Dodge Challenger Forum banner

Stupid Challenger SRT8 vs. Camaro "virtual" head-to-head test

4K views 8 replies 7 participants last post by  Ragamuffin 
#1 · (Edited)
copied from
Comparison Test, by Proxy: 2010 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT8 - Camaro Forum - 2009 Camaro / 2010 Camaro / New Camaro Forum - Camaro5.com

This is teh STUPIDEST thing ever. These car publications are so hot to compare these cars that they'll even do it based on speculation :headbang:
There's even inaccuracies in there on factual specs stuff.


_________________________________

Wherein We Call a Knockout Before the First Round

Platform sharing. Gotta love it. Car companies spread the cost of developing a crash structure or a suspension system or powertrain over a number of different models that theoretically will appeal to different paying customers. It's economies of scale, as the guys wearing the suits like to call it.

Yeah, cool. But the real benefit of platform sharing is that it allows Inside Line to conduct a comparison test of two vehicles that we have not yet actually tested. In fact, we have not even seen the production version of one of the two combatants, the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro. We have driven a 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT8, which you might think would give the reborn Mopar something of an advantage over the reborn bowtie. You, however, would be wrong.

Since we will be using data from the 2008 Pontiac G8 GT we just track-tested and the Dodge Charger SRT8 that we've tested on a couple of occasions to draw some conclusions about the Camaro and Challenger, you could call this a comparison test by proxy. Or you could call it silly. But you cannot call our conclusions invalid. And if you did, we probably wouldn't listen anyway.

So, let's get the make-believe motors running and head out onto the hypothetical highway.

Where the Rubber Meets the Road (or Soon Will)
First, let's take a moment to thank the folks at Chrysler, LLC and its SRT division for making this part of the comparison such a total gimme. So, thank you and good luck with that whole "future" thing.

For all the hoopla and the car's unique bitchin'-ness, the Challenger SRT8 that the company introduced at February's Chicago auto show is essentially a two-door version of the Charger SRT8. Both carry the identical 6.1-liter Hemi V8 — a bored-out version of the standard 5.7-liter motor. Both run the same 10.3:1 compression ratio. Both gulp 91-octane gasoline. Both make the same 425 horsepower at 6,200 rpm and 420 pound-feet of torque at 4,800 rpm. And the coolant capacity? The same 14 quarts. Possibly, you're getting our drift.

Both send all that power through the same five-speed shiftable automatic transmission that carries the same gear ratios and on to the rear axle, which carries the same ratio. Both cars are held off the ground by the same dual control-arm front and five-link independent rear suspensions. Both use Bilstein monotube dampers, front and rear. They carry identical Brembo-designed brakes and are fitted with Goodyear three-season tires of the same size, 245/45/20 front and 255/45/20 rear.

And although the Challenger's wheelbase is 4 inches shorter than the Charger's, Chrysler claims the Challenger is only 20 pounds lighter than the big-brother sedan. At 4,140 pounds and 4,160 pounds, both are heavyweights.

Dodge claims that the Charger SRT8 thunders to 60 mph in "the low-5-second range" and on to a "quarter-mile time under 14 seconds." When last we tested a Charger SRT8, we came away with a 60-mph sprint of 5.3 seconds and a quarter-mile run of 13.6 seconds at 105.8 mph.

Unless Dodge has something very tricky up its sleeve (unlikely), the Challenger isn't going to be much quicker. The company claimed at its Chicago auto show press conference that the Challenger SRT8 could get to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds. We're going to guess something more on the order of 5.1 seconds. This all depends on how strong the particular test engine is and on what surface the acceleration run is conducted.

No matter, for as impressive as its acceleration is, we can't help but think it could be faster if both cars weren't so heavy and didn't wear those big old 20-inchers.

Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Lie Them
The 2010 Camaro is a little harder to figure because Chevy won't release official specifications on the production car for some time. But it's not like the car is going to have a four-cylinder turbodiesel and a third row of seats. The Camaro shares its basic component set and family of engines with the Pontiac G8. It will, in fact, be built on the same production line in Australia as the Pontiac and its Holden-branded brethren.

