My experience as well. The question to ask is: If the Mustang and Camaro had EXACTLY the same Horsepower and Torque - which one would you choose?

I bet with the exception of the total GM die hards, most people would take the car that is more livable and "nimble" at lower speeds - the Mustang.

 

I'd take the car that was cooler overall, faster, handled better, looked better, suited me better, and braked better. Which equals the Camaro. I don't care if the power was the same, the Camaro is the better car that is true to a real sports/musclecar, not a sporty sedan-like car. Besides that its a F*rd. You guys sound like so many LT1 owners I've talked to when it comes to reliablity and problems. You can't judge all Camaros though because of certain ones. I've heard the exact opposite about M*stangs even from M*stang owners, so it goes both ways.

 

The Mustang is a Pony car and the original one at that. Some people think that the Mustang is cooler, better looking etc. Some don't like the plain Vanilla looks of the Z-28, the overdone batmobile looks of the Trans Am or the quirkiness of either. It's simply a matter of taste. To me the best looking 4th gen without a doubt was the 93-97 T/A.

 

Of course you're right.....but seeing the word vanilla and Z/28 in the same sentence, is so wrong on so many levels.

 

I think the better statement is that the Mustang does nothing really well, but a lot of things mediocre.


I have never owned a Mustang but I can say that my 95' Z has been so good to me even though I have put it through so much abuse. Not a problem except for a waterpump replacement.

I have never really understood the whole hard-to-live-with thing. I am 6'3" and to me, living with a Mustang is more of a chore(my friend had one). It is smaller, the driving position is terrible, and I have to watch out with hitting my head on entry more than in the Camaro. Cargo space is much more versatile in the Camaro. The only thing i can see is the long area from the point of vision to the tip of the car but all you have to do is realize that this distance is long and you are fine. This has been discussed many times so I won't go any further but I do absolutely believe that a good amount of people buy Mustangs simply because they are Mustangs.

 

if someone is just buying a mustang because its a mustang,i'd say that's a good thing.you're buying into a car's reputation of speed,style,image,if it never had any of those things,the mustang name would mean squat.it's no different for a camaro or corvette or BMW.if a person just bought a car for the name or brand,the brand would have to have something special about it to back up that status.you can't be a poseur in a car nobody has any reaction to.

 

A certain amount of people will buy it just because it is a Mustang. I am not one of them though as I hate the new design.

 

By guionM Was it ever anything else than a No compromise (or very little) performance vehicle? I believe this to be a selling point, if the Camaro buyers had wanted it to ride like a Caddy, they would've bought a Caddy. The only "unfreindly to DIY'ers" part that I can think of was locating half the motor under the windshield, other than that it's not harder to pick up on than any other newer technology vehicles. Ford on ther other hand have WAY MORE electronics to deal with, as a mechanic, I find them always harder to diagnose and repair.

by Sneaky Neil
EXACTLY.. And there's just a LOT of mediocre people out there... 'nuff said.

It may have started as a "barroom brawler", but it had ended up a "Roy Jones Jr.", light, fast, and agile with a good record!..
I had over 180K miles on my IROC when I decided to refresh it while doing a cam swap anyways. The internals didn't even need turned, a light micro-polish and rehone and that's about IT!...And it's a real BLAST to drive!...It handles EXTREMELY well, accelerates quickly, stops pretty D***quick, feels like an extension of ones self....In a nutshell, It does almost everything well!...

I think its big "problem" was styling, inside and out, PERIOD...Although the '98-ups were slightly better(IMO) especially the TA, it was too little, too late. It's too aero shape, and smaller seats(especially in the lumbar region), useless back seat(Not the Mustang has a real back seat either.)And the lack of GOOD colors, they put to much faith in color surveys, instead of offering more color(s)/combos and let the sales dictate which colors remain.(I have to agree with the "vanilla" idea...it didn't really stand out...)

 

I could be wrong, but I remember reading in one of the rags awhile back that the v6 Mustang out handles the v6 Camaro. As far as the Mustang being mediocre, that's just an opinion based on the GT Mustang. Remember there's more than one. Mach1 and Cobra are not mediocre. I don't think there's a Camaro to date that can out handle, accelerate or beat the the 2003/4 Cobra in any category including interior. That's one of the things that I like about Ford. Everyday people who don't care about performance can buy one of the so-called "mediocre" Mustangs while true enthusiasts can get a Mach1 or Cobra. Those that don't have the money to buy one of those can get a GT and DIY. You have to admit, it's a winning combination and it works.

 

DUDE - YOU ARE A GEARHEAD (me too, as are most of us in this forum - so this is not a flame or insult)...
BUT YOU DON'T GET IT!
We all need to be WISE gearheads and think outside our little world - there are more of "them" than there is of "us", and "them" don't want land missiles!!!

