# 2010 SS vs. 2011 5.0 (a true test)

**URL:** <https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150>\
**Category:** PittSpeed Automotive\
**Created:** [July 13, 2010, 10:55am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150 "2010-07-13T10:55:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quik](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/quik/32/5979_2.png) [@Quik](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Quik)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 2:45am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150/21 "2010-07-16T02:45:36Z")

</div>

about 10 yrs ago in GM high tech they broke it down over the years how the camaro vs stang rivalry was and who was victor. in the 80s GM only had one car worth a dam and it sure as hell didnt have a v8 under the hood. thats why after awhile there was an event buick vs mustang. The GMs were a joke, heavier and slower for the time

> [@Do you use the ignore feature?](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/do-you-use-the-ignore-feature/42395/65):
>
> stock for stock the L98 80’s cars could beat the stangs. Mild mods it was pretty close but the lighter stang out ran them once you got into full bolt ons and tunes/etc.
> 
> Not much could handle the 92 firehawk or the 89 turbo trans am 🙂 Pontiac had some quick cars back then 🙂
> 
> Oh and on the road course, the IROCZ kicked major ass

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Swarzkopf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7feea3/32.png) [@Swarzkopf](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Swarzkopf)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 7:17am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150/22 "2010-07-16T07:17:50Z")

</div>

I’m still in disbelief that Dodge keeps selling the Challenger R/T for $33,000 when it get’s whooped on by V6 Mustangs and Camaros, and the Challenger SRT-8 for $43,000 when it get’s beat up by $30,000 Mustang GTs and Camaro SS’.

It’s really a matter of preference between the Mustang and Camaro. The Challenger is so far behind it’s pathetic- Dodge needs to really up the performance or cut the price. It’s telling that the Challenger isn’t even included in these magazine comparos.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Darkstar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@Darkstar](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Darkstar)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 12:05pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150/23 "2010-07-17T12:05:05Z")

</div>

I’m not reading this, but I bet $20 the Ford is slower.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BigMack\_Srt8](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/bigmack_srt8/32/6025_2.png) [@BigMack\_Srt8](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/BigMack_Srt8)\
**Post date:** [July 23, 2010, 9:08am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150/24 "2010-07-23T09:08:01Z")

</div>

dodge still keeps selling the challenger r/t because of old people going through midlife crisis’s who cant afford a vette. They take there stock r/t’s to car shows and think there in because they have a new version of what once was a sick car.

[Previous page](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/2010-ss-vs-2011-5-0-a-true-test/205150.md?page=1)