[Thor142]

Originally Posted by 90503

True, that most won't ever take any kind of car to any track....(And that's a shame)....

But I would, and I hope most buyers would, consider this: The car that performs best at the track, can stand up to track conditions, is ever warrantied with track use, will also be the best engineered, best quality and reliability above the rest for street and non-track use...

Eventually this initial non-perceivable difference on the street will give way to better quality and reliability over time. The better track car will last longer and have a better ride for many more years than it's competition.....

Interesting theory. High performance rarely translates into longevity, especially if you take advantage of it.

[TransAmx2]

I drove a 2015 SRT and a 2016 1SS, both manual (so not the same comparison but similar enough), and I was impressed with the acceleration and handling of the SRT for it's weight. Sure the SS would out handle it but for it's size it didn't feel bad at all. Now this was a SRT and not the Scat Pack so it had the magnetic ride control which I believe gives it extra firmness in sport mode. The challenger liked to chirp the tires more but that can be attributed to the smaller tires, the camaro felt just as fast, if not faster, but didn't break the tires loose as often. I think it comes down to personal preference and your intended use, obviously a Challenger has more room and the smaller/ lighter Camaro handles better. I liked both interiors equally, preferred the camaro seats (just fit me better) and the challenger gauge cluster.

Outside appearance is again going to be personal taste, i think the Challenger looks great from the front and back but the huge flat plank sides with no body lines doesn't appeal to me, I personally would need to add some of the RT type side stripes if I owned one just to break it up. The camaro is new and edgier but doesn't appeal to everyone and isn't retro at all like the Challenger.

I (personally) think the biggest advantage the SS has over the Scat/SRT is the engine. While the performance is there from both, the dodge 392 is an iron block (part of what makes the challenger heavier) that doesn't handle power adders well, if you are looking to add any major power adders you are either on borrowed time or expect to replace the entire rotating assembly with forged pieces (Feel free to research the charger challenger forums on this but I think the general consensus is if you'r adding a supercharger to a 392 you want all forged rotating assembly). While the SS's LT1 appears to handle 650 hp on a stock engine without problem and then a piston swap and we are seeing guys going over 850hp. If I get a new SS I plan on keeping it for a LONG time and will likely be considering a supercharger at some point, so i figure I should factor that into my wants list in a car.

[mt3130]

Originally Posted by TransAmx2

I drove a 2015 SRT and a 2016 1SS, both manual (so not the same comparison but similar enough), and I was impressed with the acceleration and handling of the SRT for it's weight. Sure the SS would out handle it but for it's size it didn't feel bad at all. Now this was a SRT and not the Scat Pack so it had the magnetic ride control which I believe gives it extra firmness in sport mode. The challenger liked to chirp the tires more but that can be attributed to the smaller tires, the camaro felt just as fast, if not faster, but didn't break the tires loose as often. I think it comes down to personal preference and your intended use, obviously a Challenger has more room and the smaller/ lighter Camaro handles better. I liked both interiors equally, preferred the camaro seats (just fit me better) and the challenger gauge cluster.

A couple things. The SRT Challenger has an adjustable suspension, but its not magnetic, or even in the same class as GM's MRC in my opinion. With that said, the Scat Pack and SRT Challengers handle surprisingly well considering their heft.

Also, the SRT Challenger has 275 tires, just like the Camaro, although they are not as good as the factory Camaro tires. The Scat Pack has the 245 tires.

Overall, I think the OP's assessment of both cars is pretty fair to both.

[fzr100098]

Originally Posted by Raven87

But to be brutally honest, the initial throttle response off idle was much better for the Challenger

Easily remedied

Also, you need to put the SS in competition mode to get the best throttle response (stock)

The Challenger is way too porky - would not even consider it - the Camaro is a true sports car, even if it's bigger than what I'm used to

[TransAmx2]

Originally Posted by mt3130

A couple things. The SRT Challenger has an adjustable suspension, but its not magnetic, or even in the same class as GM's MRC in my opinion. With that said, the Scat Pack and SRT Challengers handle surprisingly well considering their heft.

Also, the SRT Challenger has 275 tires, just like the Camaro, although they are not as good as the factory Camaro tires. The Scat Pack has the 245 tires.

Overall, I think the OP's assessment of both cars is pretty fair to both.

Got it, yes i forgot the SRT did come with the bigger tires, it didn't seem to hook as well as the camaro and I had been looking at Scat Packs so maybe this combo caused me to think the SRT also had the smaller tires in error. I didn't realize the Challenger adjustable suspension was not in fact magnetic ride, thanks for clearing that up. I think after lingering on the SRT 392 forums and reading about the performance limitations of the engine I slowly pushed it off of my list of possible cars.

