I think Camaro has meant many things throughout its 35 year life. While each gen had some similarities and differences, they were all distinctly "camaro". Regardless of how the 5th gens seating position and overall profile turns out, i think it will still remain true to its "camaro" heritage/tradition.

Also, are things like more upright seating, etc..... really "mustang influenced" or simply "market influenced"? Seems like that is what the market/masses wants.

 

I think the car can be made a little more "easy" to own without making it "M*stang-like." I'd rather have the muscle/sportscar look and feel, not the muscle/sedan look and feel.

 

Mustang influenced Camaro from the very start.

* Camaro program was put on the fast track after the 1st few weeks of Mustang's introduction. Chevrolet was initially not worried because the Corvair (America's 1st sporty coupe) was more sophisticated and performance orented than Ford's 4-5 year old economy car with a new skin.

* 1st gen Camaro's dimensions were nearly identical to Mustangs.

* The Camaro was rushed to production without alot of effort put into design. This was solved when Chevy redesigned Camaro for 1969 with.... fake scoops ahead of the rear wheels. Now, where did they get that idea?

* The second gen Camaro went it's own way in an effort to get out of Mustang's shadow (Camaro was known in those days as Chevy's Mustang). GM went the farthest route it possibly could in design to do this.

* The sales success of the Mustang II Cobra II, as well as the Plymouth Road Runner, Aspen R/T, which were all tape & spoiler jobs (the Trans Am actually had something to back it up) enticed Chevy to bring back the Z28 in 1977. The Z28 was just a suspension package. The engine could be had in any Camaro.

* In 1982, Ford upstarted the 3rd gen Camaro by bringing out the Mustang GT, which flat-out outran the new Camaro. Chevy spent the rest of the decade trying to catch up as Ford upped Mustang's power ratings almost yearly. Chevy finally returned the 350 V8 in (in 1986 only 50 were made, 87's had restricted availablity) with only automatics, which were still barely able to keep up with 5.0 Mustangs.

The 4th gen is the only Camaro that wasn't influenced in some way by the Mustang. However, even that can be debated because the Mustang in the end killed the Camaro in sales, and paved the way for the next version of Camaro to return back to basics by showing that buyers still respond to the basic formula in great numbers.

 

Excellent points. Actually a few I never thought of.........but, how did the Trans Am back it up in the late 70's? To my recollection, the highest HP was 170hp during those years.

 

A lot of folks credit the 82 Mustang GT with kindling the "rebirth" of the Musclecar (certainly can be argued, but that was a common thread back in the day). I'm a big fan of the car, but the only thing the 82 GT really did better than the 82 Z28 was straight line acceleration. Certainly handling and braking were far better in the
Camaro/Firebird twins, and that trend continued throughout the life of the 3rd Gen F-body and Fox-body Mustangs (79-93).

I don't remember the HP ratings, though I believe one of the 6.6's was rated a bit over 200 HP (somebody will surely straighten us out). Regardless, a 6.6 T/A was THE CAR to have in those days, outside of perhaps a Vette.

 

The thing about the '82 GT is that it literally came out of nowhere. Seemingly overnight, Ford slid a higher lift "marine" cam into the 5.0 (along with other revisions), mated it to a 4 speed manual and 3.08 rear end....and voila...a 3rd gen competitor. All for under 9 grand! And you're right, an '82 GT could out accelerate an '82 Z/28....but had no hope of outhandling it.



220 hp

 

But in America straight line racing (especially in the 80's) is what matters the most. Granted Americans are getting a lot better about other types of racing.

 

The 50-1986 350 Camaro's weren't available for retail sale, it is an urban legend (much like the 91-92 L98 TTop Camaros). They were test cars for mags. The 350 L98 V8 kept up with the 302 mustang GT pretty well in straight line accel but killed it on the road course. The notchback 302 HO cars were quite a bit faster but the GT wasn't much faster. The 305 LB9 5-speed G92 cars were neck and neck with the 350 L98 and also the Ford 302 GTs. The LB9 G92 camaros would run right over both on road courses.

