Mustang vs Camaro

Hell yea!

It all comes down to who's momma can drink more Pabst Blue Ribbon while racin' her camara'.

To "Camaro"
Ok Let me start off, by pointing out my bias. I do in fact happen to like the 3rd and 4th gen camaro's look over the Foxbody and more recent mustangs (94-04). But frankly some of the all-inclusive statements made, I can't in good fatih agree with. Let me first start with this quote



Agreed whole-heartedly. But before you go out and spend upwards of $5k plus for a car, that you want to have some astute level of performance, wouldn't you first want to be an informed buyer? Its the same way with knowing performance mods. Some are not cheap, and you'd always want to buy what gives you the biggest bang for the buck, its not unreasonable. Also, I pride myself on trying to learn about the capabilities of both the camaro and mustang. Reason being; so you can know what the other guy has, or if you and byour buddies go to the open drag nights, you can make estimates about who will have which ET and who's car will win. All that aside, and to back your statement, you're right, when your in the drivers seat and your heart is pumping in the staging lanes what you know about your car, may not mean that much, in as far as your perfomance mods. all you need to know, is keeping your reflexes sharp, getting a good start, not missing a shift, and making damn sure you shift from gear to gear at peak rpm, as to keep your powerband at its maximum power generation. These are things which have crossed over my mind before i've pulled out of the staging lanes and up to the line.



Stop right there. "best performance cars in the world?" I"m sorry, but if someone Gives me the choice between a Farrari F-50 and a 99 SLP SS camaro, I"m gonna go with the F-50. Its ok to love F-bodies, I sure do, but you can't make staements like that, that just are so blatently untrue.



Uhm..........I hate to tell you this, but its been done before. I've watched a 1997 Z-28 LT1 car, get beat like the red-headed-step-child by a 2000 Roush Stage 3 Mustang. Both had performance mods. (think the Camaro had the 58mm LT4 Throttle body and LT4 heads and cam, but I never actually asked the guy). So, that one has to be false.



If you're talking about streight out of the box BONE STOCK, yes, the late 8 cyl F-bodies did in fact have more power than the Mustang GT. Only the Mach 1 and SVT cobra outpowered it, but they do it with forced induction (factory supercharger). When it comes to just the plain 6cyl coupes, The camaro has more power, but not significantly more. (I Think the GM 3.8 boasts 187rwhp verses Ford's 3.8 only putting out about 165rwhp, but I'd have to check the numbers again).

Anyways, I've said about enough, I apologize if anyone was offended, but I am in fact allergic to bullshit.

that statment is wrong, the 94-04 v6 runs the T-5 manual tranny NOT the t-45....

i dont feel like arguing with which car (v6 camaro or mustang is better) because its all in preference.

I will give you the facts about the mustang and you can then go decide for your self.

first off they fixed the head gasket issue in mid 96 if you got in before the 7 year cut off you possibly got a new motor out of it. all later years are PERFECTLY fine there ONLY issue on the 99 ups are the 99-00 pcv system getting to much oil in the upper not bad just an issue that was fixed in 01.

94-98 v6 manual mustang 0-60 9.4 seconds quarter mile 16.5 seconds with 145-150(year depending)hp@4800 rpms 220tq@2750rpms

94-98 v6 auto mustang 0-60 9.9 seconds quarter mile 16.9 seconds with 145-150hp@4800rpms 220tq@2750rpms

99-04 v6 manual mustang 0-60 7.1 seconds quarter mile 15.5 seconds with 190-193hp@5250(for 99-00) and @5500 for 01+ 225tq@2750

99-04 v6 auto mustang 0-60 7.7 seconds quarter mile in 15.9 seconds with same hp/tq as above.

i still think the camaro has a little bit of advantage~ but not to much, one major thing the v6 has going for it is the massive after market from strockers to turbos its getting pretty big, the fastest v6 i have seen to date is in 11s.... and with a powerdyne lol there are many faster just none ive seen.

www.rpm-mustangs.com
www.v6power.net (they have a time slip page)

are some other info well anyway just wanted to post some facts.

