Before mods I think I had a 4.61 on evic with my SRT8.
Next Sunday weather permitting I will be at track.

Simply untrue. I've seen the proof. You need to read the right forums. ;)

http://mustangforums.com/forum/membe...icanspeed.html
CAI+tune only 12.877 @ 106.79 w/ 1.819

That's with a manual too btw.

Just one person right off the cuff. There are others who have done similarly. So if people can bring up Tony and his 13.1 w/o air filter run, regardless of whether it's typical or not which it isn't, I can do the same. In the interest of fairness ofcourse.

It's not about being defensive either. It's about being factual. IMO it is a driver's race between the stock RT and the stock GT mustang with the RT having a slight advantage.

the fact is the mustang is faster per$ you spend on it....the hemis are really pricey to mod...

Look closely at what you wrote " CAI+tune only 12.877 @ 106.79 w/ 1.819" With tune being very important. Diablo chip with the tune is another beast entirely. Adding more fuel and higher shift points makes loads more power. That is why stock for stock is the only way to test these cars. And that is why I said "after mods its who wants to throw the most money at it". So 2009 to 2009. Stock for stock. The Challenger has alot of potential as does the Mustang when you start modding. The facts will be what they are. No matter how you spin it or me. 13.1 shows what is possible for the R/T in the right hands. Even SS owners want to compare to the R/T and not the similar SRT-8. We'll see, we'll see.

Stock for stock it's extremely close with the RT holding a slight advantage. And by slight I mean one, maybe two tenths. People have pulled 13.3 on a stock mustang if you know where to look. Typical? Ofcourse not. But then neither is 13.1 in an RT.

Regarding what's a "fair" comparison or not haven't we all seen this huge gray area argued a million times over? Considering you can get a brand new mustang GT out the door for 22-24K right now perhaps we should compare it to the Challenger SE?

All depends on how you want to go about drawing comparisons as far as who "wins" or not. It's debatable what is the most fair way to go about these things.

But you need to remeber that the Mustang has been out for 4 years. the Challenger R/T ans SE have only been out for one. That's why the mustang is cheaper. Ford has gotten the efficiency of building a Mustang down to a cheap science. So give Dodge a year or two.(if they're still around)

BTW, I'm not calling the Mustang cheap or underdone. But affordable.

This is a Camaro verses Challenger thread,quit talkin about the joke of an engine 4.6 puny.puke. I have been drag and street racing since the 70,s. If the #,s of the Camaro are correct,(weight,h.p.,ect.) then the Camaro,maybe only temporaraly, will be king. The old drag racin adage was,you gain a tenth of a second for every 100# you lose if every thing stays the same. I didn,t like the look of the new Camaro when it was first introduced,I now love the back,don,t care for the front,and by the post the other day of the yellow one in the rain,the side angle don,t do anything for me.But the Challenger looks down right awesome at all angles.I am big on h.p.,and still have alot of big number muscle,but I think I will forgo some stock h.p. and still stay with the Challenger.I will probably get a Classic this year. In this case,I think looks over rule gross h.p. Just my 2 cents.

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!!!!!!! Ridge.I don't care if the Camaro was pullin 12 sec 1/4 mile times I just plain don't and haven't since the concept like the looks of it.My Challenger is GORGEOUS and no Camaro or Mustang can compare.

Exactly....Stang or Camaro...hardly retro...

It must make you pretty uncomfortable to talk about it. You know. Seeing as how your beloved 5.7L hemi can barely take the thing in a race.

Back on topic. Personally I think the Camaro looks pretty ugly. But I'll reserve final judgement until I see it in person.

PS: I wasn't the one who brought up the mustang in the first place. Trash was talked but not by me.