AF: We aré not the fastest anymore. | Page 3 | Allpar Forums
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

We aré not the fastest anymore.

Discussion in 'Mopar / FCA News' started by Mr.Source, Jan 17, 2020.

  1. Tony K

    Tony K Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2019
    Messages:
    872
    Likes:
    1,237
    To make a Challenger weigh in the same ballpark as a Mustang means a smaller car, all other things being equal, which is not desired by people buying Challengers.
     
    cygnus, tlc, CDJSalesPro and 2 others like this.
  2. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    There's not that much of a size difference between the three, nor is there that much of a weight difference either. Sure, Challenger is the biggest of the three with definitely the most comfortable back seat, but these three are all slightly different variations on a theme. Call them pony cars or muscle cars...whatever you like.

    Shedding weight is all well and good, and great if you can do it, but they're not little roadsters and they're never going to weigh as much as a Miata.
     
    HotCarNut and Tony K like this.
  3. T_690

    T_690 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2015
    Messages:
    3,486
    Likes:
    4,561
    LOL, of course subcompact(Camaro) and midsize(Challenger) cars are the same category.
     
    ScramFan and Tin Man 2 like this.
  4. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    Um, yeah they pretty much are, why else would they be compared as frequently as they are? Take this thread for example. If you’re not familiar with the history of these three vehicles, that’s ok, perhaps you should do some research as to why they are compared?
     
    Beentherebefore, Tony K and valiant67 like this.
  5. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    Mustang dimensions:
    188″ L x 75″ W x 54-55″ H
    Curb weight: 3,532 to 3,825 lbs
    Cargo volume: 11.4 to 13.5 ft³

    Camaro dimensions:
    188-190″ L x 75″ W x 53″ H
    Curb weight: 3,351 to 4,120 lbs
    Cargo volume: 7.3 to 9.1 ft³

    Challenger dimensions:
    198″ L x 76″ W x 56-58″ H
    Curb weight: 3,894 to 4,429 lbs
    Cargo volume: 16.2 ft³

    Challenger is about 8-10 inches longer, about the same width and height. Slightly more cargo room than Mustang....Camaro might as well not even have a trunk. Weights are similar, with the heaviest being Challenger.

    2-door, RWD cars with large engine bays that can accommodate insane engines.

    Yeah, I don’t see why they would be compared at all. :rolleyes:
     

    Attached Files:

  6. dana44

    Ad-Free Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    20,041
    Likes:
    1,668
    Yeah, 350 lbs or more is a bit of a challenge. That figures out to about half a pound or more to a horsepower, and that's quite a bit when in this category of weight to hp performance. Where can the weight reduction come from? You got me there, especially in keeping it safe as possible, but that is the only solution. More hp isn't the answer because you still have to get the power to the ground in order to take advantage of it.
     
  7. AHBGuru

    AHBGuru Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2015
    Messages:
    533
    Likes:
    375
    I just find it amusing how everyone overlooks the car that hooks - and that is the Charger.
    Except at the strip, the outta-the-box Charger remains the car to beat. If Dodge would wake up and price the Charger more competitively, especially the 5.7 and 6.4 retail models, they'd pick up even more sales from guys and gals that are doing some cross-make/model shopping.
     
  8. Tony K

    Tony K Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2019
    Messages:
    872
    Likes:
    1,237
    I've seen just today some discussion of dropping as much as 300 lbs from midsize cars by using more high-strength steels, but those were FWDs, so that does change the equation a bit. Nippon Steel has come up with a high strength steel that will reduce a car body weight by 30%, putting it on par with aluminum, and giving a superior product, but no idea on the cost.
     
  9. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    I have a 2011 Mustang, so I can’t speak to the current model, but the car feels somewhat heavy to me...but I like that feeling. It feels sturdy to me, and I think someone else here mentioned that same feeling from Challenger. I don’t have any experience with Camaro...and I want to keep that streak alive. Lol.

    Driving my A3 vs the Mustang, (yes, vastly different vehicles), I can certainly tell a difference in “feel”. The A3 is a great car, it just feels slightly built...I’m petrified of potholes when driving it. I didn’t have that same fear driving the Mustang...I tried to avoid the potholes, but it wasn’t a life crisis if I hit one.

    American muscle cars just have a different “feel” to them...I liken it to the different feel of driving my Liberty vs driving another SUV/CUV. Different as night and day.

