C&D: Camaro LT vs. Genesis Coupe 3.8

[CALL_911]

I am at odds with them right now.  The Camaro has zero visibility and the tactile quality of a 1980s Cavalier, the Challenger is really badass, but it's huge, and the Mustang has the wrong rear axle and is overpriced.

I think I'd go for the Mustang out of the three, but a turbo Genesis Coupe is still looking like the best option at the moment...or a used G35.

Out of all those cars, I'd take a 370Z without a question.

I just don't know if it's fair game...

[the Teuton]

Out of all those cars, I'd take a 370Z without a question.

I just don't know if it's fair game...

I don't think I am a muscle car person.  I need me a good rice rocket...or a German car with a good warranty.

[TBR]

I am at odds with them right now.  The Camaro has zero visibility and the tactile quality of a 1980s Cavalier, the Challenger is really badass, but it's huge, and the Mustang has the wrong rear axle and is overpriced.

I think I'd go for the Mustang out of the three, but a turbo Genesis Coupe is still looking like the best option at the moment...or a used G35.

I am not sure that I wouldn't go for the Challenger. It is a huge ass car, but I bet it is terrific on the highway and that's where I do most of my driving.

[S204STi]

Out of all those cars, I'd take a 370Z without a question.

I just don't know if it's fair game...

Good call.  There's one at the local dealer, I think I'll ride over and take a closer look tomorrow.  At 50 feet it looks quite nice though.

[Rich]

I am not sure that I wouldn't go for the Challenger. It is a huge ass car, but I bet it is terrific on the highway and that's where I do most of my driving.

The lack of a handbrake would annoy the hell out of me

[sidenote]Yes ChrisV, I know I sound like a whiner, but it's my $30,000, not yours[/sidenote]

[the Teuton]

I am not sure that I wouldn't go for the Challenger. It is a huge ass car, but I bet it is terrific on the highway and that's where I do most of my driving.

It has the most presence on the road of any car made today.  Fact.

[CALL_911]

This kid I know just got a Challenger SRT-8. It's HUGE, but man does it have presence.

[CALL_911]

I don't think I am a muscle car person.  I need me a good rice rocket...or a German car with a good warranty.

See, I'd be torn between a CPO (maybe a year old with a 3 or 4-digit mileage) 135i and a 370Z. Really, at this time, I think I'd give the nod to the Z. When else would I be able to get away with having a car like that, when I'm 60? The 135i would probably be a lot more practical though.

But then again, who needs practicality.

[the Teuton]

See, I'd be torn between a CPO (maybe a year old with a 3 or 4-digit mileage) 135i and a 370Z. Really, at this time, I think I'd give the nod to the Z. When else would I be able to get away with having a car like that, when I'm 60? The 135i would probably be a lot more practical though.

But then again, who needs practicality.

Practicality is why god invented turbo hatchbacks.

[S204STi]

Practicality is why god invented turbo hatchbacks.

Like the GTI?   

[the Teuton]

Like the GTI?   

Like your car.

[S204STi]

Like your car.

Oh!!

I'd like to trade my car in on an STI, frankly.  But reality sets in and my hopes are dashed to the ground.

[the Teuton]

Oh!!

I'd like to trade my car in on an STI, frankly.  But reality sets in and my hopes are dashed to the ground.

At least your heart is in the right place.

[S204STi]

At least your heart is in the right place.

My left thigh?!  Oh that's relieving.  I was a bit worried when it made its way down there.

[the Teuton]

My left thigh?!  Oh that's relieving.  I was a bit worried when it made its way down there.

I'm not going to ask...

[Sigma Projects]

The whole point of the figure eight is that slalom numbers don't give you the full picture of how a car handles, and how that skidpad number translates to actual speed on a course.

the slalom is more demanding when it comes to handling. The figure 8 to me just kind of waters it down if it's for handling. Otherwise why doesn't anyone else really care about a figure 8? The Genesis both is lighter and has a better lateral G, yet the Camaro was slightly faster in the figure 8. Which only makes me think that with it's extra power was able to keep up because of the shallow parts in the figure 8 test.

[SVT666]

It is the track model, of course it's going to have a stiff suspension. People like you, who expect perfection out of every car that isn't one of their favorites, would be complaining if it wasn't the case.

People like me?  I don't expect perfection.  I expect a certain level of comfort though.  I've never driven a street legal performance car that stiffly sprung before.  On roads any rougher then table top smooth, it's not a cool car to drive.  I really wanted a Genesis Coupe before I drove it.  I even told the guy I carpool with that in a few years I planned on maybe picking one up on the used market...but then I drove it.  As I have stated before, it's a valiant first effort, but they need another generation of this car to polish it up.

[ifcar]

People like me?  I don't expect perfection.  I expect a certain level of comfort though.  I've never driven a street legal performance car that stiffly sprung before.  On roads any rougher then table top smooth, it's not a cool car to drive.  I really wanted a Genesis Coupe before I drove it.  I even told the guy I carpool with that in a few years I planned on maybe picking one up on the used market...but then I drove it.  As I have stated before, it's a valiant first effort, but they need another generation of this car to polish it up.

Maybe you'd be more satisfied with the ride/handling balance of the non-Track suspension.

[SVT666]

And on any given day a well driven SS will give your GT500 a run (and also stop almost 20 feet shorter) for the money! For 15k less. 

And on any given day a well driven GT500 will leave your SS in the dust.  What's your point?

