Comparison Reviews of 2018 Camaro Mustang and Challenger
| Comparison Tests
Classic Comparo: Camaro SS 1LE vs. Challenger R/T Scat Pack vs. Mustang GT
Non Their First Rodeo: Once more Into the Ponycar Alienation
FLASHBACK Friday: In instance you missed information technology, earlier this week, we dropped the first drive of the updated 2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350 We've besides been wrangling a new 2019 Mustang vs 2019 Camaro comparison examination that you'll encounter very shortly. To ship you lot galloping off into the weekend with visions of high-performance pony cars, check out this rodeo-themed 3-way comparison test between 2015 the Dodge Challenger Scat Pack, 2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE and 2015 Ford Mustang GT Operation Pack. What a deviation four years makes…
It is in fact similar déjà vu all again. This comparing test goes dorsum decades -- literally. The world get-go saw the Ford Mustang in 1964. Chevrolet followed up Ford's ponycar lead with the Camaro in 1966, and Mopar mashed upwards A- and B-bodies to create the Dodge Challenger in 1969. The Mustang never went anywhere, but both the Camaro and the Challenger exited the bullring at some point, simply to come roaring back in contempo times.
Defining what exactly makes a ponycar is tricky, but you can boil it downwards to a few central attributes. One is they're blatantly American. Another is long-hood, short-deck styling suggesting a corral total of horsepower. Each of the cars in this test kicks out well over 400 hp. The final bit is that they're not pure sports cars -- they're sedan-based. The Challenger rides on Chrysler's 60 platform; the Camaro'south a cut-down Holden Commodore; and the all-new Mustang withal contains traces of Lincoln LS, most notably the floorpan, which results in a high heel betoken.
These aren't regular ponies -- they're stallions. You can tell past the suffixes: 1LE, Performance Pack, Scat Pack. To properly test such studs nosotros ran them along one of our favorite driving routes, an approximately 45-mile barrel-kicking collection of roads we call the Surfschleife. We starting time off with a super-tight, extra tortuous department that somewhen turns into Mulholland Bulldoze, a road that needs fiddling explanation. (Information technology's rad!) Then nosotros get most 10 miles of straight-upwardly cruising next to the Pacific Ocean through Malibu along the Pacific Coast Highway. Next upwards is a long, high-speed department that tin best be idea of equally a hill climb. Finally, we get a 5-mile department of the 101 freeway in which we test things such as ride quality, prowl command, and the radio. There are also nearly iii miles of urban center streets and traffic lights thrown in for good measure. After flogging all iii on the Surfschleife, here's what we institute.
3rd Identify: Contrivance Challenger R/T half dozen.4 Scat Pack
Big Muscles, Medium Price
If life consisted of nothing simply directly lines, the Challenger Scat Pack would be your winner. The automobile nerd world is still catching its commonage breath from Dodge dropping the 707-horsepower Hellcat bomb. But by focusing all our attention on that animal, we missed the fact that the Dodge Boys are selling a car with 485 naturally aspirated ponies for less than $40K. I hope yous appreciate how amazing that last sentence is. I'1000 not quite 40 years old, but I well recall when the Lamborghini Countach 5000S made -- are you sitting down? -- 449 hp, and that seemed like the most powerful car the world would always meet. This here Dodge smacks it.
The trouble with the Scat Pack, similar all Challengers, is its heft and girth. The motorcar is massive. Says associate editor Rory Jurnecka, "The Challenger feels similar information technology smothers the road. Information technology's large and broad and wants to wrap every inch of tarmac in a giant carry hug." The Challenger is about 400 pounds heavier than the others, and Chevy and Ford are on the but barely acceptable side of big-boned. For yous numbers freaks: Challenger, 4235 pounds; Camaro, 3886 pounds; Mustang, 3814 pounds. For who knows what reason, our Scat Pack examination car came with a single choice: a $1400 guzzler-tax-killing eight-speed automatic. Surely the manual version will weigh less and be the better performance car (we'll allow you know). It will sticker for $39,490.
