I agree--the Mustang may not be the best looking, but it is the most complete package. Backup camera, sync, in-dash nav--toys but nice toys if you so chose. Economy, power, glass roof, drop-top, hard top, it's nice to have the choices. You can go from $22-$52K--it has a little something for everyone (which has always been the strength of the product).

 

With the Challenger..you get an extremely comfortable ride (owing to the Benz based suspension and chassis), ALOT of low end torque (with traction control off you'll just spin through first gear) and alot of room.

You get all of these in a car that can turn in comfortable mid 13 second times in stock or nearly stock form.

If you're wanting a car that is light, whips around turns and "feels" smaller than it is..the Challenger isnt for you.

I guess what it comes down to is comfort vs. power, Challenger leans more to comfort, Mustang to power..

 

Abberation, not the norm - gahhh.... somebody prune this stuff and put it in the politics and religion forum, off-tpoic action aside. the pro/con union threads are alaways interesting

 

12.34 is the best published time for an 07-09 GT500 I've come across (you guessed it, Evan Smith). My car traps between 113-116 mph, so 11's are possible even at a porky 4100 lbs race weight.

 

That was the '10 GT500 IIRC - 540hp and 3.73 gears (did they juggle the trans ratios as well?)

 

2010 has 3.55's. There were no gear options. The trans is the same 1 - 4 as 07-09 with higher 5th and 6th.

 

Good to know, I had pondered swaping out the final drive from 3:31's to a 3:55 so that I could run not only a wider tire, but a taller tire as well at the track for improved traction (wider doesn't really net an increase in the foot print, but wider and taller does) but had wondered about the gear mix in the transmission as well.