I know im randomly asking but does anyone know a way to get back into an instagram account? I was stupid lost the login password. I appreciate any tricks you can offer me!
@Nelson Enzo i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site thru google and Im waiting for the hacking stuff now. Takes a while so I will get back to you later with my results.
I AM A HUGE CAR GUY I HAVE 9 MUSTANGS AND ONE CHEVY CAMERO BUT I HAVE TOO BE HONEST THE 94 MUSTANG GT WAS PATHETIC SLOW LOL MY 87 MUSTANG GT WOULD HAND THE 94 MUSTANG A BEATING LOL FOR THE CARS FOR THE EARLY 90S MY VIBRANT RED 93 COBRA WAS A LEGIT 13 SECOND CAR AND FOR 93 THAT WAS VERY FAST LOL EVEN THE 94 AND 95 COBRA WAS A DOG MY 93 COBRA BACK THEN SMOKED BOTH YEARS AND THE BEST PART ABOUT MY 93 COBRA IS ALL THE WAY BACK IN 93 I SAID SOMEDAY THE COBRA WOULD BE VALUABLE AND I HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
Love my 95 GT. Been in the family 16 years, pushing 300k miles. I drive it 80+ miles a day and it doesn't miss a beat. Hard to beat those old push rod 5.0's in terms of reliability.
@@timhornswaggle1243 Yes I still have it. I will own that car until I'm dead. I daily drove it until the spring of 2022 when gas prices spiked. I was driving it 125 miles a day at the time and it just didn't make sense anymore. It now has 417,000 and still runs fines.
@@brtek09 2v engine with smog. Making room for aftermarket. Plus you don't drive on the HP PEAK you drive 2000-4500 and the torque there is equivalent to a 300 HP engine. Ford was trying to keep too many kids from killing themselves and their friends - but many died in the towns around me. I just remembered, ford couldn't make a tight exhaust back then. I owned either three or four of these back in the 80- 90s including Mercury Capri RS. I just remembered, ford couldn't make a tight exhaust back then - always leaking at the manifold donut or somewhere.
@@brtek09 its very restricted in factory form. A decent set of heads, cam, and intake even mild ones can gain you 100+ whp on these cars. They also have close to 300 torque stock which helps get the 3200 lbs car moving. Nothing compared today stock vs stock but quicker than what it sounds like it would be just hearing 215 hp.
Motorweek's times are always slower than anyone else because they give real times - they press the pedal and go. There's no 3-foot roll out, not rolling start, no burnouts and revving the engines like an idiot, it's a real test of the car, not the driver. That's why I really like the way they do things. Also, in this particular case, they even said the times were slower than their previous test - and watching the video its pretty easy to see why, the tires were not hooking up at all off the launch. They just got beater review cars, and I'm guessing the tires were not in that great of shape, or they already burned them up earlier in testing.
@@rodmunch69 because everyone's best launches are right off idle? This isn't "real times" at all. They should be trying to get the best launch without wheelspin.
@@dub537h5 99.999% of people just press the pedal and go - so yes, that is realistic. Being some douche bag doing burnouts at a stop light, jumping up and down in your seat, yelling LETS GOOOOOO, that's stupid, no one does that except people that sleep with their sister, which is apparently something you're in to.
@@rodmunch69 where do you come up this stuff? I said nothing about burnouts or yelling anything lol Why don't you try to grow up a bit before sharing your lack of reading comprehension with everyone, you prick.
I had that exact Z28, 1994, 6sp manual with the same color and all. I bought it pre-owned in 1998. It was an incredibly fast car for being 100% bone stock. Very tough to keep the rear wheels from spinning on wet ground. The only thing I hated was working on the engine, basic maintenance like plugs and wires was an all day nightmare. That said, the car was amazing on long road trips, in 6th gear doing 80 MPH the engine was barely at 1000 RPM's which gave the car very impressive highway fuel economy. I drove the car from Miami to Tallahassee and back dozens of times and the fuel cost was not much more than the Honda Accord I had before this. It was a 1994 Accord EX, 4 cylinder V-Tec with 5 speed manual.
Mr. Tibbs I did too but it was mostly due to GMs gas gauge calibration. No low fuel light and if you are on E, you are completely out of gas. Some are out just before the needle hits E.
I'm currently rebuilding an all black 94' in my garage. I grew up in that car and wanted to put some cash back in it. But damn if you're not right. Everything in the engine bay is so close together and I've considered more than once just pulling out the headers just to get to the plugs. Can't bring myself to throw away the old girl, though.
Ian Thompson i never saw many on tv either, just a hit or miss thing if I ever saw them, I was in my young teens and of course, watching them later on the website wasnt available yet.
Me. It’s crazy to think that the current turbo 4 camaro has the same horsepower as this older 5.7 v8 but a quicker acceleration 5.4 or 5.5 compared to the 6.4 in this 94 camaro with the v8. And for the mustang gt 94 the current high performance ecoboost and the standard ecoboost or even just the 2011-2016 v6 would beat it in a race
@@jeremyreese9663 I totally get what you are saying, but the joy in these old cars is that yeah, the performance numbers are low, but they are so cheap to work on and tune. That year mustang, is one of the last years for the old 5.0, so you have decades of good old fashioned known how to make it faster. Same with the z28 that lt-1 is a beast, without all the mumbo jumbo attached to these new cars. Sure the newer cars have every bell and whistle known to man, but good luck giving it a tune without practically having a degree in computer science (and hell, you probably have one lol). Even today, I would rather have that weak 5.0 mustang (or a v8 firebird formula) than the current versions, just cause...I’m not trying to race anybody or anything, just to cruise around.
Those Z28s were, and still are, amazing cars to drive. Throw a nice exhaust on there and you got a fun car for less than 4 grand. Best bang for buck car in America.
I’ve owned the exact same Vibrant Red ‘94 Mustang GT since it was a couple years old and couldn’t ask for a more solid or reliable car. Still going with 270K miles.
The 1/4 mile time for the camaro is super high I ran 14.0 with a bone stock 96 z28 at 99 mph. Then with exhaust and intake got it down to 13.8 at 101. I love these old reviews I have a 95 z28 m6 with full bolt ons and she's still a blast to drive!
That's why putting gt40ps off a explorer 5.0 is a good swap ups the compression and hp they were struggling with emissions at the time and the4.6 was already on the way
I agree they should have had the cobra r engine in the regular cobra at the very least if not having the option in the gt as well. It always pissed me off then they went even smaller with the 4.6 they started to gain performance but it gave chevy the advantage for years because of having such larger displacement now. Going to the mod motor paid off because now we have the coyote and we all know how beastly that engine is for 5 liters
Michael Harris You said,man.The svt cobra motor was within one cubic inch of the LT1...that wouldve been a better comparison if this was to be a fair shoot-out.
I remember my friend came over all excited about his new 94 Gt. Let's race he said. I had an 89 5.0 with a set of Flowmasters and it had 100,000 miles already. I beat that thing by like 2 car lengths, what a pig they were. My friend was mad as hell! Gotta love the Foxbodies!
I had a '94 Camaro for about a year and it was a lot of fun. You could tell it had some weight to it, but it still was faster than most cars on the road.
Aspie Otaku gm built the better performance machine for sure but ford won the decade by building a better car. the mustang made sense even as a v6 commuter while the f body was a borderline exotic with all the drawbacks that implies. that being said I would by far rather have my ws6 back than any similar trim mustang. practical or not it just doesnt grab my like the bird does!
88' Iroc Z-28 owner here. 5.7L TPI. Loved it. Fastest? Nope. Did I care? Nope. It's not about being the fastest by specs in tenths of a second. It's about loving your car! That's what being American is all about!