Back to straight-line fury: You sure don't find the extra lard when the light turns greenish. Dodge holds tight to the adage that in that location'south no replacement for displacement (never mind the blown Hellcat). That'due south because information technology has a large power and torque advantage over the other two. To wit: Challenger, 485/475; Camaro, 426/420; Mustang, 435/400. The Scat Pack striking 60 mph in four.ii seconds and pummeled the quarter mile in 12.6 seconds at 112.iii mph. The Mustang GT was barely in second place, hitting 60 mph in 4.iv seconds and running the quarter mile in 12.8 seconds at 112.2 mph. It is interesting to note the trap speeds of these two. That Mustang 5.0-liter engine revs high and comes on stiff near the cease line. The Camaro also hit 60 mph in 4.4 seconds and lost the quarter mile to the new 'Stang past a tenth of a 2d, 12.9 seconds at 110.5 mph.
But the Surfschleife doesn't have that many places from which to launch a machine. Unremarkably you lot're turning left or right. Says acquaintance editor Christian Seabaugh, "Actually started to experience big on Mulholland. Lots of rolls, lots of complaints from the tires, and the brakes revealed themselves not to be upwardly to the task." Different the SRT Challenger, the Scat Pack doesn't get adjustable shocks. One time things got rocking, this Challenger was let down past subpar damping. My own notes read, "Lots of secondary movements, similar a water bed." The SRT besides comes with stouter brakes. Nevertheless, like all 5-8 Challengers, there'due south something totally lovable about the Scat Pack. The 3 of u.s. hated giving such a uniquely American machine tertiary place. But, as the French say, such is life...
2nd Place: Ford Mustang GT (Operation Pack)
Where's the Boss?
We're not sure what to make of the new Mustang's looks. While I'm happy information technology's not slavishly retro, I think the new metal represents a swing and a miss. The headlights are wrong. Mustangs accept e'er -- salvage for Vanilla Water ice'southward Flim-flam-torso -- had big, round eyes. This 1 doesn't. The three of the states also observed more people checking out the Camaro, and in particular the Challenger, than the all-new Mustang. Information technology's somehow sort of anonymous. Weird, correct? Also, at that place's way besides much front overhang. But that's what happens when your wheelbase is 5 inches shorter than the Camaro's, even though the cars are only 2 inches autonomously in length.
Rory sums upward why the brand-new Mustang didn't win this way: "I'm angry considering Ford didn't benchmark the Dominate for the new Mustang the manner Chevy benchmarked the Z06 for the new Stingray." I agree, and I'k going to become a footstep further: I'm disappointed. Specifically because the Mustang GT has packed on 196 pounds of heft compared to the last GT Track Pack we tested. That's considerable. So there'southward the fact that, here'southward Ford, nigh to turn carmaking as nosotros know it on its head with the 2015 aluminum F-150 pickup, however information technology decides to let its sports car gobble Twinkies? How'd that happen? I just don't get it.
No dubiousness some of you are thinking, "Hey, the new 'Stang's 70 pounds lighter than the Camaro. If it's all about weight, shouldn't the GT win?" Turns out, it's non all about weight. Nosotros're happy that later all these decades, Ford finally switched the Mustang's rearend abroad from a solid, alive axle to a fully independent one, something nosotros groused about dorsum in Baronial 1964! Aye, yes, at that place are some advantages to a alive axle, but they are few and far between. There'due south a reason the Ferrari 458 Italia doesn't have a solid rear axle. Having IRS is i thing; having IRS make your motorcar handle meliorate is another.
To be off-white, the new 'Stang was quicker around our figure 8 than the car it replaces, at 24.7 seconds compared to 25 flat. And 24.7 seconds is how long it took the Hellcat to run the figure viii, also as the Alfa Romeo 4C. The old Boss 302, too. Problem for the Mustang GT is that the heavier, less powerful Camaro 1LE ran it in 24.v seconds. Non a huge departure, mind you, but faster is faster. Also, there's a reason we don't just publish numbers and phone call it a day. For instance, our effigy-8 meister, Kim Reynolds, chosen the 1LE "a wonderful car," while he unleashed a very un-Kim-like string of colorful language at the Mustang. Under throttle, the rear cease wanted to footstep out, and if you lifted, the Mustang would default to understeer. There was no smooth way to run the figure eight.
