CHEVY VS. FORD THE SAGA CONTINUES

5.0KILLER · 05-01-2001, 11:43 AM

why do so many of you ford guys think the Z28 is such a slug when the fact is they are faster than the gt's stock. I am not saying there are no fast stangs but for the most part the Z is faster. as for some of you guys who thing they are junk and the break and fall apart, have you driven one? probably not. because mine runs and looks great and its 6 years old and bone stock and have still never lost to any mustangs.

stamper99Z · 05-01-2001, 02:02 PM

Haha, no replies

I love my car with 35K on it, no problems at all yet. Most cars out there are stock and yes the LS1's still edge the Gt's and Cobra's. I respect the 4.6's performance for what it is and the high mod capability, but again, most cars on the road are stock. I have been whopped repeatedly by this guy is an 80's stang with big gauges sticking out everywhere and an exhaust that makes my Borla tremble. but I have also repeatedly beat my friends newer Cobra with gears and exhaust pretty easily. All I have is intake, exhaust, stall convertor, and that hypertech programmer. It's addictive and fun and I intend to keep it that way

Try Me · 05-01-2001, 02:37 PM

Put it together cc boy

I put twenty thousand kilometres on my mothers x's '99 ragtop Corvette the summer before last - i know LS1 power. Smooth, unlimited power. It's always on tap

Do i think F-Body's blow? Hell no!
I think they rock! What stinks is the $40,000 price tags that go with 'em

There's a new WS6 for sale near my place - asking price is around $50K

Oh but wait, your 'Maro is 6 years old.
We're talking Iroc, right?
I've lined them up before, and if you think you can run circles around my slow SN-95 with a stock Iroc, bring a shovel, you'll need it when i bury that thing

5.0KILLER · 05-01-2001, 02:57 PM

Nope no IROC here LT1 95 Z28, I did have a third gen and i admit it was way slower than my LT1

Try Me · 05-01-2001, 02:59 PM

Where are you from?

Power · 05-01-2001, 03:02 PM

Hmmm.....I don't remember anyone saying an LT1 was slow. Maybe you should read the Street Racers Corner forum and search for LT1 threads. Lots of stories of beating LT1's and getting beat by LT1's.

Like my car, I won't win anything unless its something pretty slow. The old girl is tired and needs to be implanted with a new engine.

------------------
1966 Baby blue Coupe, 289, Manual 3-speed, Edelbrock 650, Flowmaster 3-chambers, and minor upgrades. Interior work includes custom paneling, custom dash dress-up(I refuse to cut anything out of the original), Rewiring most of the electronics, Porsche 911 seats installed soon, and Stroker kit when I get to Texas. November of 2001 I will go back to Dallas.

SkarodoM · 05-01-2001, 03:04 PM

$40k!! good god man, how much are stangs in CA?? The old man was bored and went and looked at stangs, maros and vettes... 01 5spd stang gt 'vert w/ all options was ~$27k, m6 z28 w/ cloth was same price, and '00 blk/blk/blk m6 C5 'vert was $50k

Just curious

Try Me · 05-01-2001, 03:13 PM

My buddy John paid $72K and change for his C-5 Vert, new.
Corvettes are rich man's car if you ask me

Stangs here (GT of course) range from $27K to $35 for a loaded 'vert.

horseairplane · 05-01-2001, 04:44 PM

Yall ought to come to Texas. A Loaded 00' GT runs around $23k. 01's are around $24K. A lot of bang for the buck.

A

------------------
00 GT

NTIMD8 · 05-01-2001, 05:12 PM

This is truly a class a forum!!!!!! The guy comes in here talking smack and not one person returns it. I am very impressed with this board!!!!!

LT1's are fast as hell but let me tell you something. It is very rare to see a stock Mustang and very rare to see a modded 4th Gen F-body.

Besides talk over the internet is cheap. Its what happens when you are behind the wheel that matters.

------------------
SHP RACING

www.SHPRACING.com
Hang on for the ride of your life!

