New Comparo

[Tm@c1965]

They will

"Dodge Dart GTS" I think it'd be amazing, albeit an engineering nightmare.

produce an Alfa Romeo based Challenger replacement in 18' or 19.' It may be called a Cuda or Challenger. It will probably be a Twin Turbo V6 Pentastar based motor. It will be a radical departure.

Sponsored

 

[PatrickHenninger]

produce an Alfa Romeo based Challenger replacement in 18' or 19.' It may be called a Cuda or Challenger. It will probably be a Twin Turbo V6 Pentastar based motor. It will be a radical departure.

It can't be a Cuda, since that was Plymouth, which Mopar killed off. I still feel like the Charger is blasphemy, but I digress.
Sometimes this forum makes me sad, because FI is too far out of reach for me.

 

[Spartan]

If they could bring down those hips on the Challenger and just streamline it a bit (even smaller by a few inches) I think it would be a sexy car.

And this is just bad...this shouldn't be happening 2 years into production. Ford QA should be ashamed.

Fit-and-finish fail: "The exterior fit and finish are a problem," Robinson said. "The body gaps are not consistent, and panels are misaligned." "Inconsistent sheet-metal gaps and uneven trunk lids make a terrible impression," Wiesenfelder said. "Poor build quality is apparent from nose to tail," Bruzek said.

 

[5.0 435]

Black 2SS

How can you call this ugly in black. I've got so many positive comments on this cars looks. Both the Mustang GT and SS are outstanding looking cars. It's not like the 80's and those were ugly.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Actually the 80s Camaro was sharp as hell. Slow but sharp looking.

 

[Tm@c1965]

It could be called a Cuda

It can't be a Cuda, since that was Plymouth, which Mopar killed off. I still feel like the Charger is blasphemy, but I digress.
Sometimes this forum makes me sad, because FI is too far out of reach for me.

Chrysler bought the rights to the name Cuda 2 years ago. I bet they did this for a reason.

 

[Tm@c1965]

The hips are what make it look good

If they could bring down those hips on the Challenger and just streamline it a bit (even smaller by a few inches) I think it would be a sexy car.

And this is just bad...this shouldn't be happening 2 years into production. Ford QA should be ashamed.

Fit-and-finish fail: "The exterior fit and finish are a problem," Robinson said. "The body gaps are not consistent, and panels are misaligned." "Inconsistent sheet-metal gaps and uneven trunk lids make a terrible impression," Wiesenfelder said. "Poor build quality is apparent from nose to tail," Bruzek said.

It's also what makes the 15 Stang look better. Prior to the 15, there were no hips on the car. Now it looks like a 69' Fastback from behind. I still think the 15 should have retained round headlights. Some of us do not tire from the retro look. The retro cars are based on timeless designs. I never get tired of the 69 Camaro, Mustang and 70 Cudas. My car has good fit and finish. The interior is very nice on the SRT.

 

[Taneras]

Gotta wonder whats up with the second difference in quartermile time between the GT and the SS.

They said that its hardest to launch at the strip due to wheel hop... But a 13.2? I'd say the vast majority of the forum who's tracked their cars did better on a stock run. I could see maybe its just a bad DA but then again the SS did an expected 12.3 run.

The body panel issue is something to take note of. Mine isn't too bad, it actually took me a while to notice, but I've seen some really bad alignments.

 

[Hack]

All three cars are pretty good. I haven't driven the new Camaro yet, but the last gen was pretty good. I'm glad there are some differences between the three so people can choose based on what they like. The Challenger is really solid feeling with good power. I have picked Mustang in the past because it's cheaper... but my latest decision was entirely based on a cool engine design.

 

[Childs Play]

That article compares the RT SCAT. If you drive the SRT with adaptive suspension, it's totally different. Stiffer and no slop.

If they used more aluminum and carbon fiber on the Challenger, that would be great. I am for lighter...not smaller on that car.

I don't think the Camaro should have placed first. It should have placed 3rd. Its UGLY. Looks are important in these cars. Visibility is also important. I don't care how fast that POS is. If you can't see you should not be racing the car.

Looks are subjective. Also visibility is better in the 6th gen than the 5th gen Camaro by a long shot. Look over your shoulder when trying to change lanes in a 5th gen Camaro... You won't see a damn thing, it's terrible, they fixed that in the 6th gen. Sight lines aren't perfect for sure though, but Mustang isn't without it's faults in visibility either.

 

[Childs Play]

How can you call this ugly in black. I've got so many positive comments on this cars looks. Both the Mustang GT and SS are outstanding looking cars. It's not like the 80's and those were ugly.

Mustang II............. (not 80's but meh. I thought the Fox body was pretty nice. I like the sharp boxy look of 80's cars though. Many people didn't...)

But I agree. I think all three are amazing looking.

Each of them have their faults IMO.

I feel the Camaro could have a bit more aggressive looking rear, the Mustang could have less of a catfish look up front, and the Challenger could tone down the bulkiness (Can't think of anything bad about how the Challenger looks so I'll point at the weight). However those are just my opinions.

 

[Spartan]

How can you call this ugly in black. I've got so many positive comments on this cars looks. Both the Mustang GT and SS are outstanding looking cars. It's not like the 80's and those were ugly.

Looks nice but for the life of me, why the belt line is so high and why they put the mickey ears on the console just baffle me...if they didn't do those 2 things the car would be a big seller. The visibility just kills it for most DDs.

 

[1320']

Looks nice but for the life of me, why the belt line is so high and why they put the mickey ears on the console just baffle me...if they didn't do those 2 things the car would be a big seller. The visibility just kills it for most DDs.

The high beltline is a styling choice and a result of the ATS/CTS DNA found in the car. If you look at GM's designs over the last 2 years they almost ALL have high beltlines. The 2016 Camaro that I sat in was an eye opener because when I put my arm up on the door top..the point of my elbow is only slightly below my ear.

The mickey mouse ear dash pod is a result of lowering the entire dash to improve forward visibility to compensate for the even more chopped roofline. Had the dash been at say...the height of the 5th Gen the dash pod wouldn't have nearly been so pronounced. It was also that way because GM has decided to use a common dash in the Camaro (parts bin car, remember?). It's used in at least 4 other GM vehicles for cost saving, but they don't have the interior design styling of the Camaro and have visibility issues. Shoehorning the gauges into the Camaro but still lowering the dash caused the hump, which was then styled into the mouse ears.

2016 Sierra Gauges:

2016 Camaro gauges:

 

[Khell86]

Yeah unfortunately in my eyes the high beltline with the low roof gives the car sort of a toy car look. Scion TC has almost the same side profile, minus the roof being slightly higher and car being slightly shorter. Performance wise though the camaro is a killer.

The Challenger has a high betline too and while the front profile is great, the side is a litty iffy for me as well. It just makes the car look so big from the side. Which is why they went with the black side skirts, but im not too much of a fan of that. Didnt really appreciate it on the 10-12 mustangs.

 

[1mic]

That article compares the RT SCAT. If you drive the SRT with adaptive suspension, it's totally different. Stiffer and no slop.

If they used more aluminum and carbon fiber on the Challenger, that would be great. I am for lighter...not smaller on that car.

I don't think the Camaro should have placed first. It should have placed 3rd. Its UGLY. Looks are important in these cars. Visibility is also important. I don't care how fast that POS is. If you can't see you should not be racing the car.

How wide for rear tires can you go with the Challenger? Also, has anyone done 18s or small for rear wheels to compliment a drag setup?

I'd love to own a hellcat, slicks and skinnies, remove all the seats and install a racing driver seat, and oh yes in manual please!

Sponsored