Rated at 400 hp, a 6.0-liter LS2 engine was under the hood of the 2006 Camaro concept. That engine has been replaced in GM's lineup by the 6.2-liter LS3 engine, which makes 436 hp in the Corvette. We expect that this will be the main V8 option for the Camaro, which will carry a 3.6-liter V6 standard. We expect that it will be detuned to right around 400 hp to prevent it from challenging the Corvette. We also expect GM to cite plumbing restrictions for the car's intake and exhaust systems for the drop in power.

The G8 GT carries the so-called L76 6.0-liter rated at 361 hp. The benefit of that particular small-block is that it allows the car to squeak into the market without carrying a gas-guzzler tax — at least while bolted to the mandatory automatic transmission. Should Chevy decide to use this motor for the same reason, it still won't be at as much of a disadvantage to the 425-hp Challenger SRT8 as you might think.

Drag Queen
Consider that the Pontiac G8 we just tested ran to 60 mph in 5.4 seconds and made it through the quarter in 13.7 seconds at 104.1 mph. And, yes, that was accomplished with the 6L80 six-speed automatic, which will likely be the Camaro's optional transmission. Those figures are essentially identical to the Charger SRT8's numbers.

And the G8 GT does that with ridiculously tall 2.92:1 rear axle gears. Chevy will probably shorten those up a bit in the Camaro, which would make the car even quicker.

Either way, the Camaro's available six-speed manual transmission should nudge it ahead of the more powerful Dodge. This assumes that the General doesn't do anything silly like mount 21-inch iron rims and fill the backseat with lead. Of course, the crystal ball says there will be a Challenger SRT8 with a six-speed manual in 2009 and that might even things up.

Or will it? Rumor is Pontiac will get a version of the Corvette's LS3 making about 400 hp for a GXP model. If that's the motor the V8 version of the Camaro carries, it should be able to pull a 0-60-mph run in the high 4-second range. And we expect the Camaro will be somewhat lighter than the G8 sedan's 4,100 pounds. Figure Chevy will claim a curb weight somewhere around 3,800 pounds. God help Dodge should Chevy decide to do a limited higher-performance SS model with the 505-hp LS7 from the Corvette Z06 or the 620-hp supercharged LS9 from the Corvette ZR1.

A 0-60-mph run in the high 4s and a quarter-mile in the low 13s would put the Camaro LS3 way ahead of the Mopars, but still behind the Shelby GT500 Mustang, which our radar gun clocked at 12.8 seconds in the quarter-mile. A Z06-powered Camaro, however, could take the crown.

That Other Stuff
Handling is a stickier issue to figure. It's worth noting that the G8 GT and Charger SRT8 are remarkably close in terms of lateral grip (0.85g G8 and 0.84g Charger) and slalom speeds (65.7 mph G8 and 66 mph Charger). We therefore expect that the Camaro SS and Challenger SRT8, which share the same basic suspensions with their sedan brethren, will be a near dead heat in terms of quantifiable handling traits.

And if the performance of the sedans is as predictive as we expect it to be, the Camaro will trounce the Challenger under braking. Despite big Brembo brakes, the Charger SRT8s we tested stopped from 60 mph in 120 feet and 135 feet. The Pontiac G8 halted from the same speed in a world-class 109 feet. For perspective, a Shelby GT500 does it in 120 feet and a Porsche 911 Carrera S stops in just 103 feet.

If you're having trouble accepting our conclusion that the 2010 Chevy Camaro wins a comparison test simply because we haven't "tested" them, then perhaps it would help if you imagine, as we are right now, that we're hammering the two cars at our double-top-secret location where all the roads are twisty, all the cops have wooden legs and a man and his muscle cars may lay rubber with total impunity. This would be right next to the beer springs.

Now, if you'll excuse us, we must be off to a victory party for the next U.S. president.

The manufacturers will eventually provide Edmunds these vehicles for the purposes of evaluation.>
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Well, the beauty is that I will be driving a "real" car and reaping the benefits....and they will be "virtually" driving with their thumbs where the sun doesn't shine. A bird in the hand that can actually complete a 1/4 mile run, will always beat an imaginary car. No matter what engine package you imagine, it won't get you on Pinks" or down a dragstrip. Ever! Funny how that works. The members of this forum are acutely aware of the pains of going from concept to production. This essay is mindless and I'm sorry I wasted my time reading it. 15 year olds have logic like that...too bad we have to hear them. O.K. I'm done venting...for now! LOL!

