Ford Mustang VS Chevrolet Camaro

[LeadSlead#2]

I really love C5 Vettes looks. period. especially the Z06.
I really like the C6 Vettes looks, though not as good as ^^^
my only prob with C6's? they ripped the Viper off big-time, but thats another story.
99-04 "Stang's? love the looks.
05 & up? uggghhh. I guess I'm off my rocker, cause these things are fugly.
and HUGE looking.
and, as for F-Body's, well, never saw an ugly one, and never saw a better looking car than the '97 T/A WS6

@YSSMAN: hate to disagree, but it's what I do.
if a Vette, or f-body came out, with 500HP, and ran like this "GT500", I'd be so pissed, I'd probly never buy a GM car again. ever.
somehow, being a Mustang, it's semi-acceptable, cause they've never ran like GM's with the same power, for whatever reason.
but it's still a disgrace to Mustang's. 500HP? 12.7? 157mph? sorry Ford guys, but that's called "treason" where I come from

2000 COBRA R. "ahem" went 170mph
2003 SVT Cobra "ahem" ran 12.7
what do these car have in common? both have OVER 100HP less, than this..this....this....

 

[YSSMAN]

That has been my biggest arguement against the GT500. It's predecessors, both with over 100 fewer BHP were both faster and could argueably handle better as well. Plus, you didn't have to spend $50K for your Cobra in the previous generation (they were what, mid $30K range?).

Granted, it is a cool car. But for the money? I'd never throw $50K at my local Ford dealer when I can get better performance for far less money.

 

[JCE]

That may be true but I think the extra premium is exactly for the revival of the GT500 name. I think it's more marketing and emotion rather than performance. Taking the performance out of the equasion is there anything else wrong with the car? You do realize that GM is going to do the same with the Camaro...it too will be overpriced for the V8 models and the "special" models. It's just business...

 

[YSSMAN]

Of course, thats how business works. Ford had to replace the GT as the brand's top model, and thus the GT500 was the one to do it. If they subtracted the performance gains from the regular GT, kept it looking about the same, and just called it the GT350 I'd probably be less likely to complain. Atleast that way it would have seemed like a deal with what probably would have had a slightly modified 4.6L and a slightly altered suspension.

But if were going to talk GM, I don't think they are going to overprice their models given the different versions that will be offered.

A) $20K-ish V6/RS with 240 BHP, 6-speed auto or manual
B) Mid $20K-ish Z/28 with 350 BHP L79, 6-speed auto or manual
C) Low $30K-ish SS with 400 BHP LS2, 6-speed auto or manual
D) Low/Mid $40K-ish ZL1 with 505 BHP LS7, 6-speed manual

All of those prices could be adjusted with about a $5K increase, but given the extra technology baked into the Camaro from the engine and transmssions down to the suspension, someone has got to pay for it.

I'm not saying the GT500 is a horrible car, I was just dissapointed for 500 BHP and $50K. If Chevrolet does the same thing with the Camaro ZL1, I'd be pissed too, but I'd be more likely to choose the Chevy over the Ford.

As of right now, I'd love to have a GT500... But I wouldn't spend my own money on it. Maybe if I won the lottery or something, but chances are, Chevrolet or BMW would be getting my $50K long before my local Ford dealer.

 

[JCE]

Thing is the real MSRP is $39k~40k on the GT500. It just won't sell for that in the exact same way the Camaro won't sell for those MSRPs you mentioned. It just won't happen right away...

 

[Onikaze]

Yeah, it's just under $40k to start, optioned out it's about $45k, and with dealer markups it's up to $60k sometimes, but only the hardcores with more money than brains will be getting them at that cost.

As for the GT-350.

Well, I'm just biding my time, IRS or not, just improve the suspension, lighten it, and give it 350 Hp prz.

 

[YSSMAN]

Watch the GT350H package become an option after the first wave of models go though the rental fleets back to the Ford dealers.

 

[Onikaze]

I would hope they would do a little more to the suspension than the GT-H has right now.

I saw my first GT-CS yesterday while talking to a dude in an RX-7 with an LS6 in it.

 

[Sparco Drifter]

1970 Camaro SS split bumper

my uncle has one and hopefully he will pass it on to me

 

[YSSMAN]

Those '70-'73 models are great Camaros, but they certainly aren't my favorites. I think it's funny how the entire second-generation is often forgotten by most folks when it comes to Camaro comparisons, given how much better it was than the Mustang and Mustang II models of the same era.

 

[JCE]

Those '70-'73 models are great Camaros, but they certainly aren't my favorites. I think it's funny how the entire second-generation is often forgotten by most folks when it comes to Camaro comparisons, given how much better it was than the Mustang and Mustang II models of the same era.

No way, the '71 Mach 1 was teh own.

