Why 1994-2004 Mustang Trounced 1993-2002 Camaro
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 авг 2022
- Since the late 1960s the Ford Mustang vs. Cheverolet Camaro battle has been very fierce with each having their moments of victory. The battle of the 4th generation 1994-2004 Mustang vs. the 4th generation 1993-2002 Camaro appeared on the surface to be a competitive matchup however the Mustang easily bested the Camaro. Watch the video to find out why.
Авто/Мото
Say what you want, but I like both designs of these cars, I love the styling of the 4th Gen Mustang and Camaro/Firebird, they all deserve the love they needed
Ever notice how this Gen. Of Camaro looked like a Geo Storm?
Exactly! First time I saw a 4 gen Camaro, it looked like they stretched a geo storm over a third gen Camaro. The Geo Storm looked like a miniature version of the 97 Camaro. From the headlights to the taillights. From the frontend to the rear hatchback glass. The similarities are uncanny. I thought I was the only one who noticed.
I went straight to the dealership when the all-new Camaro Z-28 first hit the showroom floor. Salesperson says to me, "looks like a Geo Storm on steroids." I told him "yes, it does" and that he lost a sale. Ended up buying a '94 Pontiac Firebird Formula about a year later. Basically the same car but much better looking.
Catfish
@@BCaldwell not the 98 - 02 Camaro. The 93 - 97 with the quad head lights.
ever heard of brand recognition?
In sales maybe, but in performance, a 95 Z28 would eat a 95 mustang GT for breakfast.
I remember I raced a Ws6 once and it felt like he left the earth before I could even get my throttle all the way open.
@@phoenix21studios my bone stock 95 Trans Am ran 14.4@ 96 with a 2.3 60ft time, ie lots of wheel spin.
@@pdennis93 my 97 GT ran 15 something at 1500 foot elevation. My 01 GT was around 13.9 with mods. I came over to the dark side tho. Now I have an LS2 Corvette.
🤔highest trim vs a stock gt
Duh
@@tonygundy7815The Z28 competed directly with the GT. The Cobra competed with the SS when the SS debuted in 1996.
Ah, trounced the f body in sales. Definitely not in performance though, lol.
Clearly you know nothing about the Cobras and Terminators.....It give the LS Based V8 Camaros credit however
@@spukersonmerlosk1661 we don't count limited run special order cars that require a racing license. If you want to go there, I will just say COPO. I know it's not the same. It's better 😌
@@The_R-n-I_Guy Last time i checked, the Terminator didnt need any "racing license".
And clearly you're relocating the Goalpost with that "limited run" B.s.....in that case we shouldn't compare the Dodge Challenger Demon to anything else. That also includes the Buick Grand National GNX
@@spukersonmerlosk1661 the terminator mustang didn't come out until after Chevy killed the Camaro and trans am
@@jebediahgentry7029 Yet would had the Trans Am and the Camaro would had beatin' the Terminator if those was still around? That's the thing.
I had a 1995 Z28 back in 96. When it comes to looks, I guess everyone has different taste but I liked the Camaro. But in performance hands down the Camaro was a better and faster car.
Z28 vs GT race the Camaro will will 8 of 10 runs. Trust I had plenty of runs back in the 90s.
I had a 2003 Mustang GT in 2009. I ran a 96 model Z28. I stayed with him till about 130 then he ran away from me.
Doubt it
I had a brand new 94 Z28 with the Six speed LT1. So did the New York State Police! Great car. Put 191,00 miles on it…
Owning a Camaro SS or Z/28 back then was a big deal. It beat anything from Ford. It was only until GM killed it's pony car that Ford finally came out with a Mach 1 and Terminator. Too little, too late at that point. When GM popped in the LS1 motor in the WS6 and Z/28, it was pretty much over for the Mustang GT.
Both cars work as everyday drivers, but the Mustang was a friendlier package to live with: easier to get in and out of, more comfortable rear seats, more useable trunk, better visibility.. Ultimately that's what led to better sales numbers.
Yes, it's too bad Ford didn't capitalize on the performance of the 351 and 5.4 powered Cobra R models and sell those powertrains to the public. The 351 was an equal to the GM 350, while the DOHC 5.4 was an absolute beast. I remember the 5.4 was rated at 385 HP but when tested it put down 390 RWHP. when factoring in a 15% drivetrain loss that puts it about 450 hp at the flywheel. In 2000 that was V10 Viper level of power.
@@yankeetraveler1118 you know what the problem is? Ford always tried to do the bare minimum. A prime example of this is the disappointment that is known as the 2005 to 2009 Mustang GT. It wasn't until the Camaro started to become a serious deal that Ford really stepped back and went back to the drawing board for the new 5.0. With the Camaro now being discontinued and the Challenger going EV, I don't think Ford is going to push the envelope as much as it would otherwise do if it had actual competition. You know I'm not a Ford guy I like there to be a direct competition so that we as consumers win.
@@The_Hulkster the 5.0 came out for the 2011 year. I remember how raw the 2010 GT owners felt when their 4.6 making 315hp were out gunned by a six cyl 370Z with 330hp let alone when the coyote motor came out with 410hp the next year.
