Nostalgia isn’t what it used to be; today’s reinventions of the classic pony car might owe their styling to their late-60’s ancestors, but they’re better in every measurable way. Subjectively, things are better today than they’ve ever been, too. Owning and driving a 400-horsepower car in 1970 required a level of commitment to a lack of creature comforts and civility that just wouldn’t be acceptable today. The fact is that you really can’t go too far wrong with today’s Camaro, Mustang, or Challenger, but that doesn’t mean there’s any end to the debate as to which one is “best.” Log on to any make-specific internet forum and, guaranteed, there will be a long, long thread debating the merits and flaws of these three cars.

Like it or not, the fifth-generation S197 Mustang can lay claim to being the first of the new crop. Debuting in the 2005 model year as a replacement for the ten-year-old SN-95 body style (which itself was a refinement of the Fox chassis, dating all the way back to the end of the 1970’s), the new Mustang is arguably the reason the current Camaro and Challenger even exist. From 2004 until the introduction of the Dodge for the 2009 model year, the Mustang had the segment all to itself, and the meat-and-potatoes GT model made do with a 300-horsepower 3-valve version of the “Modular” V8 architecture which dated back to the early nineties. The 2009 Challenger R/T, though a significantly larger and heavier car, debuted with a 75-horsepower edge with its 5.7L HEMI powerplant, and both the Dodge and Ford were left in the dust in terms of BHP by the 2010 Camaro SS, listed at 426 for the LS3 (400 for the automatic and L99).

On The Drag Strip

Of course, followers of the Bowtie, Blue Oval, and Pentastar will argue the issue endlessly, and it’s made for some great media fodder. When Motor Trend put together a three-way comparison, all it did was make everyone unhappy.

Even in 6.1L, 425hp SRT8 trim, the Challenger was the also-ran of the group, with 4.8 seconds-to-60 and a 13.3 quarter mile at 106.1 compared to the Camaro’s 4.7 and 13.1 at 110.8. But the big controversy out of that test was the Mustang’s 12.7 pass at 111.3mph (and 4.4 seconds-to-sixty, in case you were wondering) – a result that no other magazine has duplicated. Per Motor Trend, “The Mustang enjoys a (diminishing) advantage in all six gears, which enabled the ‘Stang to dominate the acceleration tests, storming to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds (three- and four-tenths ahead of the Chevy and Dodge), and on through the quarter in 12.7 seconds at 111.3 mph (four and six tenths ahead of its 251- and 567-pound heavier sedan-based competitors).

Chevy geared the Camaro to avoid a guzzler tax (Dodge pays shareholder Uncle Sam $1751 for each SRT8), making the first three gears 35-39 percent taller than the Mustang’s. With equivalent gearing, the race would be a lot closer, but there are no factory options for the Camaro. (It probably isn’t feasible for the aftermarket to provide a 4.72:1 ring-and-pinion set, so the tranny internals would probably need changing.)”

Edmunds’ Inside Line found the SS-vs-GT match to be a dead heat: “On the quarter-mile at Auto Club Speedway in lush, park-like Fontana, California, Inside Line’s long-term Camaro SS whomped to 60 mph from a standstill in just 5.1 seconds with the traction control turned off (4.8 seconds with one foot of rollout like on a drag strip).

The full quarter-mile went by in 13.1 seconds at 110.4 mph. Our red Mustang GT (on all-season Pirelli P Zero Nero tires) matched the Camaro SS’s blast to 60 mph by hitting that speed in an identical 5.1 seconds from a standstill with the traction control turned off (4.8 seconds with one foot of rollout). But the quarter-mile took another two-tenths to complete with a slightly lower trap speed, 13.3 seconds at 107.3 mph.”

“That’s a razor-thin advantage for the Camaro and, just to throw in some additional ambiguity, we also tested another Mustang GT (this one in blue and wearing summer tires), which ripped to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and blitzed the 1,320 feet in 13 seconds at 110.6 mph. That’s the kind of razor’s edge that can be measured in microns.”

To add fuel to the fire, The Smoking Tire paired up an automatic-equipped 2011 GT with its L99-powered Camaro SS counterpart in an eighth-mile race, prompting more cries of an unfair apples-to-oranges comparison, and questions about 60-foot-times, the fact that it doesn’t appear that either car was brought up on the converter, and what the hell was going on with that plane at the end…

“Clearly, the Mustang slaughters the Camaro in a 1/8-mile drag race on a runway,” says TST. “The drivers were two Ford engineers, and for those of you who think the Camaro driver sandbagged, he was a former pro racer who cut a .001 light. The Mustang driver cut a .008 light.”

