2010 camaro

-
mikedevore

mikedevore

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
123
Location
Oklahoma
I saw a 2010 camaro at T-N-T on Friday. It was a v-6. It ran a best of 14.97. Not the published 14.20 that I have been reading about. Maybe it is like the old days, when the chevys ran faster in the magazines than at the strip.
 
One showed up at a cruise in I was at last night.
underneath all of the plastic shrouds, lie's a beast (he he) of a six cylinder.
I like my Dart a lot better.
 
Is it me, or does it seem that they have chopped the top on theses cars like the Chargers & the Magnums? To me , it looks a little out of prportion.
 
mikedevore said:
Is it me, or does it seem that they have chopped the top on theses cars like the Chargers & the Magnums? To me , it looks a little out of prportion.
Click to expand...

Higher window sills, not chopped tops. I bet thin door skins are cheaper than longer window tracks and glass - all in the effort to save costs.
 
One of the guys where I work has one, with the V8. He let me take it for a spin, it accelerates good....and that's about it. Handling is horrendous, my duster handled better BEFORE I rebuilt the suspension and added sway bars. The brakes felt really spongy, and you couldn't see out of the thing. Front end looks horrible too. Saw one next to a 2010 Mustang on the freeway the other day, and their front end shapes look the same from certain angles.
On another note, just after passing those guys, I was passed by a bright orange Porsche 911 GT3 that was flying down the road...he slammed on his brakes once the Hemi Orange Challenger flew past him...another sign of what a real car can do
 
Anyone see motor trends 3 way shoot out on the Challenger/Mustang/Camaro? I want to know how the SRT8 Challenger goes from kicking the **** out of the GT500 in the side by side test, to the R/T loosing in the salolm to the GT? Can anyone explain that one? The suspension isn't that improved on the '10 Mustang: it's still a nose heavy piece of sh**. (I drove 'em daily!) And the Mustang wins the shoot out because it gets better gas mileage than the other two! LOL. Who buys a V8 ponycar and gives whoot about fuel mileage?
 
The New Camaro wins for HP=Per Dollar.The Camaro in my opinion is ugly as sin. The Mustang takes it for being the first one to have the balls to do retro, and in a good way. Mustang has the look right. When you talk about over all package, The Challenger is the baddest of them all. Yes, it's a bit clunkier looking then the original, But it also out performs everything the best original Challenger can throw at it. And let's not forget the convience and comfort level. It was designed more as an upscale mature ponycar then a light weight boy racer.

I will give it to Chevy for bringing back the Camaro at a bargain price. I was thown when I compared the Challenger performance/Price to the Camaro! An SS is about 10,000 cheaper! WOW


p.s. IMO lol
 
dahdgedaht said:
The New Camaro wins for HP=Per Dollar.The Camaro in my opinion is ugly as sin. The Mustang takes it for being the first one to have the balls to do retro, and in a good way. Mustang has the look right. When you talk about over all package, The Challenger is the baddest of them all. Yes, it's a bit clunkier looking then the original, But it also out performs everything the best original Challenger can throw at it. And let's not forget the convience and comfort level. It was designed more as an upscale mature ponycar then a light weight boy racer.

I will give it to Chevy for bringing back the Camaro at a bargain price. I was thown when I compared the Challenger performance/Price to the Camaro! An SS is about 10,000 cheaper! WOW


p.s. IMO lol
Click to expand...

the new chally is too tall, too flat and too damn heavy and too over priced. give me a new mustang anyday of the week. mustang has a huge aftermarket which the chally won't ever come close to having.

saw the new camaro on a local dealers lot. looks better then what it did in magazines. i'll have to stop ove day to get a better look at it. i don't really like the front or rear end though. looks good from the side though. a lot better then the chally looks from the side.

the 10 mustang looks better from the front and side then either of the others. they kinda screwed up the rear of it though. the tail lights got ugly.
 
abodyjoe said:
the new chally is too tall, too flat and too damn heavy and too over priced. give me a new mustang anyday of the week. mustang has a huge aftermarket which the chally won't ever come close to having.

saw the new camaro on a local dealers lot. looks better then what it did in magazines. i'll have to stop ove day to get a better look at it. i don't really like the front or rear end though. looks good from the side though. a lot better then the chally looks from the side.

the 10 mustang looks better from the front and side then either of the others. they kinda screwed up the rear of it though. the tail lights got ugly.
Click to expand...

True, The Challenger is way over weight and bulkier then it should have been. The fact that it's based off the Charger/300 platform caused that. Ford really screwed up the 2010 stangs *** end. Looks terrible. Front looks great though. If ford frought some more impressive power numbers to the game it would truely be the winner. Right now, you can't beat the Camaro's HP numbers for the price.
 
True, The Challenger is way over weight and bulkier then it should have been. The fact that it's based off the Charger/300 platform caused that.
Click to expand...


that was stupid on their part. looks horrible.
 
I saw a 2010 Camaro today, going the opposite way on the freeway, not a bad looking car, but the silver color made it look pretty boring. Chrysler needs to shed about 4-5 hundred lbs off the Challenger & make the 425 horse 6.1standard on the R/T, & bump the SRT up to aroud 500 horse.
 