I was in the car business back when these were new. The camaro's fell apart and had lots of problems. The mustang was built well but lacked power. That's why the Ford racing aftermarket is still going strong today.
damn W. I don't think foo gets your wit. Unsprung weight adds a great weight savings and will contribute to more wheel horsepower. If a car weighs 3000lbs and produces 200hp, reducing 10 pounds unsprung weight would give you about 1 to 3 more wheel horsepower depending on if its a standard trans or auto. Diff ratios considered. Math isn't that hard guys.
I liked the looks better of the Camaro and Trans Ams better than the Mustangs of the 1990's and in Januaryt of 1996, I went to a dealer to buy a Trans Am - until I drove it. They are very long vehicles with most of that space wasted on body and looks with no head room, back seat space or trunk space. If you are 5' 7 they are fine. But at 6' 3", no way. I ended up buying a Grand Prix GTP that although smaller, had far better room, bigger trunk and same acceleration unless both were on the floor. It was also far nicer with a heads up display, nicer interior, etc. Oh, and cheaper! But none of those 90's vehicles had the accelerations of the big block mustangs and camaros of the late 60's, especially the '68-'70 428CJ mustangs and Mach 1's.
Ah, 1994 was one of the greatest years of my childhood. A lot happened that year, much bad, but some good. For some reason, this year sticks out, and always enjoy the good feels of that year. My mother almost bought a Z28 with the manual this year but she decided against it at the last minute and got a 94 Cutlass coupe. I believe 1994 was my 5th or 6th-grade year.
+click bait i don't know about that, mustang dominated the camaro/ formula/ t.a. back in the 80's part of the '90's with foxbody. forced gm to go to 5.7tpi. that 5liter ford was terror on street
difference of opinion. Until 05 for the Mustang and 07 for the camaro, fit and finish was always questionable for both. The f body door hinges and t tops were a joke. the huge glass rear windows melted rear seats and consoles literally fell apart but sometimes held our longer than the bubbled up dashes. I owned a 99GT vert for 15 years and literally did not have a fit and finish issue. My 03 Cobra has close to 100k and is as tight as day one. Perspective I guess
Door hinges on my LT1 were replaced, T-tops on every car suck, never had interior issues, but the cars were always garaged & didn't sit in a parking lot all day. My experience was with '87-'93 Mustangs. They all have flaws.
love the way the sn95 looks i have mine since 2011 till now with only few mods but man i love the raspy sound she makes when down shifting thinks to my offroad x pipe and exhaust system
had a 94 z28 and I loved it.. sold it when I bought my house.. lt1 had it issues but you cant deny the power output for back then. id like to get another one some day.
I remember these , drove both as dealer demos when I sold cars. They were about equal overall with the Camaro being faster, however the 94 Stang handled better and had a much nicer interior.They are both good looking cars even today.!
matthewmullins55 I'm a year late answering but humidity kills times. A few years ago on a cool spring day I ran my stock 02 Mustang GT 5spd in the 1/4 mile in 14.1 96mph. Later that summer in humid conditions the best I could do was 14.6 93mph.
real world numbers. magazines like car and driver never get the numbers they report as they use a standardized correction factor to adjust everything they get.
The mustang ran dead on what the sloth mid 15 second sn95 ran. The camaro was way off its time. Motor week use to have a giant boner for mustangs videos like this show it. They did a massive 1st and 2nd gear burn out in the 0-60/quarter mile test in the z28 to make the times closer. Wouldnt look good having a high to low 14 second car putting a 1 1/2 seconds beat down on the mustang of its same year. In 95 the 3.8l v6 camaro was faster than the 94 mustang gt, and the 95 mustang gt..... Had there been a 3.8l v6 option in 94 it would have been faster than the gt. Make all the excuses you want 1 car here is well over a second faster than the other one but it didnt show....
car & driver tested an LT-1 Z/28 and got a 14.1@98mph..love motor week, but throughout the years their drag racing capabilities have not gotten any better.
siamiam really good question you have..a shame really as they didn't do either car here any justice..and didn't the rims on the Z look dirty as hell or was that just me ???
I noticed they didn't mention tire width when describing the Mustang's tires. That's my only gripe about MotorWeek, sometimes the most important information isn't mentioned. I've noticed this with engine size as well, as there has been a couple episodes where Jon Davis will mention the number of pistons and valves, but make no mention of displacement. It's a little puzzling considering they're obviously very well in tune with car people. They give great observations of the cars they test.
I bought a brand new Z28 in Blue with a Bone Color interior and was so excited as it was my 1st GM hot rod. I left the dealership in this car on 3 separate occasions and never did get it home. Left rear wheel bearing locked up on the 1st attempt, front brakes locked on the 2nd and the engine blew on the 3rd try. After the dealer returned my money I went back to Ford and bought another Mustang. I’ve never left the Blue Oval again and never will.
yep, and damn .. it really was the ugliest generation ever! this is coming from a huge Camaro/f-body fan. early 4th gens were ugly, later were ok, but none had the lines and clean look of the later year third gens, I think the thirds were the nicest looking of them all.
+derzx 479 True, Ford internally called it the Fox-4 platform, also known as the SN95 chassis. It's basically a redressed Fox platform with stiffening upgrades to make it a stronger rigidity wise.
Back in March 2016 the Mustang outsold both the Challenger and Camaro put together. It's been outselling them individually since the introduction of the 6th Gen. Camaro's 6th Gen was supposed to tip the scales back in GMs favor but lukewarm reception to Camaro 6 made that but a pipe dream
@Sin City Bargains Yea, we're actually getting divorced soon, so maybe I can get another Z! I like the new ones but they are about half the price of a house!
Wow its not even a contest. The mustang 5.0 only had 215hp compared to the z28 275hp thats a big difference. The z28 (allot) improved while the 5.0 got weaker from the previous year. And on top of that the 5.0 is more expensive, doesn't make any sense to me.
I remember when i was a kid, probably 9. There was this guy in highschool w a white foxbody. It was loud and sounded like nothing my kid mind had ever heard. I was to young for these cars. I do like a new edge cobra though. And the sn94 cobra is a solid car imo
I don't know what's up here, but I ordered a 1995 1LE Z28 and (when it was new) ran high 13's at Indianapolis Raceway Park bone stock in the summer heat.
Today, with 20-some years gone by, people tend to laugh at the 4th gen cars for their (admittedly, fair number of) faults. But, in 1994 when the 4th-gen F-bodies came out, their performance to dollar ratio made a HUGE splash. I'd love to find a good early 4th gen 6-speed Camaro and do some brake/wheel and tire/suspension/body stiffness upgrades to it.
I have a 4th gen ls1 z28 with bolt-ons, its fun to see people in newer sports cars get pulled by a 16 year old car. the build quality is horrific tho, things rattle and break all the time, I feel like I need new interior parts every week. the engine (ls1) is rock solid and strong and will always put a smile on your face when you step on it at 50mph and the tires break loose
+Harakudoshi904 You obviously have never driven one. not only are they fast straight line, but they probably are the best handling live axle cars ever made.
+andxx0r_the_second These cars are a blank canvass. With a few of the right mods they can be made to outrun the current crop of muscle cars and you will have some change let over to shine up the faded paint and fix the interior issues they all have these days.
95 is the last year before the 4.6. 94 and 95 also had those horizontal lines on the taillights before they went vertical. I have a 95 GT. Good car and cheap to build
I personally own a 94 Camaro that is Bright Red with Black Soft Top Convertible. The Camaro came with a 3.4 SFI V-6 with Automatic transmission, but it's one damn good car and very tough for a V-6 Camaro. I never care too much for the LZ-1 or Z-28 Camaro's. I just love the sound of a V-6 engine.
I like the 4th generation Camaro better than the new ones. I owned both a Z28 and a Trans Am. Both were great performers, and got good mileage. Now these cars are going up in price. I would love to find a 2001 or 02 model in good shape, for a reasonable price.