@@The_Hulkster I can appreciate that but I ask you to look at it from a few other perspectives. 1) when there was no other competition after GM pulled the plug on the F-body in 2002, Ford still brought out the new for 2005 Mustang. 2) when there was no other competition from GM or Chrysler, Ford brought out the 500 hp GT500 in 2007 with quite a number of improvements over the regular GT. And 3) Even in 2011 the year before the 4.6 was replaced it was still faster than the new Challenger and almost as fast as the still new Camaro.
@@PumpUPdaBase Well at least the 4.6 makes a better sound than the coyote
I've owned over a dozen SN95/New Edge Mustangs and 8 or 9 4th gen Fbody cars. Fbody took it's lunch money in every performance test there was, but the Mustang was far better looking and far more comfortable to drive. Combine that with GM's total lack of advertising and the Mustang destroyed the Fbody.
In my experience the F-body's interior build quality was also an issue. Was that your experience also?
@@BrewBlaster Oh yeah, door panel cracks, dash cracks, and general rattles. Mustang wasn't innocent there either, most notably the door pulls that rip off in your hand. Another Fbody issue is leaky T Tops and bubbling sail panels.
@@316Autos Yep, yep..thanks for the response.
Have to agree with this statement!
Had a 95 5 speed GT, last 5.0. and a 97 GT convertible....both cars were slow and just cruisers vs street fighters, driving one of them you had to know your place
Fine: so that makes them bad? Much rather drive the Mustang Cross Country than a Camaro or Fire Bird of that Era.
@@bryanwinter3289 I've done both and you are backwards, the GM offerings were better on the highway and better gas mileage to boot
Still easier to live with everyday.
I had a 2003 Mustang GT 5 speed manual. It was pretty embarrassing when a V6 Altima could keep up with me.
Those v6 altimas were really quick for their time. Especially the manuals. I had a 2000 gt & I never had one try me but I knew they were overachievers. I think they ran like a high 14 which was unheard of for a car like that back then.
From a mechanic point of view, the SN-95 Mustang was more easier to work on than the 4th generation Camaro/Firebird. Under the hood, the Mustang had more space, while the F Bodies' engine was halfway underneath the cowl, which made access difficult.
4.6 4Vs are hard to work if you have ever had the pleasure of working on one lol
@@anthonytucker7705 How is it hard? The engine bay was big enough to fit superchargers and even the 5.8 cobra R. The 4.6 looks small in my huge engine bay.
But the camaro handled, braked better and had a roaring V8. Better than a mustang in every way
@@mooch514 Except in sales :)
@@angelgjr1999 and that means only one thing. That a lot of people bought the inferior car
Correction:
Why 1993-2002 Camaro
Trounced 1994-2004 Mustang
yeah so hard it went out of production.
I street raced back then. If you had a 4.6 with no blower you got ate up like lunch meat. The old 5.0's and aftermarket support kept the mustang alive during those dark days. Had a friend build a 01 back in the day and it only made like 290HP. Talking cams, Heads, 4340 guts...Thats good for a 281 but those LS cars hit the scene it really changed the game.
I street race back in the early 90s
If you your 5.0 mustang didn’t have a five speed, 373 gears, and a bunch of boltons Chevy would eat you alive
The problem with the Camaro is that the seats were so low. It was like sitting in a bathtub. Plus it had a real cheap rubbery dash. The Mustangs were a much nicer car to drive day to day. You didn't have to crawl in and out of it.
The low seating position and low roof line of the Camaro gives it a more exotic car feeling. Combined with the glass T-tops you feel like in a jet plane.
This gen Camaro somehow managed to be both too small/tight on the inside and a half size too large on the outside from the driver's seat...
@@MalcolmCir I thought they were beautiful cars. I'm 5'10" and felt like George Burns when I sat in it.
The WS6 tho is one of the nicest looking cars ever made.
@@nikolaystoykov9413 ... You said the Camaro was more exotic because of the low roof line and those terrible seating positions?.. hahaha.
I guess they're good for a young man. Before an everyday driver no thanks. I like a car I can drive for hours and hours and don't get out the seat you have to go straight to the chiropractor. Lol
When the F bodies came with LS1's that was when people saw how sluggish the Ford Modular engines were in comparison.
while the 4.6L was not a power house, it did manage decent torque compared to other cars on the road. It was able to stay with and sometimes beat almost any Naturally Aspirated Japanese tuner car of the time. By 1999 the extra power really helped.
This.
Again, the early 4.6 non PI head was slow. It made maybe 210 hp, in 1999 the “PI head” 4.6 Mustangs got upgraded to a much better 260. Which is a big difference for the small and light coupe. My dad had an SN95. It wasn’t even close to the speed that my 03 GT gets to. Granted mine is modded…
Actually started with the 93 LT1 engine that walked the 5.0. Ford answered with the laughably bad Mod motor.
@@taylorc2542 oh you mean the Ford cobra motor from the 2003 2004 years.