SkarodoM · 05-01-2001, 05:19 PM

NTIMD8

Soooo true, which is why i got the f-body =P

dinomite · 05-01-2001, 09:04 PM

Now then. The current camaros are faster than the current mustang, but lets look at some stuff (this is gonna get long):

I hate to bring up the displacement argument, as thats the ricers favorate thing to talk about, but here it applies differently. Ricers always talk about hp/L and how there gerbils make so much of it, sometimes as much as a stock mustang, but that power is made in the stratosphere (9000 rpm) and there is no torque to accompany it (case in point, integra type-r, 195hp, 127 ft/lbs). But between the 4.6L mustang, and the 5.7L camaro engine there is not as much discrepensy as there should be given the displacement. Ok, 2001 models now: Mustang makes 260hp@5250 and 300tq@4000 Camaro: 310@5200 340@4000. Those power and torque numbers occur at same (close) rpms, so you can't say that we only get power cause we rev through the roof. Lets do some quick math: the 4.6 makes 56.5hp/L and 65.2tq/L, the 5.7, 54.3 x 59.6. Where is all the power from that extra 1.1 liters (we have all heard ricers say this)? I just don't know. Where is all the torque (never heard em say this)? same place, up the collective GM a$$hole (sorry, cheap). With that big discrepency in displacement, I'd hope that the Z28 would be faster.

Lets go back a few years, to when the 'stang had a 5.0L and the camaro had the same 5.7; 1991. In this year, the stang and the maro both ran around 15, depending on driver (sources I checked said 15 for stang and 15.1 for maro, thats just driver), but the camaro had another .7 liters! With that extra .7 liters the camaro only made 20 more horses@400 more rpm and 45 more ft/lbs. By the ratios, GM was mising some horses, even thought they were on the ball as far as tq goes. The camaro had .7 extra liters, more power, and a good bit more toque, but still lost/tied. Whats going on

I see the root of all this problem as: GM=bad. DON'T JUMP ON ME TOO QUICK! The reason I say it like that is just because all of GM has really taken a bad turn over the past 15-20 years. As I have already pointed out, they can't engineer, nothing more to be said. The facts show it. But they also can't run a business, once again that is proven, GM themselves know that they are haveing trouble running the business (they loose money on EVERY softop cavalier that they sell), and over the last decade they brought in many a consulting firm to check it out and try to find the problem. Its very hard to pinpoint, as there are so many problems. GM products are badly designed (hello, whats with the new pontiac models??????), badly built (rattleboxes; this is cause they bully their suppliers), and badly marketed.

And one more thing, you cannot even compare the Mustang aftermarket to the Camaro one, the mustang one is indisputably much larger.

We around here don't think that camaros or corvettes are slow, we have respect for them.

5.0KILLER:you came here obviously trying to start fights, but, as you can see with this post, we are not like ricers or chevy people, we are very reasonable and will listen to anyone else who is reasonable. You can stay on the board and we will accept you as long as you don't blatantly start fights like this.

[This message has been edited by dinomite (edited 05-01-2001).]

dinomite · 05-01-2001, 09:12 PM

Whew, that took a LONG time to write.

I just wanted to reiterate that we will welcome anyone here. We have a number of people who hang out here who don't drive mustangs (camaros, CRX, etc.) but come to this board because it is such a great place. We don't hold uneccessary grudges and will listen to anyone, so I hope that you can come to your senses and join us.

SkarodoM · 05-01-2001, 09:22 PM

Quote:

we are not like ricers or chevy people

Brilliant.

Mustangbelle306 · 05-02-2001, 10:28 PM

Not all chevy people start fights...I consider the Chevys that start fights DOMESTIC RICERS!!!!!!

A class allll their own

------------------
Elisha~5.0 HO Racing (ahem HIGH OUTPUT!)
1994 GT: under top secret construction
http://www.geocities.com/mustangbelle_306
Email: mustangbelle_306@yahoo.com
AOL name: GT306Chick

Unit 5302 · 05-02-2001, 11:47 PM

dinomite

One of the things your math does not show is weight. The Fox body Mustang's had about a 300-400 lb advantage on the F body. The Mustang has always been lighter.

As far as those times quoted being accurate, I would have to disagree with that wholehartedly. Most of the car mags do this on a test.

Rev to redline, dump clutch, shift at redline. While that may be great for engine noise and burnouts, it's not too great for 1/4 mile performance.

As far as the F body being faster stock for stock, from 1993-current, I'd agree. 1987-1992, I wouldn't.

As far as quality, I think the Mustang runs circles around the F body.

Oh, and btw 5.0killer, I wouldn't be the least bit scared to race a bone stock LT-1 with my near stock 87GT. So far I haven't lost to any LT1's. Whoop de doo.

[This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 05-03-2001).]

