2009 MOTOR TREND'S BEST DRIVER'S CARS

[280Z Turbo]

That is the dumbest fucking chart I have ever seen.

I'm not even paying attention to what you crackheads are talking about, I just had to pop in and tell you how retarded that thing is.

I want a pie chart showing the ratio of cupholders to allen head fasteners in the 2009 Chevrolet Aveo.

[93JC]

That would make more sense.

[Nethead]

That is the dumbest fucking chart I have ever seen.

I'm not even paying attention to what you crackheads are talking about, I just had to pop in and tell you how retarded that thing is.

93JC:  The chart is not hard to understand at all unless you have one of the several types of colorblindness, which would make some or all of the colors appear to be the same color(s) when actually they are not.

The outer white ring represents the max scores possible in these driving environment categories (each category represented by a different color, as explained in the chart).  The middle white ring represents the average scores of all ten vehicles in each category.  The inner white ring represents no score at all--getting zero points in that category because the vehicle sucked so badly in that driving environment category.  In the chart, every vehicle starts at the middle circle (average value for all ten vehicles in that specific category)--and vehicles may be right on the middle white line (that vehicle happened to score at or very near the average of all ten vehicles in this category) or they may have columns extending from the middle white line outwards (better than average scores) or they may have columns extending from the middle white line inwards (below average scores).

Sooooo, if a particular vehicle has all its colored columns extending outward from the middle white circle, it was above average in all driving environment categories.  The closer a colored column gets to the outer circle, the better that vehicle scored in that category.

Nowwww, if a particular vehicle has all its colored columns extending inward from the middle white circle, it was below average in all driving environment categories.  The closer a colored column gets to the inner white circle, the more that vehicle sucked in that category.

BTW, this is NOT a pie chart--although the Nethead here does not know the term for charts of this type.

[Nethead]

LOL at Nethead hitting tilt on CamaroHate for like the 657th time...

The Camaro leverages a platform used in larger, heavier cars (the excuses begin! ). Without this leveraging, the Camaro would either be much more expensive or would have major shortcuts like that found in the Mustang (live axle, 96-106 fewer hp, 5sp AT/MT, etc.) to be price competitive.

The Camaro at 306 hp, IRS and 6sp MT/AT and $23k or the Camaro SS at 426 hp, IRS and 6sp MT/AT and $30k is not going to be optimized for much of anything. Given the Camaro's sales success and PR frenzy (let alone being the best selling car in this test) the market gladly accepts GM's approach.

GoCougs:  How can you be wrong so consistently?  You must have a lot of experience being wrong besides your extensive experience of being wrong in the CarSPIN forums!

In addition to outright lying that the Camaro SS outbraked the GT500 in this comparo (The GT500 stopped from 60 MPH in 109 feet, the Camaro SS in 112 feet), you claim that the Nethead here is "...hitting tilt on CamaroHate...".  It wasn't the Nethead here who ranked the Camaro tenth out of ten, huh?

But don't despair!  The Camaro was CLEARLY outclassed by the other nine cars, whether or not Motor Trend did this comparo:  No one in their right mind would expect a Camaro SS to offer any real competition whatsoever against nine cars so very, very much better than the Camaro.  No cause for embarrassment there!  You don't enter the Kentucky Derby on a Shetland, y'know?  Get real!  Look at the other nine vehicles and anyone can tell you the Camaro was lucky to finish no lower than tenth.  More out-of-its-league than even the notably pitiful Jaguar XFR...

Take your Camaro to a reputable Chevy dealer and have all the recall repairs performed. Then, fork over the $2900 or so that will get you the Shelby GT500 version of the Tremec 6060 and ante up for the labor charges that'll be required to yank the imported econobox 6060 Chevy spec'd for the Camaro SS and drop in the Shelby piece.  Then head out to a dragstrip with a long run-out somewhere and you and your Camaro are now in their element--a driver and his machine where they were meant to be, and with a long run-out to provide a safety cushion for those long stopping distances that even the heavier GT500 can beat.  No curves, no inclines nor declines, and no esses to mess up the afternoon!  And if you mess up the afternoon anyway, the claustrophobic little windows will mean no one can see in well enough to recognize you when the tow truck hoists you to a Chevy dealer's Service Department later that afternoon.  It ain't really humiliation if no one knows it was you, eh?

BTW, why did you lie about the Camaro SS outbraking the GT500--did you think the rest of us couldn't read the results for ourselves?

[S204STi]

Outclasses as a driver's car, maybe.  But still one of the better bangs for your buck in pretty much any other situation.