1999 - 2004 was the new edge lifespan. Ford was so pissed at Camero that in 03 and 04 they took that 4.6 DOHC and put am Eaton roots blower on them. And those will walk 04 vettes and most every set up on the street. And 03 04 supercharged 4.6 DOhC was bullet proof and since was a mod motor at heart will see huge gains off bolt on alone.
Not to mention the fact that had manly rods and internals forged so you could build it up to a thousand horsepower reliably without any internal work at all not only that but the 03 and 04 Cobras were the only ones to offer full independent rear suspension making the 0304 Cobra able to out handle and out power any Camaro ever made straight off the showroom floor
In terms of performance it didn’t. Not even close. Not until 2003 when the Terminator came out but by then the F body had been discontinued.
From 1994 to 2002 the F body out performed the Mustang across all comparable trim levels.
I have owned my '01 Bullitt for 21 years. It is a true GT with great handling and a pleasurable drive. I have had zero problems. I just never liked GM build quality or GM styling (and still don't).
I feel the same way about Ford. To each is own though, I just never drove any mustang or ford truck that left an impression on me like GM gas. The 4.6 is a good motor but it is not anywhere near as good as the LS1.
@@turbotransam1980 In terms of reliability the Mustang will always beat the Camaro. There’s a reason why you see way more mustangs than Camaros..
@@angelgjr1999 yeah, it’s called trendiness and flagship. The mustang was a hideous touring coupe with a weak 289 V8 in its first few years of life until Carol Shelby got involved with the car in 1966. GM at the time didn’t have the Camaro yet but had other offerings such as the GTO, Chevelle, Impala SS etc. which all was more powerful than the mustang. Another reason was more mustangs have been sold is because it’s ford flagship car. The ford motor company attempted to make several other muscle cars to have in their lineup (Torino,Maverick) but where unsuccessful. GM had many options to choose from in the 1960s and early 1970’s. The Camaro and it’s cousin the Firebird were 2 pony car options that were around until 2002. The advantage that the mustang has is when it comes to buying a performance car from Ford there really isn’t any other choice where as the Camaro has alway played second fiddle to the Corvette; which is Chevrolets flagship performance. Lastly is price of the two cars. Excluding the higher end models, the mustang gt is cheaper than a Camaro when it comes to the V8 options for each car.
@@gmls1144 the pony twins frm gm have always been a hand me down Corvette while the Mustang has stood the test of time being the flagship for Ford
@@angelgjr1999 I'll agree all day the Mustang was a better car than the Camaro but the GM small block is hands down the most reliable engine you can own. To your point, there is a reason you see so many more 90's GM trucks on the road than Fords today.
i put 100,000 miles on a 97 GT. I don't miss it tho. I bought it in 2004 for about $8K. the 4.6L was possibly the best sounding V8 ever made.
I will take Firebird Trans Am over either of them. Liked the body style better.
Same!
I've got a 1996 WS6 project for sale it has to cause I'm picking up a 2020 ZL-1 tomorrow
@@tyronewalker1482 as much as I would love to buy that, I can't right now. I want a WS6.
@@peterkennedy7219 I bought for $6995 with 119864 miles I did the Opti tune up and total UMI Rear suspension $3600 takes it !!
I loved the 4th gen Camaro and Firebird they looked awesome, the problem was body structure and interior quality issues which left a lot to be desired. Creaks and squeaks was a regular feature from the 3rd gen F bodies that still plagued the 4th gen. The Mustang had a less controversial design, they were cheap, while not as fast as the F bodies they were still quick, they felt more buttoned down, and had a lot of aftermarket performance parts and kits. I liked the Mustang refresh which was a highly successful design compared to the Camaro refresh which I didnt like.
The Truth!
Compared to mustangs of that era 4th Gen F bodies were built like a mercedes.
I disagree. After owning a bunch of fourth generation cars from general motors, It is clear they fixed the rattling issue.. None of mine make or made any noise. However, all my friends with mustangs regardless of the year, all fall apart. Every one of those cars falls apart on the inside and the outside. Don't let anyone fool you. The general motors cars cost more money because they are better built with a better eye for quality.
@@mezzyshredder I agree 100% when it comes to the fourth generation cars. However I have owned seeing and fixed many third generation at bodies that just rattled and fell apart at the seams. The fourth generation cars truly were better in every way.
They were bad at killing the door window motors as well. My ex boss was informed on her 3rd window motor that the motors didn't stop until you let off the button, and that's where the motor burning and gear sheering took place. All at dealer msrp parts pricing of course.
Still though, it took a limited run, extra special SVT run to outperform a more mass produced, more easily attainable Camaro, I mean it kinda balances out a bit, especially factoring in the constant back and forth over the years. And by that metric gen 5 isn’t even questionable. But yes, the gen 4 stang beat the catfish kinda sorta, I know it was focusing on just that but there better be a video about the gen 5 camaro going on to dominate from 2005-2016 when it AGAIN took extra special SHELBY low volume cars to compete with off the shelf Camaros.
