New Video of Test 2010 Mustang GT,CamaroSS and ChallengerR/T

[Birdman]

Car & Driver test's the competitions best against the little Mustang GT and guess what ....the little Gt made them both look bad.....

YouTube - 2010 Chevy Camaro SS vs. 2010 Ford Mustang GT, 2009 Dodge Challenger R/T - Car and Driver

[SLB8SNK]

Very nice... could you imagine if they compared them against the GT500....

[rpretzel]

Cheapest one in the group too!

[VaporDude]

The other manufacturers can take all the time they need and they still can not top the Mustang. Enough said...........

[SLB8SNK]

Originally Posted by VaporDude

The other manufacturers can take all the time they need and they still can not top the Mustang. Enough said...........

You can almost bet with all the OBAMA ownership, they may as well drop the muscle car, low volume, attemtps.... my guess anyways.

[Birdman]

I saw two Challengers on Sunday at our local car show . I was blown away by just how big that car really is in person. It towers over my GT500 and makes my car look small in comparrison. Sure it has great lines but the scale is just too big.IMO

[68fastback]

I saw the C&D article too and was amazed (because it was C&D!)

...either they're getting religion (lol) or they decided Ford is the only domestic left with a non-gov't-scrutinized advertising budget they can suck-up to. ;-)

My '93 Taurus wagon pulls .78 on the skidpad! -- same as the Challenger ...what a pig!

[SLB8SNK]

Originally Posted by 68fastback

I saw the C&D article too and was amazed (because it was C&D!)

...either they're getting religion (lol) or they decided Ford is the only domestic left with a non-gov't-scrutinized advertising budget they can suck-up to. ;-)

My '93 Taurus wagon pulls .78 on the skidpad! -- same as the Challenger ...what a pig!

+ 1 and why I stopped buying C&D years ago! Good call...

[Johnny Dangerously]

Originally Posted by rpretzel

Cheapest one in the group too!

And it runs on regular too. I think both the Camaro & the Chally require premium for their V8s.


`

[Alloy Dave]

Originally Posted by SLB8SNK

You can almost bet with all the OBAMA ownership, they may as well drop the muscle car, low volume, attemtps.... my guess anyways.

I think they will...temporarily. Once the gov't loans are paid off, here comes the Z28.

And Obama says he has no interest in running a car company.

[Alloy Dave]

Originally Posted by Birdman

I saw two Challengers on Sunday at our local car show . I was blown away by just how big that car really is in person. It towers over my GT500 and makes my car look small in comparrison. Sure it has great lines but the scale is just too big.IMO

I think they are after a slightly different audience. Making it smaller would not appeal to that audience. I think they made the right call...it's more of a luxo musclecar...more back seat room, more like a family car inside..softer ride, etc....but not nearly the "grit" of a Mustang or Camaro. I like the looks, but not the personality. On the other hand, I really wish the Mustang was a bit smaller and MUCH lighter. I'd be ok shaving a few inches off each dimension, using aluminum block, and getting the car down to 3,200 lbs or so...even if it meant somewhat lower HP....I think the performance would be even better, especially the handling. Yes, to make the car smaller we'd have to give up back seat, trunk space, and maybe some shoulder room, but I'm ok with that for the upsides.

[VaporDude]

Originally Posted by Alloy Dave

I think they are after a slightly different audience. Making it smaller would not appeal to that audience. I think they made the right call...it's more of a luxo musclecar...more back seat room, more like a family car inside..softer ride, etc....but not nearly the "grit" of a Mustang or Camaro. I like the looks, but not the personality. On the other hand, I really wish the Mustang was a bit smaller and MUCH lighter. I'd be ok shaving a few inches off each dimension, using aluminum block, and getting the car down to 3,200 lbs or so...even if it meant somewhat lower HP....I think the performance would be even better, especially the handling. Yes, to make the car smaller we'd have to give up back seat, trunk space, and maybe some shoulder room, but I'm ok with that for the upsides.

I think they are after a slightly different market and yes a smaller one. If you compare the original to the retro, they would be pretty close in dimensions and interior space.

I would not change the size of the Mustang now for anything. Remember the 70's when the Mustang II came out? That is what it would look like if they shaved it down a few inches in both directions and no rear seat. I don't think Ford would like to travel down that road again.

[68fastback]

Originally Posted by Alloy Dave

I think they are after a slightly different audience. Making it smaller would not appeal to that audience. I think they made the right call...it's more of a luxo musclecar...more back seat room, more like a family car inside..softer ride, etc....but not nearly the "grit" of a Mustang or Camaro. I like the looks, but not the personality. On the other hand, I really wish the Mustang was a bit smaller and MUCH lighter. I'd be ok shaving a few inches off each dimension, using aluminum block, and getting the car down to 3,200 lbs or so...even if it meant somewhat lower HP....I think the performance would be even better, especially the handling. Yes, to make the car smaller we'd have to give up back seat, trunk space, and maybe some shoulder room, but I'm ok with that for the upsides.

Then it would be sort of a sports car...



... and have to get IRS




I think the '11MY GT with the 400HP 5.0 will be a huge hit ...tho still 3500+ lbs.


I thought they commented in the article that the mustang's rear seat was more comfy and accommodating ...even tho the 'stang is substantially smaller overall they said it has more interior room. Maybe that was relative to the Camaro. Can't remember now (darn, another brain cell must have bit the dust! -lol).