YOU are exactly the kind of guy guionM was speking of when he said,"Camaro's problem IMHO is that it became nothing more than a barroom brawler in performance. While that appeals to our "engine-in-a-box" members here, it doesn't really stand out with anyone else. There's a pretty surprizing number of people here on this board that simply doesn't get it."
Look at your last post...

So don't you see it?
What guys like guionM and WERM are trying to say really makes a ton of sense. Nobody's bashing the F4 - heck, if anything it simply may have been too good at doing what the designers wanted it to do... it became too dedicated to the persuit of "sleek and fast", and strayed too far from "slow, practical, and useful".

 

ProudPony, what you all don't seem to get is that, every car CAN'T be everything to ALL people, true?..

So why try to make every car fit everyones wants?

As far as perfomance goes, I still believe a NO-COMPRIMISES stand for cars like the Camaro is a good selling point. That's not to say it can't put some comprimises in its interior ergenomics, or exterior styling etc...

If the car shares a productive platform, who cares if it doesn't out-sell the other. It's sorta like making it an option of the great selling model, right?

There are FAR too many "bleed-over" models out there. About the only thing that sets them apart is cosmetics...Variety is the Spice of Life...remember?
Answer NOT NEAR AS MANY AS V8's!...Finding a 4cyl 3rd Gen is like finding a "Cross-Fire" one...or hen's teeth.. And for basic cheap transportation, there are other models on GM's plate for that..

I'm glad you didn't mention the T-Bird turbo coupe, that same 2.3L didn't last half that long in them..
I know of many 300K+ "V8" Chevy/GMC pickups running around in my area, there's just a LOT less strain on a larger motor to pull almost the same weight around in the same driving conditions, and you use a LOT less throttle to move it too!..

Too good, there's no such thing.. It just forgot to drag along some appealing styling in and out...as appealing to more than just us "Gear Heads" who liked the aero advantage on 150mph+ runs...
If they ponder a more "slow and useful" path for the Camaro, MAY IT REST IN PEACE!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'll take this one.

If you haven't noticed, most car companies want to make a profit. Selling 70,000 Camaros AND Firebirds for enthusiasts only wasn't making enough money to justify the vehicle's cost of manufacture, etc...Most enthusiast only performance vehicles are low production, high cost machines. Examples are Mustang Cobra, Lotus Elise, Corvette Z06, Dodge Viper, Ford GT, WRX STi, etc. All these cars are $30,000 plus. Most all are seeing production numbers under 10,000 units a year. Some even lower than 5,000 a year.

Unfortunately as Camaro/Firebird shows, this doesn't work on a large scale. If a vehicle is going to be the "Spice of Life" it has to be unique, beautiful and costly.

It may continue to rest in peace if all Camaro owners think this way. ProudPony is right, some people on here just don't get it. Rocket cars are cool, but they don't make profit unless they're unique, beautiful and costly. If GM only built 10,000 Camaros a year at $40,000 with the right looks and 500 hp, it would probably be a profitable car that would stay around for a long time. Problem is, Camaro isn't this type of car. It was never meant to be. Camaro was designed and built to compete with the Mustang. A car designed to appeal to the MASSES! Someone at GM lost sight of the original goal and built an enthusiast's car that couldn't sell to the masses.

 

I do not envy the job of the 5th Gen designers...Though I'd love to be a fly on the wall!!

It will truly take some talented individuals to pull this one off.

 

I don't think the 4th gen failed simply because it was a NO-COMPROMSE car. Not at all. It failed partly because it was a COMPROMISE car.

It had a great motor alright (both LT1 and LS1)...but it's compromises came in the form of an old platform, outdated styling, poor build quality, horrible ergonomics and enormous size.

It was compromised from day number one. Sometimes I'm surprised it sold as well as it. It's the compromises that made it unpopular.......NOT THE LACK OF COMPROMISE.

 

These are the things that have made the Camaro the better overall performance car throughout its history. They sold great until the 4th Gen, and that, says something to me. The Camaro formula worked and worked great....until then. I've said before that I don't want a GTO-like car or a Chevrolet M*stang and I mean it. You don't see F*rd making a F*rd Camaro. They might compete in the same market, but they are cars with 2 different characters and Camaro people want Camaros. Make it higher, less wide, less flashy, (well it can still be flashy) reduce its dimensions too much, compromise it's performance for usefulness and guess what? That's not a Camaro anymore. I have to say, the more I hear about the 5th Gen the more skeptical I become about it being true to the car that we know and want. I just hope the opposite happens. The Camaro has it's own unique image of coolness and that needs to be kept.