No freaking way a 1971 anything Camaro beats one of these!

 

[Tornado]

I have to agree with JGE3000GT. I'm a Camaro guy, but I really dislike the early Penifarina-copy Camaro's. Later second-gen is fine, but I dislike the early 2nd gen. ones. Besides, the Mach 1 and other Mustangs of that body style are probably one of my favorite designs of all musclecars, behind the first and 3rd gen Camaros, 99-05 Mustangs and the old Aston Martin V8.

 

[Jay]

I love the early second generation Camaro's, I have never been a fan of Mustang Mach one's they remind me of out bloated Falcons of the same era.

 

[YSSMAN]

The '71 Mach 1? You're kidding, right? Just because James Bond drove one in "Diamonds are Forever" doesn't make them cool...

Quite frankly, I'd put them in the "ugliest muscle car" category second only to it's Mustang II predecessor. The car just looks too long, too flat, and rather stretched like it was pulled in a taffy machine. The car is absolutely horendous compared to the model that it succeeded, IMO, atleast the Camaro aged gracefully well into the 1980s...

...You cannot honestly tell me that the '71 Mustang Mach 1 looks better than this '72 Z/28. The lines are clean, smooth, and actually appear to flow together unlike that of the Mustang. Added to that, the Z/28 could actually turn left and right as well, and the high-power LT1 350 was a great engine option in the early 2nd-gen models.

...And even by the end of the 2nd-gen's run in 1982, the car STILL looked good, especially when compared to the Mustang II and the then-new Fox-Body Mustangs.

 

[xXSilencerXx]

...And even by the end of the 2nd-gen's run in 1982, the car STILL looked good, especially when compared to the Mustang II and the then-new Fox-Body Mustangs.

My dad had a 79' camaro that was bugandy. I've seen a few pictures of it and it looked fricken awsome but I can't find the pictures of it now. Then he had an 86' Camaro and then a 94' Z-28 but hasn't had a fast car since cuz of havin to feed a family.

But I have continued the F-Body tradition with a 98' Trans Am.


On a side note. Have you ever noticed that its seems that majority of Mustangs seem to be driven by women. I've only seen one recently driven by a guy but seen planty of F-Body's driven by guys. Just a wierd thing I've noticed.

 

[Tornado]

Quite frankly, I'd put them in the "ugliest muscle car" category second only to it's Mustang II successor. The car just looks too long, too flat, and rather stretched like it was pulled in a taffy machine. The car is absolutely horendous compared to the model that it succeeded, IMO, atleast the Camaro aged gracefully well into the 1980s...

I do agree that the Camaro aged better than the Pinto 'Stang. However, I hate the sissy Penifarina-copycat cars of the early 70s. After they started looking like your second pic, I loved them. But the 70-74 cars destroyed all the coolness the 67-69 cars started.

...You cannot honestly tell me that the '71 Mustang Mach 1 looks better than this '72 Z/28. The lines are clean, smooth, and actually appear to flow together unlike that of the Mustang. Added to that, the Z/28 could actually turn left and right as well, and the high-power LT1 350 was a great engine option in the early 2nd-gen models.

It would have to be, because by 1972 everthing was already slow in the straight line. However, the smaller engined Mustangs could turn as well.

...And even by the end of the 2nd-gen's run in 1982, the car STILL looked good, especially when compared to the Mustang II and the then-new Fox-Body Mustangs.

Definately. This:

vs. this?:

No contest. But for those 3 or so years, I hated Camaros.

 

[YSSMAN]

Girls tend to flock twards the Mustang convertables, but atleast in my case, I've seen plenty of guys in Mustangs... Of course, a good number of the Mustangs here are GTs and not V6 models, but I'm unsure of the ratios between the two.

Two of my friends in high school had Mustang GT's, one with the 5.0L and the other with the 4.6L, both with manual transmissions, both in Black/Black. They raced eachother quite often, usually with the 4.6L winning. But the tables turned pretty easy, as a few kids owned Z/28s and Trans-Ams, as they would often get their asses handed to them by an '02 WS6 and even an '87 Monte Carlo SS with a 383-swap.

 

[Tornado]

They raced eachother quite often, usually with the 4.6L winning. But the tables turned pretty easy, as a few kids owned Z/28s and Trans-Ams, as they would often get their asses handed to them by an '02 WS6 and even an '87 Monte Carlo SS with a 383-swap.

Well, in all honesty, regardless of what Ford said about the car's power, a 4.6L Mustang GT made before 2006 could get thier asses handed to them by an IROC-Z. They only really had 230 BHP or so. Besides, a Z/28 could destroy an SVT Cobra (not the R or supercharged variant, of course). Of course it would kill a GT. Hell, a kid at my school had a Dodge Shelby Shadow CSX that he used to outrun Mustangs.

