Nearly 500 horsepower for around $40,000 is the kind of power for the money you’ll only find in modern muscle cars such as the 2016 Dodge Challenger R/T Scat Pack, 2016 Chevrolet Camaro 2SS and 2016 Ford Mustang GT. The rivalry among these three is fiercer now than ever.

The V-8 Muscle Car Challenge

Equipped with six-speed manual transmissions, we took these three high-horsepower coupes to Wild Horse Pass Motorsports Park’s drag strip in Chandler, Ariz., to measure zero-to-60-mph and quarter-mile acceleration, then we shifted to an asphalt surface for 60-mph-to-zero braking distance tests. Wild Horse’s 1.2-mile West Track road course was home for evaluating handling where some cars surprised with their sports-car-like athleticism.

Dodge’s powerhouse 485-hp Challenger R/T Scat Pack cradles the most output between its front fenders, topping the Camaro’s 455-hp V-8, and offering 50 more ponies than the 435-hp Mustang GT. Engine output isn’t the only factor in this comparison; the new Camaro weighs 555 pounds less than the Challenger, while Mustang GT weighs 475 pounds lighter than the Dodge.

The Camaro 2SS (also referred to by our judges as the Camaro SS) hit  zero-to-60 mph in 4.3 seconds and did the quarter-mile in 12.3 seconds at 114.3 mph, which proved unbeatable thanks to its favorable power-to-weight ratio and the Camaro’s all-new chassis masterfully putting power to the ground more cleanly than the others. The Camaro maintained traction during higher-rpm launches from 4,000 rpm while the other cars battled traction issues. The Camaro’s power delivery was unstoppable during acceleration testing; I was the test driver for all of the drag-strip testing.

From the very start of a run, the Camaro’s 6.2-liter churned out big power and torque you could feel from just off idle to redline, unlike the Mustang, whose 5.0-liter felt a little hollow until the revs increased.

The Challenger R/T Scat Pack barely stayed in the 12-second range with a quarter-mile time of 12.9 seconds at 111.6 mph; it hit zero-to-60 mph in 4.8 seconds. The Scat Pack’s skinny 245/45ZR20 tires barked for traction at every gear change.

Even with plenty of heat in the tires, the little guys just didn’t want to put down the Scat Pack’s awesome power, which was entertaining to revisit when returning to the start line and seeing two strips of rubber left at every gear change the entirety of the track.

Banging through the Scat Pack’s manual transmission was a huge chore with its heavy clutch pedal and long shifter throws, a sentiment echoed by several judges.

“It’s a pity the shifter throws are long and not as precise as the other two V-8 cars,” said Cars.com Detroit Bureau Chief Aaron Bragman.

Our Mustang GT equipped with the GT Performance Package and a 3.73 rear axle ratio was by far the hardest to drive at the drag strip. Launching aggressively brought huge bouts of wheel hop, and this particular Mustang GT experienced a mystery issue that prevented us from getting full power on aggressive starts.

The Mustang ripped away from the start line feeling stronger than ever, but the engine stopped revving at 4,000 rpm as I fully let the clutch out and put the accelerator to the floor.

All electronic traction assists were off and the issue proved repeatable throughout the day with multiple drivers. A Mustang engineer was just as stumped as us as to why the engine would hit a wall after a fast start. The quickest time from the Mustang — while holding back to avoid wheel hop and the mystery issue — was 13.2 seconds at 111.3 mph for the quarter-mile and zero-to-60 mph in 4.7 seconds.

Braking distances varied by only 5.4 feet from shortest to longest, and the Camaro  stopped in the shortest at 116.2 feet from 60 mph. The Camaro’s brake pedal had the most positive feel in this style of 60-mph-to-zero emergency braking. On the handling course, though, a few judges described the pedal as lacking communication and having pedal travel that was too long. 

“My biggest complaint is with the brakes; it’s hard to believe both the SS and Mustang GT have Brembos, they feel so completely different,” Bragman said. “They work just fine on the Camaro, but the long pedal travel before any real bite happens just doesn’t fill me with confidence.”

The Camaro SS has standard Brembo brakes with four-piston-caliper stoppers front and rear, and 13.6-inch rotors in front and 13.3-inch rotors out back. The Mustang requires an optional Performance Package for its upgraded brakes with Brembo six-piston calipers up front and single-piston rear calipers out back; front brake rotors are 15 inches and rear rotors are 13 inches. 