[Nethead]

Another take on the finishing order:

1.   $ 67,335      Porsche Cayman S       * The fourth most expensive finishes first
2.   $118,000     Audi R8                      * The most expensive finishes second
3.   $ 27,600      Mazda MX-5               * The least expensive finishes third  
4.   $ 62,000      Cadillac CTS-V            * The fifth most expensive finishes fourth
5.   $ 48,175      Shelby GT500              * The sixth most expensive finishes fifth
6.   $106,620     Chevrolet Corvette ZR1  * The second most expensive finishes sixth
7.   $ 39,850      Nissan 350Z NISMO       * The seventh most expensive finishes seventh
8.   $ 80,000      Jaguar XFR                  * The third most expensive finishes eighth
9.   $ 37,775      BMW 135i                    * The eighth most expensive finishes ninth
10. $ 31,040      Chevrolet Camaro SS     * The ninth most expensive finishes tenth

Some drove above their money, some drove below it.

[GoCougs]

Outclasses as a driver's car, maybe.  But still one of the better bangs for your buck in pretty much any other situation.

Imagine the Netheadism we'll get should the Camaro outsell the Mustang again in August...

[Nethead]

Imagine the Netheadism we'll get should the Camaro outsell the Mustang again in August...

Soooooooo, who outbraked whom in this comparo--the GT500 or the Camaro SS?  Or is this one of those questions that marosexuals "don't ask, don't tell"?

[Raza]

Outclasses as a driver's car, maybe.  But still one of the better bangs for your buck in pretty much any other situation.

The Camaro is ridiculous as a value for money proposition.  Even better than the Genesis.

[Nethead]

The Camaro is ridiculous as a value for money proposition.  Even better than the Genesis.

Depends on what you value.  It's THE car for those who value Mullet Uber Alles, and looks great in front of the single-wide!  Flashy on the tow hook, too!  Jack up the back so the wheelwell arches will clear some protruding slicks and you're set for the remake of Deliverance--marosexuals are locked in mortal combat over who gets the role originally played by Ned Beatty...

[Raza]

Depends on what you value.  It's THE car for those who value Mullet Uber Alles, and looks great in front of the single-wide!  Flashy on the tow hook, too!  Jack up the back so the wheelwell arches will clear some slicks and you're set for the remake of Deliverance...

Let's be realistic.  The Mustang in its current form, barring the GT500, is extremely outclassed by the Camaro.  The Camaro V6 would run circles around the Mustang V6 (and I'd really like to see the Mustang V6 keep up with my Jetta) and the SS far outpowers the Mustang GT.  The Mustang GT is overpriced (32-40K for a car that's still got a 5 speed manual, a massive engine with low output, et al), and the Mustang V6 is worthless.  I wouldn't pay more than half what they charge for a 4.0L V6 with barely more power than fours that come in European subcompacts. 

The Mustang needs updated engines and a price slash, otherwise when the Camaro gets on the market in more than a trickle they'll be left behind in sales and on the drag strip. 

[r0tor]

those that are forgetful should suppliment this years test with...

2007... http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/tuners/112_0706_americas_best_handling_car_selection/index.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a41:g26:r19:c0.055059:b24951882:z0&ID=loomia

2008.... http://www.motortrend.com/features/performance/112_0810_americas_best_handling_car_conclusion/index.html

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Let's be realistic.  The Mustang in its current form, barring the GT500, is extremely outclassed by the Camaro.  The Camaro V6 would run circles around the Mustang V6 (and I'd really like to see the Mustang V6 keep up with my Jetta) and the SS far outpowers the Mustang GT.  The Mustang GT is overpriced (32-40K for a car that's still got a 5 speed manual, a massive engine with low output, et al), and the Mustang V6 is worthless.  I wouldn't pay more than half what they charge for a 4.0L V6 with barely more power than fours that come in European subcompacts. 

The Mustang needs updated engines and a price slash, otherwise when the Camaro gets on the market in more than a trickle they'll be left behind in sales and on the drag strip. 

[SVT666]

Let's be realistic.  The Mustang in its current form, barring the GT500, is extremely outclassed by the Camaro.  The Camaro V6 would run circles around the Mustang V6 (and I'd really like to see the Mustang V6 keep up with my Jetta) and the SS far outpowers the Mustang GT.  The Mustang GT is overpriced (32-40K for a car that's still got a 5 speed manual, a massive engine with low output, et al), and the Mustang V6 is worthless.  I wouldn't pay more than half what they charge for a 4.0L V6 with barely more power than fours that come in European subcompacts. 

The Mustang needs updated engines and a price slash, otherwise when the Camaro gets on the market in more than a trickle they'll be left behind in sales and on the drag strip. 

Not a single comparo says the Mustang is outclassed.  Sure it has less horsepower and 1 less gear, but the Mustang is more fun to drive, handles better, has better steering, better seats, and much better visibility.  Also, I don't see why it needs a price slash when it's cheaper then an equivalent Camaro by $2000 ($5000 in Canada).