    I’m concerned that if they drop too much weight, they’d lose that “feeling”. I don’t know, I’m probably making more out that than it needs to be...and my days of driving muscle cars are probably over once I get rid of said Mustang. But for me, the feel of the vehicle is what makes these cars special & unique. They’re not European sports cars...or roadsters...they’re muscle cars (or insert the term that suits you).

    Like I said, my days of having guns in the fight are rapidly coming to an end....
     
    djsamuel, HotCarNut and Tony K like this.
  10. TheViking

    TheViking Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes:
    612
    A solid rear axle will do that:)
     
    Tony K and Zagnut27 like this.
  11. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    Ha! Good point! :D
     
  12. hmk123

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes:
    3,276
    GT500 is over 4000 lbs though. Non carbon fiber package cars (base) is I believe over 4100 lbs.
     
    sickboy likes this.
  13. hmk123

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes:
    3,276
    To me a Mustang compares to a 3 series coupe (aka 4 series now) while a Challenger is more like a 6 series (aka 8 series now). Not that people are cross shopping those even though they should! :)
     
    eastcoaster, ScramFan and Zagnut27 like this.
  14. Zagnut27

    Zagnut27 Jeepaholic

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes:
    10,776
    Yeah, I don’t think those numbers were all inclusive as I thought the GT500 was heavier. It’s a good generalization for comparison though, as I was stating that I think people make more of a big deal about the “weight” of Challenger. Depending on variants, these cars can be pretty similar in weight.
     
    hmk123, tlc and Tony K like this.
  15. TheViking

    TheViking Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes:
    612
    A kid on YouTube with a channel called Speed Phenom weighed his non-CFTP car and it came in at 4080 lbs. The carbon fiber package cars should weigh about 80 lbs less based upon wheel weight savings and rear seat delete. So while it's still a porker, it weighs less than many predicted.
     
    Zagnut27 likes this.
  16. hmk123

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes:
    3,276
    I read that his tank was not full though when he filmed that. I believe usually cars are weight with a full tank of gas? Which seems too small in a Mustang fo begin with at only 16 gallons. C&D has the CFTP GT500 at 4059 lbs.
     
    TheViking likes this.
  17. Mark Powers

    Mark Powers Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    Messages:
    112
    Likes:
    232
    A regular stock 2016 Hellcat with 707 hp and drag radial can run 10.80's easily....

    The 717 hp should be a few tenths quicker and the Red Eye should run low 10's!

    Heck 392 Challengers run upper 11's!!! Not even the 1320!

    Remember cars that have power and spin,it's the driver ... I can make cars hook with street tires better than some guys with drag radials!! Hellcats like to spin more so than Mustang/Camaro..

    But whatever,the Challenger looks better and is a real car not just a 2 seater! You can fit 5 adults easily ,smoother ride,better road manners and a better road car than a Camaro/Mustang! Even so,for example:I don't care if the 5.7 Hemi Challenger has a 4 banger Mustang stuck to it's bumper in a 0-60 race,the Challenger looks and SOUNDS better and is more comfortable!

    Who cares if the Mustang is quicker...its ugly,small car that is uncomfortable! When I spend money on a car I want it to drive good,not feel every bump on the road and I want it to fit people,after all it's a people mover..My Hellcat Challenger is a people mover and it does it better than any other car!
     
    danbek, wtxiceman, tlc and 3 others like this.
  18. Beentherebefore

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,737
    Likes:
    2,717
    That Mustang is a beauty queen compared to the latest versions of the Camaro :D.
     
    Zagnut27, tlc, Tony K and 2 others like this.
  19. TheViking

    TheViking Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes:
    612
    Considering where the auto industry is heading I'm just happy we still have (quasi) affordable American V8 muscle cars available. Personally I think they all have their niche, although the Camaro is so hamstrung by its ergonomics/packaging that it's easy to see why sales are so bad.
     
    hmk123 likes this.
  20. TheViking

    TheViking Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2015
    Messages:
    420
    Likes:
    612
    I was reading a new GT500's owners posts where they were only getting 230 mile on a tank with mostly highway driving. Apparently it will pass everything but a gas station.
     
    Zagnut27 and hmk123 like this.

Share This Page

Loading...
 We are not affiliated with FCA. We make no claims regarding validity or accuracy of information or advice. Copyright © VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.