Jump to content

New & old Camaro and Challenger - Which one do you like?


Recommended Posts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I think the old ones are better looking in my opinion. </div></div>

Certainly a better investment!

What's those new ones cost? $40-50,000?

Can you imagine the nice early pony cars you could buy for that kind of money? wink.gif

Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W Burgess</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I think the old ones are better looking in my opinion. </div></div>

Certainly a better investment!

What's those new ones cost? $40-50,000?

Can you imagine the nice early pony cars you could buy for that kind of money? wink.gif

Wayne</div></div>

I'm fairly certain that you would still be spending $40.000.00 to $50,000.00+ for that old Challenger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the Challenger. The Camaro is a little "puffy". The Camaro is a little more sinister looking. Even though the early 'Cuda and Challengers shared the same platform, it is still hard to compare an OLD 'Cuda with a NEW Challenger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last year a friend of mine bought a new black Challenger with all the bells and whistles. I have a black 1970 Challenger conv. with white top and interior, we took both cars to a car show and displayed them side by side. The public liked the 1970 more than the new one but I drove his new Challenger and it is quite a car, it doesn't have to take a back seat to anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the new Camaro looks somewhat like the 1999 Pontiac GTO concept car (rear fenders, wheels, etc). Took 10 years to bring something semi exciting to the market when GM had it in hand the whole time. If they would have used this design in 99 the GTO probably would not have failed.

post-30758-143138081705_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say, I like them both. The 2009 versions look almost as if they could have been the next-gen versions of both cars back in the day.

As for practicality, if I were in an accident, I would definitely want to be in either of the newer versions.

So, as a day-to-day commuter car, I would buy the newer versions. As the baby-in-the-garage, old school works every time!

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for practicality, if I were in an accident, I would definitely want to be in either of the newer versions. </div></div>

Could not agree more. I can not, for the life of me, understand those that say that old, heavy iron is safer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Wolk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for practicality, if I were in an accident, I would definitely want to be in either of the newer versions. </div></div>

Could not agree more. I can not, for the life of me, understand those that say that old, heavy iron is safer.</div></div>

I imagine that because the older cars are "heavier" that some people think that they are safer. Newer cars are lighter with "crush" zones. Much safer. I just really like the road feel of older iron. Not so much for the newer mushier rides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really can't compare the new and old Camaro and Challenger. As far as styling, the old ones are the originals, and look better. But the new ones are the best thing the auto industry has produced in years. Finally cars that are exciting to look at and make you want to own one. Not just another boring 4 door mid size box or egg.

However, the old ones cannot be driven every day. Sure, maybe if you are retired, and live in Florida, you can have an old Camaro or Challenger (or any old car) as your only car. However, I don't think you would want to take a fully restored 1969 Camaro and drive it around every day for a 40 mile round trip commute in 6 months of snow and salt or even summer construction and potholes in Chicago. Your mint Camaro would be in need of a restoration in less than 6 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the new Camaro better. It harks back to the old Camaro, yet is not an exact replica. It has a newer, fresher look than the Challenger, which is more of a replica yet much chunkier than the original Challenger. I agree, the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang are the best things to come out of Detroit or anywhere in years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the new designs but they are HUGE. Have you seen one in person? Granted some of it is mandated safety stuff, but they all need to go on a diet.

First one to come out with a decent performing car without being the size of a 4-door sedan (and weight) will gain so much market share they won't need a government bailout - the mini achieved some of this IMO - new beetle came close but is still huge/heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I like the fact that they are not little econoboxes. No offense to anyone that does, but I have no desire to own a small car. The new Camaro and Challenger are basically the same size as their 1969-70 counterparts. Except then they were considered compacts. A Camaro the size of a Mini would not be very intimidating as a muscle car. The new GTO didn't go anywhere. It was smaller. I have seen and sat in both Camaro and Challenger, and my only objection is the lousy rear visibility of both. Something that never gets mentioned in any reviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 72caddy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I like the new designs but they are HUGE. Have you seen one in person? Granted some of it is mandated safety stuff, but they all need to go on a diet.