The Mustang took second place in braking at 119.1 feet. Strangely, the Mustang’s brake pedal during emergency braking felt hard and disconnected, while on the road course those same brakes proved to be a favorite.

“The brakes that were unpleasantly grabby out on the street come into their own on the track. Strong, good feel, no fade,” Bragman said.  

The road on which we tested the brakes may have been cold in oddly below-normal 40-50-degree Phoenix-area temps, but the Challenger R/T Scat Pack felt like it was stopping on ice with an overactive antilock brake system working wildly to whoa the heavy coupe down on those skinny tires, which it did in 121.6 feet. The Challenger’s stopping power comes from Brembo four-piston calipers up front with 14.2-inch rotors and 13.8-inch rotors in the back with Brembo four-piston calipers.

The Challenger R/T Scat Pack’s brakes were the only ones with which we experienced a soft brake pedal after a set of runs; we had to let the brakes cool and bring the pedal back to normal.

Each car showcased a unique character on the 11-turn, 1.2-mile road course. Judges agreed the Camaro SS’ capabilities shined on the road course with its new lightweight chassis clearly the most capable, which is an impressive feat considering it didn’t come with the available Magnetic Ride Control suspension. Planted and composed, the Camaro entered corners faster, stuck to the road and was able to put the power down earlier than other cars with gobs of torque in all the right places, rocketing the car out of a corner without drama. Just as on the drag strip, the Camaro SS required the least amount of work to drive fast.

Two recurring Camaro characteristics popped up on the road course. First off, it was crazy fast for a “base” SS, meaning one without a special-equipment option such as the previous generation’s  SS 1LE Performance Package or ZL1 or Z/28 trim levels. Second, visibility was a big annoyance on the track as well as during street driving. The judges’ range of helmets and body sizes barely fit inside the car. With the seat slammed on the ground to accommodate the extra height of a helmet, I was peering over the steering wheel like an 80-year-old sunk into the front bench seat of an old Buick.

Wiesenfelder agreed. “The shape of the roof limited my ability to tilt my head left to see around the pillar when wearing a helmet,” Wiesenfelder said. “The unquestionable acceleration and handling prowess of the car itself couldn’t compensate for the decreased confidence I had going into almost every corner compared with the Mustang. If you don’t have confidence on the track, you’ve got nothing,”

Judges found the Mustang GT more entertaining to drive, even without the overall grip and technical proficiency of the Camaro SS. Our GT Performance Package included retuned springs, bushings and monotube rear shock absorbers with a thicker rear sway bar and additional chassis bracing. The Mustang’s easily controllable handling was a blast to drive with the throttle where a little extra juice exiting a corner danced the tail around and a little extra counter-steer brought it right back in line.

“The Mustang has quick reflexes and Ford’s typical steering mastery. It slid around a bit more than the Camaro, but in a very entertaining and controllable way. The handling isn’t quite as unflappable as the Camaro’s, but I think it’s more fun,” Wiesenfelder said.

If the Mustang needs anything, it’s more exhaust baritone from the whisper-quiet factory mufflers, which are a far cry from the Camaro’s screaming dual-mode exhaust or Challenger R/T Scat Pack’s wailing pipes.

The Challenger did better than expected on the road course with a big asterisk proclaiming “for its size.” That it packs a few hundred extra pounds more than the Camaro and Mustang was apparent when drivers moved from one of the lighter cars to the big purple tire eater.

“Having driven the Camaro and Mustang first, charging into those first two left-handers at speed was an eye-opener for sure.  The car just didn’t want to turn,” said Brian Robinson, “MotorWeek” producer.

A short transmission gear spread and a 3.90 rear axle ratio did a commendable job making up speed on the tail end of a corner, but it meant changing gears more frequently, and the Challenger’s gear shifter and clutch provided the biggest workout of the bunch.

All acceleration data was recorded at Wild Horse Pass Motorsports Park drag strip with a RaceLogic VBOX II GPS data logger. Weather during our testing saw a high of 51 degrees, but data was not corrected for atmospheric conditions. We used the drag strip’s method of measuring quarter-mile acceleration with a 1-foot rollout accounting for the distance a front wheel moves in the timing beam before rolling out of the beam and triggering the timing system, which is typically a few tenths faster than not including rollout. Zero-to-60-mph times were raw times from a standstill and do not include a 1-foot rollout.

By Fred Meier and Brian Normile