Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blur
You're putting the Mustang on a pedestal and ripping on the Challenger for sharing a platform. It's hypocrisy to say that the new Mustang is a vast improvement on the old platform. Side-by-side comparisons between new and old Mustangs will be like comparing concept and production Camaros. It's ridiculous to call one a vast improvement over the other. They look the same. They will perform the same.
Sales are a different matter. There are so many factors in every sale, that I simply don't care to talk about it. Having more sales isn't up for discussion right now as the Camaro simply doesn't have any in the market yet. Until it hits lots, sales discussions are speculative and, therefore, ridiculous.
As far as performance, the Challenger is ahead of the Mustang. The Camaro, of course, will beat the Challenger due to similar horsepower numbers and a significant weight difference. The Mustang wins on the scale, but track performance is lackluster. Road performance is even worse by comparison because the primitive suspension setup employed by Ford simply doesn't feel good to drive. I test drove one, so I'm talking from experience. Moreover, the Mustang's only performer is the V8, much like the Challenger. This is where the Camaro is a clear winner. Even the V6 platform was taken seriously by the manufacturer. Instead of a gimp, the Camaro LS, riding on steelies, will punish both the Challenger and Mustang V6s. When comparing models, we can expect that the one that is clearly superior will have the largest sales numbers, but I've said before that we can only guess. Since the V6 represents the highest volume of all 3 cars, it's really a wonder that only GM came to the conclusion that making a competitive V6 matters.
In any case, the new Mustang is an old Mustang with the laziest facelift in domestic history. To call the new Mustang an update is a substantial overstatement. All it represents is saggier headlights and a fresher interior. The Challenger shares the Chrysler-dominating 300 platform. As a result, it lazily has all the same features inside as all of the other cars on that platform. It's still nicer than a Mustang, though.
I'm not trying to be cruel here. From the standpoint of someone who likes American cars, I feel thoroughly let down by Ford's lack of competitive will. The Mustang GT has owned the market for long enough for Ford to settle into a very boring place when it comes to performance. Instead of competing with the titans of the automotive industry, Ford has settled into a place where beating Civics was enough. Fortunately, Chevrolet aimed high when designing the Camaro SS, making a car with top-notch design and unparalleled performance.
|
Oh,you test drove a GT,nevermind me,you're the expert
I was laughing at your "prioritize" performance statement,which Dodge has done the bare mininimal of with the Challenger. These Civics that the Mustang can beat,barely by your standards,must be pretty badass because the Mustang beats all Challengers at every trim level,so these "Civics" must have a field day with the porky Challenger. Dodge had 5 years to come up with a Mustang-beater and they couldn't even match the outgoing model,talk about "prioritized" performance......ohhhh,it's a nicer car,it has a nicer ride,go put on a dress. That's a wussy argument,ohhhh,a Accord is a nicer car than a SS,it rides better
Keep this to real cars,like the Camaro and Mustang. I know you're not clear on what makes a real car,being the owner of a Impreza,but try to keep up.oops,i didn't mean to be cruel
I'll say it again,the Challenger is dead in 2 years,it's the new Mercury Marauder.