I loved the 5.0 302 mustang GT but the LT1 5.7 Camaro was such a faster car. The 89 Fox Body mustang I had was slightly faster than my 04 4.6 liter mustang I have now and did amazing burnouts. Still the Camaro was king.
I had a 94 and a 96 GT loved them both, but they were relative dogs in power. Fast forward, I could not wait for the 99 Cobra. It was supposed to be a beast etc but once again was a let down. So, I stretched my wallet and got an LS1 vette that year. Ford has always had some great cars, but they've always shot themselves in the foot. The Thunderbird SC was amazing and no clue how they screwed that up. The 01 Cobra was a massive let down. The Terminator Cobras were all time incredible, so they stopped making them. I realize it's a business, but Ford shoots themselves in the foot, when it comes to what could have been, more often than not. It's a shame.
Ford outsells Chevy n Dodge so it's no wonder they always used smaller engines n lower hp n trq numbers, take a lil, give a lil is how the big 3 work, man, remember that.. If Ford didn't ever play nice guy Chevy n Dodge wouldn't exist anymore..lol
@@P71ScrewHead you're cringe, making crappy cars isn't playing nice guy and Ford won't ever sell enough cars to put GM and MOPAR out of business, the market is too vast, buyer's preference is too diverse.
@@BrainFuck10 Well, the gov bailed them out so they'll stay a while.. I'm a Ford guy but I prefer the more the merrier.. I wouldn't want there to just be Fords, where's the fun in that?? Lol.. Japan 🇯🇵 has 12 car brands, more countries should get in the game 🎮..
These Camaros started to vanish from the roads within a few years of the warranty going out. A lot of that probably has to do with how they made is to you have to drop the entire subframe and front suspension to remove the engine. Access to the engine was so bad you could not do much with it still in the car. Those Mustangs survived longer but were pretty bad in terms of quality. Still, both were priced nicely for the new car buyer that was under warranty and got rid of them before the troubles started. In those days 4 cyl FWD Japanese cars like the FWD Celica or RWD 240SX were selling for similar money so to get a RWD V8 domestic that made the V8 sound and went "sort of fast" for those days was a good deal. The premium Japanese sports cars like the 300ZX, Supra, and 3000GT were all $30K+ and shot up to the high $40Ks for the top of the line models. These 2 cars were a bargain.
+texan176 ... and it's still really a premise that happens today. Its nice being in the USofA with plenty of truck V8 engines being made that we can siphon off a few to justify a $20,000 (now $40,000 in 2016 dollars) sporty looking car ... that really only sells at most 25k examples a year. God bless America!
+texan176 Responding just to the Subframe design... Its not bad at all, pretty sweet actually. In my Fiero I can drop the whole cradle, engine/trans/rear suspension in 45 mins. In my 2 car garage, with a floor jack, no hoist.
+texan176 LOL! Some one had the balls to say it how it is! Those things are such plastic headaches. And underneath of them is so mundane and the engineering level is dismal. Like texan176 said its all about right. LT1 Camaro never seen one make it much past 150,000 miles. They also rot underneath and you don't even know because the plastic body panels don't show and one day the rear axle control arms just rip out of their rotted mounts. I've seen Mustangs go well into 200,000 miles territory without major issues, but here in the rustbelt the rust is the silent killer.
+dsavish Haha funny! Mine has 230,000 miles. You guys seriously don't have a clue what you are talking about. I see plenty of these cars still on the road. I rarely see old Mustangs.
I had a 93 f body that just hit 188k miles when I sold it. Engine wouldn't die on the car. Interior was complete shit though. Everything broke and rattled. The whole center of the dash moved a few inches back and forth. Still love the car and miss it.
I had a 94 GT that i bought in 1999 with 50k miles. Bine stick and super reliable. Sold it to my brother who kept it just as nice. He sold it 8 years ago to purchase a 93 Cobra. He searched for it recently and it came up for sale in Miami, completely trashed. :(
+misamisatv I think the last 02 camaro ss/ws6 trans ams were made in canada? didn't they shut down that plant right after? i could be wrong but maybe gm was just too lazy back then and wasn't making as much money
+misamisatv Had a lot to do with sales. Mustang was selling better mainly because of women actually. The F-body structure was long in the tooth and no real update was scheduled after the 2002 year. Also, the Mustang was Fords only real performance machine so it couldn't die. GM had the corvette so the camaro/firebird was allowed to fade out unfortunately
+misamisatv The terrible driving position and bad visibility. Overall the mustang was just a better car to live with day to day. THE Camaro was positioned to close to the corvette in terms of performance.
I love these retro reviews. I drove a 97 Z-28 Camaro for years. The LT-1 in stock form wasn't fantastic, mechanically, *cough optispark cough* but mated to that T56 transmission it was still a great car to drive. I owned a 99 Mustang GT for a while. While it wasn't the 5.0 SN95 car it had the same interior. Which i thought was garbage. But otherwise, that T5 made for a decent cruiser.
The 4th gen F body (an upgrade of the 3rd generation) looks like a stealth fighter jet and back in the 1990s beats the Mustang hands down in power and performance
Yeah, those 8-speed or CVT 300hp turbos, we'll see how long that will last. Still got the video of a 270hp 2015? Acura TL trying to show off on highway @ 100mph+ while my SS passes him like he's still, I only have ~375hp. Most new sedans are still well behind these, even with 300hp or more, since heavy as hell.
+Reality Dealer Hear ye, hear ye!!! According to reality dealer, 15.6 and 14.9 are practically identical, even though they mentioned the Camaro's time was lower than what they usually get! Ford foamers...
+Reality Dealer Hear ye, hear ye!!! According to reality dealer, 15.6 and 14.9 are practically identical, even though they mentioned the Camaro's time was lower than what they usually get! Ford foamers...
I remember when the GM F bodies came out with the LT1 and the 6 speed. Some magazines had then running in the high 13's but almost everyone had them at least in the low 14's. After years of the lame TPI cars getting spanked by Fox bodies the Camaro and Firebird were suddenly fast. Then the LS came out and they were even faster. That was a fun era. Cars today are incredible though compared with cars from the 90's.
i ran a 13.98 in my 93 z28 bone stock 6spd hardtop 3.42 gears with 90k miles. a 89 lx coupe mustang 5spd with headers, exhaust, 4.10 gears and some south side machine lift bars and drag radials on fat n skinny weld wheels ran a 12.99
Both of those 0-60 times were with at least 1 full second of blowing the tires off. Motorweek always had way slower 0-60 times than anyone else. I'm assuming its just floor it and hold on versus the other review companies actually trying to launch the best they can. I had a 96 trans am and got 5.8 seconds with an auto trans without being used to the car yet. Probably would have been at least 5.5 with practice.
Nick Motsarsky I said if you don't think of them as a sport/muscle car, the're great. They came with a soft suspension, lots of sound deadening, comfortable seats. It was more of a 2 door cruiser with adequate power for the time.
There is also a video on here of someone who took a 98-02 firebird to the limits. Look it up. Firebird Nuremberg (something like that). I couldn’t believe how it was handling and the speed with the cts-v brakes was pretty insane. I really wonder if you could put even more modern cts brakes on than what he had.
The best looking mustangs were 1964-1970 and 2005+. I hated the 1974+ mustang 2's and I never really cared for the mustangs of the 1990's. They were simply okay but lacked the character of the original mustangs or of the retro vehicles of 2005+. The most recent mustangs look pretty good too.
@@ONTHEEDGEFRED Mad because it's true little triggered fanboy? Did your petty ass feelings get hurt? Are you going to cry? Do you need a safe place little bitch?
Theo Pigis Ford also had the time. And since when do sales figures have anything to do with it? People buy cars for many reasons other than which one performs better stock.
