Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > 2005 - 2014 Mustangs
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


2005 - 2014 Mustangs Discussions on the latest S197 model Mustangs from Ford.

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


2010 Mustang GT vs. 2010 Dodge Challenger

Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-18-2009, 10:44 AM   #41
Mustangemd19
3rd Gear Member
 
Mustangemd19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Vehicle: 2004 Ford Mustang
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 581
Default

The Challenger R/T will not beat a Mustang GT.
I was at the drag strip sunday and a R/T challenger went up against a (looked/sounded stock) 00-04 Bullit Mustang. The Challenger lost by at least 2-3 car lengths.

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl9ihuvUVsE
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
__________________

Last edited by Mustangemd19; 02-18-2009 at 11:44 PM. Reason: video
Mustangemd19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 10:41 AM   #42
provofam
1st Gear Member
 
provofam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Vehicle: 2008, Ford, Mustang
Location: Illinois
Posts: 72
Default

I really love both cars. I grew up a muscle car fan and my first vehicle was a 71' 340 Dodge Demon. I just bought an 08' mustang GT convertible, but I did consider the challenger. The clincher for me was when my wife chimed in about getting a convertible. The other big selling point was I like the pony car feel of the mustang. The challenger definitely has a bigger feel. With that said, I'm glad that Dodge & Chevy finally got smart and followed Fords lead by giving their fan base what they wanted all along - new musclecar handling & performance with old musclecar looks. Imagine how big a success the GTO would have been had they gone the nostalgic route. Like I said I'm a musclecar fan and how can any gearhead not enjoy seeing more American musclecars on the road!
provofam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 07:37 PM   #43
rex7010
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustangemd19 View Post
The Challenger R/T will not beat a Mustang GT.
I was at the drag strip sunday and a R/T challenger went up against a (looked/sounded stock) 00-04 Bullit Mustang. The Challenger lost by at least 2-3 car lengths.

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl9ihuvUVsE

not that is really matters.. but here is one that say it does ( Challenger wins ).. so which one is correct..?????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPROcXoOvW8&NR=1
__________________
06 GT Auto, Redfire Metallic, With ALL the toys.. C&L w/ SCT & custom tune. FRPP 3.73's.

rex7010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 08:08 PM   #44
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Vehicle: 05 Mustang GT
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Send a message via Yahoo to ThisBlood147
Default

Both of you are off mark, because in both vids you posted one car was stock and the other wasn't. So making stock vs stock arguments with either vid is stupid.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielleAnne
So technically the power to money ratio is still much better with the Camaro...
I don't think they correct times at the 1320 for that......
ThisBlood147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 01:34 AM   #45
99RedStang
2nd Gear Member
 
99RedStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 1999 Ford Mustang
Location: The Motor City
Posts: 215
Default

Theoretically, the GT should be able to beat the R/T. 0-60 for the GT is 5.2 sec. 0-60 for the R/T is 5.9 sec. Despite it's power advantage, the Challenger is just too damn heavy. The 2008 Bullitt, which is what the 2010 GT is based on, runs about a 13.8 quarter-mile while the R/T runs about a 14.1. The 2010 GT is only slightly slower than the SRT8.
99RedStang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 10:54 AM   #46
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2014 GT
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,194
Default

LOL

0-60 5.9 seconds. You're reading to many magazines. They are faster than that.
__________________
WILL WORK FOR MUSTAKE
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 06:21 PM   #47
99RedStang
2nd Gear Member
 
99RedStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 1999 Ford Mustang
Location: The Motor City
Posts: 215
Default

Well, you can't argue with actual road results. Although, Inside Line recorded a 5.5 sec. 0-60 from a 1 mph rollout for the R/T. It's still slower than the 2010 GT. I'm a fan of both cars. I'm just stating facts here.
99RedStang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 06:39 PM   #48
torque_is_good
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 334
Default

I've always been a Mopar fan but IMHO, Chrysler missed the mark making the Challenger so big and expensive. I'll take a base GT and add a few mods and keep money in my pocket.

Sure, there is huge upside to the Hemi without having to go forced induction but it's just too damn heavy.