Merely that'south limit handling. What nearly out on the Surfschleife? The Mustang virtually impressed the three of us on the freeway. This is where the IRS pays off bigtime. The ride was much better than in the other 2 ponycars. I know you commenter types volition say different, but if you lot're honest with yourself, cruising on the freeway is where almost of us spend the majority of our time. Says Rory, "Enough of passing power. I'd road-trip this car, no problem." When we cruised next to the beach, the Mustang more or less tied the Challenger. The 'Stang'due south ride is meliorate, just with the windows down there's not much to hear, whereas the Scat Pack'south mega V-8 howls. Once the road started twisting, we all liked the Mustang GT, but we're not in love with information technology. Still, the new pause has merit. From Rory, "Practiced thing is that with IRS, the 'Stang is no longer tossed into oncoming traffic past mid-corner bumps. Huzzah!" Christian called it a "sweetheart" on the twisty sections.
1st Place: Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE
The Ponycar King
Iron Mike Tyson once said, "Everyone has a programme 'til they become punched in the mouth." That'due south no doubt how the good men and women at Ford are feeling right at present, especially considering, equally tested, the winning car costs about $4500 less than the optioned-up Triple Yellow Mustang. Out of these 3 ponycars, the Camaro SS 1LE is improve on both a coulee road and a racetrack. Sometimes these things are that easy.
Perfect? No. The usual Camaro complaints were heard loud and articulate over lunch—cheap interior built from materials (seemingly) sourced from Happy Meal toys, and you can't meet out of it. Rory felt the shifter is likewise notchy and loftier-endeavour. Aye, the interior'southward not fabricated from the best stuff on Earth, but at least the steering wheel and shift knob are swaddled in Alcantara. As for non existence able to come across out of the Camaro, that's only when you lot're turning left. Equally such, information technology's non a abiding problem (kidding). Besides not so hot: The 1LE is mode likewise high-strung to transform into a beach cruiser, and the ride is crush-y'all-up rough on the freeway. Easily the worst of the three in terms of twenty-four hour period-to-day condolement. Of course, a Camry is even more than comfy.
The biggest divergence betwixt the Camaro and the others on the fun-to-drive portions of tarmac was confidence. The 3 of united states were all inspired to push the white and black Chevy harder than we dared in the Mustang or the Challenger. Says Seabaugh, "The 1LE is unflappable. So. Much. Grip. It'south then planted to the footing that it might as well be magnetically attracted to the road." Rory adds quite a flake more: "Wow, this thing feels pocket-sized and light -- which, for a Camaro, is nuts! The machine is and then well-counterbalanced; it's neutral about of the time with easily provoked -- and controlled -- oversteer. Brakes feel strong with no fade. Zip body coil, well-controlled damping. The 1LE filled me with confidence. The Camaro SS is hands-down the best driver's car of the group." My notes said things like, "Superb steering. Could handle 100 more horsepower, easy. So much grip, so much conviction -- outstanding! How much per month?" Rory showed upwards at the rodeo in the 1LE, got out of the car smiling, and said, "I'm thinking nigh buying one." Chevy and the Camaro team accept turned a massive corner.
Special props are due for the engine. Sure, numbers-wise, information technology'southward the weakest, both in terms of power and directly-line bravado. But there's something magical nearly a Chevy small-block. The half dozen.2-liter cam-in-block V-viii in the Camaro reminds me of a scene from the film "Ronin." Sean Bean's Spence character is bugging De Niro's Sam nigh his favorite gun. After some hostile banter, Sam says, "You know, I actually favor the old 1911." Spence replies, "Forty-5. Old gun." To which Sam counters, "It's served my country well. For a long fourth dimension." Exactly. Jurnecka gets a bit less metaphoric in his praise: "The virtually road-racer-sounding engine in the grouping. Tough to put into words, but it reminds me of watching old Trans Am Serial races. It crackles and spits more than than the others, and generally sounds more raw." Gotta love crackling spit. Christian was more economic with his sentiments: "This engine is a beast."
Disappointed, disheartened, and angry Ford fans tin accept solace in the knowledge that this is only the beginning of the new Mustang story. Plow your minds back half a decade and remember how bad the Camaro was when information technology launched, or even years after it launched. Here'south what I wrote well-nigh the Camaro SS convertible versus the Mustang GT convertible back in 2011: "While the Chevy is much improved, information technology's still not competitive with the Ford. As a commuter you experience more than confident in the Mustang. Not only that, but it's more fun and a better dance partner in the corners." The more things change, they and so change right dorsum. Rumors of a Mach 1 Mustang keep pouring in every day, and nosotros're pretty sure the upcoming Shelby GT350 volition be a track stud/thug.