Had a 97 z28 I worked from stock. Stock it ran a 13.9 and 60 in 5.5ish range. Got it running 12.8 pretty easy. My friend bought it and drives it daily. The 5.0 need a good deal more work to go 12s, the parts are cheaper and easier it's to work on. Did the same with my 88 mustang. Also the LT1 will leak oil no matter what. The reverse cooling like to spit out the back of the manifold in hard downshifts.
Авто/Мото
![Rich Dunk (Ft. DaBaby) - BIG DAWG [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Pz2ewsSKAEM/mqdefault.jpg)
Want to help keep our weekly Retro Reviews alive? DONATE NOW: mptevents.regfox.com/motorweek
I know im randomly asking but does anyone know a way to get back into an instagram account?
I was stupid lost the login password. I appreciate any tricks you can offer me!
@Nelson Enzo i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site thru google and Im waiting for the hacking stuff now.
Takes a while so I will get back to you later with my results.
@Nelson Enzo it did the trick and I actually got access to my account again. I'm so happy!
Thank you so much you saved my ass!
@Case Leonard happy to help :D
I AM A HUGE CAR GUY I HAVE 9 MUSTANGS AND ONE CHEVY CAMERO BUT I HAVE TOO BE HONEST THE 94 MUSTANG GT WAS PATHETIC SLOW LOL MY 87 MUSTANG GT WOULD HAND THE 94 MUSTANG A BEATING LOL FOR THE CARS FOR THE EARLY 90S MY VIBRANT RED 93 COBRA WAS A LEGIT 13 SECOND CAR AND FOR 93 THAT WAS VERY FAST LOL EVEN THE 94 AND 95 COBRA WAS A DOG MY 93 COBRA BACK THEN SMOKED BOTH YEARS AND THE BEST PART ABOUT MY 93 COBRA IS ALL THE WAY BACK IN 93 I SAID SOMEDAY THE COBRA WOULD BE VALUABLE AND I HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
Love my 95 GT. Been in the family 16 years, pushing 300k miles. I drive it 80+ miles a day and it doesn't miss a beat. Hard to beat those old push rod 5.0's in terms of reliability.
I wish I could have got the GT, I could only afford the V6 but it was a good car, really comfortable seats and smooth ride for a Mustang.
@@frankcoffey I got a 4.6 gt for 1300
Nice!
Still got the 95 mustang? I’ve got 97 gt with 35,000 miles. Great car.
@@timhornswaggle1243 Yes I still have it. I will own that car until I'm dead. I daily drove it until the spring of 2022 when gas prices spiked. I was driving it 125 miles a day at the time and it just didn't make sense anymore. It now has 417,000 and still runs fines.
i'm just here to read the fanboys rip each other apart in the comments
Because you're nothing more then a troll
tiger1945 nice late comment buddy
tiger1945 Spotted the Honda Odyssey owner.
I don't deny being a fanboy.
Becuse your a drama bitch queen ...lol
Nothing says 90's like 3 spoke Alloys!
I still think they're sexy wheels. Still have them on my '95 GT. lol
Lol V8 5L with 215hp , comical
@@brtek09 2v engine with smog. Making room for aftermarket. Plus you don't drive on the HP PEAK you drive 2000-4500 and the torque there is equivalent to a 300 HP engine. Ford was trying to keep too many kids from killing themselves and their friends - but many died in the towns around me. I just remembered, ford couldn't make a tight exhaust back then. I owned either three or four of these back in the 80- 90s including Mercury Capri RS. I just remembered, ford couldn't make a tight exhaust back then - always leaking at the manifold donut or somewhere.
I always loved those wheels!
@@brtek09 its very restricted in factory form. A decent set of heads, cam, and intake even mild ones can gain you 100+ whp on these cars. They also have close to 300 torque stock which helps get the 3200 lbs car moving. Nothing compared today stock vs stock but quicker than what it sounds like it would be just hearing 215 hp.
Those LT1s were vastly underrated and much faster than the times presented here.
That's probably why Mr. Davis mentions the ambient temperature at least two separate times.
Motorweek's times are always slower than anyone else because they give real times - they press the pedal and go. There's no 3-foot roll out, not rolling start, no burnouts and revving the engines like an idiot, it's a real test of the car, not the driver. That's why I really like the way they do things. Also, in this particular case, they even said the times were slower than their previous test - and watching the video its pretty easy to see why, the tires were not hooking up at all off the launch. They just got beater review cars, and I'm guessing the tires were not in that great of shape, or they already burned them up earlier in testing.
@@rodmunch69 because everyone's best launches are right off idle?
This isn't "real times" at all. They should be trying to get the best launch without wheelspin.
@@dub537h5 99.999% of people just press the pedal and go - so yes, that is realistic. Being some douche bag doing burnouts at a stop light, jumping up and down in your seat, yelling LETS GOOOOOO, that's stupid, no one does that except people that sleep with their sister, which is apparently something you're in to.
@@rodmunch69 where do you come up this stuff? I said nothing about burnouts or yelling anything lol
Why don't you try to grow up a bit before sharing your lack of reading comprehension with everyone, you prick.
I had that exact Z28, 1994, 6sp manual with the same color and all. I bought it pre-owned in 1998. It was an incredibly fast car for being 100% bone stock. Very tough to keep the rear wheels from spinning on wet ground. The only thing I hated was working on the engine, basic maintenance like plugs and wires was an all day nightmare. That said, the car was amazing on long road trips, in 6th gear doing 80 MPH the engine was barely at 1000 RPM's which gave the car very impressive highway fuel economy. I drove the car from Miami to Tallahassee and back dozens of times and the fuel cost was not much more than the Honda Accord I had before this. It was a 1994 Accord EX, 4 cylinder V-Tec with 5 speed manual.
Mr. Tibbs no gas gauge?
Mr. Tibbs I did too but it was mostly due to GMs gas gauge calibration. No low fuel light and if you are on E, you are completely out of gas. Some are out just before the needle hits E.
Meanwhile, the f body Camaros from the 80s were piss easy to work on.
I'm currently rebuilding an all black 94' in my garage. I grew up in that car and wanted to put some cash back in it. But damn if you're not right. Everything in the engine bay is so close together and I've considered more than once just pulling out the headers just to get to the plugs. Can't bring myself to throw away the old girl, though.
I also had a black 96 z28 auto drove nice and fast
When t.v was actually enjoyable
But not the cars
A true actual reality show. No made up drama.
Clearly you're not a car guy Steve.
@@steverussell6642 Tesla fanboi?
@@cbrown9287 my challenger rt says otherwise 😜
I still LOVE these old school reviews:)
+Acc0rd79 Me too, I was born in 94 so I never seen these. Besides nostalgic reviews..
Ian Thompson i never saw many on tv either, just a hit or miss thing if I ever saw them, I was in my young teens and of course, watching them later on the website wasnt available yet.
+Ian Thompson Me neither. I noticed Motorweek since the 2000's.
Hell to the ya
+Acc0rd79
I was in my mid-20s at this time, owned a '95GT, and later a '99Z28,
and watched this show often.
Who else is watching this during the covid-19 lockdown
Me. It’s crazy to think that the current turbo 4 camaro has the same horsepower as this older 5.7 v8 but a quicker acceleration 5.4 or 5.5 compared to the 6.4 in this 94 camaro with the v8. And for the mustang gt 94 the current high performance ecoboost and the standard ecoboost or even just the 2011-2016 v6 would beat it in a race
A reminder when “life” was just a little more simple and enjoyable...