[Raza]

Not a single comparo says the Mustang is outclassed.  Sure it has less horsepower and 1 less gear, but the Mustang is more fun to drive, handles better, has better steering, better seats, and much better visibility.  Also, I don't see why it needs a price slash when it's cheaper then an equivalent Camaro by $2000 ($5000 in Canada).

I mean, you've looked over the performance numbers more than I have, but when the V6 Camaro is 95% as good and is less than 95% of the price of the Mustang GT, it's a much better deal.  I know there's some discussion as to whether or not the SS gets its power down as well as the Mustang GT, but until the headline numbers look closer to the SS's, it will always appear outclassed. 

The visibility thing is true though. 

However, with my money, I'm still leaning to the Camaro here. 

[S204STi]

Not a single comparo says the Mustang is outclassed.  Sure it has less horsepower and 1 less gear, but the Mustang is more fun to drive, handles better, has better steering, better seats, and much better visibility.  Also, I don't see why it needs a price slash when it's cheaper then an equivalent Camaro by $2000 ($5000 in Canada).

Without a doubt the V6 Mustang is outclassed by the V6 Camaro.  Things get a little blurred when dealing with the GT.

[S204STi]

The whole visibility thing is... debate-able.  Neither one is really great in that regard, so saying one is better than the other is saying that molasses is slightly slower than a slug.

I have to admit though, if that new 5.0 is a barnstormer I think I would prefer to own the Mustang, honestly.

[Raza]

The whole visibility thing is... debate-able.  Neither one is really great in that regard, so saying one is better than the other is saying that molasses is slightly slower than a slug.

I have to admit though, if that new 5.0 is a barnstormer I think I would prefer to own the Mustang, honestly.

I've driven both, and the difference in visibility is more than just degrees.  Everything--forward, side, and rear quarters--is easier to see in the Mustang.  The quarter windows are where they're the closest though, and frankly, I don't remember looking behind me much, so I can't speak to that.   

[GoCougs]

Yep, since when has this segment been known for "steering" and "seats?"

This segment primarily sells on style, value, legacy and to a lesser extent, raw performance (acceleration).

Styling is a matter of opinion, but GM took a major risk with the radical styling (so far it's paying off).

Value there is not much of an argument - the Camaro is simply more car for equivalent money.

Legacy overall is in the Mustang's favor but the '69 Camaro fore bearer of the new Camaro is one of the most popular cars of Detroit's heyday (and I dare say more popular than any Mustang).

Acceleration is no contest overall; only the low volume GT500 is faster but with more than a 50% premium it barely outruns a Camaro SS.

IMO, it's straight forward to see why the Camaro has had the sales success and PR buzz: It's simply the better car overall, and the much better car for the segment.

[SVT666]

Yep, since when has this segment been known for "steering" and "seats?"

Since cars have started taking corners better.

This segment primarily sells on style, value, legacy and to a lesser extent, raw performance (acceleration).

Styling is a matter of opinion, but GM took a major risk with the radical styling (so far it's paying off).

Definitely a matter of taste.

Value there is not much of an argument - the Camaro is simply more car for equivalent money.

More motor or more weight or 1 more gear, sure.  But the Mustang gives less weight, better handling, higher fun quotient, and more visibility.

Legacy overall is in the Mustang's favor but the '69 Camaro fore bearer of the new Camaro is one of the most popular cars of Detroit's heyday (and I dare say more popular than any Mustang).

Legacy is definitely in the Mustang's favour.

Acceleration is no contest overall; only the low volume GT500 is faster but with more than a 50% premium it barely outruns a Camaro SS.

You're definitely right about that.  One thing I agree wholeheartedly with you on.

IMO, it's straight forward to see why the Camaro has had the sales success and PR buzz: It's simply the better car overall, and the much better car for the segment.

It's had the sales success and PR buzz because there hasn't been a Camaro in 7 years.  Also because it's been a feature character in two blockbuster movies before it ever came out.  That's why.  It has nothing to do with whether the car is better or not, which it arguably isn't.

[Nethead]

Well, the article that initiated the forum is:

2009 MOTOR TREND'S BEST DRIVER'S CARS

in which the GT500 finished fifth and the Camaro SS finished tenth.  And it's not just the finishing order--read that praise the GT500 received all through the article on the GT500, and then read the Camaro SS article.  

It's the whole vehicle, gentlemen, the whole vehicle.  That's why Camaros were discontinued in 2002 and it's why they'll be discontinued again down the road.  The Mustang and the GT500 at the top of the Mustang line are the whole package--great everywhere and soon to get much better with the EcoBoost V6 and whatever they will finally call the Coyote/Boss/EcoBoost/Hurricane/Whatever 5.0L V8, and possibly even an EcoBoost I4.  

