ORIGINAL: RLSH700

I will start by welcoming Huntman USA to the site. Now I'd like to go through and discuss some areas that are not entirely accurate.

1. It's too close to call right now to make a judgement about the GT500 vs. the SRT-8 as the acceleration times reported by major sources indicate that the acceleration times are around 4.7-4.8 secs for the automatic and the manual by all logic should be faster and considering that the GT500 does the acceleration times in around 4.5-4.7 secs it is certainly possible. The thing the Challenger has in its favor when the manual is introduced is the 3.91 axle-ratio to the GT500's 3.31, which should help address some of the lower power output. Also the 6.1L is known for being underrated, and the weight difference is less significant at this level with only a 250lbs difference as opposed to the 500 lbs difference. Also, the Challenger will be faster in the top speed due to the lack of a governor that the GT500 has. So we will have to wait until the two are finally compared head-to-head on the track.

2. The 6-speed is not completely an advantage. The fact of the matter is the gearing for the GT is actually shorter when combined with the manual as the 1st gear ratio is a 3.38 with the 3.55 axle equals about 11.999 vs. the Challenger's 2.97 1st gear ratio with the the 3.73 equals about 11.078, with the fuel economy being the same, hopefully the closer gearing will pay off by keeping it in the peak range.

3. The V6 department isn't a guaranteed advantage for the Challenger. Although it produces 40hp, the fact of the matter is the Mustang has the advantage in the transmission department in terms of performance. The gearing on the Mustang's 5-speed automatic is set up for acceleration which comes at the cost of fuel economy, the Challenger's 4-speed is an early 90's design that was built to be practical and gets better fuel economy while not really boosting performance. On top of this, the Mustang has a manual that makes up for the automatic's lackluster fuel economy. Then the fact of the matter is the Mustang V6 weighs and costs less. The advantage that the Challenger has is the 3.5L V6 is a design that pretty much has any bugs it might have had when they updated it last in 1999 resolve; meanwhile, the 4.0L has been having issues since they changed it over to a SOHC engine in around the same time period. The 3.5L is a more reliable design which is a real plus.

I think what they basically did was they took a E-Class suspension and built the sedans around this, now this is a modified version of that platform; however, it isn't a completely re-badged Mercedes like the SLK was.

Also I have driven a Mustang and felt like a compact on the inside. Even though the last gen Mustang was smaller, it actually felt bigger on the inside.

Urlosingbd and MrKrisSullivan, I think it's going to be close and best to wait for the actual test. I doubt that Dodge would build the R/T without first making sure it was at least as fast as the GT; however, remember that lb/hp doesn't always guarantee a victory. We'll have to wait and see to be certain.