Yeah no, the coyote in the standard GTs trumped the standard Camaro SS
You got all that performance for around $5000 less than a mustang GT.
@InYoFace did you actually reference the years camaro was OUT of production? C’mon man, we’re talking about years they competed head to head. Are you a kid?
@InYoFace Technically… and I know that it’s just a technicality. They stopped production of the true mustang in 1973. Made what they called a Mustang II from 74-78. They released a newly designed Mustang in 79. It’s kind of like now. If they were to stop making a regular mustang and continue on what that suv ev thing. It’s got a mustang name but is it really?
@InYoFace Yeah and now it's an EV and who knows how long that the ICE engine will be allowed on the streets. Go get Your Mustang code red while you still can pony boy.
To declare the SN95 was objectively nicer looking than the Fox body is quite the stretch. It's totally subjective. In my group of Mustang owners at the time, we were very disappointed in the new SN95's looks as well as performance. The 2000 was much better received with us.
Give me a black/black ‘88 LX all day long.
@@fitfogey Agreed. I owned a '89 dark gray coupe and a middle-age-crisis red '91 LX convertible at the same time. The coupe just had bolt-ons. I bored and stroked the vert to 347c.i. with a nitrous setup, roll bar, etc. . Tons of fun in both. Me and Bud totaled the vert one Saturday night. I stuck its drive train in a lighter, red '70 Maverick Grabber. Then it really got fun. Yee hi!
Interesting. When they unveiled the 4th gen Mustang, I thought it was the ugliest thing since the Pinto II.. err..um.. Mustang II. They grew on me over time, but still think the Camaro has always been the better looking car.
Honestly I still think it’s the ugliest mustang ever. Which is saying something considering the mustang II
This is a very underrated opinion but I always like the 4th gen camaros more than the 4th gen mustang
Those were rough years to be a Mustang fan. The Camaro definitely had the performance bragging rights until the Terminator came out. The Mustang's only saving grace in the magazine comparisons was many testers much preferred the Mustang's day to day livability. Talk about disappointment when the new '94 GT's performance numbers were released. And then again in '96 with the new engine.
The terminator changed the game. I wish I had one as they are stupid expensive now.
Great video as always. Keep up the good work.
THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS MUSTANG AND CAMARO COMPARISON!!!! HOWEVER I STILL LOVE MY LS1
The f body platforn was cooler, and with the LS, was far more buildable, but GM making it a "baby Corvette" made it far less practical. The Mustang definitely had more mass appeal, better seating, and better daily driving ability. Both were sports cars, but the camaro was too much sports to sell at volume.
fbodys were very practical they had alot of storage room, spare tire, jack, 4 seats, If only gm designed the camaro better and the noise wasn't so long making it harder to daily drive.
Chevy guys getting mad Mustangs outsell Camaros 2 to 1. It’s not all about speed… Reliability and comfort matter.
Good point. Those were my thoughts exactly.
Don’t know if anyone else experienced this, but I was 26 when I attempted to trade in my 96 gt for a 99 z28; my insurance company (can’t remember who it was, possibly State Farm) was going to practically double my rates. I believe I had a speeding ticket or two but nothing crazy, no accidents, dui, etc. I was shocked, and it ended my Camaro dream. Going from one pony car to another I would’ve never believed that would happen.
I drove a new mustang from that era once. It had a 4.0 liter V6. It plowed like a John Deere in the corners and acceleration was leisurely. The 96 Accord I owned at the time with its 2.7 liter V6 was faster and handled a lot better.
Anything out handled a mustang
4th gen mustangs had the 3.8 "Essex" V6 5th gen(05-10) got the 4.0
Great vid, really enjoyed!!!! 👍👍
The 82-92 Camaro was my favorite generation of the F body. 93-02 just looked and felt cheap inside and out. Ford really did do their homework for the redesign of the Mustang. I remember a supervisor at a company where I worked my first full time job after high school, bought a brand new '95 GT and everyone came out to the parking lot to see it. People don't do that anymore today!
Great learning video. Please make more.😀
While prior generations of Camaros and Firebirds differed in style and performance, but both good, the Firebird was clearly better looking than the Camaro during these years. The Mustang in my opinion was meh in terms of styling, but clearly stuck to it's roots not only in terms of styling, but size, which is probably why it was so popular, and why subsequest models had/have retro styling
The 4th gen Firebird WS6 package wins the "I'm an angry muscle car and will eat lesser cars all day!" styling contest hands down. They look mean, especially in black.
I had a '03 Mustang GT and absolutely loved it. Thank you for this indepth video about the two cars.
4:26 - I'm a mustang owner but that is one camaro I liked very much. It came with a ram air scoop on the hood and some people paired it with single sided mounted twin tailpipes that made it look sick. And of course it sounded the part as well. I had the money I would've bought one to keep with my Mustang.
I️ have both, sort of, a 94 Formula and a 96 Cobra. I️ think the 98-02 TA is the best looking followed by the 96-98 Cobra. The stock Cobra is faster than the stock Formula. The GT’s were absolute dogs but were good looking.
