It’s fair to say not every Camaro buyer will be opting for the 6.2-liter LT1 V8 in SS trim. In a perfect world, yes, buy the V8, but it’s simply not practical for every single consumer.
The Camaro team has shaken things up in the sixth-generation and introduced an all-new 3.6-liter LGX V6 engine, but also a 2.0-liter LTG turbocharged four-cylinder, too. Chevrolet stated the V6 is actually meant to compete with Ford’s Ecoboost-powered Mustang, and the Camaro turbo is to do battle with the Mustang’s V6. Okay.
Knowing that, Cars.com rounded up the more bargain-priced muscle cars for a good, old fashioned comparison test. We’ll call these muscle cars, hustle cars.
Other than a top-notch interior, the Challenger was largely discounted as fun to drive, earning it a last place finish. Moving right along.
Number two is the 2016 Chevrolet Camaro 1LT, the V6-powered variant. Yes, the Camaro concedes a loss to the Mustang here. Judges scolded the Camaro for lack of visibility inside the cockpit, something everyone in the industry has complained about since the fifth-generation returned. No surprise it cost the Camaro points here. The “rental-car special” interior was also lamented in 1LT trimmings, with judges stating nothing felt special about it in the slightest. Close, but no cigar, Camaro.
So, that leaves the Ford Mustang Ecoboost as the winner this time, a much need victory from the Camaro SS’ winning streak. The Mustang’s saving grace became its punchy, turbo-four cylinder, and easier-to-live-with feels of the vehicle.
Despite the Camaro 1LT being the athlete of the bunch, the Mustangs sneaks a win this time.
Comments
In other news, bloggers make news covering other blogger’s opinions.
This is not a test. A test is quantitative, not qualitative, which is what a blogger’s review is.
Better title: “Camaro was disliked by one blogger with a high-value domain name. We write an article documenting his/her team’s opinion.”
Google’s definition of the word ‘test’ – “a procedure intended to establish the quality, performance, or reliability of something, especially before it is taken into widespread use.”
To say that a car comparison should be based on quantitative measurements is a qualitative statement in and of itself. You are denying the validity of this test because, in your opinion, it needs to be based more on numbers. That is an opinion, that is subjective. What car is “better” is relative.
The poor visibility of the current gen camaro is such a disgrace for chevy and GM. This is supposed to be a drive-able car, not a hot wheels toy. The fact that safety regulators approved this visibility is also lamentable.
Poor visibility isn’t an issue at all. It’s created by media who compares the Camaro to Camrys and Accords in that matter.
I’m 6’2″ and have never owned a Camaro and when I sat in one, ’16 model, and adjusted the seat to my liking I had no issues seeing out of it. My line of vision was in the middle of the windshield and side windows. It’s a sports car and it’s build like one. Gen 6 Camaro is improved in every aspect over last generation and that car had no problem outselling competition even with imaginary created so called ‘visibility issues’
Megatron, Poor visibility? Do you own one? While I won’t speak for everyone, I have been the proud owner of a 2010 and a 2013 and yes, I will agree for sure that the visibility is very different than my Sierra but once you actually spend time driving it, it isn’t bad. I guess I am old school as I still use all 3 mirrors (and have them set properly). I can pull in, back in, change lanes, etc with NO problems.
Optimus
As the owner of both a 2nd and 3rd generation F body cars I just do not care for the claustrophobic feel of that short green house. I’ve had one to drive a couple of times and while a nice looking and driving car I just cannot get around that short roof. Sit one next to a 1st gen and you will see what are near perfect proportions.
Yea iv’e never had problems with visibility, however…if you’ve ever had to climb out the driver’s side window with a helmet on…well you can forget it. Racing with a helmet definitely doesn’t help things.
Optimus….I as well own a 2010 SS and yes use all three mirrors. No scratches or dents on my baby for for poor visibility. People nowadays are getting lazy with all the sensors and cameras.
It is obvious Megatron has never driven one for a few days to acquire the proper self training the brain is capable of when faced with a situation it is not used too. But his repeated comments dissing the Camaro only because of the visibility is getting tired. Is it compromised? Sure, but no more so than a van or most of the midsize SUV’s people are driving around in. I drive a company Ford Explorer everyday and you can’t see anything out of it and the mirrors suck, but it’s free to drive and I’ve overcome the visibility issues just like I did with the Camaro. The car is great, and if the visibility is your only complaint then I say get over it and enjoy the ride.
MRB, there are so many ppl that are out there to ruin somebody’s fun with the Camaro or Mustang or pick any car.
They will say negative things about it- if their is a flaw they will blow it out of proportion.
I want to know what megatron drives.
Megatron what vehicle you own?
Not even just people out there and they’re mostly Ford fans. Sites like cars.com (which is in Fords pocket, but I don’t wanna go into detail) will bitch about it for no reason and then tell you the Mustang is a better car simply because of it.
I’ve sat in a Mustang, never driven one, and it felt no different than Camaro in outward visibility. It’s belt line is high as well, tall dash, bulging hood, windshield angle. Do these things limit your out vision in small way? Yes. But in no way they make the car undrivable.
If I were in a Mustang I would be worried what is behind me as it could be a Camaro. In a Camaro the long pedal on the right is a Mustang eliminator.
OK I got the Biased BS out of the way.
Come on people do you want a car with the roof line of a Camry or do you want something that looks good?
You have three good mirrors, A back up camera and even sensors. If you can not drive the damn car with all of this then you should not be on the road.
You don’t hear Ferrari owners complain about viability do you?
In the old days many Muscle cars came with C pillars you could hide a semi in and no outside mirrors. Yes the Mirrors were optional even on the drivers door and few bought the right mirror. Yet we had no issue driving them then or even now restored with no mirror on the drivers door.
Some of you would wet your pants in a 69 Boss with the louvered window. Yet most who have driven these cars never complained. We just learned how to drive and use the mirrors we had.
What was actually tested here? Poor visibility, rental car interior? Is this blog just another Mustang vs. Camaro “my car is better” rant?
The Camaro bested the competition in nearly every objective statistic (price, HP, 0-60, quarter-mile acceleration) and many subjective ones like handling and exhaust sound. And Car.com “experts” ranked it second? Just the fact they said the Mustang had poor build quality should have kept it out of first place. What were they smoking?
Thing I find funny about this is that the ecoboost doesn’t come standard with Ford touch infotainment system while it’s standard on all camaro models. Not only that the camaro has gotten praise for having quality interior, by most people. Is it as good as most? No, but it’s still good quality. And if the biggest complaint was the visibility, then shouldn’t the SS lose as well? Beings that all camaro trims have essentially the same visibility. Excluding the convertibles. In my mind, if the camaro v6 is going to lose to the ecoboost, because of visibility, than the SS and 2.0t should lose to the mustang counterparts.