Ford Mustang VS Chevrolet Camaro

  • Thread starter Thread starter JCE
  • 243 comments
  • 9,862 views

Ford Mustang VS Chevrolet Camaro

  • Total voters
    84
Well if they are pegging the VE Commodore at 4000 lbs (overshot just a bit on Motor Trend's behalf), I would put the Camaro between 3500-3800 based uppon the weights of the previous GTO based on the Monaro/Commodore chassis.

With the Mustang weighing in at about 3500, I'd expect the Camaro to be a bit more given it's larger size overall. But GM may surprise us and build the car completely out of aluminum, saving a few pounds here and there.

But, GM can probably overcome a weight problem with oversimplified engineering, as it is what they are best at!
 
I would guess Camaro will be in the 3500min-3750max range, but who knows.
 
we could hope for 3400....but we can hope for Mustangs to NOT suck too!:lol:
No, I'm just kidding. If I got a 'Stang, it'd be a 99-04 style, as those were deginetly, IMO, the best they ever were, after that, a fox-body.

In other related news, old news, and going back to the Mustang power issue, SVT swore up and down that you simply cannot get power out of a Ford modular engine, without boost.
maybe they were right?
 
I currently have a 67 Mustang (girlfriends car) and a 69 Camaro......Now with that out of the way you cant say I am bias at all. :)
Dang this is a very hard choice. The majority of the Camaros just do not appeal to me. The only one I really like is the 69 Camaro.
Now mustangs on the other hand have many years that I like. Yup as shocked as you may be I will have to vote for the Mustang as the winner when it comes to appearance. There is a fact I must point out though in the earlier muscle car era is that the Camaro was built a lot better than the Mustang. I have built both cars front to rear and the mustangs are extremely weak and rust severely bad. I still pick the Mustang as an overall winner. They just had soo many good looking cars where the Camaro just never looked that good besides the 69.
Hmm wonder how many people were shocked by my vote for the Mustang over the Camaro. :sly:
 
Rust is an issue for any car up north that is winter driven.

As for getting power out of the 281 without boost...

Well, you could always give it a bit more bore...maybe 21 cubes of it?

I know that would be a hell of a boon for the Mustang to have a 5.0 badge on it again.

Personally, I'd much rather NOT see a 5.4, give me a 350 Hp Naturally Aspirated 4.6-5.0, lighten the car some, paint it white and slap blue le mans stripes on it, then wink at me and say it isn't a GT-350.
 
Onikaze
Rust is an issue for any car up north that is winter driven.
[/i]
Click to expand...
I want to clearify even without the rust the front end is poorly built from an engineering perspective on the early Mustangs. The frame and front suspension is severely thin and weak. If you disconnnect the export brace on any of those early Mustangs the engine compartment will start collapsing in within a few miles.
Only the early ones were poorly built. Like I said in post 64, I still voted for the Mustang as the better vehicle overall if you go from the first one to the most recent one. The mustang wins IMO.
 
Onikaze
Yeah the older mustangs were a bit flimsy.

But man that is a gorgeous body to build a good car under.
Click to expand...
I completely agree and thats why our next car will be a 67 Mustang Fastback. :sly:
I actually would have had one instead of the camaro but I could not afford a fastback. Soo expensive!
 
Onikaze
As for getting power out of the 281 without boost...

Well, you could always give it a bit more bore...maybe 21 cubes of it?

I know that would be a hell of a boon for the Mustang to have a 5.0 badge on it again.

Personally, I'd much rather NOT see a 5.4, give me a 350 Hp Naturally Aspirated 4.6-5.0, lighten the car some, paint it white and slap blue le mans stripes on it, then wink at me and say it isn't a GT-350.
Click to expand...

Great post. I also love the 4.6L a whole hell of alot more than the 5.4L. Maybe the 4.6L can't get over 400 naturally aspirated without getting expensive--but that doesn't mean it would be slow with 350~360ish BHP would it?
 
Well, that has been the problem that Ford faces with the return of the Camaro and Challenger. Do they introduce the larger BOSS 290 V8 or do they modify the 4.6L? They are going to need atleast another 50 BHP to be serious ciompeditors to either of the new cars, so why not add 80 BHP and an extra cog and go with the BOSS 290 and a Tremec T56?
 
LeadSlead#2
because every time Ford resorts to T-56's, then the had to use a Camaro trans.... and that's a bit funky, and kinda defys the point.
Click to expand...

Well they could say they are using a Aston martin trans...:sly:
 
Well, I think the T-56 clan includes:

- Aston Martin Vanquish
- Chevy Corvette
- Chevy Camaro
- Chevy SSR
- Pontiac Firebird
- Pontiac GTO
- Dodge Viper
- Marcos TSO
- Fox-Body Mustang SVT Cobra
- Shelby GT500
- Holden VZ Models (Commodore, Monaro)

...etc

Its a great transmission that can take a load of abuse, and handle quite a bit of power. Added to that, it is cheap to buy and maintain, and thus has made it in so many cars over the past few years.
 
you forgot the 03 Cobras (I would imagine at least 04's too)
But GM's got 7 on that list, I think.
Does any car company own Tremac? or are they independant?

