Motor Trend: Camaro vs Mustang vs Challenger

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

03-25-2009, 07:01 AM

#61

2010_5thgen

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: ohio

Posts: 4,482

Quote:

Originally Posted by GMRL

My guess is they were saving the good stuff for the Z28.

possibly. just like anything else, you kinda tone down the lower level and then you use your awesome parts on the higher level.

03-25-2009, 08:50 AM

#62

christianjax

Registered User

Thread Starter

Join Date: Jan 2006

Location: Jacksonville Florida

Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2010_5thgen

the gearing is the way it is for the MPG.

Still it would be nice if Chevy offered a Track Pack option for those that want performance over MPG. Heck make it a dealer installed option and it won't hurt GM's CAFE ratings.

03-25-2009, 08:52 AM

#63

2010_5thgen

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: ohio

Posts: 4,482

Quote:

Originally Posted by christianjax

Still it would be nice if Chevy offered a Track Pack option for those that want performance over MPG. Heck make it a dealer installed option and it won't hurt GM's CAFE ratings.

thats basically what you can do through the gmpp catalog. i think it has to be installed by a certain dealership though.

03-25-2009, 09:18 AM

#64

poSSum

Disciple

Join Date: Nov 2000

Posts: 1,479

Quote:

Originally Posted by JakeRobb

I know the Camaro has fully adjustable caster, camber, and toe up front, and fully adjustable camber and toe in the back. There's no such thing as caster if the wheel doesn't steer

I'm no expert on suspensions but I do know that the Solstice has rear caster adjustment ... has something to do with "bump steer". The Mustang guys are getting very good front camber numbers using factory authorized "crash bolts". I'm hoping the same will be true for the Camaro.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Logansneo

I've been doing front end alignments with/for my dad at his shop since I was 12 and feel very strongly that increased spring rates and stiffer shocks, front and back, as well as lowering the car slightly (vital to bring the gravity center down), possibly opting for wider rubber (265 front / 295 back) and those lower rear end gears all would, I feel, make the SS a completely different car, and more closely resemble the "vision" of it we have all had since the 2006 show car first wowed us.

They could call it a "1LE".

03-25-2009, 02:47 PM

#65

94LightningGal

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2001

Location: Payson, AZ USA

Posts: 1,181

Quote:

Originally Posted by TTopJohn

Ahh, I should have been more clear - I wasn't thinking of $4000 wheels and $2000 ground effects and optional color interiors as real options. When in fact they are very real options in terms of what they cost.

I got the following prices - a Mustang GT Coupe more or less fully loaded (polished 18"s instead of the $1000 19s, no "security package", no backup camera) has an MSRP of $38,015.

But my basically fully loaded Camaro was only $36,750 - a 2SS/RS with all of what I consider the real options, i.e. everything but the following: stripes, body color engine cover, wing, ground effects, automatic. Oh, and the $36,750 includes the $470 polished 20" wheels.

Ok................ no offense TTop, but I was curious about your pricing............. so I had to go build a Mustang, based on your criteria.

What you fail to mention, is your "more or less fully loaded" GT, has about every doo dad known to man, and much of it is NOT available on a Camaro. The biggie being the electronics package, that includes: voice activated navigation system, and dual zone climate control.

Of course, said car also includes the track package, which you cannot get in a Camaro, and an accessory package.

Thus, being a little more forthcoming in the explanation of what you are getting for that money, makes it a little easier to understand.

03-25-2009, 03:02 PM

#66

TTopJohn

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 1998

Location: Dallas, TX

Posts: 214

Quote:

Originally Posted by 94LightningGal

What you fail to mention, is your "more or less fully loaded" GT, has about every doo dad known to man, and much of it is NOT available on a Camaro. The biggie being the electronics package, that includes: voice activated navigation system, and dual zone climate control.

Of course, said car also includes the track package, which you cannot get in a Camaro, and an accessory package.

Thus, being a little more forthcoming in the explanation of what you are getting for that money, makes it a little easier to understand.

As you correctly pointed out, both cars have equipment not available on the other. I think it's a wash, hear me out:

The Stang does have a map screen nav, a glass roof, and dual zone a/c. Can't get any of that on the Camaro at any price.

But the Camaro does have OnStar turn by turn voice activated nav, with a display like Audi's 1st gen nav had - still useful, though IMHO not as nice as a map screen. Camaro has a sunroof, which you can't get on a Mustang and, since it opens, is in some ways nicer than a glass roof. I don't like 20s, but a lot of people do, and the Camaro has them v. the Mustangs 19s (or as I spec'd it, 18s). And perhaps most importantly, the Camaro has IRS, a 6.2 V8 and a 6 speed. All at that 36,750 MSRP price.

So that's why I think my well optioned Camaro is a better deal than a loaded Mustang GT.

03-26-2009, 05:21 AM

#67

christianjax

Registered User

Thread Starter

Join Date: Jan 2006

Location: Jacksonville Florida

Posts: 881

ONE thing the Mustang trumps the Camaro in.......Convertible. It really sucks that the convertible Camaro is being pushed back even further and questionable if it will be made at all. I think GM should have done whatever was possible to make sure the Camaro launched with a convertible. If any ONE person opts for the Mustang for that reason alone it's a loss. And I suspect that there will be a lot more than one. If you want to compete with the Mustang, then COMPETE with the Mustang.