["Charlene"]

Originally Posted by TransAmx2

I drove a 2015 SRT and a 2016 1SS, both manual (so not the same comparison but similar enough), and I was impressed with the acceleration and handling of the SRT for it's weight. Sure the SS would out handle it but for it's size it didn't feel bad at all. Now this was a SRT and not the Scat Pack so it had the magnetic ride control which I believe gives it extra firmness in sport mode. The challenger liked to chirp the tires more but that can be attributed to the smaller tires, the camaro felt just as fast, if not faster, but didn't break the tires loose as often. I think it comes down to personal preference and your intended use, obviously a Challenger has more room and the smaller/ lighter Camaro handles better. I liked both interiors equally, preferred the camaro seats (just fit me better) and the challenger gauge cluster.

Outside appearance is again going to be personal taste, i think the Challenger looks great from the front and back but the huge flat plank sides with no body lines doesn't appeal to me, I personally would need to add some of the RT type side stripes if I owned one just to break it up. The camaro is new and edgier but doesn't appeal to everyone and isn't retro at all like the Challenger.

I (personally) think the biggest advantage the SS has over the Scat/SRT is the engine. While the performance is there from both, the dodge 392 is an iron block (part of what makes the challenger heavier) that doesn't handle power adders well, if you are looking to add any major power adders you are either on borrowed time or expect to replace the entire rotating assembly with forged pieces (Feel free to research the charger challenger forums on this but I think the general consensus is if you'r adding a supercharger to a 392 you want all forged rotating assembly). While the SS's LT1 appears to handle 650 hp on a stock engine without problem and then a piston swap and we are seeing guys going over 850hp. If I get a new SS I plan on keeping it for a LONG time and will likely be considering a supercharger at some point, so i figure I should factor that into my wants list in a car.

Saying the Challenger doesn't have body lines is like saying a cheetah doesn't have spots. Challenger isn't meant to have all these sharp edges all over it. The cleaness of the body is the main point here with the main body line going the length of those ~197 inches. Curvy hips make looking out the side mirrors while driving put a smile on your face. Power bulge hood. Yes having side stripes helps break up the color so to speak but the car does have lines.

Not sure I agree that the "biggest advantage" the SS has over the Scat is the engine. The 6.4 392 makes more power and torque than the LT1 and there's many 392 cars out there running 8psi and running strong. All depends on tuner. If it were me, no I wouldn't boost a 392 to 8 lbs, only 6 max with the stock pistons. It already has the forged crank and strong enough rods. Drop ins cost less than a grand so the power figures would be about the same as the Camaro. Biggest advantage I see that Camaro has over the Scat is weight being #1 hands down, not the engine. Both are great engines but to say it's the biggest advantage is a little out there.

[JaxChris]

The SS has very aggressive torque/traction management unless you enable Track Mode and put Stabilitrak into Competitive Mode. The car goes from Dr Jekyll to Mr Hyde when you lighten the computers heavy hand.

Characteristics that can change on the SS when you play with it:
- Steering firmness (that option you didn't sound sure about in the Shaker package)
- Throttle response
- Automatic shift speed
- Shift firmness
- NPP exhaust behavior
- Magnetic ride control dampening
- Torque management
- Traction management

Then you also have Launch Control and Performance Shift Activation. You really need to attend a class to learn everything these Camaros before you take it for a test drive.

[Kobra_Klutch]

This is the link to the newly revealed 2017 Dodge Challenger T/A that comes in 3 variants to include the SRT 392. Dodge has released these packages for the Charger as well. Will come in at $45K. The 392 SRT T/A will be basically be the new Scatpack with a Hellcat twist.

More videos of both cars and reveals by Dodge on YouTube.
V/r
Klutch

[Raven87]

Originally Posted by JaxChris

The SS has very aggressive torque/traction management unless you enable Track Mode and put Stabilitrak into Competitive Mode. The car goes from Dr Jekyll to Mr Hyde when you lighten the computers heavy hand.

Characteristics that can change on the SS when you play with it:
- Steering firmness (that option you didn't sound sure about in the Shaker package)
- Throttle response
- Automatic shift speed
- Shift firmness
- NPP exhaust behavior
- Magnetic ride control dampening
- Torque management
- Traction management

Then you also have Launch Control and Performance Shift Activation. You really need to attend a class to learn everything these Camaros before you take it for a test drive.

Possibly true about the class being needed but it is not happening for any potential buyer in the real world (and I'm sure you were jesting) nor would you be able to take advantage of 99% of those tweaks ON a test drive. And, one could argue a class is needed for the Challenger Scat Pack and SRT - they offer a lot that can be improved with the on-board software. Good points though.

What I was looking for on my test drives was what they offer for the day to day part of ownership and not the 10/10ths abilities of either car. The Scat Pack has Performance Pages that allow a lot of personalization based on desired use (suspension settings, launch control, etc) but not quite as much as the Camaro. I was really looking at the stuff that a non-enthusiast would find more important than those of us that know all about what the car is capable of on a track or strip.