The Camaro really intrigues me. I also have a 95 LT1 Z28 and it moves!
__________________
My chiropractor wishes all cars had the Mustang headrest.
torque_is_good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 10:04 PM   #49
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2014 GT
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,194
Default

The Challenger R/T has a hp/weight advantage over the GT. Some people have gone down into the low 13s with them stock in the 1/4.

I don't see how it's slower than a GT stock for stock.
__________________
WILL WORK FOR MUSTAKE
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2009, 11:09 PM   #50
jakers204
 
jakers204's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Vehicle: 94 Mustang GT
Location: MI
Posts: 20
Default

Mustang newbie here. Just got a 94 GT, and after owning about ten cars, I am truly in love my ride. My jaw dropped when I first seen a Challenger on the road. Had to take one for a test drive. They only had the base model on the lot, and I thought it was ok, but the price is a little to high for me. Plus they got the gas guzzler tax on it. Cant picture paying extra taxes for a car because of MPG. Anyone know if the newer mustangs have that tax?
jakers204 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 12:20 AM   #51
deekum1627
6th Gear Member
 
deekum1627's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Vehicle: 2008 Mustang GT
Location: Long Island, moving to arizona soon
Posts: 7,386
Send a message via AIM to deekum1627
Default

i want a challenger but next to my stang too
deekum1627 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 02:22 AM   #52
99RedStang
2nd Gear Member
 
99RedStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 1999 Ford Mustang
Location: The Motor City
Posts: 215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
The Challenger R/T has a hp/weight advantage over the GT. Some people have gone down into the low 13s with them stock in the 1/4.
I don't believe that without proof. And the R/T may have the hp/weight advantage but there are many factors that play into the GT having faster times. The GT might have a tighter suspension. It has a solid rear axle. Both would help the car launch better. It's not like the GT is a ton faster, but it is faster, at least in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. This is assuming both cars had drivers of equal skill.
99RedStang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 11:19 AM   #53
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2014 GT
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,194
Default

I guess I shouldn't believe some of the times people have claimed to run around here either without "proof". For instance low 13s in a stock GT. Because there are claims.

I guess some of you just refuse to believe without being there first hand yourselves and examining the car with a fine tooth comb.
__________________
WILL WORK FOR MUSTAKE
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 04:08 PM   #54
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Vehicle: 05 Mustang GT
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Send a message via Yahoo to ThisBlood147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
I guess I shouldn't believe some of the times people have claimed to run around here either without "proof". For instance low 13s in a stock GT. Because there are claims.

I guess some of you just refuse to believe without being there first hand yourselves and examining the car with a fine tooth comb.
I guess I'll believe it when one of them hands me my *** at the track or on the street. Until then, don't count on me losing sleep over it.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielleAnne
So technically the power to money ratio is still much better with the Camaro...
I don't think they correct times at the 1320 for that......
ThisBlood147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 04:31 PM   #55
Riptide
6th Gear Member
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicle: 2014 GT
Location: Montaner
Posts: 6,194
Default

They are much rarer cars than the Mustang. May be a while. If Chrysler even stays in business that is.
__________________
WILL WORK FOR MUSTAKE
Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 05:05 PM   #56
SirKnightTG
5th Gear Member
 
SirKnightTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Vehicle: 2006 Mustang GT Premium Auto - Vista Blue
Location: Deep in the <3 of Tx
Posts: 3,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakers204 View Post
Mustang newbie here. Just got a 94 GT, and after owning about ten cars, I am truly in love my ride. My jaw dropped when I first seen a Challenger on the road. Had to take one for a test drive. They only had the base model on the lot, and I thought it was ok, but the price is a little to high for me. Plus they got the gas guzzler tax on it. Cant picture paying extra taxes for a car because of MPG. Anyone know if the newer mustangs have that tax?