@@jeremyreese9663 I totally get what you are saying, but the joy in these old cars is that yeah, the performance numbers are low, but they are so cheap to work on and tune. That year mustang, is one of the last years for the old 5.0, so you have decades of good old fashioned known how to make it faster. Same with the z28 that lt-1 is a beast, without all the mumbo jumbo attached to these new cars. Sure the newer cars have every bell and whistle known to man, but good luck giving it a tune without practically having a degree in computer science (and hell, you probably have one lol). Even today, I would rather have that weak 5.0 mustang (or a v8 firebird formula) than the current versions, just cause...I’m not trying to race anybody or anything, just to cruise around.
@WheelsAlwaysTurning No he meant Kung-flu.
February 2021, still in it. Hopeful about getting a vaccine by September!
'95 was the last year before the 4.6.
+Kerry Mills But it still got spanked by the LT1... Even more so with the LS1
+Ian Thompson Oh yeah it did. I had/have the best of both worlds.
+Ian Thompson unless you had a n/a 4v 4.6....
***** But that was never in the early Stangs right?
+Ian Thompson '96 was the first year of the 4v. I had a '98 Cobra. Badass car at that time.
The Windsor 351 developed for the Lightning should have been installed in the SN95.
It was, but only in the 95 Cobra R
Also in the mustang s351 from saleen
Yes Anon it should have😑
Wouldn’t be fair lol
*Cobra R,* genius.
Those Z28s were, and still are, amazing cars to drive. Throw a nice exhaust on there and you got a fun car for less than 4 grand. Best bang for buck car in America.
It might be fun for some people but for taller guys, interior space was minimum.
Working on them was a bitch tho. Still the best $400 I spent and sold it for $1200 after a couple weeks
@@CJ-ib2jy I highly disagree I'm 6'3 and I fit fine in my 1995 z28 camaro, lots of headroom and legroom.
too bad it was so ugly
@@guysteel so is your face.
I’ve owned the exact same Vibrant Red ‘94 Mustang GT since it was a couple years old and couldn’t ask for a more solid or reliable car. Still going with 270K miles.
The 1/4 mile time for the camaro is super high I ran 14.0 with a bone stock 96 z28 at 99 mph. Then with exhaust and intake got it down to 13.8 at 101. I love these old reviews I have a 95 z28 m6 with full bolt ons and she's still a blast to drive!
Why the hell do we not have excellent reviews of new cars like this anymore?
because SUVs all look and behave essentially the same
because most new cars are NPC's driven by real NPC's
when my friends hand me the aux cord in the car I play the groovy ass original motorweek theme
Donald J. Trump I want to be your friend
Turbo Lag Is Foreplay 🤣🤣🤣
I made an earrape version of it lol
Ford really needed to give the option for a 351W in the GT, or at least put some decent heads on the 5.0.
That's why putting gt40ps off a explorer 5.0 is a good swap ups the compression and hp they were struggling with emissions at the time and the4.6 was already on the way
people would kill themselves period
I agree they should have had the cobra r engine in the regular cobra at the very least if not having the option in the gt as well. It always pissed me off then they went even smaller with the 4.6 they started to gain performance but it gave chevy the advantage for years because of having such larger displacement now. Going to the mod motor paid off because now we have the coyote and we all know how beastly that engine is for 5 liters
Michael Harris You said,man.The svt cobra motor was within one cubic inch of the LT1...that wouldve been a better comparison if this was to be a fair shoot-out.
I totally agree
This takes me back to my high school years. I love both of these cars. I'm a mustang guy but I love that camaro. Keep it up motorweek
same!
I remember my friend came over all excited about his new 94 Gt. Let's race he said. I had an 89 5.0 with a set of Flowmasters and it had 100,000 miles already. I beat that thing by like 2 car lengths, what a pig they were. My friend was mad as hell!
Gotta love the Foxbodies!
I had a '94 Camaro for about a year and it was a lot of fun. You could tell it had some weight to it, but it still was faster than most cars on the road.
Z28 is so much quicker that year.
Aspie Otaku gm built the better performance machine for sure but ford won the decade by building a better car. the mustang made sense even as a v6 commuter while the f body was a borderline exotic with all the drawbacks that implies.
that being said I would by far rather have my ws6 back than any similar trim mustang. practical or not it just doesnt grab my like the bird does!
DrewLSsix Fords last longer as well.
Aspie Otaku yes for a bigger engine... Ford has a small v8
lol* since when? most of these ol fords are long scrap.
ford actually has the bigger v8? it has a smaller cubic inch by a small amount but its a dohc engine that ends up about twice the size of chevys ohv.
88' Iroc Z-28 owner here. 5.7L TPI. Loved it. Fastest? Nope. Did I care? Nope. It's not about being the fastest by specs in tenths of a second. It's about loving your car! That's what being American is all about!
this rivalry will never end
David Estrada and it will become a suv lol
@@anthonymolina7416 *cuv
GM said it has no plans to continue the Camaro after 2023
@@guysteel NOOOOOOOOO. You did it, you really did it. First Pontiac, now this? You blew it, blew it all to Hell
@@rya3190 I’m pretty sure that’s a lie
I was in the car business back when these were new. The camaro's fell apart and had lots of problems. The mustang was built well but lacked power. That's why the Ford racing aftermarket is still going strong today.
Bullshit i have a 93 z28 with 45000 miles and still runs and drives like a absolute dream
I had a 95 mustang.. it was a piece of shite, 55k before I got rid of it
you are on drugs, don't care if you were in the business, you are dead wrong.
rhino250r obviously your still in it Mr Ford salesman 😉
frank white omg yes that stupid dashboard it's so embarrassing.
Was that a 0-60 launch or a staging burnout? 😂
Taking the Mustang's center caps off adds 10 HP at the wheels!
Google unsprung weight. And don't say "I already knew that" because your comment says otherwise.
di foo!! You can fool a fool most of the time, but sometimes the fool fools' himself...
damn W. I don't think foo gets your wit. Unsprung weight adds a great weight savings and will contribute to more wheel horsepower. If a car weighs 3000lbs and produces 200hp, reducing 10 pounds unsprung weight would give you about 1 to 3 more wheel horsepower depending on if its a standard trans or auto. Diff ratios considered. Math isn't that hard guys.
wiibaron They removed them because at such low speed they tend to come apart and roll faster than the car itself lol.
That’s a secret bro
Of these two, i'd take the Camaro
Same here. That car is my dream car.
click bait You have small dreams
@@joshs.5623 not as small as the mustang's 5.0
I liked the looks better of the Camaro and Trans Ams better than the Mustangs of the 1990's and in Januaryt of 1996, I went to a dealer to buy a Trans Am - until I drove it. They are very long vehicles with most of that space wasted on body and looks with no head room, back seat space or trunk space. If you are 5' 7 they are fine. But at 6' 3", no way. I ended up buying a Grand Prix GTP that although smaller, had far better room, bigger trunk and same acceleration unless both were on the floor. It was also far nicer with a heads up display, nicer interior, etc. Oh, and cheaper! But none of those 90's vehicles had the accelerations of the big block mustangs and camaros of the late 60's, especially the '68-'70 428CJ mustangs and Mach 1's.
@@joshs.5623 not as small as yours click bait bitch haha haha
Ah, 1994 was one of the greatest years of my childhood. A lot happened that year, much bad, but some good. For some reason, this year sticks out, and always enjoy the good feels of that year. My mother almost bought a Z28 with the manual this year but she decided against it at the last minute and got a 94 Cutlass coupe.
I believe 1994 was my 5th or 6th-grade year.
John Davis is awesome. He really seems to love his job.
sad era for the mustang...power was waaaaay down😢
Powers never been the strongpoint for mustang.
+click bait i don't know about that, mustang dominated the camaro/ formula/ t.a. back in the 80's part of the '90's with foxbody. forced gm to go to 5.7tpi. that 5liter ford was terror on street
+jayjaylen75 lol...no shit but only because gm had to go bigger, that 305 was trash compared to that 302
sound good yes, but speed no
jayjaylen75 Well said, I've never heard a 4.6 that sounded half as good as the 5.0....and it's a damn good engine to boot!