2007
hahaha this is some really funny stuff.i came by this board by mistake too. maybe nobody heard that camaro was coming back in 2007. and just watch when it does you will be able to take the best mustang that gets made in 2007 and the best camaro made in 2007 and see that the camaro wins in the QM. hahahaha now isnt that going to suck for this guy saying stock mustangs are always faster then stock camaros!!!! i personally like the 05 mustangs right now but when that camaro comes out and every1 see's how fast it is im gunna have to get one.

mustang is defintly a camaro beater
though stats are and yes say that camaros have more hp and all
but that doesnt mater. wat maters is the quarte mile times. and since a mustang gt 01-02 has 50 less hp and is a 4.6 liter is only .1 second behind the ls1 camaro in which that has 320 hp and 5.7 liters. and lets not not forget about the 5.0 liter mustangs 87-93. talking about letting a beast out. these cars though come only with 235 hp can produce over 400 hp with headers and pipes to the back.i own a 93 i have betten camaro ss by many car lenghts. and yse i do have 400hp with my mustang with only putting in 3000 dollars. my grand total on this car is 12,000. ia a brand new camaro ss cost 33,000 base price. you could get a 2004 cobr for that proice brand new. and there is no contest in theat race that the cobra would win by many car legnths. all i am saying is that CAMAROS SUCK and cant live up to there spec. how can u only get 320 top hp from a 5.7 liter.

to the 2007 camaro
though the 07 camaro going to be fast 2007 is the same year SVT is going to come out with the new cobra 500hp or more. itll be close but i think the cobras got a nother fellow

last reply
if the camro was such a good car then y did they stop making it?
IT sucked and they new that i 03 the mach one would also be there for the same price as a ls1. but the mach one was alot faster

Re: last reply


Because they were getting too expensive, and the Mustang kept it's popularity rolling since the mid 80's, when it was a better car w/ more aftermarket options.

untouchable cobra
Actually that is untrue. there is a production camaro made by chevy in collaboration with dick harrell industries that the cobra could not even hold a candle too. It's a 630hp 600ftlbs of torque beast that no stock cobra could ever hope to keep up with. That includes sallen and roushe mustangs also. By the way the camaro is naturally aspirated

mustang v camaro
all I have to say is I constantly kill all types of LS1 cars with my 04 cobra. I know it has a supercharger, but it came that way. Also you think chevy can come up with a new engine it has been using that 350 since the beginning of time

but wait that little 350 been smoking fords since the beginning of time. your cobra needs that supercharger it has to compete with chevy. also keep in mind where chevy spends all it's performance money.....a little something called corvette. your mustang makes 390hp supercharged. a vette makes 400 out of that little 350 natuarlly aspirated. and whill where the subject af blown cars lets fing a z28 and slap a vortec supercharger under the hood and see who makes better quaters

V6
now i personally believe that the camaro/firebird v8's are much better than the mustangs in all around performance and track times, but i can't say the same for their v6's. i don't own a mustang of my own, but i do happen to have a 95 taurus with a 2001 3.8L mustang engine (which produces about 190 hp and 220 lbs/ft of torque) under the hood, and for those of you who don't know, the 95 taurus GL has a curb weight of 3118 lbs., the lightest year of the taurus, which is considerably lighter than the 99-04 mustangs. My friend happens to have a 94 firebird 3.8L and got a new engine (same size, dont know about the hp) for it earlier this summer, and i definately burn him when we race. so for all those who believe the v6 camaros/firebirds own, come meet me out on haynes blvd. in new orleans east on saturday or sunday nights, and i'll show you wut my critically acclaimed "grandmaw car" can do to your over-priced v6 sport coupe, whether it be a mustang or a camaro/firebird also, correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe if i put on headers, dual exhaust (either cat-back or flowmaster), cam, and intake, i'd be able to take gt's and possibly z-28's. also, if anyone knows about puttin cams on a 3.8 ford, please lemme know, cuz im seriously lookin into it, and i'm not havin much luck

Sorry buddy, but a damn exhaust/intake isn't going to make a Taurus with a 3.8 beat a Z28.