I had a '14 C7, a '15 ZL1, and now own a '15 C7 so I am very familiar with all those changes that occur when you dig into the modes. And they offer an array of improvements that offer stunning performance improvements when applied correctly.

There is absolutely no debate that the SS is a better Track car than the Challenger. Just the weight difference alone is a huge advantage. However, the Scat Pack (and its siblings the SRT-392 and Hellcat) were not by design meant for Laguna Seca or built with the twisties on a country back road in mind. Yes, they can be enjoyed on a track and many do successfully.

But the Camaro and ZL1 (as well as the Mustangs and Corvettes, etc) are much better suited for the road course than the Dodges. That in no way takes anything away from the Challengers. It's just the truth about the laws of physics.

[Slem]

Originally Posted by JaxChris

The SS has very aggressive torque/traction management unless you enable Track Mode and put Stabilitrak into Competitive Mode. The car goes from Dr Jekyll to Mr Hyde when you lighten the computers heavy hand.

Characteristics that can change on the SS when you play with it:
- Steering firmness (that option you didn't sound sure about in the Shaker package)
- Throttle response
- Automatic shift speed
- Shift firmness
- NPP exhaust behavior
- Magnetic ride control dampening
- Torque management
- Traction management

Then you also have Launch Control and Performance Shift Activation. You really need to attend a class to learn everything these Camaros before you take it for a test drive.

Very well put jax, it's what you find in a quality sports car

[TransAmx2]

Originally Posted by "Charlene"

Saying the Challenger doesn't have body lines is like saying a cheetah doesn't have spots. Challenger isn't meant to have all these sharp edges all over it. The cleaness of the body is the main point here with the main body line going the length of those ~197 inches. Curvy hips make looking out the side mirrors while driving put a smile on your face. Power bulge hood. Yes having side stripes helps break up the color so to speak but the car does have lines.

Not sure I agree that the "biggest advantage" the SS has over the Scat is the engine. The 6.4 392 makes more power and torque than the LT1 and there's many 392 cars out there running 8psi and running strong. All depends on tuner. If it were me, no I wouldn't boost a 392 to 8 lbs, only 6 max with the stock pistons. It already has the forged crank and strong enough rods. Drop ins cost less than a grand so the power figures would be about the same as the Camaro. Biggest advantage I see that Camaro has over the Scat is weight being #1 hands down, not the engine. Both are great engines but to say it's the biggest advantage is a little out there.

To clarify ;
1) I said the large plank side body lines of the Challenger Doesn't appeal to me the side panels are much larger on these 2016 cars then the "Classis" 70's era models and I Personally don't like that particular look. I'm giving opinion, doesn't mean anyone has to agree with me. I still think it's a beautiful car, but that is the one appearance feature I felt didn't appeal to me.

2) again I said "I (personally) think the biggest advantage the SS has over the Scat/SRT is the engine" I do feel the weight difference is the biggest performance advantage but in deciding between the 2 the extra size was an advantage to me and the extra weight offset that advantage, I basically considered it a wash. But I have been on the Charger/Challenger forums and I don't see near the number of successful supercharger installs I would expect on the 392 which started in production in what? 2011? so we have 6 years of 392's out there vs. 3/4 of a year of LT1's? In the research I have done I believe the LT1 is holding up to the big performance mods better than the 392. as you said you can safely boost the 392 to 6psi but the performance gains are sub-par, we are seeing the LT1 taking 8+ PSI stock and pushing higher numbers without problems. Again this is my opinion and I may be proven wrong over time.

I'm not trying to pick fights or call anyone out over an inaccurate detail, this was a thread about opinions between the 2 cars and as I had driven both I was just giving my 2 cents.

[Slem]

I went from the ATS to the SS , best handling car with a lt1 ...win win

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Raven87

Both cars felt similarly powerful. But to be brutally honest, the initial throttle response off idle was much better for the Challenger which really floored me. I had to be careful when applying the throttle from a stop as it would want to just get up and GO; it just needed far less application/depressing the pedal.

The SS (like my C7) was less sensitive to throttle application but not in a bad way at all - it was just that the Camaro needed more application of the go pedal to get the same sort of response. The difference was very noticeable and I even drove a second SP to see if it was something unique to the first one but it drove identically.

I wonder if some of that is the difference in gearing. The Challenger has the advantage there and it's a lot of what helps it run times at the strip similar to the 6th gen. But I do think that Competition/Performance Shift mode in the 6th gen really wakes it up.

Originally Posted by Thor142

I think this is right on point. Chevy absolutely has the highest performance metric in the segment BUT (and this is where they're getting hurt) the level you have to drive the car at to separate it from it's peers is not going to be experienced on a test drive or as you said by John and Jane Doe ever. So you have a smaller car with a high price tag and less comfort.

