Comparison: 2011 Chevrolet Camaro vs 2011 Dodge Challenger vs 2011 Ford Mustang vs 2011 Hyundai Genesis Coupe
Six Appeal: Finding the People's Pony CarStylized, affordable, and with a dollop of sport, the ponycar formula has changed little in its 46-year history. The quartet of modern versions we assembled here are draped in rakish, come-hither sheetmetal; equipped with smaller, fuel-efficient V-6 engines; affordable to the masses; and yet still offer satisfying power.
If you're experiencingdeja vu, there's good reason. We last assembled this crew in July, when the Mustang put a 3.7-liter smackdown on its domestic brethren, but lost to the Korean newcomer. (The resulting outrage ignited Internet forums for months.) Then, we were looking for the sportiest, most fun among them -- the best hustle car.
But that wonderfully balanced Hyundai? Those manual transmissions? Fanboy fantasy. When it comes to the real world, people buy high-content, automatic/V-6 pairings. In this gang, that combo accounts for around 50 percent of each marque's volume (the Genesis is the exception, mostly selling with the far less-expensive turbo 2.0-liter mill).
We attempted to gather players most representative of this ponycar class. Two caveats: A Camaro couldn't be delivered in time, so we rented one from Hertz. The only Genesis trim available was the Track variant ringer that won the previous comparison.
Our quest was to find the holy grail of the people's ponycar, the one that best combines sport, functionality, and value in a daily driver. We learned there are three very good cars here that are as close to a tie as you can get.
FOURTH: CHEVROLET CAMARO
Concept in Need of Vision
While its last-place finish may reek of a vast anti-GM conspiracy to our ever-vigilant, tinfoil hat-wearing letter writers, this Camaro -- the one with 11,000 miles of rental car duties on its odometer -- fared rather well.
No scars of abuse spoiled the Camaro's chassis, which delivered a surprisingly supple ride. Through city streets and rough patches of pavement, the Camaro's suspension soaked up bumps and road imperfections with aplomb. It was the second-best-riding car of this group.
When the road opened up, the powertrain impressed us as well. The Camaro matched its archnemesis Mustang in acceleration, not to mention braking and handling metrics. Consider the extra 287 pounds the Camaro carries around, and its reclassified 312 ponies may be more than just marketing one-upmanship. Yet its size and heft come at no discernible benefit. The Camaro shades more asphalt than the Mustang does, but its interior feels comparatively cramped.
Its small trunk opening only makes the tiny cargo volume even that much more apparent.
Thus, the Camaro's failing is its function-be-damned styling. The concept-car sheetmetal exudes cool, but leaves the driver with a small slit of sunlight between two massive A-pillars. Maneuvering through narrow, curb-lined parking lots left us wincing in anticipation of the inevitable damaged wheel.
Interior functionality was likewise "sacrificed to the altar of style," noted assistant Web producer Scott Evans. A cumbersome steering wheel offers nonsensical button placement and functions (the dial that adjusts audio tracks also changes the audio source), and the pale green illumination could double for a "Space Invaders" high score screen.
The biggest omission is the optional navigation system, a feature that every other car in this group has. Our rental had a Hertz unit called Neverlost sprouting from the dash, reminding us that a buyer's only recourse rests with the aftermarket.
The Camaro compromises the most important components of a daily driver for the sake of looking cool.





