http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...500/index.html

 

2nd Place
Ford Shelby GT500
Still an eye-catcher, and sensationally fast, but archaic chassis and whiney motor weaken its bid for numero uno.

Since when whine is a bad thing?

 

Meh - we all know the truth...

 

The "archaic chassis" and "whiney toylike engine" of the GT500 beat the Challenger in all the performance tests. They should have just saved us the time and said "We like the Challenger better because it just debuted and has IRS."

 

Reading through the entire article, if you had not said they liked the Challenger better, I would've been surprised at the end. Everything seemed to point towards the GT500. I love the looks of the Challenger, and planned on getting one, but the boring interior blew it for me. The interior is almost identical to my previous Mopar, a 2005 Magnum R/T. The dash has been shaped a bit, but it's 90% the same. They say it looks more expensively dressed. I say it's a total copout, doesn't match the exterior at all, and give me basic. I'll take the retro interior of the S197 any day. If they put the S197 interior into the Challenger, that would be a winning combination. And the 1/4 mile time is a joke. A stock GT on the right day can come very close to that with a good driver.

I'm actually quite shocked they compared it to the GT500. Most every rag and blog tries to compare the Challenger and Camaro to the GT, even though they're priced like the GT500.

 

The pictures give it away, each one has the German engineered Chrysler as the central focus of the picture and the GT500 in the background...

2008 GT500
0 to 60 mph in just 4.3 seconds
quarter mile in 12.6 seconds at 114.2 mph

2008 Challenger
0 to 60 took just 4.7 seconds
quarter mile in 13.1 seconds at 108.3 mph

the Challenger is a big car nearly 10 inches longer than the Shelby, 2.5 inches taller, and almost two inches wider.

Sad.

 

and let's not forget the weight either.

Our's is in hand. Their's still in the bush.

Let's just see where this really pans out when there are actual miles and service issues with the SRT

 

Motor Trend

I stopped reading Motor Trend when they would give truck of the year and car of the year to anything new that anyone else comes out with, Chevy, Toyota, even a freakin' Nissan, but never a Ford. Any F-150 is handsdown better than anything else. Motor Tend is so far up GM's and Toyota's asses it disgusting.

 

I noticed that as well. Wonder how much DC paid for that whole thing.

 

motor trend pisses me off

the gt500 is way more of a car in every class.... its smaller, lighter, faster, sportier, and has more heritage, yes, more heritage than the challenger....

and they picked it???? RETARDS

someone is in motor trends pockets, and i know it aint shelby

 

the pictures down right make me mad...

 

Rediculous. This is why I don't read that rag. Ford haters, and they always have been. Good thing the Honda Civic wasn't there, they'd have found a way to give it the win over the SRT.

 

something wrong with this test....the GT500 is 1.5 seconds faster to 100mph...but the quarter miles times are only 0.5 apart?
0-100 11.3 9.7 Quarter mile 13.1 sec @ 108.3 mph 12.6 sec @ 114.2 mph

 

And by the way, the Challenger looks like a shoe box with 4 wheels glued to it compared to the S197. It still is and will continue to be the best looking in this segment, even AFTER the blessed Camaro finally finds its way out of the plant.

 

Guess Chrysler paid the most money this month for advertising!! LOL!

 

Glad I let my Motor Trend subscription expire....

 

I don't care what they say nor do. Ford hit it on the head with the body style. I was considering the dodge but after seeing the final product I'm positive I'm not interested in it. I can’t wait to see what ford does after Chevy and dodge are done introducing they’re new models. Ford will just leave them behind again with a new body style. Follow the leader.

PS I’ve owned a Chevy and a Dodge before and thats not going to happen any time soon.

Ford Dodge/Chevy

 

Yup, MT is full of idiots. And the company line on the "....." of the year award is that they use what they say are the new offerings for that year. What a bunch of bullcrap! If the GT500 is a design that's a few years older than the Challenger, but is still a better car, then it's STILL A BETTER CAR!!!!

 

It's not a surprise that MT would pick the newer vehicle (all things being equal, new always trumps old), and though I'm a Mustang guy through-and-through, the writers correctly ding the GT500 for the cheap interior.

I personally like the design of the current interior a lot -- it's the materials that are the problem. Swaths of cheap-looking, cheap-feeling, hard plastic are everywhere. I have creaks and rattles after 18 months of ownership that I never had with the Civic I drove in college, a car that cost me half of what I paid for my Mustang. I know -- really, I know -- that the cheapo interior is a major reason that Ford can sell a 300hp V8-powered car for under $28,000. I get it. But how much extra could it be just to upgrade to a softer, more tactile plastic?

I understand that Ford is going to provide a richer interior in 2010 redesign, with better, more sporting seats (another cost-saving trade-off in the S-197). I can't wait to see it.

 

Daimler and Chrysler parted ways.

Without reading the article, the Challenger will be slower than the GT500 for a number of reasons: the Challenger weighs more than 4000 lb (slightly heavier than the GT500) and has less power than the GT500. My Crown Vic weighs about 4100 lb with me inside in a race ready configuration.