I think the 96-97 Trans Am WS6 is the best looking 4th gen. The 98-02 is a bit over exaggerated for my taste.
A 2003-4 Mustang Cobra with the mystichrome paint and leather is very high on my list of must own one day.
Better buy it while you can. Those cars are already $30k
Love these videos
The Mustang didn't have optispark. That alone makes it light-years better than any F-Body.
My ‘97 has 130k miles and it’s fine
@@brockdez1259 you haven't blown your waterpump yet.
Absolutely true, although the Ls1 solved that
I put 130,000 miles on my ‘95 LT1 and never had a minutes trouble with the optispark. That drivetrain was bulletproof. The T56 6 speed was 10 times better than the weak and outdated T5 in the Fords.
My 97 has 74,000 with oem optispark and zero issues. Driven through rain , car washes etc
Fit and finish was better in the Mustang as well...
Ford may have “trounced” GM by selling more V6 Mustangs between 1994 and 2002 than GM sold V6 F-bodies, but the V8 GM cars were head and shoulders above even the pricey Cobra models in terms of performance year after year after year. It wasn’t even close. Ford finally got tired of getting sand kicked in its face and sold a few hundred Cobra R models, but they were unicorns. They were even more expensive and nearly impossible to buy.
@Your Pappy The 96 4 valve Cobra was slower than the ‘96 SS. Car and Driver tested the late-to-the-party 32V Cobra against the 96 Camaro SS and the F body beat the modular Mustang by 2/10 of a second in the quarter mile and was also faster around the auto cross course they tested on. Around the road course, the SS was 3 1/2 seconds faster than the Cobra. If that equates to “game over for the F bodies”, uh ok.
@Your Pappy 4 valve cars were evenly matched with LT1 cars for 96 and 97. I've owned both. 98 4 valves competed w LS1 cars. Not close. 99/01 cobras didn't compete either
I love your videos, very informative and entertaining. I remember the SN95 Mustang as a kid when it came out, I thought the styling was really cool but not necessarily retro. The fifth generation Camaro was great from an engineering perspective, but I found the styling distinctive yet forgettable. I had a book comparing the Mustang and Camaro up to the mid 00 with all the stats.
The fourth-gen cars were great on both sides, but for my money, the Pontiacs are where it's at. I freaking LOVE the Firebirds and T/As from this period.
Yup. I have owned my 95 Trans Am for 18 years. Did the 96-97 WS6 ram air conversion in 2008. Best looking 4th gen imo.
@@pdennis93 👍👍👍
Just look at the name, the GT was a better Grand Touring/daily driver but the SS/WS6 were vastly superior Super Sports. F body’s were for serious performance whereas the Mustangs were for those who wanted more practicality then performance and it’s the same story to this very day.
LISTEN ,
I love this channel, I'm notified everytime a vid drops...BUT what is up with the way the inflections on certain words seem to come in a completely random and incorrect way?? It sounds like a "Bot" is used for all the vocals. Again I LOVE this channel and the content but I feel like the # of subscribers would be 4 times as much if the spoken words sounded more " human" I dont remember the EARLY vids on this channel sounding quite like this. Idk just wondering (maybe its me)
KEEP EM COMING ✌
I still think the post-facelift Firebird was the best looking 4th gen pony. It does sadden me that GM opted to kill the F-body even though it usually outsold the SN-95 overall.
My first Mustang was a 2001 Bullitt.
It was a great handling car. Took it to the track often.
I think the retro hints of the Bullitt led Ford to the design of the S197.
They knew the market.
Let’s see what Ford has for the new one…
the mustang was not more stream line . car & driver could not even get the mustang to 130 mph where the camaro and firebird were at 154 mph on radar they even taped the mustangs nose and still not even close. you are compairing specialty mustangs againts stock camaro's.
I think the use of the word trounced in the title is a bit overstated when comparing sales figures. Now in terms of performance, handling and style/drag co-efficiency, trounced fits much better when describing the 4th gen F-bodies as they simply dominated the Mustang. It's also fair to say that the Camaro and Firebirds of this era - especially the LS powered SLP Camaro SS, Firehawk and WS6 cars will be more collectible given their lower sales volume compared to the Mustang.
Any equally equipped forth gen F body could smoke a forth gen Mustang in performance. But at the time people preferred the Stang to The Catfish when they were buying.
Being into performance as well as a GM guy during that time, there was no question what car I was interested in during the early 90's. Back then, I was reading most of the car magazines leading up to the new 4th gen F-bodys coming out. I remember specifically Motor Trend saying how good the Z28 was, I think it was them who did an article with like 16 cars called "Bang for the buck" in which the Z28 was the clear winner. After reading that, I was on a serious mission to locate one. Up to that point Mustangs had a slight edge on me because i never had a 5.7 car, I always had the 305 version Trans am or Z28. Once I located my 1st 4th gen (1993 Camaro Z28) I wasn't losing to Mustangs anymore, just to see if all the articles were right I took it to Atco raceway in NJ before I did any mods and sure enough 14.2 with an automatic and 3.23 gears, I was pretty happy with that.
Great video.