84_GT350 · 05-02-2001, 11:52 PM

Ok...but let's be fair here 5.0Killer (if that IS your real name). First of all, Camaros have a size advantage to the tune of a little over a liter, (as dinomite has kindly pointed out) right? That's not an excuse...but an explanation. I think a lot of the trash talking just comes mostly from people with modified cars who have a heavy allegience to a specific brand. Perhaps a lot of it comes from back in the day when Camaros were getting stomped by Fox bodied Mustangs (ahhh...the 90's). Or maybe back into the early-to-mid 80s when VWs had better 0-60 times. And I much prefer the Mustang's styling a Z28. The SS's don't look too bad with that scoop, but (in my opinion...not tryin to flame ya or nothin) Z28s kinda look like a 3000GT at a glance. Just my $.02.

------------------
1984 1/2 GT350 (#842 Hatchback w/ T-tops), 302HO, Comp cams Xtreme Energy cam, Carter 625cfm carb, Weiand Stealth intake, MSD distributor, MSD coil, FMS 9mm wires, 1 5/8" MAC unequal shorties, 2 1/2" MAC Prochamber H-pipe, Flowmaster 2 chambers, KYBs, 16"x8" 4 lug Cobra Rs, Falken 245/45ZR16s

stng87 · 05-03-2001, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 84_GT350:
Ok...but let's be fair here 5.0Killer (if that IS your real name). First of all, Camaros have a size advantage to the tune of a little over a liter, (as dinomite has kindly pointed out) right? That's not an excuse...but an explanation. I think a lot of the trash talking just comes mostly from people with modified cars who have a heavy allegience to a specific brand. Perhaps a lot of it comes from back in the day when Camaros were getting stomped by Fox bodied Mustangs (ahhh...the 90's). Or maybe back into the early-to-mid 80s when VWs had better 0-60 times. And I much prefer the Mustang's styling a Z28. The SS's don't look too bad with that scoop, but (in my opinion...not tryin to flame ya or nothin) Z28s kinda look like a 3000GT at a glance. Just my $.02.

HOly $heite! Im not the only one that notices that 3000GT likness!

stng87 · 05-03-2001, 07:20 AM

Well I must admitt that I was a slight bit put off back in the day when i realized that the comaros make that extra 30-40 hp. I was like WTF?? I wondered why ford would put its mustang owners behind the 8 ball from the start. But what you have to realize is that the manufacturer doesn't give a youknow what about who has more HP or who wins a street race out of the factory. All they care about is the sales of the end product. And UNIT, correct me if I am wrong,

but supposedly the mustangs still outsell the comaros and the firebords combined so there's no real reason for ford to make any changes in power output or whatnot.
And this makes sense to me because I way way more mid-late age women driving late model mustangs which prior to this discovery, perplexed me greatly.
Oh and 5.0Killer......Welcome to the board

------------------
1987 black with t-tops. Cobra intake, 1.7 cobra crane rollers, gt40p's, bbk shorties, off road h-pipe, adj. FPR, rebuilt aod w/shift kit, 65mm TB, 4.10's 12.90's at best probably less, oops I mean worse.
*** AOD's. IT'S MANUAL! Now for the T-5z!
Semper Fi

dinomite · 05-03-2001, 05:30 PM

Unit is right about the weight, and that the F body has only beaten the mustang in the most recent years. But even with the weight thing, look at the gearing. I don't know exactly what it is, but I know they have a lot more in their rear than the mustang (mustang still comes with 3.08, the maro is higher 3).

The quality thing is my biggest problem with GM. Recently, one of my friends went to a car show and GM was bragging about how they got 350 horses out of their 350cu/in crate (read: performance) engine, WHOOPDIE F*CKING DOO!. The Ford 351 crate makes 385hp, 35 more, and I don't think that its coming from that extra 1 cubic inch.

The reason that the camaro is faster as of late, is an attempt by GM to win back buyers. The company has had numerous problems in the past 15 years, and the biggest reason that they are still around is that they sell a LARGE portion of their products to fleet buyers: governments, rental companies, and large corporations. There was a very good article a couple months ago in Car and Driver by one of the editors talking about GM quality, he made some very good points, mainly pointin out that people are embarresd to drive the low quality products.

GM is having lots of trouble, and is smply trying to get their act together.

