or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › What kind of car do you drive?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What kind of car do you drive? - Page 42

post #739 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernest Jones View Post

Sorry, the Camaro is pretty cool car but the Challenger is way classier. Camaro is sexy but trampy if you know what I mean.

IMO challengers look silly, they have a tricked-out crown vic offset stance and the rear end is disgusting.  plus performance for $ is ridiculous as the SRT8 can barely beat the SS which costs about $10k less.

post #740 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post

IMO challengers look silly, they have a tricked-out crown vic offset stance and the rear end is disgusting.  plus performance for $ is ridiculous as the SRT8 can barely beat the SS which costs about $10k less.


I don't mind the Challenger's looks, in fact I also like it more than the Camaro.  The real problem with the Challenger is that it's so large, I call my buddy's a 2 Door RV.  With the size comes weight, which is why it barely outperforms the Camaro.

 

I liked the Camaro until I had to drive one.  High door panels and dash, combined with a low roof line and huge A and B pillars make it a PITA to see out of compared to the others in it's class.  

 

If you're looking at value for performance, neither car is a great value.  The Mustang runs the same 1/4 mile times as the Camaro for 2013 and costs $4000 less.  Most tests attribute the better slalom and braking times of the Camaro to being fit with better tires from the factory, and for $4k, I can get a few sets of badass tires or upgrade the shocks/struts/springs and tires and blow it out of the water.

 

Or just buy a Boss 302..........

post #741 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt5339 View Post


I don't mind the Challenger's looks, in fact I also like it more than the Camaro.  The real problem with the Challenger is that it's so large, I call my buddy's a 2 Door RV.  With the size comes weight, which is why it barely outperforms the Camaro.

 

I liked the Camaro until I had to drive one.  High door panels and dash, combined with a low roof line and huge A and B pillars make it a PITA to see out of compared to the others in it's class.  

 

If you're looking at value for performance, neither car is a great value.  The Mustang runs the same 1/4 mile times as the Camaro for 2013 and costs $4000 less.


visibility is pretty easy to get used to, though at first it is a little off putting.

 

actually the mustang should be a little faster.  mustang was a no sell for my 6'6" frame--they have no telescopic steering column.  i literally can't fit in a car that won't let you adjust the steering wheel about a foot away from the dash.  big shortcoming by ford IMO.

post #742 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post


visibility is pretty easy to get used to, though at first it is a little off putting.

 

actually the mustang should be a little faster.  mustang was a no sell for my 6'6" frame--they have no telescopic steering column.  i literally can't fit in a car that won't let you adjust the steering wheel about a foot away from the dash.  big shortcoming by ford IMO.


My best friend is 6'10" and drives a Mustang............

 

He loves the car, but doesn't really look comfortable in it.  But then again, he doesn't look comfortable in any car.  Me, being 5'5", find the Camaro's lack of visibility horrible, but the Mustang perfect.  For someone my height, the Camaro interior is like being in a cave.

 

The difference in straight line performance between the two is so close, that it would come down to the driver instead of the car.

post #743 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

Nah, those two are practically identical cars.  Neither is "classier" or "trampier" than the other.  (They're both pretty bad-ass though)  My first car was a Camaro, as a matter of fact.  Nother super fancy at all ... a 1979 RS Berlinetta (in 1991) ... but nevertheless it was a Camaro.  My mom owned a '67 RS new that she sold around the time I was born to get a "family" car.  d1_bigcry.gif That's right ... when I ask her why she didn't keep it so I could have it when I was old enough, she blamed it on me.
c4_mad.gif

I currently drive either a Nissan Altima or a Chevy Traverse ... and occasionally on the weekends we break out the Mini. :)

Don't get me wrong, the Camaro is plenty badass, I'm just sayin' if I had my druthers...
post #744 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt5339 View Post


My best friend is 6'10" and drives a Mustang............

 

He loves the car, but doesn't really look comfortable in it.  But then again, he doesn't look comfortable in any car.  Me, being 5'5", find the Camaro's lack of visibility horrible, but the Mustang perfect.  For someone my height, the Camaro interior is like being in a cave.

 

The difference in straight line performance between the two is so close, that it would come down to the driver instead of the car.

if he has a long torso it isn't a big issue, but if he has long legs like i do, every time i scoot in close enough for my arms to reach the steering wheel, my knees are hitting the dash.  so if i have a telescoping steering column, i can pull it closer to me rather than me closer to the dash.  maybe he just hasn't realized that's a problem, heh,

 

i would think shorter would be better on visibility since the car is short.  my head nearly hits the top and i do have to bend at the neck a bit to see traffic lights when i'm stopped at one.

post #745 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post

i would think shorter would be better on visibility since the car is short.  my head nearly hits the top and i do have to bend at the neck a bit to see traffic lights when i'm stopped at one.