BTW, the braking numbers that I found show the 2008 GT500 stopping from 60 mph in 117 ft, and the 2010 Camaro SS stopping in...117 ft.  Where is this 20 foot difference?

[ifcar]

And on any given day a well driven GT500 will leave your SS in the dust.  What's your point?

I think he mentioned something about $15,000.

[SVT666]

Maybe you'd be more satisfied with the ride/handling balance of the non-Track suspension.

Maybe, though you do miss out on the Brembo brakes.  If I can find a non-Track version to test drive I will, but so far that's all the dealers are bringing in.

[SVT666]

I think he mentioned something about $15,000.

Who cares?  Fact is the highest performance factory Mustang is faster and better then highest performance factory Camaro.  He only wants to bring price into it because he thinks it means something to the argument.  I guarantee price wouldn't factor into his argument when we talk about the IROC-Z vs. Mustang GT where the IROC-Z was exactly 50% more expensive, or a late 90s Camaro SS which was $10-12,000 more then a Mustang GT.  Now that the tables are turned he wants to use price in his argument.

[GoCougs]

And on any given day a well driven GT500 will leave your SS in the dust.  What's your point?

BTW, the braking numbers that I found show the 2008 GT500 stopping from 60 mph in 117 ft, and the 2010 Camaro SS stopping in...117 ft.  Where is this 20 foot difference?

Like I noted on page 1, neither is the case per this month's C&D issue for the (that) 2010 model. The SS trailed by only a 0.10 sec in the 1/4 mile and stopped 20 ft shorter (and had a better skid pad)...

[Eye of the Tiger]

And on any given day a well driven GT500 will leave your SS in the dust.  What's your point?

BTW, the braking numbers that I found show the 2008 GT500 stopping from 60 mph in 117 ft, and the 2010 Camaro SS stopping in...117 ft.  Where is this 20 foot difference?

And on any given day, Mustangs will always lose - a fact that actually has nothing to do with the fact that they are driven by knuckle-dragging possum-eating redneck ricer boys who couldn't drive themselves out of a wet paper bag. What's your point?

[GoCougs]

Who cares?  Fact is the highest performance factory Mustang is faster and better then highest performance factory Camaro.  He only wants to bring price into it because he thinks it means something to the argument.  I guarantee price wouldn't factor into his argument when we talk about the IROC-Z vs. Mustang GT where the IROC-Z was exactly 50% more expensive, or a late 90s Camaro SS which was $10-12,000 more then a Mustang GT.  Now that the tables are turned he wants to use price in his argument.

You're insane with your fanboism - I have recently and plainly showed that the pricing was equivalent between those cars, with maybe a 10% premium for the Camaro...

[SVT666]

You're insane with your fanboism - I have recently and plainly showed that the pricing was equivalent between those cars, with maybe a 10% premium for the Camaro...

Late 80s IROC-Z was $18K
Late 80s Mustang GT was $12K

Late 90s Camaro SS was $34K
Late 90s Mustang GT was $24K

[TBR]

Late 80s IROC-Z was $18K
Late 80s Mustang GT was $12K

Late 90s Camaro SS was $34K
Late 90s Mustang GT was $24K

Wrong, a fully loaded SS Convertible didn't break $34k.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Wrong, a fully loaded SS Convertible didn't break $34k.

Not like you can even compare and SS to a GT, anyway. Even the Z28 kicked the GT's ass.

[GoCougs]

Late 80s IROC-Z was $18K
Late 80s Mustang GT was $12K

Late 90s Camaro SS was $34K
Late 90s Mustang GT was $24K

Sorry, dude. but you're beyond delusional. Seriously, you need to get a grip:

'92 Z28 a little cheaper but a little slower than '92 Mustang GT:
1992 Mustang GT: $18,315, 14.7 sec 1/4 mile
1992 Camaro Z28: $18,207, 15.0 sec 1/4 mile


'99 Camaro SS both a little cheaper and a little faster than '99 Mustang Cobra:
1999 Mustang Cobra: $28,190, 14.1 sec 1/4 mile
1999 Camaro SS: $27,466, 13.9 sec 1/4 mile

[Nethead]

You're insane with your fanboism - I have recently and plainly showed that the pricing was equivalent between those cars, with maybe a 10% premium for the Camaro...

Well, at least the vehicles he likes can surpass forty miles without needing to be towed in and repaired!  But let's be fair:  the Camaro was rushed to market in only four years so they were bound to encounter some teething problems like cracked front fascias, lead weights stuck on the brake calipers, and this from www.autoblog.com:

First Camaro Crap-Out Comes 40 Miles From Dealership
By Ben Wojdyla, 1:00 PM on Wed Apr 29 2009

Maybe worse than the first Camaro wreck is the first Chevy Camaro breakdown. This "p**sy magnet" Bumblebee-yellow Camaro lost all electrical power and coasted to a stop with a scant 40 miles on the odometer.

The ecstatic new owner, a forum fan-girl by the name of BUMLB, was crushed when the car conked-out cruising through a parking lot at a leisurely 5 MPH, completely losing all electrical power, locking the gear selector and the key in the ignition. A flatbed towed the disabled car to a dealer where diagnosis found the cable running from the trunk mounted battery had frayed (in forty miles??? ) on the starter motor and grounded out, causing complete loss of power . A new cable running a different route will be installed at the dealer (We had to finish the assembly of the Chevies we got from the factories back in '66, too.  Some things never change ). Hopefully this isn't something we'll be seeing more of on other cars.