It was in a fox body???? and they dropped it?

either way, it' still resorting to the same tranny as it's rival, it'd be classier to find a different, or maybe better one
 
Don't forget Cadillac CTS-V (another GM), DB7, SRT-10 RAM, Elfin Clubman and Streamliner.
Holden has been using it since series II VT (1999) so VT,VX,VY, not just VZ series and Monaro since the first new Omega based ones.
 
3-Wheel Drive
Both cars must be good, every time I've looked at this thread it's been split 50.0%/50.0%.

I still stand by the Camaro, though :sly:
Click to expand...

It hasn't been more than 2 apart that I've seen. Mustang FTW! :sly:
 
Transmission Technologies Corporation is the producer of the Tremec lineup of transmissions for automakers around the world. The company is based just outside of Detroit, Michigan and builds the majority of their transmissions in Tenessee or Mexico, and has another facility available in Ohio as well.

The Tremec design is actually based on that of the Borg-Warner designs, especially the T-56 that sees duty in damn-near everything.

(Borg-Warner is still around and still is a larger transmission company, but they do more work for the aftermarket than the production car lineup as of now.)

The only other major independent transmission producer is Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen Aktiengesellschaft, otherwise known as ZF, and has built some of the best transmissions the world has ever known. Hitler used ZF to produce the transmissions in the Panzer tanks, and Ford used a ZF manual in the GT40, and even today the ZF 6-speed automatic is one of the most widely used automatics in the world. Interestingly enough, ZF owned Borg-Warner for some time, but I belive is independant once again.

EDIT: @ LeadSlead#2:
Yes, the Tremec T-56 was used only in the SVT Cobras, and only for a few short years. But the new GT500 uses it, as the extra cog is necessary to keep fuel mileage at a respectable level.
 
YSSMAN
Zahnradfabrik Friedrichshafen Aktiengesellschaft
Say that three times real fast, or once correctly for that matter. lol

I really don't have much to add to this conversation except I have really enjoyed reading it and have learned a ton from you guys. It's so nice to see a nice civil rivarly being discussed in an adult manner. There are a whole bunch of you getting reputation points from me.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I like both, but the Camaro just about gets my vote, I was stuck on what to pick. Until I had another look at the '69 Camaro SS...

...I do like Mustangs though
 
YSSMAN
Well, that has been the problem that Ford faces with the return of the Camaro and Challenger. Do they introduce the larger BOSS 290 V8 or do they modify the 4.6L? They are going to need atleast another 50 BHP to be serious ciompeditors to either of the new cars, so why not add 80 BHP and an extra cog and go with the BOSS 290 and a Tremec T56?
Click to expand...
The 5.4 is cheaper, lighter, more powerful, more efficient and overall just a better engine than the 4.6. In addition, the overall design of the 4.6 apparently just barely allows it to have over 300 BHP without boost (as the '99-'02 Cobra's proved). I say go modular engine. Ford has proved at least twice that it can get near 400 BHP without that much difficulty, so why not?
 
Ford did have a 6.2L "Hurricane" OHV engine in the works up untill last year, but after the sharp rise in gasoline prices in September, Ford decided to scrap the project after nearly three years of development. A dissapointment really, as the engines were rumored to be more powerful than the LS2 and 6.1L HEMI as well.

GM and DCX have proven that not only is OHV technology still effective, but it is cheaper to build, easier to maintain, and much easier to make power with.
 
YSSMAN
GM and DCX have proven that not only is OHV technology still effective, but it is cheaper to build, easier to maintain, and much easier to make power with.
Click to expand...

Well I think its the displacement that makes it easier to make with power with, not the OHV valve-train design.

Thing I find amusing is GM keep it simple and uncomplicated to make the power (Don't get me wrong, not saying its bad), but then they need to get technical to keep the fuel economy (DOD, Direct injection etc) :p
 
How is a 5.4 Iron Block lighter than a 4.6 Aluminum or Iron block?

Riddle me that, batman.

I'd love to see a revival of the OHV 302 done with modern technology and DOD.
 
...There were rumors that the 302 would return a while back, but it seems noting has been done about it. Hell, Chevrolet built a one-off 302 based on the LS1 a few years back, and what an engine it was. Not only did it make more power than the LS1 at the time, but it also had a higher RPM range, and may have been an optional engine if the Camaro would have continued production.

...But back to Ford...

I've always been upset with the lack of power that Ford seems to make with their V8s. Of course, GM's engines are larger and use aincent technology to operate, but they make more power and are generally more fuel efficent, so why can't Ford do the same?

...I just got an idea...

Maybe Ford could figure out a way to modify the Jaguar V8, bore/stroke it out to 5.0L and call it a day?
 
YSSMAN
I've always been upset with the lack of power that Ford seems to make with their V8s. Of course, GM's engines are larger and use aincent technology to operate, but they make more power and are generally more fuel efficent, so why can't Ford do the same?

...I just got an idea...

Maybe Ford could figure out a way to modify the Jaguar V8, bore/stroke it out to 5.0L and call it a day?
Click to expand...

The Ford V8's may have been underpowered by GM's standards but the Mustang was always just a few ticks slower than the F-bodies with considerably less bhp. I actually think the Jaguar 4.2L is a great engine but I can't see it getting much more power vs the 4.6L without boost...isn't this why Jaguar throws on superchargers to get them over 320bhp?
 

Latest Posts

Back