 

[Onikaze]

Fox body Mustangs were unfortunate looking cars wrapped around an awesome engine that was choked by emissions/mileage/gas crisis tech.

I loves me a 302.

If Ford doesn't wind up selling a GT-350 before I turn 30 and get some stupid money, I'm gonna have to try to get a nice built 302 stuck into a Mustang done up with GT-350 colors and a pair of 5.0 Badges to mess with people's minds.

 

[Tornado]

Fox body Mustangs were unfortunate looking cars wrapped around an awesome engine that was choked by emissions/mileage/gas crisis tech.

Which is funny, because 4.6L mustangs were awesome looking cars wrapped around an unfortunate engine that was choked by being a bad design in general.

 

[YSSMAN]

Too bad Ford couldn't build a decent engine without having to resort to forced induction. Maybe if they would have committed to their "Hurricane" engine program, they might have actually stood a chance against the LS2 and 6.1L HEMI.

 

[LeadSlead#2]

YSSMAN: the 350's in '72 were called LT-1's?

(this thread's getting close to a giant flame-war )

 

[JCE]

I'm sorry but those are the two ugliest Camaros ever...you managed to pick the 2 ugliest generations. I can honestly tell you that I abosolutely HATE those two Camaros and would rather drive a Honda Civic. The Firebird/Trans-Am of those generations were LIGHTYEARS better looking and I would drive one of those in a nanosecond. Why is everyone so down on the Foxbody...the GT's, Cobras, and Saleens looked fantastic.

 

[YSSMAN]

YSSMAN: the 350's in '72 were called LT-1's?

Yes, from 1970 to 1972 you could order the LT-1 in your Corvette or Z/28. In it's most potent year, 1970, it made 370 bhp and 380 ft-lbs torque.

(this thread's getting close to a giant flame-war )

...Not quite yet, but I too sense a disturbance in the force...

I'm sorry but those are the two ugliest Camaros ever...you managed to pick the 2 ugliest generations. I can honestly tell you that I abosolutely HATE those two Camaros and would rather drive a Honda Civic. The Firebird/Trans-Am of those generations were LIGHTYEARS better looking and I would drive one of those in a nanosecond. Why is everyone so down on the Foxbody...the GT's, Cobras, and Saleens looked fantastic.

1) They most certainly are not ugly, they are just design-challenged by comparison to their predecessors. You can't get everything right, but by comparison to the Mustangs built between 1970-1982, the Camaro was far ahead of the Mustang in the "good looks" department.

2) As for the Trans AM, of course they looked better from '70-'81. The new bodystyle fit the overall design of the car far better, and thus an icon such as the '77 Texas-Paint Trans AM became and icon.

3) People make fun of the Fox Body because it was around for soooooo long. Granted, it all worked out pretty well the entire time and it did indeed spin off some great models such as the SVO, various SVT Cobras, Cobra R, Saleen S281, various Rousch models, etc.

But when you have a platform that dates back to 1979 and they just got rid of it in 2005, thats a problem. I seem to recall reading an old issue of Motor Trend from 1993 when they compared the best American sportscars you could buy. Even then the Editors at Motor Trend said the chassis design of the Fox Body Mustang was getting old and needed a replacement. They had to wait 12 years to get any kind of change, and that is pretty sad.

 

[GT4_Rule]

The first pic, I hate.

The second pic, I love.

 

[sidewinderl]

Mustang wins

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm sorry, but that doesn't have anything compared to this...

(Have I mentioned I live just a few miles from Berger Chevrolet?)

...I say that is just another good reason to put the Camaro out on top...

 

[GT4_Rule]

Now that's a rare car! A package worth 1 1/2 times the price of the car.

 

[YSSMAN]

I've only seen a few in the past few years, but the largest gathering of them usually occours on Memorial Day weekend during the Berger Chevrolet Super Chevy Show. It is a pretty big gathering for all-things Chevrolet, and inside the dealer's workshop they get together all of the special-eddition Berger Camaros and other extremely-rare Chevrolets over the past few years.

Last years big deal was an extremely rare '69 Berger COPO Camaro that was yellow, and if I remember correctly, it was the only one produced that way (or something like that). They had the two last Camaros produced there as well, and they also debuted the Dick Harrel-eddition GMMG ZL1 there as well.

The show gets bigger and bigger each year, funny enough, I haven't seen a Ford show like that happen around here yet...

J/K

 

[JCE]

Yea that Camaro is nice and all...but that sticker of $98k when it came out was and is rediculous. I'd never pay that much for a Camaro older than 1969...and it'd have to be one prestine Camaro. Hate to be negative but that's how I feel. Just like I would not spend $98k for a modern Mustang...even if Carroll Shelby was sitting in the passenger seat.