Why shoudn't we compare '02 SS and '04 Cobra? Almost same price, best "current" Camaro vs best current Mustang.

Like I said, Ford is still making Mustang, 2 years after GM got rid of Camaro and Firebird. And Ford still will make Mustang in the future (2005 Mustang introduces, so you'll see Mustang at least until 2009-2010).

And Camaro was always behind Mustang. Always been and always will be.

 

Hope you got your flame suit on bro, cause you're probably gonna need it here shortly

I would go on and argue with you about Camaro and Mustang rivalries and whos better when and where but you seem to be another biased Mustang fanatic so I'll let the other guys update you on your CamarovsMustang history.

 

Thats why I said STARTS with the driver. I like all the safety features in cars now, but Id like to see proper driver training and licensing regulations now, instead of three thousand different mandatory airbags. Put some responsibility in the driver's hands, instead of jacking the price (and weight) of cars up.

 

So, you're saying that Camaro is better than Mustang? Just take a look where is Mustang today and there is Camaro today. Just take a look at current Mustang and current Camaro. Ups, there is no current Camaro. Just take a look for future Mustangs, and then take a look at future Camaro. Ups, there is no future Camaro. Now, don't tell me some stuff like "GM is gonna be making Camaro again in bla bla bla", because I never heard or read official statement from GM where it says that GM will be making Camaro again.

I really don't have any against Camaro, but I'm Ford guy. I have no problem admiting that Thunderbird was always against Corvette, but you do have problem with admiting that Camaro was always behind Mustang.

If you really think that I'm wrong - PROVE ME RIGHT.

 

***Thunderbird was always behind Corvette, not against. My bad.

 

First off, by your own logic, you've alreaddy contradicted yourself.
Secondly, if we're going to be comparing 1 Camaro against 1 Mustang, lets keep them the same Model Year and similar in markets. You say we can't argue about any future Camaro when your arguing '02 vrs '04 ?! Sorry dude, take this arguement to your middle school debate class.

'01 SS vrs '01 Cobra would be a great comparison. About the same price, both offered at the same time, and pretty representative of how the 4th gen Camaro's wiped the floor with 4th gen Mustangs in terms of performance.

You can't just say '04 Cobra vrs. '02 Camaro because the Mustang has a two year advantage. How knows, maybe if the Camaro were still around we'd have a LS6 competing against the SC Cobra, we don't know. So try to keep your arguments objective.

The Camaro was more of a direct racer compared to the Mustang. The Mustang was more livable in terms of everyday driving to the general public. Thats one of the reasons its not around anymore, along with Safety standards that were coming in 2003 with the A-pillar. Also, GM had to do something with the St. Therese. Plant being somewhat of a money pit which in turn caused GM to stop advertising a car they knew wouldn't be around much longer. If the Camaro had the same inside support that Corvette has within GM, it would have ultimately embarrased the Mustang in every regard. Instead, it just mirrored the Corvettes performance and embarrased the Mustang in that category (in the 4th gen years), while Mustang ended up winning in ergonomics.

Seriously, if you want to have a Mustang vrs. Camaro debate, take it to the lounge, it doesn't belong here.

 

you claim of being unbiased is laughable.

While were at it--- compare the 84 Z28 with the L69 and the 5 speed agianst the 84 302 Mustang GT! The Mustang lost


What about Mustang 2's? They sucked. GM never trashed the F-body the way Ford did with the Mustang at that time.

 

Mustang II did suck, but Camaro wasn't much better. But even though Camaro was better at that times, Mustang still outsold Camaro. Mustang II had small engine and that was big hit, because of gas prices.

But what about Mustangs in the 60s vs Camaro in the 60s? Get real man, Ford sold more Mustangs than GM did Camaros and Firebirds together.

But once again, I don't have anything against Camaro or any GM cars. I would rather drive any Camaro than any of Japanese cars )this includes Supra, Skyline ...). In fact, I'm even thinking of buying 1999-2001 Trans Am.

If Ford did to Mustang what Chevy did to Camaro/Pontiac did to Firebird, I would never look at the Ford again. I mean, they killed true American legend. They killed 2 of the best muscle cars at all time. If Ford did that to the Mustang, I would never drive Ford again.

 

Why is it all about sales numbers for you?

There are tons of variables to look at when comparing the two cars besides sales numbers.

Say for example, that BMW out sells Audi---does that make BMW a better car? Not nessecarily. Many factors determine outright sales. Some people THINK it is better and some peole do not and buy Audis.

Same for Camaro/Firebird VS Mustangs.

Just because they sold more---does not make it a better car. Just means they duped more people!

 

When you have 2 cars that have similar engines, similar prices, then yeah, sales numbers are important. You have 2 very similar cars, almost same engine - the better one is one that have better sales. Things would be different if I said that Mustang is better than Corvette because it has different sales, because Corvette is more expensive and it have more powerful engine, so not a lot of people can afford that kind of car.

But Mustang and Camaro are very similar. Price, engine, performances ...

You compare 2 cars that are very similar (in Ford vs Chevy case, you would compare Focus vs Cavalier, F-Series vs. Silverado, Explorer vs Blazer, Ranger vs S10...). And of course, if 2 cars are similar, the one that is better is seller is better car. Right?

You mentioned Audi vs BMW. BMW is still better car than Audi. Not much better, but it is. I was born in Europe, I lived there until I was 15, so I know European cars. But Americans muscle cars are my favorite.

By the way, I prefer Audi instead of BMW, even though BMW is better.

 

What exactly do you mean by "better?" I've never heard a more pointless argument. One person's idea of "better" is different than another's.

Oh yeah, those wheels were ugly then, and they're f-u-g-l-y now.

 

Hey---I drove a BMW 300xi (or is it ix) and a Audi A4 3.0.

I thought the Audi was a far better car! The BMW was very strile and plain inside and had rock hard suspension (good solid structure though)

The Audi had a far more supple ride and nicer interior. Looks wise too.

There---I am right!

 

00MustangV6....your arguements are very weak, and as has been said, don't belong in this forum.

 

I'm not trying to argue. This is discussion board, where everyone can write down what they think. That's what I'm doing.

By the way, one of my uncles own Audi 80 from the early 1990s. That car now in the USA is wroth maybe $2,000-$2,500. I also drove new generation Pontiac Trans Am. Compared to that 2 cars, I liked Audi a lot more.

Does that mean that 14+ years old Audi 80 is better car than new generation (1994+) Pontiac Trans Am? Big N O. But I still liked Audi more.

 

OMG.....just shoot him... :banging head against wall: