2011 Dodge
Challenger R/T
vs. 2012 Ford
Mustang GT

2011 Dodge Challenger R/T

9.6

starting from

$30,720

Reasons to buy the Dodge Challenger R/T

Badge
High top speed
170 mph
Badge
Better suspension
Independent
Badge
Mediocre cornering
0.89 g
Badge
Power seats
Standard
2012 Ford Mustang GT

9.2

Runner-up

Ford Mustang GT

starting from

$30,105
"A street-legal racer that’s just looking for some action."
mustangs.about.com | talking about the Mustang's engine
"I can’t stop thinking about how much power the new Shelby offered."
mustangs.about.com | talking about the Mustang's performance

Reasons to buy the Ford Mustang GT

Badge
Good braking distance from 60mph
104 ft
Badge
Zippy 1/4 mile time
12.7 s @ 111 mph
Badge
Fast 0-60 time
4.4 seconds
Badge
Quite powerful
412 HP @ 6,500 RPM
Luxury Features 7.2 vs 10.0
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Winner: Challenger R/T
[details]
  • Conveniently adjust your seat with the Challenger R/T's power seats; not available on the Mustang GT
  • Have your choice of leather or cloth seats on the Challenger R/T
Road Tests 10.0 vs 8.4
2012 Ford Mustang GT Winner: Mustang GT
[details]
  • The Mustang GT needs around 30% less space to stop from 60mph, 104 ft vs 142 ft
  • More than 10% faster in the 1/4 mile, 12.7 s @ 111 mph vs 14.3 s @ 102 mph
  • The Mustang GT hits 60mph around 30% faster, 4.4 seconds vs 5.9 seconds
Practicality 8.8 vs 10.0
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Winner: Challenger R/T
[details]
  • The Challenger R/T has 2 more cupholders, 4 vs 2
  • The Challenger R/T offers an optional navigation system; not available on the Mustang GT
  • Passengers in front seats enjoy around 10% more room, 55.6 ft3 vs 52.2 ft3
Performance 10.0 vs 8.8
2012 Ford Mustang GT Winner: Mustang GT
[details]
  • The Mustang GT needs more than 10% less space to turn, 33.4 ft vs 38.1 ft
  • The Mustang GT's power-to-weight ratio is around 20% better, providing a sportier ride, 8.7 lb/hp vs 10.9 lb/hp
  • Around 10% more powerful, 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 376 HP @ 5,150 RPM
Safety Features 9.0 vs 10.0
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Winner: Challenger R/T
[details]
  • The Challenger R/T has 2 more airbags (including Head / Curtain, Rear Curtain), 5 vs 3
Cost 10.0 vs 9.9
Too close to call
[details]
  • Inexpensive
  • Shorter-lasting basic warranty
  • Shorter basic warranty
Crash Test Ratings - vs -
Missing information
[details]
Entertainment System - vs 10.0
Missing information
[details]
  • Neither has a subwoofer; audio won't have that deep thumping bass sound
  • Neither offers speed-sensitive volume
Overall 9.2 vs 9.6

Luxury Features

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
moon roof Not Available vs Not Available Neither offers a sun roof
Help
power seats Not Available vs Standard Conveniently adjust your seat with the Challenger R/T's power seats; not available on the Mustang GT
Help
keyless entry Standard vs Standard Both have keyless entry
Help
leather Not Available vs Optional Have your choice of leather or cloth seats on the Challenger R/T

Road Tests

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
0-60 mph 4.4 seconds vs 5.9 seconds The Mustang GT has a good 0-60 time, but the Challenger R/T is just average
Help
Braking distance at 60mph 104 ft vs 142 ft The Mustang GT has above average braking ability, but the Challenger R/T is quite bad
Help
1/4 mile 12.7 s @ 111 mph vs 14.3 s @ 102 mph The Mustang GT's 1/4 mile time is zippy, but the Challenger R/T's is just OK
Help
Lateral acceleration 0.88 g vs 0.89 g Both have subpar cornering abilities
Help
Top speed 155 mph vs 170 mph The Challenger R/T can hit high speeds, but the Mustang GT cannot

