Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew
You can see the Challenger as a bloated boat, but not the overweight Camaro? Anyways, some of us like the Challenger for the very reasons that make it different, namely size and comfort, but they, especially the 12 srt with the Bilstien performance suspension can easily handle with an SS and ones with an auto are capable of low 12s, a number have hit 12.2 BONE STOCK. I would actually hate to see the Challenger go and would love to see them offer a pony car to go against the Camaro and Mustang along with the last true muscle car (sorry, 4 seater Camaros and Mustangs have never been musclecars and have always been ponies..
|
The Camaro is a little big for my preference but the Camaro can pull it off with it's body lines and esthetics. The Challenger on the other hand, it's just so plain to me. The sides are almost completely flat with no lines, almost the same with the front and back.
Dodge's website says that the 392 will hit mid 12s in the auto, high 12's with the manual. Even if it hit 12.2 Bone stock like you said, your comparing the flagship challenger with the base Mustang and Camaro performance wise.
What is this "4 seater" Camaro and Mustang your referring to?