But with the same professional driver, would the challanger not run faster as well? The only true comparison is when they are driven by the same person in the same place. And sure it may have only ran 13 flat stock, but when people start toying with them, I see them getting into the 11s VERY easy. Drag radials and driving would get you 12s, easy. ANd ported heads and a cam can easily make close to 600 horsepower with a 6.1 Hemi...
Doesn't anyone care about handling? I'm wondering whether those extra pounds will hurt it more than the IRS will help it when the road gets twisty.
That may be, but...... my 13.01 stang only cost me 26 grand new with it's puney 4.6 and 300 hp. A pro 5.0 driver isn't going to over come 4,200 pounds or a 40,000 dollar price tag. Our stangs are surprisingly fast for what they are. A pair of slicks and an aluminum driveshaft and your in the 12's with a 281. The GT is very fast for the price, take that 10 grand savings from the challenger, put it into the stang and you have a 10 second car. However, it's all apples and oranges, it's not all about 1/4 times. The challenger is a sharp looking retro muscle car and even 13.50 is fast, back in the day, a stock 426 hemie was only in the mid 14's. As far as handling, I'm sure it's 4,200 pounds worth of car in the turns, but I'm sure it holds it's line well once planted. I'm a ford guy, but think dodge has a real winner with this car, it looks awesome and is quick with lots of torque to play with. The camero doesn't look half as good as the challenger or the stang. So reguardless how well the camero runs, it still gonna take a back seat to ford and dodge in the retro styling department. Looks is half the battle with muscle cars, if it looks like crap who cares how fast it is, no one wants to be seen in an ugly car, especially the girls!!!!!!!!
Camaro you mean ... Yeah, I mean I'd be so unhappy to be seen in this - no link to the '69 Camaro there at all. The thing with most muscle cars is they rarely look that good without the war paint and a V8 sound track. Looks is indeed half the battle but a 6.0 V8 is the other half. It depends which half you need and which half you can live with. Personally, I'm struggling to see any downside either half of the Camaro and if the spy shots of the 2010 Mustang are anything to go by, it may concede ground to the Chevy by spoiling the original design. GIven that the General has just unleashed a 500hp plus CTS-V, it looks like they won't be shying away from high power variants either.
It needs new door mirrors, a sexier rear facia, better wheel options and a pricetag for a base V8 model close to the competition. Besides those changes I might pickup a used one later in the future but no way in hell would I sell or trade any of my other cars for one. Unfortunately Bob Lutz hasn't been watching the news lately and he has no clue what price gas is now and how the economy is in a temporary slump. In a recent article he said that the new Camaro was not going to be priced to compete with the Mustang and Challenger. I.E.- More expensive. Arrogance like that made the 2004-05 GTO go the way of the DoDo Bird. His engineers would not listen to the GTO enthusiast on styling cues and thats why it looked like a cross between an Tarus and a Neon. Great motor and suspension and interior but bland looks. If they went with a more retro look or atleast put the GTO badges on a 2 door G8 with spoiler and scoops they would still be selling them today. When your ship is sinking in a sea of red ink a CEO needs to put the arrogance aside and start selling cars to the largest segment of buyers. Only about a tenth of buyers out there are going to sink $40K into a ponycar and a good portion of them will be either be forced resold for a loss or repoed by the lending bank and then someone could pick one up for a more reasonable price.
cLutz, I mean Lutz has lost it. They bring back a retro styled camaro and it's not in competion with the retro styled mustang and challenger? He's already making excuses for the lopsided sales figures between the 2010 camaro and 2010 mustang. If the 2010 mustang gets a 400 hp 5.0 then he's certainly right, the camaro won't be any competion in the sales market or the track.
You might think it looks good, but it doesn't do a thing for me, I think it's hidious. The challenger looks awesome in comparison. You know a retro car is done right when you have to look twice to tell if it's new or old. I have to look for the rear hips on a stang at a glance. The camero doesn't have that problem, one look at you know it's not the old one. GM could of done so much more with the new GTO instead of letting it die from ugliness. There's not enough old school in the new camero to be on the same playing field as the challenger and mustang. I hate chevy to begin with and that sure doesn't do anything to win me over. GM needs to retro a 79 TRANS-AM.
If I had $100K laying around I would already have a Ban III Burt Reynolds edition TA. That sumbich is sweeet!