05-01-2001, 11:43 AM	#1
5.0KILLER Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 3	CHEVY VS. FORD THE SAGA CONTINUES why do so many of you ford guys think the Z28 is such a slug when the fact is they are faster than the gt's stock. I am not saying there are no fast stangs but for the most part the Z is faster. as for some of you guys who thing they are junk and the break and fall apart, have you driven one? probably not. because mine runs and looks great and its 6 years old and bone stock and have still never lost to any mustangs.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Safety Issue 64 - 70 Mustangs	Mach1 Cobra Jet	Classic Mustangs	20	07-11-2005 08:06 PM
South Florida Ford VS Chevy Dyno Day!!	SpeedInjected	Ford Show & Go	0	11-08-2003 12:47 AM
South Florida Ford VS Chevy Dyno Day!!	SpeedInjected	Blue Oval Lounge	0	11-08-2003 12:41 AM
Lets do a ford vs chevy meet/cruise to carlsbad on sept. 14th	46stang	Ford Show & Go	10	08-12-2002 11:43 PM
Ford questions from a Chevy guy	MuscleCarFanatic	Classic Mustangs	5	06-04-2001 03:24 AM

05-01-2001, 02:02 PM	#2
stamper99Z Registered Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 8	Haha, no replies I love my car with 35K on it, no problems at all yet. Most cars out there are stock and yes the LS1's still edge the Gt's and Cobra's. I respect the 4.6's performance for what it is and the high mod capability, but again, most cars on the road are stock. I have been whopped repeatedly by this guy is an 80's stang with big gauges sticking out everywhere and an exhaust that makes my Borla tremble. but I have also repeatedly beat my friends newer Cobra with gears and exhaust pretty easily. All I have is intake, exhaust, stall convertor, and that hypertech programmer. It's addictive and fun and I intend to keep it that way

05-01-2001, 02:37 PM	#3
Try Me Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 465	Put it together cc boy I put twenty thousand kilometres on my mothers x's '99 ragtop Corvette the summer before last - i know LS1 power. Smooth, unlimited power. It's always on tap Do i think F-Body's blow? Hell no! I think they rock! What stinks is the $40,000 price tags that go with 'em There's a new WS6 for sale near my place - asking price is around $50K Oh but wait, your 'Maro is 6 years old. We're talking Iroc, right? I've lined them up before, and if you think you can run circles around my slow SN-95 with a stock Iroc, bring a shovel, you'll need it when i bury that thing

05-01-2001, 02:57 PM	#4
5.0KILLER Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 3	Nope no IROC here LT1 95 Z28, I did have a third gen and i admit it was way slower than my LT1

05-01-2001, 02:59 PM	#5
Try Me Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 465	Where are you from?

05-01-2001, 03:02 PM	#6
Power Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Oregon Posts: 420	Hmmm.....I don't remember anyone saying an LT1 was slow. Maybe you should read the Street Racers Corner forum and search for LT1 threads. Lots of stories of beating LT1's and getting beat by LT1's. Like my car, I won't win anything unless its something pretty slow. The old girl is tired and needs to be implanted with a new engine. ------------------ 1966 Baby blue Coupe, 289, Manual 3-speed, Edelbrock 650, Flowmaster 3-chambers, and minor upgrades. Interior work includes custom paneling, custom dash dress-up(I refuse to cut anything out of the original), Rewiring most of the electronics, Porsche 911 seats installed soon, and Stroker kit when I get to Texas. November of 2001 I will go back to Dallas.

05-01-2001, 03:04 PM	#7
SkarodoM Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 199	$40k!! good god man, how much are stangs in CA?? The old man was bored and went and looked at stangs, maros and vettes... 01 5spd stang gt 'vert w/ all options was ~$27k, m6 z28 w/ cloth was same price, and '00 blk/blk/blk m6 C5 'vert was $50k Just curious

05-01-2001, 03:13 PM	#8
Try Me Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 465	My buddy John paid $72K and change for his C-5 Vert, new. Corvettes are rich man's car if you ask me Stangs here (GT of course) range from $27K to $35 for a loaded 'vert.