I can't speak for everyone, but there was an immediately noticeable difference the first time I made a fast turn in with the 6th gen vs the SP I drove. It wasn't body roll, firmness of the ride, or grip. It was the fact when you turned the wheel in the 6th gen, you felt like you were guiding a missile down the road. The SP turned but it felt vague and almost disconnected in comparison. I think most of that has to do with the "just adequate" steering feel and the sheer heft of the SP which is undeniable after driving something small for so long.

Putting around the average city on a dealer test drive, I completely agree. Most people would be lucky to notice any difference with a Honda Accord, much less these two cars. It really is cruiser vs true sports car, two completely different animals. Hell when I got back into my 328i after test driving the 6th gen on a small country stretch the painful truth became apparent. Everything said about the driving dynamics, numbness, and almost pedestrian handling with the current 3 series became crystal clear. And it had their sport suspension and gripy tires as well.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Raven87

I had the opportunity to drive a new 2SS Camaro and a new Scat Pack Challenger Shaker back to back this past weekend. Both had similar MSRPs which actually I found surprising. Camaro MSRP was $46590 and the SP was $46,980. Both were 8 speed automatics and both had leather, etc, and neither had NAV. The Camaro had the NPP exhaust and Mag Ride and as mentioned, the SP had the Shaker Option.

The Shaker option is a $4800 upgrade that brings a lot of additional goodies to the car that are non-related to the Shaker hood; things are included such as better seats that are heated and ventilated, power tilt/telescopic and heated steering wheel, rear back up camera, performance steering (not sure what that is?), etc, and made it more on par with the 2SS trim versus a standard Scat Pack Challenger with cloth seats which would be similar to a 1SS.

Both cars felt similarly powerful. But to be brutally honest, the initial throttle response off idle was much better for the Challenger which really floored me. I had to be careful when applying the throttle from a stop as it would want to just get up and GO; it just needed far less application/depressing the pedal.

The SS (like my C7) was less sensitive to throttle application but not in a bad way at all - it was just that the Camaro needed more application of the go pedal to get the same sort of response. The difference was very noticeable and I even drove a second SP to see if it was something unique to the first one but it drove identically.

Pluses for the Challenger - visibility, throttle response, Shaker Hood (which includes a CAI intake), interior roominess, exterior styling, 8.4" U-Connect screen, much larger trunk opening and trunk, and some excellent seats.

Minuses for the Challenger - mileage rating (but no gas guzzler tax with the A8), ridiculously sized 245 tires, manual adjustment for the seat recline, and the dated dash and interior materials/design.

Pluses for the SS - the LT1 engine, much more modern interior, exterior styling (just my opinion of course), 275 rear tires, better fuel mileage, NPP exhaust, Mag Ride, the view out over the hood, and the instrument panel (it blows the Challenger IP out of the water).

Minuses for the SS - absurdly small trunk opening and a much smaller/narrower trunk, higher belt line resulting in less window area, initial throttle response did not compare to the Scat Pack, tighter interior (but still roomy enough in the front seats), and rear visibility. (I thought the side and forward visibility were acceptable.)

I can see why the Challenger is gaining market share and especially why the Scat Pack is so popular - the car was a pleasure to drive in every respect. The SS is a gorgeous car; the one I drove was the Red Hot with polished wheels and it was a definite eye catcher. The Scat Pack was Pitch black with the 20"x9" forged Hyper Black wheels; the car looked very sinister, especially from the front and with the Shaker Hood it looked very retro.

Both are great cars. While the Challenger does indeed look 'old' in styling, I still find it a very good looking car that pays more homage to the original than either the Mustang or the Camaro, even though it is dated. The 6G Camaro looks very aggressive in the front especially and definitely looks like a Camaro, its looks have moved away from a Retro theme. Both looked very good but for different reasons.

Both cars drove very well and were fun to drive. While I did not do any sort of hard launch I did roll into the throttle and both felt identical in acceleration and shifting of the A8s. Neither car seemed to offer a performance advantage over the other but the Scat Pack did want to break the tires loose easier which I'm sure is due to it having the 245s on the rear.

Both were reasonably quiet at cruising speed with low engine rpms and comfortable levels of road noise etc. The Challenger cabin does feel (and is) a lot larger/roomier than the Camaro but from a driver's perspective I do not see that as any advantage. For passengers? Yes, a big advantage to the Challenger.

Like I said, I can see why Dodge is gaining on the market share but the Camaro is an outstanding and very modern sports car.

Its hard to imagine you didn't feel the 400-500 lb weight difference. The Camaro should have felt more nimble compared to the challenger, its heavy. In a real world 1/4 mile track run, the Camaro should easily beat the Mopar stock for stock just the way you tested them.