Practicality

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
Passengers 4 vs 5 The Challenger R/T has lots of passenger seats and the Mustang GT is OK, too
Help
Highway driving range 416 miles vs 458 miles The Challenger R/T has good highway range and the Mustang GT is reasonable
Help
Cargo space 13.4 ft3 vs 16.2 ft3 The Challenger R/T has lots of cargo room and the Mustang GT is pretty good
Help
front seats 52.2 ft3 vs 55.6 ft3 The Challenger R/T has roomy front seats and the Mustang GT is OK
Help
folding rear seats Standard vs Standard Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
Help
power outlets Standard vs Standard Both have power outlets
Help
roof rails Not Available vs Not Available Neither offers roof rails
Help
navigation system Not Available vs Optional The Challenger R/T offers an optional navigation system; not available on the Mustang GT
Help
Cupholders 2 vs 4 The Challenger R/T has a good number of cupholders, but the Mustang GT does not
Help
front air conditioning Standard vs Standard A/C for hot summer days comes standard

Performance

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
Horsepower 412 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 376 HP @ 5,150 RPM The Mustang GT is fairly powerful, but the Challenger R/T is not far behind
Help
Number of gears 6 vs 6 Average number of gears
Help
Transmission Manual transmission vs Manual transmission Both offer a manual transmission, unlike most in this class
Help
paddle shifters Not Available vs Not Available Neither offers paddle shifters
Help
Air compressor None vs None Neither has an air compressor to maximize power output
Help
Power-to-weight ratio 8.7 lb/hp vs 10.9 lb/hp The Mustang GT is a sporty car, while the Challenger R/T is just average
Help
Drivetrain type rear-wheel drive vs rear-wheel drive Both have the usual drivetrain for this class of vehicle
Help
Curb-to-curb turning radius 33.4 ft vs 38.1 ft The Mustang GT can make tight turns, but the Challenger R/T takes a little more room to navigate

Safety Features

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
antilock brakes Standard vs Standard Both come standard with ABS brakes
Help
Stability control system Yes vs Yes Both have electronic stability control
Help
Airbags 3 vs 5 The Challenger R/T has a good number of airbags, but the Mustang GT does not (missing Head / Curtain, Rear Curtain)
Help
Rear brakes Disc vs Disc Both have the usual brakes for this class of vehicle
Help
child door locks Not Available vs Not Available
Help
Roadside assistance system None vs Uconnect

Cost

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
MSRP $30,105 vs $30,720 Inexpensive
Help
In-city gas mileage 17 mpg vs 15 mpg The Mustang GT has OK city mileage, while the Challenger R/T is very inefficient
Help
basic warranty miles 36,000 mile vs 36,000 mile Shorter basic warranty
Help
basic warranty years 3 year vs 3 year Shorter-lasting basic warranty

Crash Test Ratings

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
Rollover resistance Unknown vs 4 stars
Help
Front driver crash test Unknown vs Unknown
Help
Driver side crash test Unknown vs Unknown

Entertainment System

Ford
Mustang GT
2012 Ford Mustang GT
2011 Dodge Challenger R/T Dodge
Challenger R/T
Help
Number of speakers Unknown vs 6
Help
Has speed sensitive volume No vs No Neither offers speed-sensitive volume
Help
CD player Standard vs Standard CD player comes standard
Help
premium radio Standard vs Not Available Have your pick of music from around the world with the Mustang GT's satellite radio
Help
Has auxiliary audio input Yes vs Yes Both have an audio-in jack so you can plug in your own MP3 player to the stereo
Help
Has subwoofer No vs No Neither has a subwoofer; audio won't have that deep thumping bass sound
Help
entertainment system Not Available vs Optional It'll cost you to get an entertainment system on the Challenger R/T; but it's not available at all on the Mustang GT

Other Vehicles to Consider

2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS Challenger SRT8 vs Camaro SS
2011 Dodge Challenger 2011 Dodge Charger Challenger vs Charger
2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 2011 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 Challenger SRT8 vs Corvette Z06
2011 Dodge Challenger 2012 Nissan GT-R Premium Challenger vs GT-R Premium
2011 Dodge Challenger SRT8 2011 Nissan 370Z Challenger SRT8 vs 370Z
2012 Ford Mustang GT 2011 Dodge Charger R/T Mustang GT vs Charger R/T
2012 Ford Mustang GT 2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS Mustang GT vs Camaro SS
2012 Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 2012 Nissan GT-R Black Edition Mustang Shelby GT500 vs GT-R Black Edition
2012 Ford Mustang GT 2011 Subaru Impreza WRX STI Limited Mustang GT vs Impreza WRX STI Limited
2012 Ford Mustang GT 2011 Nissan 370Z Mustang GT vs 370Z

Comments Which car would you recommend, and why?