Read all the areas where the GT500 bested the Camaro SS.  Or go back and read that C&D comparo of the Mustang GT, the Challenger SE, and the Camaro SS.  The GT500 easily bested the Camaro SS because it is the whole package--more reliable, more powerful, more agile, better braking, more faster, and much more satisfying to drive more faster.  

The GT500 is a musclecar for grown men--the Camaro SS is a musclecar for teen-agers whose daddies can spare $31,040.  That's the essential difference between the two.  

The rest of the difference is execution.  The GT500 is a muscle car built well and done right--the Camaro SS is neither...

Motor Trend agrees.

[MX793]

Without a doubt the V6 Mustang is outclassed by the V6 Camaro.  Things get a little blurred when dealing with the GT.

The V6 Mustang is outclassed by practically every comparable car out there in the general price range (Genesis coupe, Camaro V6, Civic Si, Subaru WRX, VW GTI, MPS3, Cobalt SS...).

[SVT666]

The V6 Mustang is outclassed by practically every comparable car out there in the general price range (Genesis coupe, Camaro V6, Civic Si, Subaru WRX, VW GTI, MPS3, Cobalt SS...).

The V6 Mustang is outclassed by my 2003 SVT Focus.

[S204STi]

troll

Yes, the Mustang Cobra is "more faster" than the Camaro, but then it should be too. 

[Onslaught]

Read all the areas where the GT500 bested the Camaro SS.  Or go back and read that C&D comparo of the Mustang GT, the Challenger SE, and the Camaro SS.  The GT500 easily bested the Camaro SS because it is the whole package--more reliable, more powerful, more agile, better braking, more faster, and much more satisfying to drive more faster. 

Motor Trend agrees.

Prove that.

[MexicoCityM3]

I like both cars (Camaro & Mustang). I think that you guys can continue this argument forever in part because of how they are positioned price-wise:

GT500>SS>GT>Camaro V6>Mustang V6

They are positioned on that ladder both price-wise and performance wise. The Camaro fans can always point to the SS vs. GT and the Mustang fans to GT500 vs. SS and so forth.

This rivalry is very much like Audi/BMW/Merc. It boils down in the end to personal preference.

[Nethead]

The Camaro is ridiculous as a value for money proposition.  Even better than the Genesis.

Easy fix.

[Nethead]

Prove that.

The Camaro has had more recalls in its first three months of production than the S197 edition of the Mustang which entered production in the Fall of 2005--now six model years ago.  The 2004 Mustang that preceded the S197 was found by Consumer Reports to have the fewest problems per 100 vehicles (4 per 100, was it?) of any domestic vehicle for sale in the USA at that time.  And Chevy has chosen not to recall Camaro SSs to fix the breaking transmission output shafts on the six-speed manuals--nor have they explained why they had to put layers of lead weights onto Camaro SS calipers and they certainly have not offered to properly fix whatever brake/suspension problem that band-aid is supposed to correct (I think it's to reduce brake chatter when you put spinner wheel covers on your SS--those wheels are big so those equally big spinners represent substantial unsprung weight at each wheel ).  One must make some sacrifices to get that drive-thru restaurant bling...

[CALL_911]

How do recalls=reliability? The fact that Chevy has caught the initial problems early, and rectified them would make me feel better.

Didn't the original Focus have a metric shit-ton of recalls? I don't think it has a reputation for terrible reliability.

[GoCougs]

Since cars have started taking corners better.

FALSE. The segment has never been about "steering" or "seats."

Definitely a matter of taste.

Uh, huh. The Camaro's however is much more radical.

More motor or more weight or 1 more gear, sure.  But the Mustang gives less weight, better handling, higher fun quotient, and more visibility.

"Fun quotient?" and "higher visibility?" That just sounds desperate.

The segment is about acceleration first and foremost.

Legacy is definitely in the Mustang's favour.

FALSE. The legacy of the '69 Camaro > legacy of any Mustang.

You're definitely right about that.  One thing I agree wholeheartedly with you on.

Um, the LOL point being $17k premium gets you an equivalent 0-60 time and tenth in the 1/4 mile.

It's had the sales success and PR buzz because there hasn't been a Camaro in 7 years.  Also because it's been a feature character in two blockbuster movies before it ever came out.  That's why.  It has nothing to do with whether the car is better or not, which it arguably isn't.

FALSE. The last Camaro went out with a whimper, and was hardly loved by the automotive press or the market as a whole, and arguably hadn't been since the heyday of the IROC-Z.

FALSE. People don't buy $22k - $35k products because they see it in movies - at least not to the tune of 7,500 - 9,300 a month; The movie no more helped the buzz or sales success of the Camaro than it did Peterbilt, Top Kick, Soltice, H2, Mustang, or the other vehicles featured in the films.