05-01-2001, 04:44 PM	#9
horseairplane Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Austin, Tx Posts: 9	Yall ought to come to Texas. A Loaded 00' GT runs around $23k. 01's are around $24K. A lot of bang for the buck. A ------------------ 00 GT

05-01-2001, 05:12 PM	#10
NTIMD8 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Ottawa: What the hell is all this white stuff? Posts: 33	This is truly a class a forum!!!!!! The guy comes in here talking smack and not one person returns it. I am very impressed with this board!!!!! LT1's are fast as hell but let me tell you something. It is very rare to see a stock Mustang and very rare to see a modded 4th Gen F-body. Besides talk over the internet is cheap. Its what happens when you are behind the wheel that matters. ------------------ SHP RACING www.SHPRACING.com Hang on for the ride of your life!

05-01-2001, 05:19 PM	#11
SkarodoM Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 199	NTIMD8 Soooo true, which is why i got the f-body =P

05-01-2001, 09:04 PM	#12
dinomite The Dude Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 1,262	Now then. The current camaros are faster than the current mustang, but lets look at some stuff (this is gonna get long): I hate to bring up the displacement argument, as thats the ricers favorate thing to talk about, but here it applies differently. Ricers always talk about hp/L and how there gerbils make so much of it, sometimes as much as a stock mustang, but that power is made in the stratosphere (9000 rpm) and there is no torque to accompany it (case in point, integra type-r, 195hp, 127 ft/lbs). But between the 4.6L mustang, and the 5.7L camaro engine there is not as much discrepensy as there should be given the displacement. Ok, 2001 models now: Mustang makes 260hp@5250 and 300tq@4000 Camaro: 310@5200 340@4000. Those power and torque numbers occur at same (close) rpms, so you can't say that we only get power cause we rev through the roof. Lets do some quick math: the 4.6 makes 56.5hp/L and 65.2tq/L, the 5.7, 54.3 x 59.6. Where is all the power from that extra 1.1 liters (we have all heard ricers say this)? I just don't know. Where is all the torque (never heard em say this)? same place, up the collective GM a$$hole (sorry, cheap). With that big discrepency in displacement, I'd hope that the Z28 would be faster. Lets go back a few years, to when the 'stang had a 5.0L and the camaro had the same 5.7; 1991. In this year, the stang and the maro both ran around 15, depending on driver (sources I checked said 15 for stang and 15.1 for maro, thats just driver), but the camaro had another .7 liters! With that extra .7 liters the camaro only made 20 more horses@400 more rpm and 45 more ft/lbs. By the ratios, GM was mising some horses, even thought they were on the ball as far as tq goes. The camaro had .7 extra liters, more power, and a good bit more toque, but still lost/tied. Whats going on I see the root of all this problem as: GM=bad. DON'T JUMP ON ME TOO QUICK! The reason I say it like that is just because all of GM has really taken a bad turn over the past 15-20 years. As I have already pointed out, they can't engineer, nothing more to be said. The facts show it. But they also can't run a business, once again that is proven, GM themselves know that they are haveing trouble running the business (they loose money on EVERY softop cavalier that they sell), and over the last decade they brought in many a consulting firm to check it out and try to find the problem. Its very hard to pinpoint, as there are so many problems. GM products are badly designed (hello, whats with the new pontiac models??????), badly built (rattleboxes; this is cause they bully their suppliers), and badly marketed. And one more thing, you cannot even compare the Mustang aftermarket to the Camaro one, the mustang one is indisputably much larger. We around here don't think that camaros or corvettes are slow, we have respect for them. 5.0KILLER:you came here obviously trying to start fights, but, as you can see with this post, we are not like ricers or chevy people, we are very reasonable and will listen to anyone else who is reasonable. You can stay on the board and we will accept you as long as you don't blatantly start fights like this. [This message has been edited by dinomite (edited 05-01-2001).]

05-01-2001, 09:12 PM	#13
dinomite The Dude Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 1,262	Whew, that took a LONG time to write. I just wanted to reiterate that we will welcome anyone here. We have a number of people who hang out here who don't drive mustangs (camaros, CRX, etc.) but come to this board because it is such a great place. We don't hold uneccessary grudges and will listen to anyone, so I hope that you can come to your senses and join us.