Showing 23 comments

Avatar for Briane Howland Briane Howland (4:02 PM, October 28, 2014)
Ok, wow this was a messed up really biased comparison. Are you kidding me? The Mustang destroys the Challenger R/T, and there isn't anything inconvenient or non luxurious things about the Mustang GT over the Challenger R/T, it won because of what reason??? The Mustang GT has a speed limiter of 155 mph because the base model GT's tires aren't rated for higher speeds, and it can easily be disabled with any OBDII reader/controller. I did 155 mph in both of my 2006 and 2008 Mustang GT's, with a whole 300 hp in 4th gear, lol. The 420 hp 2014 GT is capable of 175 mph. The 412 hp 2011 Mustang GT kicks ass, handles great with a solid rear axle, brakes the same as a supercar from 60 mph, and it kicked the crap out of the Challenger R/T in a major way. Reading this comparison was funny. Whoever wrote it is a moron, and has no common sense whatsoever. Go test drive all 3 Pony Cars and you'll see for yourself.
 
Avatar for WhataBunchofShi WhataBunchofShi (8:32 PM, September 27, 2014)
These comparisons don't even make sense...This is a BS Website!
 
Avatar for SFBay69 . SFBay69 . (11:53 PM, August 27, 2014)
The camaros need the fuse pull and 93 to kinda make a little more power maybe 10 is all you are gonna get out of that. Camaros and mustanhs both look good, if you lower that mustang and put on some 275/40s on the back with 9.5-10" wide tires....its gonna look really sick even better than the camaro coming down the road. The thing I hate about camaros vs mustangs is the interior...HATE camaro cheap interior! Its waht drove me from not buying one plus the car felt slow like you stated. Its funny watching challengers and camaros ride behind you knowing they will get smoked.
 
Avatar for Sizeth3 Sizeth3 (11:30 PM, August 27, 2014)
Thanks man, I am a little nervous about the tune since my car has a 6 year warranty still, but I probably will end up doing it :). Yes the Camaros look cool, arguably cooler than the Mustang (but again, I have friends that disagree and like my car better.) The surprising thing about the Camaro, was for a 6.2 liter, it had no torque. I read it was because GM avoided the gas guzzler tax by gearing it numerically low in the rear end. And I could tell, 1st gear seemed to redline near 50 mph on the 6 speed manual. My wife was pinning the car around corners on the test drive. I had one person tell me it's possible that the dealer put regular gas in it, and it had retarded the timing and needed a fuse pull. Guess I will never know :).
 
Avatar for SFBay69 . SFBay69 . (11:09 PM, August 27, 2014)
Good analysis...wait till you mod that mustang...tune, exhaust, and cai...you are near 11's or there in fall weather....camaros look cool but none of them are fast in my book until you cam them or supercharge one. NONE. Challengers are way too heavy and dont look that cool anymore...Mustangs are feared now...just watch the road and the people around you.
 
Avatar for Sizeth3 Sizeth3 (4:48 PM, August 27, 2014)
I will be honest, the Mustang is the last of it's breed. I went out to buy a Camaro SS or a Challenger RT, with the Mustang dead last in my "Top 3" list for buying a new pony/muscle car. I am a die hard Chevrolet fan and loved the look of the Dodge. However, the Camaro and the Challenger are too heavy, and you can feel it when you drive them. The Mustang is 3580 pounds and makes 420 horsepower in 2013, the Challenger RT is 4170 pounds and makes 370 horsepower. Even the Camaro SS with 426 horsepower, it weighs 3900 pounds, and you can feel it. They can't be compared in my opinion, the Challenger is practical and looks cool, but the Mustang GT screams. The Mustang GT has the power to weight to be exciting, it pins you to your seat. I wound up buying a Mustang GT. You just have to drive them and decide, but I don't think this review makes sense, these cars couldn't be more different.
 
endophage (8:30 PM, August 02, 2014)
Indeed, I have power seats and navigation (with the best navigation software I've seen in any car, at any cost) in my Mustang GT, and the top Shaker audio option they offer puts a massive subwoofer in the trunk (although you basically give up 25% of your usable trunk space for it). Not to mention I got a 6 year, 75k mile, bumper to bumper warranty for $1700, and it includes clutch plates :-)
 
Avatar for Peter D. Heidgerd Peter D. Heidgerd (5:26 AM, July 27, 2014)
My 2014 Dodge Challenger R/T Plus with 6 spd manual typically gets 18 all around, and gets up to 26.4 mpg on the Hwy-- Now that was not something I was prepared for, so that was a great surprise. I am sure glad that I did not buy the V6 thinking that I needed to be getting 27 mpg on the Hwy when mine gets just a hair under that--- And I have a wonderful, rumbling V8 with an awesome stock exhaust note! I love this car and did NOT EVEN consider Mustangs or Camaros. Dodge did such a great job winning my heart as an old musclecar nut as this cars design and execution down to the showroom look of it reminds me so much of the 1970's (last) musclecars!!
 
