Camaro vs Mustang

[JYODER240]

Too many similarities for me to like this car.

They really don't look that similar to me.

[sportyaccordy]

A late 80s 5.0 LX notchback. Or an '84 SVO.

[CJ]

Holy crap!  They look strikingly similar.

[3.0L V6]

Depends on the generation.

1964-1967 - Mustang wins by default.
1967-1970 - Camaro Z28 wins. Better looking.
1970.5- 1973 - Camaro.
1974 - 1979 - Mustang. The Camaro was hideous by then. Bloated. Bleh.
1979 - 1993 - Mustang. Especially after they changed to the 'Aero' headlamps during the mid-80s. The 5.0 is a nice engine too.
1993 - 2002 - Camaro, just because of the 275 - 305hp engine, and the looks of the 1998+ gen.
2002 - present - Mustang by default.

[saxonyron]

One of my friends in college had a '76 Mustang II hatch uhhh..."fastback".? It wheezed along with a puny 4 cyl that couldn't have put out more than 100 HP and drove like crap.? At least it had a 4 spd manual.? It was comparitively great at the time, since I drove a '71 Chevy wagon, but even then I knew it was a poseur pony car.? That black mark on Ford's history can't be erased in my mind.? Chevy went low, but never that low with the Camaro.? It may not have had much more HP in the base models of that era, but at least it looked? the part of the Pony Car




Sure this 76 Camaro is no good looker (especially in Puke Green), but to me it still has a sporty edge where the Mustang looked like a fat flaccid economy car.

[J86]

i dont particularly care for either

[dazzleman]

In their classic versions, these are two of my favorite cars.

I'd say that the Camaro held up better during the 1970s than the Mustang.  The Mustang was first discontinued in the early 1970s, and then brought back in 1974 as the weepy Mustang II, which was a total piece of crap.  It only lasted a couple of years, and then a new version of the Mustang was revived in 1979.  That car was OK for its time, which isn't saying much.

Meanwhile, the Camaro continued largely true to form through the 1970s.  It was much more consistent during this era.  From its inception in the late 1960s through most of the 1970s, the Camaro had two basic forms, its original form, and an updated form from the early 1970s that carried it through, with some updating the modifications, the rest of the decade.

The Camaro started to move well down the social ladder in the 1980s.  The 1978 model was the last year I really liked it.  In 1979, the new design guido-ed up the car significantly, and it was during this era that the IROC mentality was really born.  [For those who don't know, IROC stands for, no offense please, "Italian Retards Out Cruising."]  The car became more and more associated with guidos, rednecks, and increasingly people of low social and economic status as the years went by.

Having faltered seriously during the 1970s, the Mustang actually held its own better than the Camaro in subsequent years/decades.  It never went down the slippery slope demographically to the same extent that the Camaro did, and today, the new version seems to be very popular.

Full disclosure -- I once owned a 1973 Pontiac Firebird, basically the same car as the Camaro.  If you'd asked me at any point in the 1970s which car I would buy, it would have been the Camaro.  But in more recent years, it would be the Mustang.

[ChrisV]

One of my friends in college had a '76 Mustang II hatch uhhh..."fastback".  It wheezed along with a puny 4 cyl that couldn't have put out more than 100 HP and drove like crap.

That's because the 4 cyl versions put out less than 100 hp and drove like crap. They did, however, come with V6s and V8s, as well, and have HUGE potential. I've posted a couple here before...

I'd love to build my next race car from one...



No need for smog or safety inspections in these years, which means built 460 set back and 600+ hp... For cheap. Some economy car, huh?

[ChrisV]

The Camaro started to move well down the social ladder in the 1980s. The 1978 model was the last year I really liked it. In 1979, the new design guido-ed up the car significantly, and it was during this era that the IROC mentality was really born. [For those who don't know, IROC stands for, no offense please, "Italian Retards Out Cruising."]

At least try to be factual while going on in such a serious tone...



IROC was International Race Of Champions, featuring identically prepped cars.



They are still excellent race cars and great performance car values...



(To be honest, I owned the same era Trans Am (1978), and prefer those over the Camaros, but it's simply personal preference).

[Onslaught]

I'm afraid I just don't like the looks of that one much. Looks very cheap and ugly.

[280Z Turbo]

They really don't look that similar to me.

All you need to do here at Carspin to prove that a car is a piece of crap is post something crappier that kinda looks like it.

It's an air tight argument.

Fortunately, Camaro fans can use this tactic to their advantage as well:




Things that look alike are the same. The Mustang is a crazy, unrelible, bitch of a car.

[SVT666]

All you need to do here at Carspin to prove that a car is a piece of crap is post something crappier that kinda looks like it.

It's an air tight argument.

Fortunately, Camaro fans can use this tactic to their advantage as well:




Things that look alike are the same. The Mustang is a crazy, unrelible, bitch of a car.

\I just said the design is too similar to the Geo Storm.  I never siad the car was crap.

[280Z Turbo]

\I just said the design is too similar to the Geo Storm. I never siad the car was crap.

Or maybe they made the Geo Storm to look like the Camaro in hopes that some of its charm would rub off on the Storm.

[nickdrinkwater]

It's a shame the way that both these cars went.  At least the Mustang is getting back on track with the latest model.