First one to come out with a decent performing car without being the size of a 4-door sedan (and weight) will gain so much market share they won't need a government bailout - the mini achieved some of this IMO - new beetle came close but is still huge/heavy.</div></div>

I think the reason they look so huge is the way each seems to have raised the mid-body line and created an almost "air dam" look to the areas below the crease.

post-37352-14313808183_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soooooooo, now that Detroit made some cars that people wanted, they still aren't selling like hotcakes. So now what should they do???????????? Keep investing billions? That's what it cost Chrysler to do the Challenger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Camaro and Challenger were put on sale 2 or 3 years ago, I bet they would have sold quite well, and dealers would even have been trying to charge over sticker price for them. Right now nothing is selling, foreign or domestic. So yes, they will have to keep investing billions to have cars and trucks ready for when the economy picks back up. I'm sure foreign car companies haven't stopped investing in new product designs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with LINC400.....2 or 3 years ago would have been the most opportune time to release those cars. Now they have to play "catchup". The new generation Mustang came out just in time. Ford is not suffering as much the rest are. Ford's better idea??? Maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mustang has been on the market for years, the Challenger has been out for a year, and the Camaro is just out - usual GM speed to market. PT Cruiser was out how long before HHR? Challenger was a comparatively cheap development because the platform existed and the capacity at Bramalea came from cancelling the Magnum.

As to the size, the sedan underpinnings do indeed drive it. It's still F= ma, which means a = F/m and mass is the enemy. As Colin Chapman said, add lightness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LINC,

A Dodge dealer here in San Antonio that was dropped by Chrysler was discounting their inventory on everything EXCEPT their Challengers. One manager told me they had a standing offer from a dealer in California to sell them at full window sticker because they were going for $5,000 over window sticker out there.

Don't know if he was telling the truth; that dealer is sometimes 'truth-challenged' and his story could have been an attempt to get customers here to pay full sticker for a Challenger.

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can believe dealers not discounting the Challenger. Selling them for $5000 over sticker in CA is a little harder to believe.

My mom wanted to buy a Camaro in 2006 when she bought her Monte Carlo SS. I have no idea why it took so long to get both the Challenger and the Camaro to market. Especially the Challenger. Chrysler seemed to get from concept to showroom a lot faster with other cars that shared less with current platforms. As I said, both of those would have sold a lot better a 2-3 years ago. Now she has been laid off and won't be buying either. She isn't the only one not buying a car in this economy.

It would be nice to see convertible versions of both in a year or two. So far, I haven't even seen a concept or sketch on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Camaro is a better car in my opinion. The price starts @ $23,000-(6cyl/std trans, no options). Fully optioned 8cyl SS is about $37,000.00. The challanger is too big, appears 20% larger than the Camaro. The Camaro is designed after the 1969 Camaro. I may be opinionated as I'm ordering a 2SS/RS Camaro and have always restored and owned G.M. cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LINC400</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I can believe dealers not discounting the Challenger. Selling them for $5000 over sticker in CA is a little harder to believe.

My mom wanted to buy a Camaro in 2006 when she bought her Monte Carlo SS. I have no idea why it took so long to get both the Challenger and the Camaro to market. Especially the Challenger. Chrysler seemed to get from concept to showroom a lot faster with other cars that shared less with current platforms. As I said, both of those would have sold a lot better a 2-3 years ago. Now she has been laid off and won't be buying either. She isn't the only one not buying a car in this economy.

It would be nice to see convertible versions of both in a year or two. So far, I haven't even seen a concept or sketch on that. </div></div>

Chrysler has scrapped the idea of a convertible challenger. From what I heard, it was cause of the economy. This is also the same company who a couple years ago said there was no market for a 2 door sports type car, yet the Mustangs were selling like hot cakes.

Also, I have compared a side by side of the new and old challenger and they are quite different in length. The new one is a lot longer heavier compared to the original. Another disappointing thing is the lack of a spare tire in the new challenger. The new challenger is equipped with run flat tires meaning when you get a hole in one, you keep driving on that tire and basically have to replace the entire tire instead of repairing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the Challenger much better. It looks very close to the old Challenger. The new Camaro, I just think Chevrolet missed the mark on this one. Mabey if the front end of the car resembled the old Camaro even slightly. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Chevy fan from way back. Bought a new Z-28 Camaro back in '68 and wish I still had it. But, if Chevy was going for a retro look, they missed the mark IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave Fields</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

All three seem a bit thick at the waist, </div></div>

Some of us looked alot thinner at the waste back then also. grin.gifgrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...