A Look at Handling

Of course, not everyone lives their life a quarter mile at a time, and for those who do more than just take the turnout at the end of the strip, how a car handles and stops is just as important as how it goes. On paper, the Challenger has the most sophisticated suspension setup of the trio, with an unequal-length dual A-arm setup in front and 5-link independent rear, while both the Camaro and Mustang utilize front struts with a 4.5-link IRS in back for the Camaro and a 3-link-plus-Panhard bar locating a live axle on the Mustang.

Two tons put a damper on the fun for the Challenger, though – once again Motor Trend ranked the cars in the same order for handling, with the Mustang stopping quicker and cornering better than the Camaro, and the Dodge trailing the other two. Despite the clear evidence that 30 years’ experience tuning a live axle rear end has allowed Ford to hang with the IRS competition, it’s still fodder for those looking for a reason to doubt. “The most obvious difference between the Camaro’s and Mustang’s respective chassis is out back where the Chevy has a multilink independent suspension while the Ford retains the same sort of solid rear axle that underpinned the chariots of the Roman Legion,” says Edmunds.

“Ford has never tuned the Mustang’s suspension better than on the ’11 GT,” Edmunds grudgingly admits. “There’s a certain eagerness to how the Mustang reacts to steering inputs, as if the car just can’t wait to move. Even with the traction control engaged, the Mustang GT is always dancing, ready to pounce and excited to test the limits of its P245/45R19 Pirelli P Zeroes. It’s flat fun. As well tuned as the Mustang’s solid axle is, however, it’s still not an independent system. The Mustang’s rear end takes its time to calm down after knocking against a pothole or bump, and this sort of skittishness can be unnerving. On the rugged freeway surfaces of Southern California, the Mustang’s rear end never quite has a chance to settle in completely. It’s as if the coil springs are always working back there and they want you to know it.”

Edmunds is far more enamored of the new Camaro; “Meanwhile the Camaro SS feels as if its summer-spec 245/45R20 Pirelli P Zeroes are sutured to the pavement with steel cables. The independent rear suspension produces a poised, comfortable ride the Mustang can’t match, and deals with pavement hiccups almost casually. If the Mustang feels like it’s skipping over the road, the Camaro feels like it’s a smothering steamroller. The steering doesn’t have the same giddy, light feel that you sense in the Mustang, but it’s precise and quick enough. It’s reassuring where the Mustang is entertaining.”

You can’t measure poise, though, and Motor Trend sums up the cornering contest by saying, “The Mustang ran away from its portlier pursuers in all of our handling tests, circling the Figure-8 course in just 24.7 sec at 0.77 g, fully a half-second ahead of the Camaro and a second quicker than the big Dodge. Lateral grip measured at a legitimate sports car level of 0.97 g. Here the more interesting statistic may be the Dodge’s ability to match the lighter, fatter-tired Camaro at 0.92 g each. The Challenger also generated an average of 0.71 g on the skidpad — just 0.02 g under the Camaro — while lapping a half-second slower.”

On the topic of style, it’s obviously a matter of personal taste. While the Camaro and Challenger are new-from-scratch in the past two years, the Mustang is a 2010 model year rework of a car we’ve had five years to grow accustomed to. Put the three side by side in the same parking lot, and it’s obvious that the GT is a smaller car than the SS or R/T.

Where it Matters Most: The Checkbook

Another source of contention has been price versus performance – the Mustang leads in this area (at least in theory) with a base MSRP of $29,645 compared to $30,860 for the Dodge and $30,945 for the Chevy. Of course, with all three cars still in demand even in a down economy, finding a “stripper” GT, SS, or R/T anywhere but in a newspaper ad with “one at this price” in tiny print is fairly unlikely, as dealers frequently option-up cars they know they can unload.

Of course, if the S197 Mustang (and the SN-95 and 4th Gen Camaro before it) has taught us anything, it’s that these cars rarely stay bone stock in the hands of enthusiasts. Relatives of the Camaro’s LS powerplant have already become favorites with tuners, and the 5.7 HEMI has a healthy aftermarket, while the 5.0 Modular is quickly catching up (and poised to surpass the competitors). In the see-saw battle for pony car supremacy, it will inevitably come down to which platforms the aftermarket embraces with the most gusto.