[SVT666]

Or maybe they made the Geo Storm to look like the Camaro in hopes that some of its charm would rub off on the Storm.

The Geo Storm came first.

The last gen Camaro is a beast.  My brother-in-law ownes a 1998 Camaro SS which he built a 600+hp 383 stroker with a 300 shot of nitrous for.  It's a monster.  However guys build 900 hp Mustangs too.  In stock form the last gen Camaro was way faster and handled way better, however the Mustang was the better car which is why it sold more.  Mustangs can be modified to run with and beat modified Camaros.  Even my brother-in-law who is a GM guy admits that the Mustang is a great car and can be modified to beat his 600 hp Camaro.  He will never buy one, but he respects them.

[Raza]

Mustang was a better looking car, that's why it sold better. 

[SVT666]

Mustang was a better looking car, that's why it sold better.?

Actually it was a better looking car, more comfortable car, more practical car, a cheaper car, an easier car to drive, and a better all-around car.  The Camaro was faster and a better handler...that's it.

[Raza]

Actually it was a better looking car, more comfortable car, more practical car, a cheaper car, an easier car to drive, and a better all-around car.? The Camaro was faster and a better handler...that's it.

Right, that stuff too.  It was the non-performance stuff that made it so popular with non enthusiasts. 

[SVT666]

Right, that stuff too.? It was the non-performance stuff that made it so popular with non enthusiasts.?

Exactly.  A good chunk of Mustangs are bought by people who love the style of the Mustang and the fact that it's semi-practical, but aren't enthusiasts.  Most people, even enthusiasts didn't like the catalytic converter bump in the passenger side footwell of the Camaro, how low you sat in the Camaro (hard to see out of it), and the fact that the "trunk" was completely useless...or the "mullet" image the car had. 

[Raza]

Exactly.? A good chunk of Mustangs are bought by people who love the style of the Mustang and the fact that it's semi-practical, but aren't enthusiasts.? Most people, even enthusiasts didn't like the catalytic converter bump in the passenger side footwell of the Camaro, how low you sat in the Camaro (hard to see out of it), and the fact that the "trunk" was completely useless...or the "mullet" image the car had.?

Wasn't the Camaro's trunk a liftback like the Corvette's? 

[SVT666]

Wasn't the Camaro's trunk a liftback like the Corvette's??

Yes.? Here's a picture of it.? Trust me, this picture makes the well look bigger then it is.? A duffle bag or two fills it up, and with the T-tops in there, there is no room for anything else.

[Raza]

Interesting.  The official cargo volume on a C5 Corvette is like 24 cubic feet.  Obviously, you can't stack cargo to form fit to the glass canopy, but I figured the Camaro would be the same way. 

[Ron From Regina]

You'd be suprised what can be hauled in a mustang.? ?

[SVT666]

You'd be suprised what can be hauled in a mustang.? ?

I used to stand mine up on the backseat without folding it down.

[Ron From Regina]

I initially did that, but I didn't want to mark the leather.

[280Z Turbo]

The Geo Storm came first.

I was thinking about the 3rd gen. Besides, the 4th gen Camaro was probably in the pipeline before the Geo Storm. I think the Storm was designed at 4:30 on a Friday using some concept drawings from the Camaro.

Not that it matters anyway...

In all seriousness, I'm tired of these asinine "this car stole this from another car" debates that don't go anywhere. ChrisV was right!

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

Yes.? Here's a picture of it.? Trust me, this picture makes the well look bigger then it is.? A duffle bag or two fills it up, and with the T-tops in there, there is no room for anything else.

When packed correctly my '94 Z28 held alotta stuff on my trips up to Michigan.But in reality who buys a Z28 or Stang based on trunk/hatch capacity?

[Soup DeVille]

Interesting.? The official cargo volume on a C5 Corvette is like 24 cubic feet.? Obviously, you can't stack cargo to form fit to the glass canopy, but I figured the Camaro would be the same way.?

I believe the DOT cargo capacity is only counted up to the bottom of the windows, not to the top of the hatch/roof.

[hounddog]

I'm not so sure about that.

From '79 - '81, though riding on a new platform, the Mustang was saddled with a 2bbl 302, while the older Camaro was still available with a?4bbl 350. The Camaro had the edge in acceleration, though handling went to the Mustang. Both had terrible brakes.

From '82 - '92, the Camaro had the edge in acceleration as it held onto its 350 (and the Mustang, the 302), but now it (generally) had an edge in handling and definitely in braking. The Camaro's major (performance) fault is that the 350 was not available with a manual transmission.

IMO, the Camaro has always been the better overall performer throughout its existence. Some years were surely quite close, and some tests may show that the Mustang came out ahead, but over all, generation vs. generation, the Camaro wins. I think it comes down mostly to the engine: in the wars of old-school small blocks (and old-school engines in general), the Chevy small block was better than the Ford.

To echo the sentiment of you and a few, IMO the Mustang has been the better built vehicle from '79 onward.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the 89 notchback 5 speed with the optional gears (do not remember ratio) was the worlds fastest production car.   It was the year after the death of the Grand National who had owned that title for a couple years prior.   I guess, if I remember that right, makes the Mustang faster for that year breaking up the Camero run you mentioned.

[nickdrinkwater]

I severely doubt the Mustang was ever the fastest production car in the world.