Avatar for ambaryerno ambaryerno (10:04 PM, July 05, 2014)
Some of this is VERY inaccurate. The Mustang GT does indeed have leather seats and, depending on the model year, offers a glass roof option.
 
Avatar for Xwingfighter1138 Xwingfighter1138 (4:40 PM, June 17, 2014)
Were extra cup holders given the same weight as performance in this comparison?
Did an adjustable seat get the same weight as turning radius?
Really?
Depending on what aspects of a car you prefer, this comparison could go the other way really easily.
 
Avatar for Alberto Valenzuela Alberto Valenzuela (4:47 PM, August 20, 2013)
"Neither has a Air compressor to maximize power output." WTF is this idiot babbling about ?! Does he mean supercharged/turbocharged? Or is he thinking a "performance" smog pump, or a Campbell Hausfeld AC compressor stashed away in the trunk ? I don't c how an "AC compressor" translates to horsies.
 
Jay R 80 (0:15 AM, December 10, 2012)
ive had my 2012r/t to 60 mph in 4.8 sec and it is governed to about 140 or so
 
Shamus (10:40 AM, September 02, 2012)
The Challenger weighs 4000lbs, not 4500,and they said the Challenger WAS more practical..
 
WunJee (1:38 AM, August 11, 2012)
Skidpad for the Challenger R/T and Mustang GT are the same at .91 lateral Gs.

The listed 0-60, 1/4 mile and braking distances for the Challenger are all the worst I've seen in reviews. So take them with a grain of salt. Pretty much every review I've read showed better performance.

The Challenger is a bigger car, it feels like a bigger car, it's far more roomy and is more practical. I like how they call the Challenger R/T's 0-60 time "Just average". Because 0-60 in just over 5 seconds is average for 4,500lb full-size cars?
 
Possessed_angelz (10:57 PM, June 30, 2012)
Ok here is the deal...i actually test drove the hell out of the challenger rt, camaro ss, and the mustang gt yesterday and i must say that the mustang left me in a shock and aw. Im a big dodge person and the challenger rt was fast and fun just like the camaro ss but when i drove the mustang gt it thrown me back into my seat and handled like a dream. The best way to find out wich one you like more is to test them and find out for your self.
 
Guest (8:59 PM, June 21, 2012)
i didn't test drive the mustang, it's very cool looking, but the challenger was just calling to me, and google kept putting challenger ads on every page after while of browsing, their marketing works, if the car holds up it's a gem, it drives really well, just the r/t plus, so damn fast......it's an interstate machine!
 
Guest (0:47 PM, June 13, 2012)
Just got my Challenger R/T Plus......So happy, drives like a dream. Styling more to my taste. Trunk holds a lot of stuff. Suspension and steering out-of-site.
 
2012RTClassic (8:32 PM, May 21, 2012)
And I agree with Jmkrause01, there are several inaccuracies in the comparisons.  One thing is that I was able to achieve a 5.4 sec 0-60.  and if I keep my foot out of the radiator I can get a little better than 19 MPG city and have gotten 23MPG on the highway.
 
2012RTClassic (8:27 PM, May 21, 2012)
I had my RT Classic up to better than 148 and it felt like it wanted to keep on going. 
 
Levi Foley (7:34 PM, May 19, 2012)
I believe the challenger srt8 top speed is 172 where the r/t is around 148 or 158 I'm not sure what one
 
Levi Foley (7:32 PM, May 19, 2012)
There is a difference between a sunroof and moonrooof very comparable cars in my opinion I'm kinda a dodge fan but the mustang gt is a great car too
 
Bob123 (10:47 PM, May 06, 2012)
This is completely wrong, The Mustang does offer a moon roof, and if that is wrong, I could only imagine how many other things you screwed up on. 
 
Jmkrause01 (1:08 PM, September 23, 2011)
This is one of the worst comparisons I've ever seen. I mean we all have bias but you are supposed to try and leave that out when you compare something, and there are so many inaccuracies ... did you even try to research? Or kust make stuff up when you got lazy.. where is fail blog when you need them.