Cuda340

By LAWRENCE ULRICH
Published: April 16, 2009

The New York Times reviewed the new Camaro. Here are some excerpts where it is compared to the Challenger:

NEARLY five million Camaros, produced over 35 years, are bound to produce some stories. This one is mine:

The Camaro, a working-class hero of the 1967-2002 model years — a run that included forgettable cars as well — is back. Its arrival completes a blessed baby boomer trinity of so-called pony cars, after reintroductions of the retro Ford Mustang and Dodge Challenger.

With the old pony-car wars suddenly revived, even people who love fast cars can reasonably ask why. Those who dial 911 at the sound of screeching tires are even more upset: how, they ask, can Detroit be turning out fluff when its survival is at stake? The answer is that sports cars and sexy coupes still have a role to play, no matter the price of gas or the blood on Detroit’s balance sheets.
The V-6 in the reasonably priced ($22,995) base model is the type you’d find in a $45,000 Infiniti, Mercedes or, well, a Cadillac: shared with models like the Caddy CTS, this 3.6-liter overhead-cam engine combines fuel-saving direct injection and a 6-speed automatic to produce 304 horsepower with a stellar highway economy rating of 29 m.p.g. That’s better highway mileage than you will get from a slew of less powerful V-6 models, including not just the Mustang and the Challenger but the Toyota Camry sedan and the Honda Accord coupe.

Where Ford and especially Dodge photocopied their old models and called it a day, the Camaro addresses the past more obliquely. The result is unmistakably a Camaro, yet it’s also a bold, 21st-century design that may age better than its more literal rivals. Befitting a car that scored the Bumblebee role in the “Transformers” movies, there’s some cartoonish adornment, including the nonfunctioning hood scoop on the V-8 model and fake brake vents along the side. But during my week of testing, even Audi and Porsche owners gushed over the Camaro’s looks — high praise for a Chevy.

Make no mistake, the V-6 whips the base 6-cylinder Mustang and Challenger in both power and sophistication. Yet it still doesn’t feel like a muscle-car motor. With little low-end torque, there’s no hold-on-tight sensation when you floor the gas. And while the engine will spin to 7,000 r.p.m., keeping the revs high is a strange way to drive a Camaro.

The SS lops nearly 1.5 seconds off the time it takes the 6-cylinder to reach 60 m.p.h., which the V-8 accomplishes in 4.7 seconds. That stoplight talent easily outshines the 315-horse $30,000 Ford Mustang GT and is neck-and-neck with the 425-horse Dodge Challenger SRT8.

If the Camaro feels a tad less fire-breathing than that $40,000 Challenger, it also costs about $8,000 less, making it the clear bang-for-the-buck winner.

Anyone wanting to read the entire article and view the photos, can view them here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/au.../19camaro.html

gunnerwhite

I know for me I am sick of the speed and power comparisons. If the only thing I wanted was speed and power I would not buy any of the three. I could care less if one is .5 seconds faster then the other. I want one because of the look. I have always wanted a yellow with black strips style pony car. Now I can have a new one (Well, in June).

Ford Mustang – sorry I have owned three and each one was a nightmare.
Chevy Camaro – sorry just looks odd to me.
Dodge Challenger – Yep right on the money.

Can’t believe any of these so called stories/reviews, everyone is biased in some way shape or form.

Just my two cents

Ridge Runner

I,m with ya man.

Thor77

Performance comparisons, and performance/price comparisons are a very natural thing for any car enthusiast, and especially in the muscle/pony car segment.

Here on a Challenger forum, we all know that the Challenger is far superior to the Camaro or Mustang but not every hack journalist will recognize its true greatness. Lacking discerning taste, they will often fall back on simple numerical analysis.

I wish the Challenger was the fastest, and fastest for the money, but just because it isn't doesn't mean I don't want one anymore. Performance numbers for stock vehicles are just for bragging rights. Just get a Challenger, make it as fast as you need it to be, and then you've got the style and the speed.

I have to tip my hat to the Camaro though, because it is truly excellent bang for the buck. I don't love it like I love the Challenger, but 426 HP in a 30K car that handles is a great value.