05-02-2001, 10:28 PM	#15
Mustangbelle306 Yay for Chickys Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 1,532	Not all chevy people start fights...I consider the Chevys that start fights DOMESTIC RICERS!!!!!! A class allll their own ------------------ Elisha~5.0 HO Racing (ahem HIGH OUTPUT!) 1994 GT: under top secret construction http://www.geocities.com/mustangbelle_306 Email: mustangbelle_306@yahoo.com AOL name: GT306Chick

05-02-2001, 11:47 PM	#16
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	dinomite One of the things your math does not show is weight. The Fox body Mustang's had about a 300-400 lb advantage on the F body. The Mustang has always been lighter. As far as those times quoted being accurate, I would have to disagree with that wholehartedly. Most of the car mags do this on a test. Rev to redline, dump clutch, shift at redline. While that may be great for engine noise and burnouts, it's not too great for 1/4 mile performance. As far as the F body being faster stock for stock, from 1993-current, I'd agree. 1987-1992, I wouldn't. As far as quality, I think the Mustang runs circles around the F body. Oh, and btw 5.0killer, I wouldn't be the least bit scared to race a bone stock LT-1 with my near stock 87GT. So far I haven't lost to any LT1's. Whoop de doo. [This message has been edited by Unit 5302 (edited 05-03-2001).]

05-02-2001, 11:52 PM	#17
84_GT350 Registered Member Join Date: Apr 1999 Location: Overland Park, KS, USA Posts: 1,631	Ok...but let's be fair here 5.0Killer (if that IS your real name). First of all, Camaros have a size advantage to the tune of a little over a liter, (as dinomite has kindly pointed out) right? That's not an excuse...but an explanation. I think a lot of the trash talking just comes mostly from people with modified cars who have a heavy allegience to a specific brand. Perhaps a lot of it comes from back in the day when Camaros were getting stomped by Fox bodied Mustangs (ahhh...the 90's). Or maybe back into the early-to-mid 80s when VWs had better 0-60 times. And I much prefer the Mustang's styling a Z28. The SS's don't look too bad with that scoop, but (in my opinion...not tryin to flame ya or nothin) Z28s kinda look like a 3000GT at a glance. Just my $.02. ------------------ 1984 1/2 GT350 (#842 Hatchback w/ T-tops), 302HO, Comp cams Xtreme Energy cam, Carter 625cfm carb, Weiand Stealth intake, MSD distributor, MSD coil, FMS 9mm wires, 1 5/8" MAC unequal shorties, 2 1/2" MAC Prochamber H-pipe, Flowmaster 2 chambers, KYBs, 16"x8" 4 lug Cobra Rs, Falken 245/45ZR16s

05-03-2001, 07:20 AM	#19
stng87 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: southern california Posts: 329	Well I must admitt that I was a slight bit put off back in the day when i realized that the comaros make that extra 30-40 hp. I was like WTF?? I wondered why ford would put its mustang owners behind the 8 ball from the start. But what you have to realize is that the manufacturer doesn't give a youknow what about who has more HP or who wins a street race out of the factory. All they care about is the sales of the end product. And UNIT, correct me if I am wrong, but supposedly the mustangs still outsell the comaros and the firebords combined so there's no real reason for ford to make any changes in power output or whatnot. And this makes sense to me because I way way more mid-late age women driving late model mustangs which prior to this discovery, perplexed me greatly. Oh and 5.0Killer......Welcome to the board ------------------ 1987 black with t-tops. Cobra intake, 1.7 cobra crane rollers, gt40p's, bbk shorties, off road h-pipe, adj. FPR, rebuilt aod w/shift kit, 65mm TB, 4.10's 12.90's at best probably less, oops I mean worse. *** AOD's. IT'S MANUAL! Now for the T-5z! Semper Fi

05-03-2001, 05:30 PM	#20
dinomite The Dude Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 1,262	Unit is right about the weight, and that the F body has only beaten the mustang in the most recent years. But even with the weight thing, look at the gearing. I don't know exactly what it is, but I know they have a lot more in their rear than the mustang (mustang still comes with 3.08, the maro is higher 3). The quality thing is my biggest problem with GM. Recently, one of my friends went to a car show and GM was bragging about how they got 350 horses out of their 350cu/in crate (read: performance) engine, WHOOPDIE F*CKING DOO!. The Ford 351 crate makes 385hp, 35 more, and I don't think that its coming from that extra 1 cubic inch. The reason that the camaro is faster as of late, is an attempt by GM to win back buyers. The company has had numerous problems in the past 15 years, and the biggest reason that they are still around is that they sell a LARGE portion of their products to fleet buyers: governments, rental companies, and large corporations. There was a very good article a couple months ago in Car and Driver by one of the editors talking about GM quality, he made some very good points, mainly pointin out that people are embarresd to drive the low quality products. GM is having lots of trouble, and is smply trying to get their act together.