As for the Challenger, we honey it as-is. Considering of its plus-sized nature, information technology'south never going to exist the back route all-star the 1LE is, or that the Mustang is sure to morph into. The Challenger thinks unlike. For now. Word is that a new Challenger is coming in 2017 on an all-new platform, and will be at least 300 pounds lighter and 8 inches shorter, with a smaller wheelbase. In other words, the next Challenger will exist the same size as the current Camaro (the Alpha platform Camaro is coming in 2016). The new aluminum-intensive Camaro will exist significantly lighter than the current car. The future is anyone's to win, equally is a future ponycar comparing test. Until then, nosotros advise you to go grab a Camaro SS 1LE. It rocks.
Ponycar Limited Lane
Our trio's speed traces through Streets of Willow's very beginning plough are basically a performance synopsis of each car. The Challenger's immense power deposits the big red Dodge into the corner's entry at a substantially higher speed than the others, simply driver Randy Pobst and so has to drastically rein information technology all in to transit the turn'due south heart. The closely matched Mustang and Camaro approach it more slowly but go deeper, with the Ford checking its speed first though decelerating far less drastically than the Dodge. And while both the Challenger and Mustang are feathering their throttles, the Camaro briefly accelerates farther, needing only a modest lift before they all brake together. In that location, in a nutshell, are these iii cars: one with tremendous power, some other, astonishing grip, and the third, somewhere in the middle. It'due south a pattern repeated throughout their best laps. (Note too their speeds negotiating Turns v through 7.) Effectually the apartment, skidpad-like Turn 14, the Camaro's cornering grip is 15 percent higher than the Challenger's -- that's a massive advantage.
| 2015 Chevrolet Camaro SS (1LE) | 2015 Dodge Challenger R/T vi.four Scat Pack | 2015 Ford Mustang (Operation Package) | |
| POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS | |||
| DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT | Forepart-engine, RWD | Front-engine, RWD | Front-engine, RWD |
| ENGINE Blazon | 90-deg V-eight, aluminum block/heads | xc-deg V-8, iron block/alum heads | 90-deg V-8, aluminum block/heads |
| VALVETRAIN | OHV, 2 valves/cyl | OHV, 2 valves/cyl | DOHC, 4 valves/cyl |
| Displacement | 376.1 cu in/6162 cc | 391.i cu in/6410 cc | 302.1 cu in/4951 cc |
| COMPRESSION RATIO | ten.7:1 | 10.nine:one | 11.0:ane |
| Power (SAE NET) | 426 hp @ 5900 rpm* | 485 hp @ 6000 rpm | 435 hp @ 6500 rpm |
| TORQUE (SAE NET) | 420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm* | 475 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm | 400 lb-ft @ 4250 rpm |
| REDLINE | 6250 rpm | 6000 rpm | 6500 rpm |
| WEIGHT TO POWER | 9.i lb/hp | 8.7 lb/hp | eight.8 lb/hp |
| Transmission | 6-speed manual | 8-speed automated | 6-speed manual |
| Axle/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO | 3.91:ane/1.96:i | iii.09:1/2.07:1 | three.73:1/ii.43:one |
| SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR | Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multilink, whorl springs, anti-roll bar | Control arms, coil springs, anti-whorl bar; multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar | Struts, coil springs, anti-whorl bar; multilink, coil springs, anti-coil bar |