But the dash and door panels are up high as well.  There's not a lot of window height at all.

post #746 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post

my head nearly hits the top and i do have to bend at the neck a bit to see traffic lights when i'm stopped at one.

I have a long torso too and, therefore, this same problem in just about any car.  When I drive my wife's Mini and the top is down, I actually find it easier to look OVER the top of the windshield to see the lights change. :)

post #747 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt5339 View Post


I don't mind the Challenger's looks, in fact I also like it more than the Camaro.  The real problem with the Challenger is that it's so large, I call my buddy's a 2 Door RV.  With the size comes weight, which is why it barely outperforms the Camaro.

 

I liked the Camaro until I had to drive one.  High door panels and dash, combined with a low roof line and huge A and B pillars make it a PITA to see out of compared to the others in it's class.  

 

If you're looking at value for performance, neither car is a great value.  The Mustang runs the same 1/4 mile times as the Camaro for 2013 and costs $4000 less.  Most tests attribute the better slalom and braking times of the Camaro to being fit with better tires from the factory, and for $4k, I can get a few sets of badass tires or upgrade the shocks/struts/springs and tires and blow it out of the water.

 

Or just buy a Boss 302..........


I'll provide a little levity here as a challenger owner.   The stock RT and SS are pretty even in the quarter mile. Both can run the 1/4 in the 13's stock..... The best driver who knows how to launch on street tires will win.....If 1/4 mile time is all that is important, the new 5.0 mustang is faster.   It's smaller and lighter....the new GT is crazy fast for the $$$.  

 

IMO...the typical Challenger RT owner is a different person.  It's a bigger car, the ride is softer and more comfortable, it costs more than the Mustang,  the interior is more spacious, and it has a bigger trunk..............a 375hp HEMI doesn't hurt, but people don't buy this car to have the fastest 1/4 mile pony car on the block..   The challenger is more true to what old MOPAR muscle was.......mid-size cars and big motors!! I don't race mine....it's just a baddazzz daily driver that has a comfy ride and a lot of storage........and I can haul AZZZ if I want to!!!  I considered the others, but for my purposes, the Challenger was the best option as a cool pony and daily driver. 

 

I never considered the mustang for me because it's too small and the ride is too stiff for a daily driver.  That stiff ride is great for racing, but not for me to drive everyday!!!  I did consider the SS.....what swayed me is more passenger and trunk space in the Dodge...plus...MOPAR is waaay cooler looking..IMO......the challenger is baddazzz.  MOPAR rules..LOL

 

 

On the other hand, the 392HEMI is an entirely different beast..........it's not for me, but it's pretty DAMN badazzz with 500HP...a stiffer suspension, and all that I don't want.

post #748 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post


I'll provide a little levity here as a challenger owner.   The stock RT and SS are pretty even in the quarter mile. Both can run the 1/4 in the 13's stock..... The best driver who knows how to launch on street tires will win.....If 1/4 mile time is all that is important, the new 5.0 mustang is faster.   It's smaller and lighter....the new GT is crazy fast for the $$$.  

IMO...the typical Challenger RT owner is a different person.  It's a bigger car, the ride is softer and more comfortable, it costs more than the Mustang,  the interior is more spacious, and it has a bigger trunk..............a 375hp HEMI doesn't hurt, but people don't buy this car to have the fastest 1/4 mile pony car on the block..   The challenger is more true to what old MOPAR muscle was.......mid-size cars and big motors!! I don't race mine....it's just a baddazzz daily driver that has a comfy ride and a lot of storage........and I can haul AZZZ if I want to!!!  I considered the others, but for my purposes, the Challenger was the best option as a cool pony and daily driver. 

I never considered the mustang for me because it's too small and the ride is too stiff for a daily driver.  That stiff ride is great for racing, but not for me to drive everyday!!!  I did consider the SS.....what swayed me is more passenger and trunk space in the Dodge...plus...MOPAR is waaay cooler looking..IMO......the challenger is baddazzz.  MOPAR rules..LOL


On the other hand, the 392HEMI is an entirely different beast..........it's not for me, but it's pretty DAMN badazzz with 500HP...a stiffer suspension, and all that I don't want.