R/

Butch
 
#3 ·
Ok, I'm in full agreement with how the stupid argument is of the G8 putting up numbers close to a Charger SRT8... I love how authors cherrypick the fastest time available for the G8, and compare it to the slowest SRT8 time they could find. They have people on lxforums and chargerforums running 12.8's bone-stock in SRT8's... one person even ran a 12.55s with just the Predator tuner.

Realistically it should line up as a 13.2-13.3 for the SRT vs. 13.8 for the G8 for decent, normal times.

Still... while I LOVE the Challenger, I think Chrysler needs to get its act together if they want to compete with the Camaro in the performance arena. That article above does have some very valid points.

Transmission: Dodge is running with only the 5-speed now... The 6L80 transmission currently owns this tranny. After the 79REM and 6-speed manuals come out in a year or two it will be different, but for now...
Advantage: Camaro. (In 2009-2010 this may switch to Dodge)

Engines: Chevy has an advantage in engine development because of the Corvette being around for years. They have a lot of big V8’s to pull from: The LS2 (400 HP), The L76 (361 HP and possibly underrated or detuned), The LS3 (428 or 436 HP), The LS7 (505 HP), and the LSA from the CTS-V at 550HP. The author talking about the LS9 is a really stupid argument… they’re not taking their crown jewel from the ZR1 and sticking it in the Camaro… Now, I’d be surprised if the LSA doesn’t make it in down the road though. And this puts Dodge at a disadvantage. Currently Dodge has the 5.7L(380 HP) and the 6.1L (425 HP – but underrated 10-15 HP)… the 6.4L is under development at a rumored 480 HP, and a there are rumors of larger engines under development as well. So currently no answer for the LS7 or the LSA… but they can at least come close to matching the LS7 w/ the 6.4L Hemi. Still…
Advantage: Camaro, and I don’t see this changing.

Weight: The Challenger is a porky 4140 pounds… bad idea. I think the Camaro will weigh in at 3800-3900 pounds; it’s not going to be light either. Still…
Advantage: Camaro, but only slightly.

I really want to say the performance for the Challenger will be better than the Camaro, but I’m a realist… things aren’t looking good for the Challenger. It’s got some rocking looks, but I think Chrysler has allowed GM to get a bit of an inside track on them. Especially in the way of engines…
 
#4 ·
this reminds me of a mustang comparison I read a short while ago. The writer was obviously a very bias mustang fan and at least had the decency at the end to admit it. Some of the comparisons were just silly. compare a bare bones big engine mustang to a fully decked out challenger with features that aren't even options on the 'stang, the say that the Challenger is overweight and costs a little more.

I am not a real 'car guy' and if I am lucky enough to get one it will never see a track so the performance stuff isn't a real high priority to me. Still I can't help wonder with all the comparisons and complaints, how would some of those other cars peform (weight, speed, handling, etc) if they too were fully decked out with all the options? How much would they cost? I may be way out to lunch but I am betting if you put similar power and similar creature comforts and safety features and options into a mustang or a camaro that the differences will shrink pretty quick. I would guess that their weights won't be anything to write home about and they're cost will probably be at least 40K.

Thats my story and I'm stickin to it!!
otherwise I'd have to start rethinking the whole deal and thats too much like work! LOL
 
#5 ·
here's a comparo where the Camaro definately fails since it's supposed to be lighter than the Challenger .....

We all know why the Challenger is heavy as it is - creature comforts , and a whole bunch of safety equipment ....

Well , in the majority of times - a heavier vehicle wins it in a crash collision ; coming out with less damages and inflicting more ! I'd rather be in a Challenger when it's in perfect looking condition , AND when I come out of a collision ALIVE and still lookin good myself
 
#7 ·
I'm laughing , but I'm crying more seeing this car .... at least you walked away !
You still have her (uh not the lady - I KNOW you still have this beauty) , did you fix your Dodge ? Those trophies I'm sure are not from the crash - but since you walked away from that life-saving wreck - we could award you a few hahahaha
 
#8 ·
I'll admit the challenger isn't that fast, but I think that has alot to do with the transmission and rear gear choice. a 3.92 rear gear will help with the acceleration times. I'm not going to really mod mine since it'll be a DD and gas prices suck now, but I know the first thing I'm going to do is change that 3.06 to a 3.92.

Whatif- man that sucks, but your right I'd rather be heavy and safe. glad your not hurt!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top