| STEERING RATIO | sixteen.1:1 | 12.3:1 | sixteen.0:1 |
| TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK | 2.seven | two.four | 2.6 |
| BRAKES, F;R | xiv.0-in vented, disc; 14.4-in vented disc, ABS | 14.two-in vented, grooved disc; thirteen.8-in vented, grooved disc, ABS | xv.0-in vented disc; 13.0-in vented disc, ABS |
| WHEELS | 10.0 10 20-in; eleven.0 x 20-in, forged aluminum | 9.0 x 20-in, cast aluminum | 9.0 10 19-in; 9.five x 19-in, cast aluminum |
| TIRES | 285/35R20 100Y Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar | 245/45R20 99Y Goodyear Hawkeye F1 Supercar | 255/40R19 96Y; 275/40R19 101Y Pirelli P Zero |
| DIMENSIONS | |||
| WHEELBASE | 112.3 in | 116.two in | 107.1 in |
| TRACK, F/R | 63.vii/63.7 in | 63.4/63.viii in | 62.three/64.ix in |
| LENGTH ten WIDTH x Superlative | 190.6 ten 75.v x 54.2 in | 197.9 x 75.seven ten 57.5 in | 188.3 x 75.4 x 54.9 in |
| TURNING CIRCLE | 37.7 ft | 38.8 ft | 40.0 ft |
| CURB WEIGHT | 3886 lb | 4235 lb | 3814 lb |
| WEIGHT DIST., F/R | 53/47% | 55/45% | 54/46% |
| SEATING CAPACITY | 4 | 5 | 4 |
| HEADROOM, F/R | 37.iv/35.3 in | 39.3/37.one in | 37.6/34.8 in |
| LEGROOM, F/R | 42.4/29.9 in | 42.0/33.one in | 44.5/thirty.6 in |
| SHOULDER ROOM, F/R | 56.9/50.4 in | 58.5/53.9 in | 56.3/52.2 in |
| CARGO Book | 11.iii cu ft | sixteen.ii cu ft | 13.5 cu ft |
| Test DATA | |||
| Dispatch TO MPH | |||
| 0-30 | one.7 sec | 1.vi sec | one.7 sec |
| 0-twoscore | 2.4 | 2.3 | two.4 |
| 0-50 | three.4 | 3.2 | 3.4 |
| 0-lx | 4.4 | 4.2 | four.iv |
| 0-seventy | 5.six | five.four | 5.vii |
| 0-80 | seven.i | vi.6 | 7.0 |
| 0-90 | viii.7 | 8.1 | viii.7 |
| 0-100 | ten.6 | 9.9 | x.5 |
| PASSING, 45-65 MPH | 2.ane | 2.1 | 2.2 |
| QUARTER MILE | 12.9 sec @ 110.5 mph | 12.6 sec @ 112.3 mph | 12.8 sec @ 112.two mph |
| BRAKING, 60-0 MPH | 99 ft | 108 ft | 107 ft |
| LATERAL Acceleration | 0.98 thousand (avg) | 0.89 1000 (avg) | 0.96 one thousand (avg) |
| MT FIGURE EIGHT | 24.5 sec @ 0.87 g (avg) | 25.v sec @ 0.81 one thousand (avg) | 24.7 sec @ 0.84 g (avg) |
| 1.55-MI Route COURSE LAP | 82.81 sec | 85.77 sec | 84.32 sec |
| Top-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH | 1450 rpm | 1500 rpm | 1800 rpm |
| CONSUMER INFO | |||
| BASE PRICE | $38,000 | $39,490 | $35,420 |
| Toll As TESTED | $41,880 | $39,890 | $46,380 |
| STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL | Yes/yes | Yes/yes | Yep/yep |
| AIRBAGS | Dual front end, front side, f/r curtain | Dual front, front side, f/r drape, driver human knee | Dual front, front side, f/r pall, front genu |
| BASIC WARRANTY | 3 yrs/36,000 miles | 3 yrs/36,000 miles | three yrs/36,000 miles |
| POWERTRAIN WARRANTY | 5 yrs/100,000 miles | v yrs/100,000 miles | 5 yrs/sixty,000 miles |
| ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE | v yrs/100,000 miles | 5 yrs/100,000 miles | 5 yrs/lx,000 miles |
| FUEL CAPACITY | 19.0 gal | 18.5 gal | xvi.0 gal |
| EPA CITY/HWY/Rummage ECON | 16/24/19 mpg | 15/25/18 mpg | 15/25/19 mpg |
| Free energy CONS., Urban center/HWY | 211/140 kW-hrs/100 miles | 225/135 kW-hrs/100 miles | 225/135 kW-hrs/100 miles |
| CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB | i.03 lb/mile | one.06 lb/mile | 1.06 lb/mile |
| RECOMMENDED FUEL | Unleaded premium | Unleaded premium | Unleaded premium |
Source: https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/comparison-camaro-ss-1le-challenger-rt-scat-pack-mustang-gt/
0 Response to "Comparison Reviews of 2018 Camaro Mustang and Challenger"
Postar um comentário