something that they will enjoy.

Here are links to each site I got this list from
http://saleen.com/vehicles/
http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/mustang/models/
http://www.shelbyautos.com/vehicles.asp
http://www.roushperformance.com/vehicles.shtml
http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2010/camaro/build.do
http://www.dodge.com/hostc/vsmc/vehicleSpecModels.do?modelYearCode=CUD200903

Now if there are Camaro's and Challenger's I have not heard about please tell me about them because I'm always interested in anything with wheels!
 
YSSMAN
Well, its a 4300lb car (give or take) saddled with a five-speed slushbox and a rather-tall rear axle. Now that they've added the six-speed Tremec gearbox, the Challenger should sprint a bit faster, but overall, its still falling behind the (current) Mustang and (presumably) Camaro.
Click to expand...

Still can't believe that they managed to make the Challenger even fatter than my fatassed 18ft long land yacht Interceptor.

As much as I love the new Camaro. I'd have to pick the 2010 Mustang. Equally stunning to look at IMO and the 4.6L is more potent than some people give it credit for. Now imagine it with those new Coyote 5.0's coming soon.
 
AXLE_BULLITT_13
Okay, this guessing on the weight of these cars is making me angry. You got the internet people do some darn research!
Mustang 3533lb
Camaro 3737lb
Challenger 4055lb

Here is the link for the stats of each from Motor Trends Comparison tests

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...ford_mustang_gt/specs_and_road_test_data.html
Click to expand...
Well it's not as heavy as previously stated but it's still amazing to know it's about 60lbs give or take from the weight of my Interceptor!
 
The Challenger SRT8 clocks in at nearly 4200 lbs (4140), which is absolutely massive in this class. As I recall, the Camaro SS is just over 3800 lbs. I think the weights you have there are either dry, or for the lower-spec models.
 
Your Interceptor is body on frame, correct?

Unibody construction which meets the latest crash regs and stiffness targets plus increased amount of standard equipment as well as IRS.


M
 
1. Dodge Challenger
2. Chevrolet Camaro
3. Ford Mustang
I would take all three but if it would be my money, then the Challenger is the one for me.
 
Has anyone read this months topgear, it has a article on these 3 cars, a very good read, with some stunning photography. I like the new shelby gt500 in baby blue and whit stripes I love the curves.
 
Last edited:
I would go with the Challenger, other than me being a Mopar muscle car guy it just looks awsome. I just don't like the looks of the Camaro(which is ironic as it's based on my favorite the 67') and the Mustang's novelty has worn off as everyone and their grandma seems to have one.
 
Can a moderator change my vote from the Camaro to the Mustang please?
 

Latest Posts

Back