Thor77

Camaro SS Base Price is around 30K, just like the RT. It would be the mid-line model if the planned Z28 is ever produced. Just because SS gives SRT horsepower at R/T price does not mean they cannot be compared.

They will compete for many of the same buyers: those who want some mean American muscle and have 30-35K to spend.

I wish the Challenger was the most speed/per dollar, but it does not seem to be. Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure I still like it the best.

An SS vs SRT comparison would also be fun and valid, but from the perspective of someone looking to spend their own money, comparing cars with roughly equal prices makes sense.

RoswellGrey

Pricewise, while Fords and Chevys traditionally were considered in the same class, Dodge actually was a step above -- in the Mercury or Oldsmobile range. Plymouth was the car that competed in price against Ford and Chevy. Unfortunately, with Plymouth no longer a factor, it's going to be the mid-level Challenger against the top-end Camaro and Mustang. Using price as a guide, the only real comparison would be a stripped-down SE against the 6-cylinder Mustang and Camaro. While the Challenger would win hands-down on its coolness factor, it MIGHT be able to beat the Mustang (the only comparison I have is my 2000 Mustang against the 09 Challenger) and it definitely would definitely get beaten by a 6-cylinder Camaro.

2007HemiCuda

Well Challenger fans it looks like the debate will continue. Jalopnik has thrown down the BS flag. The writer does make an interesting point.
http://jalopnik.com/5181922/shenanig...g-than-comparo

Check this out: smart and pretty.
http://www.lvrj.com/drive/41554412.html

RoswellGrey

It was nice on the reviewjournal.com piece having the pictures of all the models mentioned. I gotta admit, the 1970 Challenger remains the best-looking car of all times.

BLK 6050

Challenger wins in the looks dept...hands down it's the best retro of the group. (The Mustang then Camaro coming in second and third.) Reguarding the testing of cars...most, if not all tests during the performance years were...lets just say not always on the up and up. There were many ringers (cars that were "super tuned" from the factory) and so many of the numbers turned in by the test cars need to be taken with a grain of salt. With today's cars...if the test was not done with all the cars in the same place at the same time...the test tells you very little. Heads up is the only true test....
(It's still fun to read the old stories and road tests)

roadagent

and either the Camaro is a piece of crap that's gonna fall apart in a year is why it's 10k less than the SRT , ORRRRRRRRR that's why GM is in the trouble they're in cuz they're underselling the car to outdo Dodge

RoswellGrey

Nah, roadagent, GM probably figures it will make up whatever it loses on the cheap price of the Camaro when the millions and millions of buyers start shelling out $40K each for the Volt.

Raydar

I have always thought the Challenger was overpriced.
They're keeping the production low so that they can call it a "specialty" vehicle and sell it for a premium, where GM and Ford are (or will be shortly) building all the Camaros and Mustangs they can sell.
Seems like Dodge would do better to go for volume instead of price per unit. The Challenger can't be any more expensive to produce than a Charger.

Axel

With that being said, Challenger Starting price for SE, $22,945 to Charger $25,585. R/T Challenger is $30,945 and Charger is $32,910. SRT8 Challenger, $42,645 Charger $41,420. So in terms of it being more expensive, except the SRT8, it is actually cheaper then the Charger.

tdub2112

Wouldn't it make sense for a Charger to be more than a Challenger? That's two more doors to build.(and alot more than that)