Yes, for some reason the 2005 Mustang often gets credited as the first "retro" Mustang, but it was really the 1994 that started that trend. The '94 and '95s are unique as they are a sort of transition model since they had the older 5.0. Some other random thoughts-I think I read '97 Camaro LT4 production was only 100 cars. I know some Corvette buyers were not happy with the all of the same parts that went into Camaros and Firebirds at half the price back then.
Of course today it almost impossible to find these '90s pony cars in stock form, low miles, and excellent condition-if you do they often sell for double that of a C4 Corvette. The C4 were usually purchased by Baby Boomers who took care of them. The '90s really was a special time as many of these cars exceeded late '60s muscle car performance for the first time in 25 years or so.
I don't remember styling being an issue on the f-body twins, the only real detractors I saw were on online forum pissing matches. The big difference I saw was the amount of female buyers for the v6 mustangs. They were EVERYWHERE, half my high schools parking lot was made up of v6 stangs and at the time I remember it being understood that the pony cars money making ability was heavily reliant on V6 sales. Being a 4th gen Camaro owner for two decades I get it, for everyday driving the mustang was easier to live with with the seating position and smaller doors. I rarely saw females driving f-bodies and if they were it was a firebird. The f-body v6 sales seemed to be amongst men that couldn't afford the v8 models for whatever reason.
Take into account the long histories of both classics (Mustang since 1964, Camaro since 1967) the Mustang is the better car and better investment, too
Very well put together. I learned something about sales. I wonder what would be said in 2022 now it is Mustang, Camaro and Challenger.
Mustang still wins
The Camaro not only looked better but it beat the Mustang in performance up until it was discontinued, Some years it wasn’t even close.
Having had friends with both cars, I always thought the F-bodies (in this case a Trans Am) looked like space lozenges. The Trans Am was fast, but it was more difficult to live with on a day to day basis. The Mustang was stumpy and not very pretty but was a far more livable car for day to day driving. For my tastes and driving habits, I would have taken a Mustang GT hands down, although I would have rather had a 5th gen GTO over both of them.
I have a 94 Z28 that i still drive all the time. How many SN-95 mustangs are even still in existence?
Not many. I think the 4th gen F bodies just totally outclassed those mustangs.
@@Valorius LOL, I think the '70 Firebird (first year of 2nd gen F-body) that was my first car outclassed them both. Wonderful car.
@@catjudo1 My first car was a 1972 Z28 LT1, but If you put them on a track side by side the 4th gen would crush it in every single category.
Even if you took the hottest 70 T/A and lined it up against the top end 4th gens, the 70 T/A wouldn't even win in straight line acceleration.
The 4th gens were the first American pony cars that were flat out better than the 60s and 70s muscle/pony cars in pretty much every possible way.
@@Valorius you are so wrong. Many more of that generation Mustang on the road vs the Camaro and Firebird combined. Get your facts straight.
@@bryanwinter3289 maybe where you live, not where I live. And when I do see one of those old sn95s it's a complete rat trap being driven by a 16-year-old kid.
Back in 97, a kid in my class was picked up by his dad in a candy apple red SN95 Mustang Coupe.
I had a 95 Mustang GT. I put a small supercharger on it (6PSI Powerdyne) and some other supporting mods (Headers, exhaust, fuel pump and fuel injectors). It was basically as fast as any of them new Camaros / firebirds of the time. But I always seemed to have better traction at the hole shot. I remember racing a early 90s firebird and I thought he wasn't even trying. I saw him in the rearview and only realized he WAS trying after seeing tire smoke from both wheel wells. Good memories! I also remember smoking a lot of those eclipse / Talon turbos. Those guys ALWAYS thought they were fast LOLOL I now have 2 foxbody stangs. An 84 Vert and 89 GT. My 89 GT has a 347 with 6PSI blower. That is a nice car...
I'll have a 4g Camaro over a 4g Mustang any day. I was 10-11yrs old when these came out. Both were everywhere by 1995. I was a Ford fan as a kid, and was always letdown when I'd read the newest comparos in the magazines of the day, comparing the hottest new SS & GT/Cobra. The WS6 Firebird was the best looking, and performing but only slightly above the SS. The Mustangs were rarely close. In maturity, I prefer the Camaro. Own a 2017 SS 6M. Secretary's prefer the Mustang. 🤘
They were common and cheap and fun to look at in the rear view mirror.
The Mustang was simply cheaper. That’s why it “Trounced” the Camaro as you say. Nothing more, nothing less. And to this day the Mustang is still about $5k less on average than the Camaro.
The 4th Gen Mustang was more of a true muscle car that was suited more for day to day driving while the F-Bodies were more of a 2+2 sports car that wasn't nearly as practical. I always preferred the F-Bodies of every generation, but I love Mustangs as well.
The Cobra R was a beast they should have built more of those
My friend has new camaro its like being in cockpit of plane but nice car
I’ve always been a Camaro guy. The 80’s F body was peak in terms of looks.
When it comes to sales however, I’m willing to bet a ton of those Mustang sales were fleet.