The GT500 has the guzzler tax. I think that tax is so lame.
__________________
Boomtube crew
TCI StreetFighter crew
Kooks crew
FRPP Hot Rod crew

Dance, Dance...DANCE!!!


camthumpinstang (Gary Marine of Illinois) is a scammer!
SirKnightTG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2009, 07:44 PM   #57
ThisBlood147
5th Gear Member
 
ThisBlood147's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Vehicle: 05 Mustang GT
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 4,197
Send a message via Yahoo to ThisBlood147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
They are much rarer cars than the Mustang. May be a while. If Chrysler even stays in business that is.
I dunno, I had a base model Challenger on the side of me trying to race a few weeks back. I declined, out of respect for his good lookin ride.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielleAnne
So technically the power to money ratio is still much better with the Camaro...
I don't think they correct times at the 1320 for that......
ThisBlood147 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 02:44 AM   #58
99RedStang
2nd Gear Member
 
99RedStang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Vehicle: 1999 Ford Mustang
Location: The Motor City
Posts: 215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisBlood147 View Post
I dunno, I had a base model Challenger on the side of me trying to race a few weeks back. I declined, out of respect for his good lookin ride.
HA! He sure was out of his league. Lucky for him, you declined.
99RedStang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2009, 08:24 PM   #59
neverUmind
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Vehicle: 2009 Challenger R/T
Location: California
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
The Challenger R/T has a hp/weight advantage over the GT. Some people have gone down into the low 13s with them stock in the 1/4.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99RedStang View Post
I don't believe that without proof. And the R/T may have the hp/weight advantage but there are many factors that play into the GT having faster times. The GT might have a tighter suspension. It has a solid rear axle. Both would help the car launch better. It's not like the GT is a ton faster, but it is faster, at least in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. This is assuming both cars had drivers of equal skill.
Intruder Alert: I'm a Challenger R/T owner and came across this thread and wanted to compliment most of you Mustang owners on your well reasoned and fair comparisons of the Mustang vs Challenger.

I just wanted to post a few comments and run along.

1. Speed. The best 1/4 mile time that I've seen for a completely stock R/T is 13.4 seconds (proof and time slip available on the web). People are also recording 0-60 in under 5 seconds. If you think we're doing mid-14's, we're kewl with that just don't go betting your 401k on it. And certainly don't forget about people modding it. With two of the simplest and most common mods, a CAI and an exhaust, the Challenger picks up 30-40hp.

2. "Extra Big *** Car." Ok, we win this hands down.

3. Ride. Ok, we win this too. Remember, Chrysler was owned by Mercedes. The Challenger R/T got the Mercedes touring suspension, and you can tell. The STR8 got a tighter suspension.

::: poof :::
neverUmind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2009, 01:28 AM   #60
gburke1
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neverUmind View Post
1. Speed. The best 1/4 mile time that I've seen for a completely stock R/T is 13.4 seconds (proof and time slip available on the web). People are also recording 0-60 in under 5 seconds. If you think we're doing mid-14's, we're kewl with that just don't go betting your 401k on it. And certainly don't forget about people modding it. With two of the simplest and most common mods, a CAI and an exhaust, the Challenger picks up 30-40hp.
The 13.4 is not surprising to me but I bet those were some really really nice conditions and track prep... just like some people who have ran a 13.2-13.3 in a stock 5-speed GT.
__________________


12.647 @ 110.1 MPH w/ 1.993 60' - Mods: (Novi 2200, FRPP 3v Intake Manifold, Kooks LT Headers, Kooks Catted X-Pipe, Pypes Mid
Muffler System, Spohn LCA's, 18" Contintenal ExtremeContact DWS All Seasons)

13.082 @ 105.05 MPH w/ 1.969 60' on Stock P-Zero All Season 17s (CAI, Full Exhaust, only)

Show: 18" Black Saleen Replicas, Trufiber GTS III Hood, California Special Front Bumper
gburke1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2009, 01:28 AM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
2010, boss, challenger, challengers, cobra, date, dodge, forum, gt, hood, iv, mustang, release, rt, sale, type, win

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comparison Test: 2010 Camaro SS vs. 2009 Challenger SRT8 vs. 2010 Shelby GT500 inyadreems Mustang News, Concepts, Rumors & Discussion 10 08-26-2009 08:59 AM
Motor Trend:2010 Camaro SS vs. 2009 Challenger R/T vs. 2010 Mustang GT inyadreems Mustang News, Concepts, Rumors & Discussion 13 05-12-2009 05:00 PM
2010 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2009 Dodge Challenger SRT8 rwh129 Mustang News, Concepts, Rumors & Discussion 56 04-24-2008 10:18 AM

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup