Buying a new car, down to 4 options. HALP

2010 Dodge Challenger R/T:

Specs and other info: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2010/dod ... index.html

2011 Ford Mustang GT:

Specs and other info: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2011/for ... index.html

2010 Dodge Charger R/T:

Specs and other info: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2010/dod ... index.html

2010 Camaro SS:

Specs and other info: http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2010/che ... index.html

I'm torn. They're all pretty equivalent, specs-wise and price-wise, so it's down to the looks. HALP ME, ASYLUM! You're my only hope!

um duh mustang

I like the Camaro.

the one with the horsie on!

The Jaguar!

The Mustang is the newest design so is the best that way, however I am not that pleased with its looks.

The Challenger is just no.

The charger on one hand is awesome because it is a 4 door muscle car which is just below a muscle wagon/estate on the coolness level. However I dislike the looks a lot.

Camaro. I have nothing bad to say about this vehicle and if I could afford a new car this would be it.

I am sad Pontiac is gone because the G8 made me moist.

I'd pick the Charger, but I need four doors.

Though in reality, if I was going to get a muscle car, I'd get one of these: MuscleWagon!

6.2 litre LS3 V8 with 325kw. Non-supercharged version of the engine in the Corvette ZR1 - which I believe is about 50kw more than any of these teeny little muscle cars.

If I was willing to be impractical?

HSV W427 Still 4 doors. 7 litres (427CI). 500 HP, no blower.

My thinking:

Challenger - most comfortable ride, biggest interior of the 3 coupes, still a nice pony car. It'd be a great touring or road trip car, if it weren't for the 20mpg combined driving (it gets around 360 miles per 18 gallon tank) and the soft tuned suspension.

Mustang - best specs of the bunch, least comfortable ride. But, I could get it as a convertible, which I might consider doing. If I could afford the gt350 or gt500 conversion, this question would be a no-brainer. I may not like the LOOKS of the shelby converted mustangs, but you really can't argue with the performance.

Charger - I'm not entirely sure whether or not I like the new muscle car designs. I'd prefer a coupe to a sedan, but this might be nice if I have to carpool somewhere. It basically screams "midlife crisis compromise" if you're driving a pony sedan. Still, Chargers are nice cars.

Camaro - It looks mean and is the only camaro to ever outsell the same year mustang. It'll beat a 2010 'stang off the line, but still corners like a dead whale. It's also not a very comfortable ride; I'm a big guy and it's another small coupe.

Flex wrote:I am sad Pontiac is gone because the G8 made me moist.

The Pontiac G8 is a re-badged Australian Holden - which is the base vehicle that all my suggestions above are built from. Holden still exist, HSV (Holden Special Vehicles) still exists, and Holden is still a GM subsiduary. HSV take high-end GM V8s out of Corvettes and stick them in sedans with some suspension tweaks.

GM can stick any name-badge they want on a Holden and import them to the USA. They send them to the UK as a Vauxhall, and Clarkson thought they were the maddest thing ever.

There's videos on YouTube if you hit the search button.

Ah, so that explains why pontiacs kicked so much ass. I, too, am sorry that GM axed the pontiac line.

if your looking to mod-it and put work into it... go with the pony, only downside as my chevy friend puts it "a mustang is like a tampon, every girl has one"

I like the way the camero looks, its bad ass, and it sets you aside from the others... minus under the hood

I wanted to say none of the above

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2010/mit ... index.html
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2010/mit ... index.html
http://www.motortrend.com/new_cars/04/m ... index.html

Fivelives wrote:My thinking:

Mustang - best specs of the bunch, least comfortable ride. But, I could get it as a convertible, which I might consider doing.

Well according to the MSN 2011 Preview:
2011 Chevrolet Camaro Convertible
Until now, buyers of the Chevrolet Camaro had to take their muscle car as a hardtop only. For 2011, GM's engineers are set to introduce the new convertible version to take on the comparable Ford Mustang Convertible. Expect the engine program to mirror that of the standard Camaro, including the 304-horsepower 3.6-liter V6 and the 426 horsepower 6.2-liter V8.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/listarticle.aspx?cp-documentid=1149254&page=2

So if you wait for the 2011 models you can get a Camaro Convertable.

No offense to the OP, but buying one of these is like buying a $45,000 ticket to the bandwagon express. I'd suggest not doing it.

Do you know how badass a old Mustang or and old GTO would be if you bought one and put that $45,000 into upgrades? It would easily blow all of those cars out of the water. Not to mention, you could drop some cash on a nice custom paint job or even some, dare I say it, but spinners [ugh].

That's just me, though. I've never been the type to jump on these bandwagons & I love seeing 40 year old dads driving these around town to get groceries. I often want to pull up next to them at one of the 1000 stoplights here in Chicago & ask them, "did you win the race?" They'll be confused, but they'll figure it out when they think about it.

BTW, I drive an '02 Honda CR-V & a '92 Honda Civic. I bought them because Hondas have a reputation for longevity, safety, & fuel mileage. That's exactly what I want out of a daily driver. The Civic is up to 202,000 miles & I've only ever replaced the rotor & distributor because of component failure. I also have an old Jeep that is my offroad toy when I want to go out and get muddy. I picked it up used for $4000. If I had spent $35000 on a new Rubicon, I'd have a really nice offroad vehicle. If I spent $31000 in upgrades on this old Jeep of mine...Gah! I'd have full tube roll cage, lift kit, air lockers, 38s, winch, Rhinolined floor boards, 5-point harnesses... You get my point.

Either way, good luck in your decision.

Ha. I actually saw two little old ladies drive past me the other day in the Charger with a MONSTER kicker in their car. I heard them coming before I saw them. Hilarity was had.

Goins2754 wrote:No offense to the OP, but buying one of these is like buying a $45,000 ticket to the bandwagon express. I'd suggest not doing it.

Do you know how badass a old Mustang or and old GTO would be if you bought one and put that $45,000 into upgrades? It would easily blow all of those cars out of the water. Not to mention, you could drop some cash on a nice custom paint job or even some, dare I say it, but spinners [ugh].

That's just me, though. I've never been the type to jump on these bandwagons & I love seeing 40 year old dads driving these around town to get groceries. I often want to pull up next to them at one of the 1000 stoplights here in Chicago & ask them, "did you win the race?" They'll be confused, but they'll figure it out when they think about it.

BTW, I drive an '02 Honda CR-V & a '92 Honda Civic. I bought them because Hondas have a reputation for longevity, safety, & fuel mileage. That's exactly what I want out of a daily driver. The Civic is up to 202,000 miles & I've only ever replaced the rotor & distributor because of component failure. I also have an old Jeep that is my offroad toy when I want to go out and get muddy. I picked it up used for $4000. If I had spent $35000 on a new Rubicon, I'd have a really nice offroad vehicle. If I spent $31000 in upgrades on this old Jeep of mine...Gah! I'd have full tube roll cage, lift kit, air lockers, 38s, winch, Rhinolined floor boards, 5-point harnesses... You get my point.

Either way, good luck in your decision.

And no offense to you, but I'm pretty sure he's looking for a new car. Yeah, it's fun to fix up a car and mod it out, especially old ones. (Talking from experience.) But it's also nice to just have a CAR. Not having to worry about "oh you gotta fiddle this to get this to work" or "you have to close this this certain way" or "I wish my car wasn't 40 years old and the AC worked."
The elitism at the stoplight is something I grew out of long, long ago. Yeah, there's a lot of people driving around in modern muscle cars that have no intention of racing them. So what? They have a racing heritage, sure, but that's not their main purpose. I love driving, and I love racing. But a lot of people just want their transportation to look good, and run like a modern vehicle should. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Can you buy a Fox body and jam $40k worth of upgrades into it, making it a racing monster? Sure. Will it be a practical, modern car? Not a chance in hell. (I'd also be interested in seeing how that old Mustang/GTO went around a CORNER, even after $45k worth of upgrades. :3 )

Get a Volvo.

Goddamn steel tank on wheels.

All it needs is a turret.

Ask and you shall receive?

Anywho, to debate this with the legendary contrarian Invis, all of my $45,000 upgrade kit wouldn't be on the engine. You have to buy other things like brakes, good gripping tires, ect. If an 800 hp NASCAR can hug corners at Watkins Glen, then I'm sure that a beefed up GTO could do the same.

I will concede, however, that building up a car isn't everyone's cup of tea. It's certainly not mine & if I had that money, half of it would go to beer to pay cheap labor from Craigslist to put on the upgrades I bought. I can kinda understand the racing heritage daily driver...kinda. I mean, it doesn't really make sense to me to spend that much money on something that has a top speed (legally) of 65 (in Illinois) and a top speed (realistically) of 25 because of all the traffic and stoplights here.

If I were to suggest the best possible car to buy for real life driving situations, it's probably gonna be something super comfortable with a high quality sound system. 90% of cars out there can get up to the speeds that most normal people are willing to drive, so that's not really an issue. The only thing engine power will help is that epeen flex when you race from stop light to stop light. And then you get your d*** knocked in the dirt by some guy racing an '05 Civic with NOS and you want to cry because you spent $45000 & he spent $12000.

Buy something like this: http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/ca ... gen_Jetta/

You've saved yourself a ton of money, it doesn't have planned obsolesence like American cars do (I don't think it does, at least), it's pretty sporty, and it's not gonna kill your bank (either at the pump or at the register). The Germans have a history of building cars for the "driving experience." I'd wager something like this is probably one of the best daily drivers out there.

Anyone who spends $45k on an engine without touching the brakes or suspension needs to....
well, drive their newly modded car. That'll get them all the punishment they need.

Case in point tho, looks like he's got his heart set on a new muscle car. Thread's not really here to bash them.

Flex wrote:The charger on one hand is awesome because it is a 4 door muscle car which is just below a muscle wagon/estate on the coolness level. However I dislike the looks a lot.

The Charger is like a perfect midlife-crisis car.

- muscle car: duh.
- seats 4: sometimes you want to go out with more than the wife.
- looks schweet. Your opinion may vary.
- It's very comfy inside.

OTOH, my friend bought a used BMW for probably a similar amount ... and holy hell I want one.

Nikachelle wrote:Get a Volvo.

Goddamn steel tank on wheels.

All it needs is a turret.

This lady knows what she's talkin' bout.

Invisusira wrote:And no offense to you, but I'm pretty sure he's looking for a new car. Yeah, it's fun to fix up a car and mod it out, especially old ones. (Talking from experience.) But it's also nice to just have a CAR. Not having to worry about "oh you gotta fiddle this to get this to work" or "you have to close this this certain way" or "I wish my car wasn't 40 years old and the AC worked."

So
Much
THIS.

I've got a 68 Mustang fastback, and a 78 Jaguar XK-R. I'm restoring a 63 Shelby Cobra and I'm thinking about getting a 73 Charger as my next restoration project.

But they all take more time than I've got to keep running. They're also LOADED with "personality".

The Mustang - hood sticks, have to start it a half hour before driving it if I want to take it for a spin in the winter, doesn't have a/c and I have to run the heater if I don't want the engine to overheat in the Arizona summer.

The Jag - yeah. Good luck keeping this beast running. There's a reason it got a reputation for being a mechanic's car. I just don't have the time to keep it going, so it's parked.

The Cobra is where all of my "Yo dawg, I herd you like cars" fund is going, currently.

Oh - and yes, I will probably be racing whatever car I get. That just isn't my main goal in buying the new car. All four of the options would make great touring cars (even if some are more comfortable for long-distance driving than the others).

Also:

Anywho, to debate this with the legendary contrarian Invis, all of my $45,000 upgrade kit wouldn't be on the engine. You have to buy other things like brakes, good gripping tires, ect. If an 800 hp NASCAR can hug corners at Watkins Glen, then I'm sure that a beefed up GTO could do the same.

Edit: Finally got new tabs to load. Pesky virus.

Nascars weigh 3400 pounds to race. I imagine the banked turns would have some effect there. I've driven a beefed up GTO, and compared to the rx-7 or another light tuner car, it handles like a dying whale.

Nikachelle wrote:Get a Volvo.

Goddamn steel tank on wheels.

All it needs is a turret.

when I was looking for a new car when I got the current one I was looking for V70Rs

My Jag was the 50's version of the 4-door muscle car - same motor as the cars that were winning Le Mans all through the 50s (C and D type Jaguars). First large-scale full-size production sedan to do 100 MPH. I've had it 8 months, it's never broken down.

I've done a "just bought it" full service, which included a front suspension rebuild that I knew I'd have to do when I purchased the car. I also did some minor brake work and fitted a full set of seat-belts and child-restraint anchors. I'll do an oil change minor service shortly that will cost a couple-hundred instead of $23 or whatever it costs to spin a filter onto a GM. Service intervals are a hell of a lot shorter as well - every 2,500 miles instead of 15,000.

It's 53 years old. I drive it to work in Sydney CBD peak-hour traffic. Doesn't overheat in mid-summer Sydney temperatures. Good heater in winter. I may add a Vintage Air A/C for next summer. It seats 5 in comfort, 6 if you get the auto with the front bench seat. My wife finds it more comfortable as a passenger than our "modern".

It gets cheers, waves, thumbs up, endless smiles and shouts of "Awesome car!" driving to and from work.

It cost $14,000 Australian, plus $3,000 to do the "post purchase" work I wanted done. That's about $15k US.

You can get a good classic car for not much money. But they're an old car! My car has no power steering, no AC, no seat-belts till I added them, no ABS, no crumple zones (other than the hatchback I'm going to squish like a bug if that's what I hit). It needs to be serviced every year. It uses a LOT of fuel in heavy traffic or if you mash the throttle - cruising around on good roads at 50 MPH it is actually pretty good on gas - 20-23 MPG. More like 12 round town, or if I decide to show people that it's actually quick.

In every practical sense other than size and comfort, my hatchback is a better car. Given the choice, I drive the Jag almost every time.

But it was bought VERY carefully. 50s and early 60s Jags are from the era when they were built incredibly well. I wouldn't expect a late 60s or *shudder* 70s-80s Jag to be reliable unless it had been fully rebuilt. So I was starting with a car that was put together right. My one has had 3 owners, done 40k miles, always garaged, has a full service history, documented back to the first service (I have the docket). I looked for 6 months before I found one I liked, and had to fly 1,000 miles to see it, then ship it back on a truck. I also have to buy parts form the US and UK, get service done by over-priced specialists, and be willing to live with a car thats 50 years old.

If you're an enthusiast, it seems mad to buy a new car. If you're not... you'd be mad to by a classic.