RT is 4,000lbs and 375hp vs 3,900lbs and 425hp is the Camaro, so I don't think they should be that close. Specs are usually crap, there are plenty of manual SSs stock that have clocked 12s on the Camaro forums. I think the lowest is 12.6. Though the auto SS has less power, but I personally don't drive those! Anyway... I do agree the new Mustangs are supposed to be quicker despite the lack of a telescopic wheel! Haha.
post #749 of 939

In my opinion, having driven all 3 extensively, but not owning any of them, The username is because I own Mustang Bullitt #5339, which wouldn't hold a candle to any of them bone stock, but after a few small upgrades, runs 12.25@110mph with no supercharger or nitrous.

 

In Comfort:

 

Challenger SRT8

Mustang GT

Camaro SS

 

In Handling:

 

Camaro SS

Mustang GT

Challenger SRT8

 

Straight Line:

 

Mustang GT

Challenger SRT8

Camaro SS

 

The other issue is the few "special edition" models that are actually closer in price to the SRT8.  The RT isn't in the same performance league as the SS or GT, so you have to go up $10k to get it competitive.

 

But if you add in the Camaro ZL1 vs The GT500, the SRT8 is way outgunned.  The ZL1 has an edge over the GT500 on road courses, but the GT500 will destory the ZL1 straight line.  Camaro has decided they can't ever get a leg up on the Ford in the power levels anymore, so they're working on some great suspension packages, since everytime they've tried, the Shelby comes out and if that's not enough for you, you can have a GT500 Super Snake with 920hp, fully street legal if you have to be the baddest dude on the block.

 

The sleeper is the Boss 302.  Use the Red Off-Road Key, and it outperforms the standard GT by quite a bit.  The suspension in the Boss 302 is as good or better than the ZL1, tons better than the standard GT,  but costs a lot less and has less horsepower.

post #750 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt5339 View Post

In my opinion, having driven all 3 extensively, but not owning any of them, The username is because I own Mustang Bullitt #5339, which wouldn't hold a candle to any of them bone stock, but after a few small upgrades, runs 12.25@110mph with no supercharger or nitrous.

In Comfort:

Challenger SRT8
Mustang GT
Camaro SS

In Handling:

Camaro SS
Mustang GT
Challenger SRT8

Straight Line:

Mustang GT
Challenger SRT8
Camaro SS

The other issue is the few "special edition" models that are actually closer in price to the SRT8.  The RT isn't in the same performance league as the SS or GT, so you have to go up $10k to get it competitive.

But if you add in the Camaro ZL1 vs The GT500, the SRT8 is way outgunned.  The ZL1 has an edge over the GT500 on road courses, but the GT500 will destory the ZL1 straight line.  Camaro has decided they can't ever get a leg up on the Ford in the power levels anymore, so they're working on some great suspension packages, since everytime they've tried, the Shelby comes out and if that's not enough for you, you can have a GT500 Super Snake with 920hp, fully street legal if you have to be the baddest dude on the block.

The sleeper is the Boss 302.  Use the Red Off-Road Key, and it outperforms the standard GT by quite a bit.  The suspension in the Boss 302 is as good or better than the ZL1, tons better than the standard GT,  but costs a lot less and has less horsepower.

The Boss is awesome, though the color schemes are ridiculous and for that not sure I could ever own one. I can't wait for the Z28. It should be a good competitor.
post #751 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post


RT is 4,000lbs and 375hp vs 3,900lbs and 425hp is the Camaro, so I don't think they should be that close. Specs are usually crap, there are plenty of manual SSs stock that have clocked 12s on the Camaro forums. I think the lowest is 12.6. Though the auto SS has less power, but I personally don't drive those! Anyway... I do agree the new Mustangs are supposed to be quicker despite the lack of a telescopic wheel! Haha.

the camaro loses a lot of HP from the flywheel to the tires.......................the 425 rating is generous.  

post #752 of 939

When it's all said an done.........................black is beautiful!

 

 

No need to go into detail.........LOL

post #753 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post

the camaro loses a lot of HP from the flywheel to the tires.......................the 425 rating is generous.  

I dyno'd 392 with an intake only.
post #754 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post


I dyno'd 392 with an intake only.


That seems about right.  Anything between 10-15% loss through the drivetrain is completely acceptable.

post #755 of 939
Older pic of my car. Just paid it off a couple months ago!
post #756 of 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachcomber View Post

Nice ride!  Would be fund to have here in Socal.

 

 

 

My other ride - only thing they have in common is that the Germans like their gas caps on the passenger side.

I'm a "semi-retired" carpenter and if you can believe it, this is my work vehicle which occasionally carries my chop saw and trim compressor. 

The VW is a hoot - 6 speed paddle shift, accelerating can pin you to the seat.

Fun car - can't wait to top down it and have the bag in the back seat this spring.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Grill Room
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The 19th Hole › The Grill Room › What kind of car do you drive?