I see many mustangs at airport rental lots…..Been that way for years.
Fox body GT was better looking than the 4th gen, the refresh made it look worse.
Airport rentals? No way they’d rent out V8 Mustangs lol. Nowadays you can’t get anything above a 4 cylinder unless you’re an old woman.
In those years the z28’s DESTROYED the rustangs in performance.
Sales only matters to the execs. You buy a Camaro or Mustang for performance. Aside from the 03-04 Terminator the 4th Gen was better in every category hands down. Seriously when did sales begin and end being a factor. We don’t argue today whether which car is better based on sales. Failed and archaic logic.
The sales represent a way to judge which car looked better. Mustangs offered worse performance than the Camaro, which means people were buying way more Mustangs because of their looks alone. So it actually makes sense to bring it up.
@@Lamtitude 5k price difference has to be considered
... Thnk you soooo much, great vid 💯💥💥💥💥
Played at 1.25x speed it's much more watchable, narrator doesn't sound drunk and desperate to stretch the video runtime to 10 minutes
Love them both but the SN95 was the better overall choice and since it’s essentially a foxbody with a more modern exterior, meaning its a modder’s dream. I have a soft spot for 4th gen Camaro but I think it’s Firebird counterpart was a much better car
My 1995 & 1998 Z-28 was a vastly faster & better handling car than the Mustang counterpart, it felt far more stable & safe at high speeds too & those early 90's Mustangs had bad mechanical issues as my friends with them were constantly having expensive repairs done on them.
A very well researched segment, quite enjoyable my friend!
Great video
This dude. My 02 stock SS LS1 Camaro still regularly beats 5.0 and 4.6 liters GTs and Cobras. I love the sound of the SVTs and SVTr. They sounds great. But I'll take the sound of a cammed LS any day.
“Look, it only took us putting a supercharger on a bigger engine and placed it at a $50,000 sticker price and it beat a car with smaller engine that’s naturally aspirated and sells at only $30,000. Can you believe it?!?!”
Yes, yes I can. It always takes the terminator to beat a stock camaro SS and that’s hilarious. And don’t everyone get all butthurt, I’ve owned a ‘91 mustang 5.0, a 2012 5.0 as well as a 2000 Z28.
Ahhh the 03/04 cobras where stock too. Straight from the factory with a supercharger.
Love driving 96 mustang pi head swapped stage 3 cams and I just buy a procharger last weekend for 1500 bucks intercooler and all
I love my 2004 Mustang GT convertible. I also had a 96 Camaro and I can tell you from experience the mustang is the better car. It is much easier to work on the engine because the Camaro has half it's engine under the dash. The interior is nicer too with retro styling instead of crappy GM parts bin stuff. My Camaro also had the bad habit of T Top leak. I also like the style of the 4th gen mustang more. The front end of the Camaro is kinda ugly in my opinion.
Camaros in the 90s we’re fugly. Mustangs looked way better and handle better do to lower weigh and shorter body. LS camaros are not even that much faster. Motorweek barely had them getting to 60 .2 seconds faster. Not impressive considering the camaro had like 100 more hp.
@@angelgjr1999 While taste is individual, honestly the 94-98 Mustang weren't much to look at either. It really came into it's own in 99.
I’ve had a 94,95,01 and an 02. Love those Mustangs.
How do you leave out the Terminator Mustang?
Part of the sales discrepancy is that the Camaro was a much longer car than the Mustang - by over a foot in length. The Camaro was closer in length to a 1st Gen Dodge Intrepid or 2nd Gen Lumina than it was to the 4th Gen Mustang. On top of that, at the time the Mustang seemed to have better build quality - especially interior materials. I've had a number of friends that had 4th Gen F-body cars and all had at least one or two interior bits break within the first couple years on the road. One friend had his Camaro's instrument cluster completely die when the car had less than 2,000 miles on the odometer, and another friend had the center console come completely loose on his before the car had 10,000 miles on the odometer.
the 02 zl1 phase 3 had a aluminum 427 with 600 hp c5r vette motor, it also had z06 brakes and other stuff
Im a GM fan,but they sure did drop the ball.
Dude the F body Camaros absolutely destroyed the Mustang performance wise up until it was discontinued
@@jebediahgentry7029 The Camaro looked like a cat-fish. We all loved the WS6 back then and kind of just acknowledged the SS.
@@phoenix21studios the Camaros were really good cars also. I was lucky and my brother had a Z28 with the RS body kit that I got to drive quite.a bit and that thing was sooo fun to drive. I would prefer the WS6 though. I also got to drive a 2004 Mustang GT aroun that time and I remember thinking that Z28 would run circles around it. It sounded great but was underwhelming
@@jebediahgentry7029 GM has a history of ruining great looking cars. I remember thinking about it when I was a kid. I would think, “Why doesn’t Chevy make a new Camaro that looks just like a 1969 Camaro instead of making these hideous wedges. Then about 5 years later Ford made the S197 Mustangs that looked like a 1968 model and about 5 years after that Dodge made the new Challengers that looked like a 1970 model. Both of which were amazing successes because they are timeless.