Unless you have wicked cool stickers on your windows.

I have driven three Tauruses of various years/engines including the 3.8L you speak of. All I can say is that I've never been more frightened while simply attempting to commute to work. They don't track at all, they float down the road, and seem to have their own mind when it comes to where they want to go. Total POS.

i have to agree with you on the lack of traction... during a normal-to-heavy rainstorm. But on a regular road, whether there be heavy winds or a light rain, i get pretty good traction. I've never been "frightened" by the taurus while commuting to and from school, or to and from anywhere else, as a matter of fact, except for maybe its incredible pick-up, which i greatly enjoy Also i've never noticed that i "float down the road." However, i have noticed that the steering wheel likes to kick itself around on occasion, which is definately not a good thing, but i would never rank it a POS, for the mere fact that its much more comfortable and is a much smoother ride than a mustang, and, from my personal experiences, is considerably faster when it comes to street racing. I've ranked supreme among ricers who have invested more than $600 into their engine, and they even have the advantage of a manual tranny, whereas i get stuck with the crappy-repsonse automatic. you also stated that you've driven tauruses with the same engine... i'm yet to see or hear of one from taurus forums that has a 190hp stang engine... besides mine of course, but i have no doubt there are a few around. The older 3.8's ur probably referring to (which is what my car had originally before our local Ford dealership burned out the engine while attempting to fix the A/C and replaced it with the '01 stang's 3.8L) were not as reliable nor were they as powerful, producing only 150hp and around 200-215 lbs/ft torque.



I also mentioned cams and headers, and accidentally left out a tranny swap from automatic to 5-speed manual, and said that it could "possibly take a z28." i personally and seriously doubt it could beat a z28, but i don't find it hard to believe that i could keep up with one after such additions are made. especially if i supercharge it

First off, why would you ever invest the kind of money to swap a Taurus to a 5-speed? Why not put that money towards a true performance car?And yes, you could beat a "ricer" who is pissing around in some POS Civic LX with $600 of mods. It takes alot more than that to make those econoboxes move.

Maybe it's the feel, but I'm wondering why you think a Taurus with a Mustang V6 is quicker than a Mustang with the V6? It's a bigger car with front wheel drive.

Funny CJ says that...I drove my buddy's Sable one night(his was a 97 I think), and I remember telling him it handles like a shopping cart. The thing was so loose feeling, and it was wandering all over the highway. A big part of that was I was used to driving a BMW 3-series at the time though.

Sorry, total POS. I'll take one of these:

Slappy and I are of like mind I guess.

I guess we could put a vortec on a new camaro, wait they dont make them any more do they we also could put a 351w in a mustang since we dont like to change engines. Also 350 is not exactly little, try 281ci 4.6l thats makes 84.8 hp per liter also my car makes 385 rwhp so that figures to well over 425 hp. Out of a little 4.6l

oh so if you like small engines so much why don't you go buy a supra....or better yet an rx-7. thats got a small motor a 1.3 liter . HEY WE COULD TURBO THAT JUST LIKE THE MUSTANG. ooh wait then it would be making like 500 rwhp. that comes out to be like 384 hp per liter compare the numbers. how much was your cobra making again...i forgot
also that must be one heck of a 4.6. question have you ever seen a built 5.7...probably not. there quick...well over 500 horse. but according to you 281 cubic inches is infinitly better than 350. if thats how you figure power would you also say that your engine could take an 702 ci. why not ,smaller is better right. pitting an ls1 against a cobra is the same as a gsxr1000 against a moped. i'm sorry chevy did'nt slap a supercharger on everything they could find but they left that up to the men. ya see my grandmother could go out and by a cobra just like you and she would be just as cool right .also, true they did stop making camaro but they also stoped making f-15 fighter jets. could your cobra take one of those