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.

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?

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 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…

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

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.

@@PrimePrius 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.

@@PrimePrius 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

yeah so hard it went out of production.

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.

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

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!

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

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 !!

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

I can't concur though I owned 97&98 stangs Saleen and cobra flavors, there wasn't a 90s to current then 03 maros or FBs that could keep up or touch me on take off. Just a some programming no bolt on stuff in either. And safe, well atleast they didn't have the GM steering column that locked up on people while driving, on many of their offerings for 15-20 years worth of models. My friend use to feel like you till he drove my 98 svt, he got turned on to the ferds after that. In the cobra I had to rebuild the rear end and replace driveline, in the saleen I busted the plastic intake where the coolant passes through because I loved reving on it, I didn't have any expensive repairs over my several years of ownership not even on the 98 GT stang with a automatic that some other guy had dogged out before I picked it up cheap, just plugs and wires and fluids for that one... I use to drive 40-50k a year on those cars back then, 90s ford aren't expensive to fix, that's just a straight lie or you just are talking about dealership prices LOL. My 95 ford E350 need rear brake cylinders last year, amzon $6.95 shipped per side. Your friends might have spent alot having someone else rip them off but for the DIY guy, this stuff is cheap to keep running, theres loads of parts everywhere, ford made so many more stangs than GM did theirs. But today both brands suck so I'm not really a ferd fan like that I just like some of their stuff from the 90s and early 2000s. I like NOTHING GM offers other than Isuzu products but that's not really a GM product just on paper lol.

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!

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.

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.

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.

My ‘97 has 130k miles and it’s fine

@@bdez1259 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

Honestly I still think it’s the ugliest mustang ever. Which is saying something considering the mustang II

@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

The terminator changed the game. I wish I had one as they are stupid expensive now.

Anything out handled a mustang

4th gen mustangs had the 3.8 "Essex" V6 5th gen(05-10) got the 4.0

uhh you know the mustang sold over 2-1.. thats counting both Pontiac and gm fbodies. This is facts its one google away. No matter how your feeling get into it

@@simbanugz2906 sales numbers don't necessarily reflect the best overall design..Looking back at these cars from today, in my opinion, the F-Body was by far the more advanced overall design. It was more expensive and this of course plays into sales numbers. Most times you get what you pay for but admittedly I lean bowtie except 65-69..Mustang all the way!!

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.

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.

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.

I was actually going to make this exact comment. Except I was going to insist he was high rather than ask. Lol.

He's referring to sales figures mostly, how the general public saw the car. Not by performance. Which he did mention they were some of the best cars of that era to be fair.

@@RandomCarGuy17 The mustang was only more "popular" in the sense that they were much cheaper cars. That made them more attainable for boy racers. 4th Gen F Bodies rivaled the Corvette in pure performance, and had a price tag that reflected that fact.

But the customers spoke with their funds so loud that GM had to suspend ALL Camaro and Firebird production and wait one generation until HOLDEN came to the rescue (the Zeta platform was Holden-designed for their Commodore and Monaro, GM-US hitchhiked from them on the Québec-built 5G Camaro and the Holden-built Pontiacs and Chevys).

@@Valorius and I'm not disputing that, so I don't know why you're telling me this. Are you bothered by the title or something? The Mustang outsold them each, because not everyone buys these cars for performance.

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 👍👍👍

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.

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.

Better buy it while you can. Those cars are already $30k

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.

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.

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.

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

Mustang still wins

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.

Ahhh the 03/04 cobras where stock too. Straight from the factory with a supercharger.

i like both

Because there were no Camaros those years.

@@austinfrazier7325 In the title is the 1994-2004 4th gen mustang.. he mentioned the ss & slp versions of the F- bodies, why not mention the pinnacle of mustang performance in that Era.....with the cars back story, and following it has, the 2003-04 cobra is a legend!

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

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.

no cus the stang motor has the weight advantage, not to mention its superior cam design, the mustang motor should have smoked the ls1 but it didnt, it was more than fair

It became a fair fight when Ford offered it to the public as a competitor. Ford couldve chosen any engine they wanted. They chose to compete and lose on their own. Sales say they won I guess...They're a business. That's their priority. As a consumer...it doesn't have to be yours and if you're buying one car t outrun the other, you bought the Camaro. A Mustang FAIRLY lost.