I've owned both and there's no comparison: the Z28 is superior in every possible way.
except fit and finish, comfort and a daily driver
Collin Burris no comparison. the Mustangs I've owned were both poorly built garbage. just quick and fun, but horrible cars
difference of opinion. Until 05 for the Mustang and 07 for the camaro, fit and finish was always questionable for both. The f body door hinges and t tops were a joke. the huge glass rear windows melted rear seats and consoles literally fell apart but sometimes held our longer than the bubbled up dashes. I owned a 99GT vert for 15 years and literally did not have a fit and finish issue. My 03 Cobra has close to 100k and is as tight as day one. Perspective I guess
There's an 07 Camaro? Silly me. I could've swore GM stopped production of both F Body cars in April of 2002....*sarcasm*
Door hinges on my LT1 were replaced, T-tops on every car suck, never had interior issues, but the cars were always garaged & didn't sit in a parking lot all day. My experience was with '87-'93 Mustangs. They all have flaws.
I remember watching this on Saturday morning TV with all of the other car shows. Great times!
I’m still loving my LT1 car!
love the way the sn95 looks i have mine since 2011 till now with only few mods but man i love the raspy sound she makes when down shifting thinks to my offroad x pipe and exhaust system
had a 94 z28 and I loved it.. sold it when I bought my house.. lt1 had it issues but you cant deny the power output for back then. id like to get another one some day.
I had a 98 Corvette and had to sell it when I bought my house. Great car, so fun to drive, never had any issues.
The LT1’s styling makes it look like a corvette or Ferrari it’s so beautiful
1994 Z28 was my first new car. I enjoyed the car and I remember this review at the time. Purchased at Bauger Chevrolet in Waynesboro Va.
I remember these , drove both as dealer demos when I sold cars. They were about equal overall with the Camaro being faster, however the
94 Stang handled better and had a much nicer interior.They are both good looking cars even today.!
Lt1 cars are the best bang for buck u can get even today in 2019.
G H just bought one
G H hell no. It’s a 96 firebird with 41k miles
For the 5 minutes it works lol
@@adamspitfire Mines been on factory optispark for 200k
@@seshtilirest4748 not just optispark it's dexcool too
6.4 seconds for the camaro? everywhere else it does 5. 6 ish
matthewmullins55 that fucker cant shift!
matthewmullins55 I'm a year late answering but humidity kills times. A few years ago on a cool spring day I ran my stock 02 Mustang GT 5spd in the 1/4 mile in 14.1 96mph. Later that summer in humid conditions the best I could do was 14.6 93mph.
real world numbers. magazines like car and driver never get the numbers they report as they use a standardized correction factor to adjust everything they get.
The mustang ran dead on what the sloth mid 15 second sn95 ran. The camaro was way off its time. Motor week use to have a giant boner for mustangs videos like this show it. They did a massive 1st and 2nd gear burn out in the 0-60/quarter mile test in the z28 to make the times closer. Wouldnt look good having a high to low 14 second car putting a 1 1/2 seconds beat down on the mustang of its same year. In 95 the 3.8l v6 camaro was faster than the 94 mustang gt, and the 95 mustang gt..... Had there been a 3.8l v6 option in 94 it would have been faster than the gt. Make all the excuses you want 1 car here is well over a second faster than the other one but it didnt show....
I'm a Mustang guy, but Motorweek always sucked on the performance side of reviews.
car & driver tested an LT-1 Z/28 and got a 14.1@98mph..love motor week, but throughout the years their drag racing capabilities have not gotten any better.
they tend to not push the cars as hard...
pbfloyd13 very true.
+brian centi i wonder what times C&D would have put down if they ran on that same track on the same day in the same conditions?
siamiam really good question you have..a shame really as they didn't do either car here any justice..and didn't the rims on the Z look dirty as hell or was that just me ???
+pbfloyd13 Did you not see the 0-60 test where there rolled smoke in 2 gears? lol They just cant drive, nothing to do with pushing it hard.
I noticed they didn't mention tire width when describing the Mustang's tires. That's my only gripe about MotorWeek, sometimes the most important information isn't mentioned. I've noticed this with engine size as well, as there has been a couple episodes where Jon Davis will mention the number of pistons and valves, but make no mention of displacement. It's a little puzzling considering they're obviously very well in tune with car people. They give great observations of the cars they test.
I bought a brand new Z28 in Blue with a Bone Color interior and was so excited as it was my 1st GM hot rod. I left the dealership in this car on 3 separate occasions and never did get it home. Left rear wheel bearing locked up on the 1st attempt, front brakes locked on the 2nd and the engine blew on the 3rd try. After the dealer returned my money I went back to Ford and bought another Mustang. I’ve never left the Blue Oval again and never will.
Am I the only one who loves and appreciates both these cars, and not blinded by brand loyalty?
The Camaro looks like a Geo Storm in retrospect.
yep, and damn .. it really was the ugliest generation ever! this is coming from a huge Camaro/f-body fan. early 4th gens were ugly, later were ok, but none had the lines and clean look of the later year third gens, I think the thirds were the nicest looking of them all.
1gbayfisher 4th gen was by far the best looking Camaro. There hasn't bern a better one before or since.
I completely disagree, I think early 4th gens look better.
bigpigslapper split bumper has a bit of a truck appearance imo with that big ass grill.
it's the other way around
It would be cool to see the fox body and iroc vs review
+C-FLO They have that, it's called "MotorWeek | Retro Review: '82 Mustang GT vs Camaro Z28"
+ToMaSaRuS REX he wants the iroc though, if I'm right they had 5.7 Tpi instead of the 5.0 305
+C-FLO this was a fox body mustang, they were used into the 2000s
+derzx 479 True, Ford internally called it the Fox-4 platform, also known as the SN95 chassis. It's basically a redressed Fox platform with stiffening upgrades to make it a stronger rigidity wise.
+derzx 479 i kno i just ment the 80- 90's model
I had a 95 Mustang GT. The last year of the 5.0 before they went to the 4.6 liter modular motor. Loved it.
They should've review the 2003 Mustang and Cama... oh wait... lol
+Tyler Kulchinsky Lol.
Hahaha
+Tyler Kulchinsky yeah but GM realized their huge mistake and brought back the camaro so you could do a 2013 camaro vs. mustang review
They've only sold 80k per year average since the re-came out. 1/3 of a factory output seems they made a mistake bringing it back instead...
Back in March 2016 the Mustang outsold both the Challenger and Camaro put together. It's been outselling them individually since the introduction of the 6th Gen. Camaro's 6th Gen was supposed to tip the scales back in GMs favor but lukewarm reception to Camaro 6 made that but a pipe dream
I owned both of these cars. While the Z28 was faster, the GT was MUCH higher quality and easier to service also.
+Shawn Crowe so true.
But the Z28 didn't need as much servicing...
But The Z28 doesn't kill people around every Corner it wipes out in. LOL
says the mustang owner lmao the stereotypical crowd killer
@@BuzzLOLOL z28 needed lots of servicing had over heating issues ... i had one and it ran hot
Seems like they always need a driver mod for their 0-60 tests. They roasted the tires on both of them.
And they are at least 2 seconds off everyone else’s times.
The LT1 Z28 with a 6 speed was a fast car in its day. Most Ford guys missed the Foxbody Predecessor when this new gen Mustang came out.
Just bought the 94 convertible gt with some engine work and it's a convertible, love the sound and the hp!! Great car
I had a kick ass 96 Z28 but my future wife said it wasn't a practical family car, so we traded it in for a PT Cruiser. Sad but true story.😥😥😥
@Sin City Bargains Yea, we're actually getting divorced soon, so maybe I can get another Z! I like the new ones but they are about half the price of a house!