I've been a devout GM guy all my life. Never owned a Mopar until last year when I bought my 65 Cuda project. So far I'm digging this little car and even my Chevy buddies on the site I help run are very supportive of my fish fixation, but here's my take on the big 3's new Ponycars.

The Challenger looks great and I think they did a great job to make it look like an old one. The problem is that it's based on a platform that makes the car to big and heavy. they need to shed quite a few lbs off of it somehow. I've seen 3 or 4 of them on the road now I and really do like the look of them.

I have yet to see a new Camaro on the road but from the many pictures I've seen on the net, the styling does nothing for me, maybe when I see one with my own eyes that will change but I doubt it. I was never really into Camaros anyways. More of a tri-5 and Chevelle guy here. One thing you can't argue with is the impressive power that the LS series motors put out and the available aftermarket parts to mod them.

I do know a bit more about the Mustang though. One of my best friends just bought a low mile 05 Mustang GT Vert and I've driven it a few times and was quite impressed with the seat of the pants feel of the car. It flat out goes. As far as seat comfort and braking goes, not so impressive. I think as far as his brake problem goes though I think it's due to glazed over pads from a previous owner standing on them too hard, too many times. I sure do like the looks of it, and the acceleration. The old school looking wheels on it certainly don't hurt either. Like the old American grey 5 spoke style.
 
When I first saw a Camaro in a magazine I thought it didn't look too bad. Saw a couple of them in person recently and they didn't do much for me. They exaggerated the lines too much IMO. Looks like something out of a Pixar film. I will give GM credit for making it more affordable.
 
There is a great article in Motor Trend titled ominously "Smoke'em while you got'em" that puts the Callenger the 'Stang and the Camaro head to head to head.

The short version is the Stang wins off the line, the Camaro wins in the turns and the Challenger is the big, cruiser with lots of room and long legs. The Camaro is last in interior space, the stang was a bit short on interior quality and the Challenger is great for long drives but does not snap like it smaller rivals.

An honorable mention was given to the V6 Camaro RS in regards to fun/$ factor and fine handling. It is a very good write-up on 3 models that have not seen each other in 35 years and, sadly, may never again.

It is worth checking out. -LY
 
Lone Yankee said:
There is a great article in Motor Trend titled ominously "Smoke'em while you got'em" that puts the Callenger the 'Stang and the Camaro head to head to head.

The short version is the Stang wins off the line, the Camaro wins in the turns and the Challenger is the big, cruiser with lots of room and long legs. The Camaro is last in interior space, the stang was a bit short on interior quality and the Challenger is great for long drives but does not snap like it smaller rivals.

An honorable mention was given to the V6 Camaro RS in regards to fun/$ factor and fine handling. It is a very good write-up on 3 models that have not seen each other in 35 years and, sadly, may never again.

It is worth checking out. -LY
Click to expand...

was a bias write up, they do an ss camaro, but why not against a 6spd srt? srt will out perform, stop, and handle better. Also interior on the srt is huge improvement over an rt, and the ss is only 80 lbs less weight. It was very bias and not apples to apples.
 
djwhog said:
was a bias write up, they do an ss camaro, but why not against a 6spd srt? srt will out perform, stop, and handle better. Also interior on the srt is huge improvement over an rt, and the ss is only 80 lbs less weight. It was very bias and not apples to apples.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was kinda scratching my head as to why the SRT-8 wasn't used either, kinda BS to me, def biased
 
Will I agree that the Challenger is heavy? Yeah. At 4400 lbs it's hardly anything but. The IRS helps with balance, though. That's what struck me odd about the right up on this article. When the Challenger hit the streets the same magazine did a side by side of the SRT8 against the GT500. For the extra horsepower the GT500 has it was just a hair quicker in the quarter, a hair quicker in 0-60 (we're talking less than a tenth here) and got it's *** kicked in the slalom (the Mustang is nose heavy) and braking. Overall ride because of the IRS compared to the three link was better and the same magazine gave the winning points to the SRT8 over the GT500. Now, it's saying the base Mustang GT at 315 horse is a better car than the Challenger R/T? And one of the things that put it over is fuel mileage? Compare fuel mileage on Camrys to Accords to Fusions. No one is buying a V8 pony car to get fuel mileage.
By the way, autoblog and several others have reported that the 6.4L will be replacing the 6.1 in the SRT8 packages, the 6.1 will be in the R/Ts, with the 5.7 being relegated to truck only. But that was reported before the bankruptcy and Obama's meddling with the car companies: ie "you will build only small, fuel sipping death traps no one wants." With Fiat's history in the performance arena (having owned Ferrari back in the 70s and 80s and now owning Lambo) we'll have to wait and see I guess.
And given Obama's mandate that the car companies build "eco-friendly" bull**** cars that the American people have rejected... truck sales are down around 20% while things like the Prius are down 48%, the fed taking a 72% stake in GM does anyone think the Camaro will be more than a one year, two year production run? The Z/28 has already been axed according to Automobile mag.
 
I rather drive an import than drive that new mustang its fugly and i like the camaro better than the mustang
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top