 

You've got your 3rd gen info down pat.

 

I'm still going to have to say I disagree (x infinity) on this. If you option up a Camaro right into GTO territory, you have two VERY similar cars in the consumers eyes (which are the eyes that matter). Two RWD 2+2 Coupes with identical motors and almost the same performance and they might even be on the same freak'n chassis. How is this apples to oranges again? Their even very similar when you don't throw in the options. The major difference is going to be ride firmness, uprightness, and some cabin ergonomics (and if you say it will become Chevrolets Mustang, then a lot of those things will be even more similar). We all know their not going to be the same car, but many people will cross shop between these cars, and the biggest factor is going to come down to price, and how much they value one more compared to the other. If the GTO and Camaro don't compete, then 99% of the cars on the road today don't have competition by this logic.

 

What made things interesting was that Camaro and Mustang were constantly trying to out do each other. Camaro's kept getting faster in a straight line..and Mustangs kept getting better going around corners.

They would pressure each other to constantly get better.

The 3rd gen forced the '82 Mustang GT package. The '82 Mustang GT forced the '83 L-69 HO for Z/28. Z/28's world class handling, forced the '84 SVO.....

And it went on and on and on..............

For all of those who want Mustang dead and buried....remember, you're doing Camaro no favors.

 

The '82 Mustang GT actually & litterally DID come out of nowhere. Mustang GT made it from idea to production in under 1 year!

Depending on when you want to mark the start of the project or who you talk to, time ranges from 9-11 months (when the 1st cars were screwed together) to 6-8 months (when actual approval was given).

All excellent points!

 

Correct on all counts.

But fox Mustang GTs still had 2 things all over 3rd gen Camaro Z28s & IROCs that tilted things in their favor back then:

1. They were about $2,000+ cheaper than the comparable Camaro.
2. They had an aftermarket and factory parts list to die for.

 

Even if both cars truely influenced each other back and forth in design and performance, to me the Camaro had a slightly different purpose from the start. More performance focused overall while being slightly less "versatile" for everyday use than the competitor. In the 2nd Gen the car was made the way they would have rather had it from the begining. I'd also like to see a 1st Gen/M*stang dimension comparison.

Regarding 3rd Gens, 87 was not limited production of the 350 and there were none at all sold to the public the year before, they were test cars only. While the early 3rd Gens were slower, they outclassed the competitor in every other way. The 5.7 TPI vs. 5.0 is basically a tie, and a close one at that with wins here and there for both sides. But I have never seen a 305 G92 M5 that was faster than an L98 G92 car stock. Close, but not faster.

 

1968 CAMARO/MUSTANG SIZE COMPARISON:
LENGTH-------184.7 / 183.6
WIDTH--------72.5 / 71.3
WHEELBASE---108.0 / 108.0
HEIGHT-------51.4 / 51.8
WEIGHT------3415 (z28) / 3335 (GT 350) [BOSS 302 IS 3250#]
TRACK (F-R)--59.0-58.9 / 58.1-58.1
LUG CAP (cu. ft)- 8.3 / 9.0


The 5.7 automatic only IROC was able to be competitive to Mustang's 5.0 which came in manual as well as automatic, and on a course the Camaro was always the better handling car. But to the performance buyer back then, it really didn't matter. The quickest Mustangs were much cheaper, came with manuals, had a company that didn't treat it's engine codes as a state secret, and could be made to compete with Camaros on the track for less than the price difference between the 2.

Back then, IROC to the GT was sort of the 90s DOHC Mustang Cobra to the z28 Camaro. More expensive, more sophisticated, and more appealing to the turn-key buyer. But still, really no quicker than the cheaper car.

In the 1990s, Camaro had it all over Mustang on performance. In the 1980s, it was Mustang that had it all over Camaro with the performance crowd.