I still don't quite understand muscle cars. Actually, that's not true. What I really can't work out is the logic of muscle car fans.

Challenger A recent telephone conversation with hot Yankee metal 'superfan' Colin Goodwin made me realise this. I think we were supposed to be talking about Renault Twingos or some such, but that rapidly turned out to be too dull a conversation for me to even remember, so we turned to the subject of the new Dodge Challenger.

As I had driven it earlier that week, Colin wanted to know what it was like. The answer, apart from the fact that it looks so good that it even if you saw Angelina Jolie dressed in an orange catsuit, the Challenger would still win the prize for Sexiest Orange Thing Ever, is 'good in parts'.

It feels well built, it stops, grips and steers effectively (though not enthusiastically) and it bellows down the road with extreme ferocity when you really put your foot down. But the steering is lifeless, and the engine and gearbox can feel a little lethargic.

CamaroAll of which is fine - muscle cars just have to sound good and look amazing. But there is a problem in my eyes, and it's called the Chevrolet Camaro. This will be powered by the latest LS3 GM V8, which is a much better engine than the Chrysler Hemi, and its chassis is based on the Holden Commodore HSV (also known as the Vauxhall VXR8), which is a much better chassis.

I explained this to Col. And his response? "The thing is, young Rigby, none of that matters, because Chryslers always have been - and always will be - much cooler the Chevrolets. One day I'll explain that to you."

Can anybody else see what Col means? I'm willing to be educated.