@@phoenix21studios they look the way they do to be aerodynamic. That's why they get almost 30mpg highway and walk away from anything w similar power from about 100mph forward.
Still reliable in 2022
The 2000s SN95 Definitely my favorite body style of any modern muscle car, and I'm a Corvette guy. Dont get me wrong the fbody is great but I don't know what it is about the SN95 but it just looks so beautiful and timeless. Just so aggressive but also a looker. It's just always looked so beautiful and always reminded me of the early 2000s. Its just the pure example of a early rowdy loud muscle car, that looks simple but beautiful. Ford definitely has captured my heart over the years but this style is just my favorite. Planning on buying one at the end of next year if finances continue to be good as they are. The prices have been going up ALOT on these recently so snag it up soon.
It was a clean design with REAL Mustang styling cues. That when the Mustang really started to come back styling wise.
@@robertpoudrette4483 i agree they perfected the blend of mustang and modern.
How Strange is The American Car Market!
That Futuristic Sleek Longer, Sportier Seating gave the Authentic GT Experience to The Camaro "Hands Down".
Long-distance travels in those Mustangs were a really Cramped Bone-jarring experience aside from the frightening closeness to the big haulers.
Berger 4th gen Camaro is the equal to the 2000 SVT Cobra R....So, gonna have to say OldCarMemories may not be as familiar with the rare 4th gens as he is with the blue oval specials...the biggest let down GM made with the 4th gen F-bodies was using their smallest 10bolt to back their V-8 engines. I ended up with a Strange 12bolt in my 99WS6 because the rears were so weak. I have driven both Mustangs and F bodies from this time. The Mustang felt like you sitting on a crate sitting up higher and the F-bodies had you lower in the seat. Since its supposed to be a sporty segment the seat position of the F-bodies was always more comfortable to me. Then again, we live in a country where a truck is the best selling vehicle so maybe the higher position in the Mustang was a positive for a lot of people. And I'm gonna throw this out there, the C5 Z06 was born because a LS1 4th Gen SS was too good on a race track for the Corvette team to be comfortable and that spawned the Fixed Roof Coupe (FRC Z06 and the LS6 that was developed as well).
The rears were only a problem if you were modifying the car. An F body with just a cold air intake and exhaust could live a long happy life with the factory rear.
@@Valorius no. Bone stock automatic ate 2 10bolts.
@@tellyourmomisaidhi5804 I've had three 4th generation F bodies over the years (and still have a 94 Z28), all mostly stock. None of them ever broke the rear. But I don't dump the clutch either.
@@Valorius with a stick & burnouts?
@@rogerdodrill4733 if you don't treat the car like an animal you won't have these problems
I’ve owned mustangs and fbodys from these eras. The mustang was way easier to drive and more comfortable but as far as power train goes the gm is a no contest except for the rear end . Ls1 with a t56 is probably the best engine trans combination I ever owned.
Loved both of them
There was an SN 95 model call the Shinoda Boss. I’m not familiar with the power plant or any suspension parts on this, it may just be decal on a standard GT sales item.
Sales maybe. And who is gonna buy their kid a Camaro with that much power? Nobody, that is who
With the difference with sales between the mustang and camero 4th generation, recon the camero is most likely in general worth more because of low production numbers..love my 88 iroc TPI didn't partiality like either 4th gen just my opinion
In 1994 I bought my wife a new Z-28 which turned out to be a mistake. The car was fast (for then), had no mechanical problems but the body integrity was horrible. The body creaked and rattled, the dashboard rattled, and the car was just not a quality vehicle in my opinion, and we sold it.
I have one that's 30 years old and doesnt creak or rattle. Maybe you got a lemon. Or maybe I got that one built on the best day of the production lines life. lol.
@@Valorius yours is a different vintage I believe.
@@craigcardwell4143 I currently own a 1994 Z28 T-top car. I've had several variations though over the years.
Still the Mustang was no match for the Corvette. (I’m aware they’re not really the same category of car)
SVT Cobra makes 300hp while the C4 still was making 300-330hp in the later years.
SVT Cobra R 385hp but the Corvette from 1990-1995 ZR-1 made 375-405hp and still clapped it.
I'm definitely biased, but I genuinely prefer the 4th gen F-bodies to the SN95
i like both
Good Video
You know these pictures make the pre new edge look actually decent
I wanted both so test drove both 97 models (stang/z28), even though I went with the mustang I knew where my place was on the food chain!
Love my sn-95 stangs. I’ve owned 6 or 7 or since I’ve been driving. And 2 Foxbodies !
GM faithful had the Camaro and the Firebird...... AND the Vette. Ford purchasers only had the Mustang. A BIG reason for the Ford sales. Ford guys had only one option.... and a lot of them were women.
Even the mustang guys in the comments are confused 😂 like "nope I get smoked by those things all the time"
Got to bring up the special models (Bullitt, Mach 1,etc) and the customizations available on the mustang.
I own both and will be doing a video on this in my channel for my 04 mach 1 and one of my 4th gen fbodies