MGTOW
Wow its not even a contest. The mustang 5.0 only had 215hp compared to the z28 275hp thats a big difference. The z28 (allot) improved while the 5.0 got weaker from the previous year. And on top of that the 5.0 is more expensive, doesn't make any sense to me.
Ford sold the name not the car
I remember when i was a kid, probably 9. There was this guy in highschool w a white foxbody. It was loud and sounded like nothing my kid mind had ever heard. I was to young for these cars. I do like a new edge cobra though. And the sn94 cobra is a solid car imo
I don't know what's up here, but I ordered a 1995 1LE Z28 and (when it was new) ran high 13's at Indianapolis Raceway Park bone stock in the summer heat.
I have owned both of these cars and the Mustang has always been more reliable the LT1 was a beast when it ran properly
@@larrywhinnery1808: I remember those $1000 tune ups.
@@TeeroyHammermill shit man i only paid 80 dollars for labor on a tune up for my lt1 of course parts not included
I "F-ing" love these retro reviwes.
i LOVE THE 93-96 Camaro look. It's so pretty
Yep. I had a 1993 and 1995 z28 camaro.
Do you guys have a review of the Bricklin SV-1? Would love to see it :)
That '94 Mustang is cool for both the 5.0 and horizontal slat taillights. Gotta wonder if it'll be a collector year for it.
If by 'cool' you mean generic looking, you're right.
Today, with 20-some years gone by, people tend to laugh at the 4th gen cars for their (admittedly, fair number of) faults. But, in 1994 when the 4th-gen F-bodies came out, their performance to dollar ratio made a HUGE splash.
I'd love to find a good early 4th gen 6-speed Camaro and do some brake/wheel and tire/suspension/body stiffness upgrades to it.
I have a 4th gen ls1 z28 with bolt-ons, its fun to see people in newer sports cars get pulled by a 16 year old car. the build quality is horrific tho, things rattle and break all the time, I feel like I need new interior parts every week. the engine (ls1) is rock solid and strong and will always put a smile on your face when you step on it at 50mph and the tires break loose
+Harakudoshi904 You obviously have never driven one. not only are they fast straight line, but they probably are the best handling live axle cars ever made.
They came out in 93
+Harakudoshi904 ummm they are light by today's car standards... A Z28 was 3500 pounds or less ... Most muscle cars today are 500+ pounds heavier
+andxx0r_the_second These cars are a blank canvass. With a few of the right mods they can be made to outrun the current crop of muscle cars and you will have some change let over to shine up the faded paint and fix the interior issues they all have these days.
95 is the last year before the 4.6. 94 and 95 also had those horizontal lines on the taillights before they went vertical. I have a 95 GT. Good car and cheap to build
I personally own a 94 Camaro that is Bright Red with Black Soft Top Convertible. The Camaro came with a 3.4 SFI V-6 with Automatic transmission, but it's one damn good car and very tough for a V-6 Camaro. I never care too much for the LZ-1 or Z-28 Camaro's. I just love the sound of a V-6 engine.
95' was the last year of the 5.0, than went on to the 4.6 in 96
Wow, what a throw back haha
I like the 4th generation Camaro better than the new ones. I owned both a Z28 and a Trans Am. Both were great performers, and got good mileage. Now these cars are going up in price. I would love to find a 2001 or 02 model in good shape, for a reasonable price.
I loved the 5.0 302 mustang GT but the LT1 5.7 Camaro was such a faster car. The 89 Fox Body mustang I had was slightly faster than my 04 4.6 liter mustang I have now and did amazing burnouts. Still the Camaro was king.
I had a 94 and a 96 GT loved them both, but they were relative dogs in power. Fast forward, I could not wait for the 99 Cobra. It was supposed to be a beast etc but once again was a let down. So, I stretched my wallet and got an LS1 vette that year.
Ford has always had some great cars, but they've always shot themselves in the foot. The Thunderbird SC was amazing and no clue how they screwed that up. The 01 Cobra was a massive let down. The Terminator Cobras were all time incredible, so they stopped making them.
I realize it's a business, but Ford shoots themselves in the foot, when it comes to what could have been, more often than not. It's a shame.
i had a 5spd super coupe. it was great. couldnt keep the harmonic balancer on it. got rid of it because of that
Ford outsells Chevy n Dodge so it's no wonder they always used smaller engines n lower hp n trq numbers, take a lil, give a lil is how the big 3 work, man, remember that.. If Ford didn't ever play nice guy Chevy n Dodge wouldn't exist anymore..lol
@@P71ScrewHead you're cringe, making crappy cars isn't playing nice guy and Ford won't ever sell enough cars to put GM and MOPAR out of business, the market is too vast, buyer's preference is too diverse.
@@BrainFuck10 Well, the gov bailed them out so they'll stay a while.. I'm a Ford guy but I prefer the more the merrier.. I wouldn't want there to just be Fords, where's the fun in that?? Lol.. Japan 🇯🇵 has 12 car brands, more countries should get in the game 🎮..
These Camaros started to vanish from the roads within a few years of the warranty going out. A lot of that probably has to do with how they made is to you have to drop the entire subframe and front suspension to remove the engine. Access to the engine was so bad you could not do much with it still in the car. Those Mustangs survived longer but were pretty bad in terms of quality.
Still, both were priced nicely for the new car buyer that was under warranty and got rid of them before the troubles started. In those days 4 cyl FWD Japanese cars like the FWD Celica or RWD 240SX were selling for similar money so to get a RWD V8 domestic that made the V8 sound and went "sort of fast" for those days was a good deal. The premium Japanese sports cars like the 300ZX, Supra, and 3000GT were all $30K+ and shot up to the high $40Ks for the top of the line models. These 2 cars were a bargain.
+texan176 ... and it's still really a premise that happens today. Its nice being in the USofA with plenty of truck V8 engines being made that we can siphon off a few to justify a $20,000 (now $40,000 in 2016 dollars) sporty looking car ... that really only sells at most 25k examples a year. God bless America!
+texan176 Responding just to the Subframe design... Its not bad at all, pretty sweet actually. In my Fiero I can drop the whole cradle, engine/trans/rear suspension in 45 mins. In my 2 car garage, with a floor jack, no hoist.
+texan176 LOL! Some one had the balls to say it how it is! Those things are such plastic headaches. And underneath of them is so mundane and the engineering level is dismal. Like texan176 said its all about right. LT1 Camaro never seen one make it much past 150,000 miles. They also rot underneath and you don't even know because the plastic body panels don't show and one day the rear axle control arms just rip out of their rotted mounts. I've seen Mustangs go well into 200,000 miles territory without major issues, but here in the rustbelt the rust is the silent killer.
+Dan Spirescu got that right!
mustangs always had better quality an they sold more too for a reason.
+dsavish Haha funny! Mine has 230,000 miles. You guys seriously don't have a clue what you are talking about. I see plenty of these cars still on the road. I rarely see old Mustangs.
Dear lord... can you imagine buying one of these cars today? how far was have come...
yes i can. because i did. bought a 30th anniversary z28. and i can still see out if it better than any newer car.
I had a 94 z28 with the 2.73s and got better mpg than I do in my minivan now. Besides the optispark, it was amazing.
I had a 93 f body that just hit 188k miles when I sold it. Engine wouldn't die on the car. Interior was complete shit though. Everything broke and rattled. The whole center of the dash moved a few inches back and forth. Still love the car and miss it.
I've driven both of these cars same model/year. The Camaro definitely feels faster.
It was lol
That's because it was👍
I had a 94 GT that i bought in 1999 with 50k miles. Bine stick and super reliable. Sold it to my brother who kept it just as nice. He sold it 8 years ago to purchase a 93 Cobra. He searched for it recently and it came up for sale in Miami, completely trashed. :(
I never really thought abput it. Are these cars you test on loan from the manufacturer? What happens to them when testiting is over?
