Camaro Ss Vs. Challenger R/t Vs. Mustang Gt

P71_CrownVic · April 20, 2009

Great review. The Camaro is not the slouch that all of the Mustang people thought it was going to be. And it is only 287 pounds heavier than the Mustang GT.

Read more here:

Link!

Zembonez · April 20, 2009

Great review. The Camaro is not the slouch that all of the Mustang people thought it was going to be. And it is only 287 pounds heavier than the Mustang GT.

Read more here:

Link!

That is very cool. Regardless of what one you like, it is great to see American muscle again... fighting it out. I can't wait to drive the Camaro.

pennzoil29 · April 20, 2009

WOO!!! HOO!!!

VR021302 · April 20, 2009

the SS also includes standard launch control; the driver simply mashes the throttle, waits for revs to stabilize around 4000 rpm, and then dumps the clutch

Zembonez · April 20, 2009

the SS also includes standard launch control; the driver simply mashes the throttle, waits for revs to stabilize around 4000 rpm, and then dumps the clutch

That SUCKS!

Let us drive the damn car and keep your nannies to yourself GM! Stop making cars sissies can drive.

VMax2007 · April 20, 2009

the SS also includes standard launch control; the driver simply mashes the throttle, waits for revs to stabilize around 4000 rpm, and then dumps the clutch

That SUCKS!

Let us drive the damn car and keep your nannies to yourself GM! Stop making cars sissies can drive.

Calm down Jim, you can shut it off.

Oh, and if/when you do, you won't void the warranty on your $20,000 tranny **cough**Nissan GTR**cough**.

Zembonez · April 20, 2009

the SS also includes standard launch control; the driver simply mashes the throttle, waits for revs to stabilize around 4000 rpm, and then dumps the clutch

That SUCKS!

Let us drive the damn car and keep your nannies to yourself GM! Stop making cars sissies can drive.

Calm down Jim, you can shut it off.

Oh, and if/when you do, you won't void the warranty on your $20,000 tranny **cough**Nissan GTR**cough**.

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

VMax2007 · April 20, 2009

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

Then why put the switch on the dash? At least GM doesn't put the TM on/off switch on the dash.

I agree though.....That is why I will most likely choose a 1969 Camaro when I buy my toy.

Zembonez · April 20, 2009

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

Then why put the switch on the dash? At least GM doesn't put the TM on/off switch on the dash.

I agree though.....That is why I will most likely choose a 1969 Camaro when I buy my toy.

1969 Camaro FTMFW!

VMax2007 · April 20, 2009

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

Then why put the switch on the dash? At least GM doesn't put the TM on/off switch on the dash.

I agree though.....That is why I will most likely choose a 1969 Camaro when I buy my toy.

1969 Camaro FTMFW!

And YES!, it WILL have 4 wheel disc brakes.

VR021302 · April 20, 2009

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

Then why put the switch on the dash? At least GM doesn't put the TM on/off switch on the dash.

I agree though.....That is why I will most likely choose a 1969 Camaro when I buy my toy.

1969 Camaro FTMFW!

And YES!, it WILL have 4 wheel DRUM brakes.

fixed

VMax2007 · April 20, 2009

That isn't the point. Point is we keep making these things more complex for idiots that don't know how to drive... at the expense of those of us who actually took the time to learn. More complex just means more to break and more expense when buying, It's the same for all automakers. Lawyers and nannies... YUK!

There is more to that Nissan story. That came to pass because people were racing them in sanctioned events after bypassing the system... so Nissan said hell no. Much like GM would say if you were to bypass TM on your truck, killed a trans, and they knew about it. You are right though... it's bullshit.

Then why put the switch on the dash? At least GM doesn't put the TM on/off switch on the dash.

I agree though.....That is why I will most likely choose a 1969 Camaro when I buy my toy.

1969 Camaro FTMFW!

And YES!, it WILL have 4 wheel DRUM brakes.

fixed

Nope, you FAILED!

mr_bots · April 20, 2009

I'm surprised the 315hp/325lb-ft Stang doesn't embarrass itself against the 426hp/420lb-ft Camaro. I know there's a big weight difference, I just figured the extra 111hp and 96lb-ft would be enough to offset it.

svensk · April 20, 2009

I'm surprised the 315hp/325lb-ft Stand doesn't embarrass itself against the 426hp/420lb-ft Camaro. I know there's a big weight difference, I just figured the extra 111hp and 96lb-ft would be enough to offset it.

Might have a slight gearing advantage to make up for the power?

Zembonez · April 20, 2009

I'm surprised the 315hp/325lb-ft Stand doesn't embarrass itself against the 426hp/420lb-ft Camaro. I know there's a big weight difference, I just figured the extra 111hp and 96lb-ft would be enough to offset it.

+1 Something isn't right about those figures... Maybe Ford is holding back on theirs? The weight difference isn't THAT big.