Why was the Camaro discontinued for 8 years while the Mustang was still able to survive?
***** What does that even mean
+misamisatv I think the last 02 camaro ss/ws6 trans ams were made in canada? didn't they shut down that plant right after? i could be wrong but maybe gm was just too lazy back then and wasn't making as much money
+misamisatv Had a lot to do with sales. Mustang was selling better mainly because of women actually. The F-body structure was long in the tooth and no real update was scheduled after the 2002 year. Also, the Mustang was Fords only real performance machine so it couldn't die. GM had the corvette so the camaro/firebird was allowed to fade out unfortunately
+misamisatv The terrible driving position and bad visibility. Overall the mustang was just a better car to live with day to day. THE Camaro was positioned to close to the corvette in terms of performance.
+misamisatv because most people in america are stupid. Hope this helps
I love these retro reviews. I drove a 97 Z-28 Camaro for years. The LT-1 in stock form wasn't fantastic, mechanically, *cough optispark cough* but mated to that T56 transmission it was still a great car to drive. I owned a 99 Mustang GT for a while. While it wasn't the 5.0 SN95 car it had the same interior. Which i thought was garbage. But otherwise, that T5 made for a decent cruiser.
I crashed my 89 LX 5.0 and blew up my 94 Z28! Loved them both!
'85 Mustang did 14.3 @ 92 How did this one slow down to 15.6 @ 90?
The 4th gen F body (an upgrade of the 3rd generation) looks like a stealth fighter jet and back in the 1990s beats the Mustang hands down in power and performance
Makes you appreciate the power of a typical sedan in 2019
Numbers aren’t everything. My Mustang has the same horsepower of a new v6 Maxima, but I’d beat it 9 times out of 10.
Yeah, those 8-speed or CVT 300hp turbos, we'll see how long that will last.
Still got the video of a 270hp 2015? Acura TL trying to show off on highway @ 100mph+ while my SS passes him like he's still, I only have ~375hp.
Most new sedans are still well behind these, even with 300hp or more, since heavy as hell.
Had a '98 Z-28 with the LS1. What a motor!
What's the song at 1:04? I used to hear that song almost every time a NASCAR race went to a commercial break during the TNN years.
Look at that Camaro pushing 300 horses stock and the Mustang barley gets over 210 always go with a 350
+Eric Cymbura The 4.6 was Over rated too
***** To be fair they smoked the Camaros tires a lot longer than the stang.
+Reality Dealer They were NOT "nearly identical". I don't know where you got that, but even the 94 Cobra could barely keep up with the Z28.
+Reality Dealer Hear ye, hear ye!!! According to reality dealer, 15.6 and 14.9 are practically identical, even though they mentioned the Camaro's time was lower than what they usually get! Ford foamers...
+Reality Dealer Hear ye, hear ye!!! According to reality dealer, 15.6 and 14.9 are practically identical, even though they mentioned the Camaro's time was lower than what they usually get! Ford foamers...
Mustang has 245/45/zr17s. Camaro has 245/50/16. How does the Camaro put "a bit less rubber on the track?" Just curious...
@@rombierto Thank you.
I feel smarter every time I read the comments section. Common sense is really missing these days.
@@twany442 Camaro is my favorite car
I remember when the GM F bodies came out with the LT1 and the 6 speed. Some magazines had then running in the high 13's but almost everyone had them at least in the low 14's. After years of the lame TPI cars getting spanked by Fox bodies the Camaro and Firebird were suddenly fast. Then the LS came out and they were even faster. That was a fun era. Cars today are incredible though compared with cars from the 90's.
i ran a 13.98 in my 93 z28 bone stock 6spd hardtop 3.42 gears with 90k miles. a 89 lx coupe mustang 5spd with headers, exhaust, 4.10 gears and some south side machine lift bars and drag radials on fat n skinny weld wheels ran a 12.99
Both of those 0-60 times were with at least 1 full second of blowing the tires off. Motorweek always had way slower 0-60 times than anyone else. I'm assuming its just floor it and hold on versus the other review companies actually trying to launch the best they can.
I had a 96 trans am and got 5.8 seconds with an auto trans without being used to the car yet. Probably would have been at least 5.5 with practice.
Wasn't 1995 the last year of the 5.0?
Also, any videos on a 3.8 mustang?
why? those 3.8 mustangs were terrible. I doubt they'd have bothered testing it.
+kirbyswarp they were absolutely horrendous.
Omaha419 No they weren't, as long as you don't think of them as sports cars.
+kirbyswarp He's right. They were awful. Only in '99 the 3.8 Mustang got kind of decent with an extra 50hp.
Nick Motsarsky I said if you don't think of them as a sport/muscle car, the're great. They came with a soft suspension, lots of sound deadening, comfortable seats. It was more of a 2 door cruiser with adequate power for the time.
Jon Davis of korn hosts Motorweek? sweeeeeeet!
Bahahahaha I bet im the only one here who gets that joke. He must have gone bald from his dreads being to tight.
+TheRealHecky420 LOL no your not the only one but I bet there are damn few of us that get it
+paradoxdesigns Thats Jon Davis????
+Dan Spirescu Yea. The rock star life really took its toll. Say no to drugs kids!
+paradoxdesigns HAHAHA!!! That always crosses my mind too. ... twist twist twist
There is also a video on here of someone who took a 98-02 firebird to the limits. Look it up. Firebird Nuremberg (something like that). I couldn’t believe how it was handling and the speed with the cts-v brakes was pretty insane. I really wonder if you could put even more modern cts brakes on than what he had.
Could the throw for that mustangs shift be any longer
i love that mustang even with 100HP
The 94-98 Mustang Model Is The Best Looking
1978 - 2004 look like Mazdas...
They are the ugliest next to the 04
The best looking mustangs were 1964-1970 and 2005+. I hated the 1974+ mustang 2's and I never really cared for the mustangs of the 1990's. They were simply okay but lacked the character of the original mustangs or of the retro vehicles of 2005+. The most recent mustangs look pretty good too.
Love this review. Wish I was able to snag then 351 version.
Borg warner transmissions?? i thought they were tremec t-5 and t-56's??
I'd like to drop the Coyote in that 94 GT.
Michael Bacon That’s a popular mod. But I prefer the sound of the 2 valve so I’d just supercharge mine if I had the cash. :)
I would gap your coyote with a junk yard GM 5.3
@@boostjunkie2320 Yeah, only gap you would have would be between your ears.
@@ONTHEEDGEFRED Mad because it's true little triggered fanboy? Did your petty ass feelings get hurt? Are you going to cry? Do you need a safe place little bitch?
@@boostjunkie2320 As the old saying goes, like mother like son, you the little bitch Coming out of the closet with that Ls bs.
camaro had the 70s,90s and 2010s but mustang won the 60s 80s and 2000s notice a pattern plus 4th gen camaros are awesome american muscle cars
how did Camaro win 2010's? there being outsold
+Theo Pigis not really the new 2016 model is just a much better car than the stang
+Joeys WorldTour yeah cause Chevy had the time
+Joeys WorldTour but it's always gonna be a cat and mouse game
Theo Pigis Ford also had the time.
And since when do sales figures have anything to do with it? People buy cars for many reasons other than which one performs better stock.
knocked out the trans on my 94 Z28. Threw on a shift kit....much better!
Had a 97 z28 I worked from stock. Stock it ran a 13.9 and 60 in 5.5ish range. Got it running 12.8 pretty easy. My friend bought it and drives it daily.
The 5.0 need a good deal more work to go 12s, the parts are cheaper and easier it's to work on. Did the same with my 88 mustang. Also the LT1 will leak oil no matter what. The reverse cooling like to spit out the back of the manifold in hard downshifts.