Camaro Z28 vs. Mustang GT

    Had the Z28's performance advantage come at a huge cost in such areas as ride comfort, ergonomics, and noise control, we might feel more reserved about its dominance. But in truth, the Camaro is a refined piece as well. Ride quality is marginally stiffer than the Mustang's but still entirely acceptable. And the extra racket is almost all V-8 rumble - hardly objectionable in this kind of car.
    The Camaro has a much racier feel, and impression that begins when you plop into the driver's seat. It's a wide, low car, and the driver looks out through a radically raked windshield and over a rapidly dropping nose. By contrast, you sit bolt-upright in the narrower Mustang, the higher hood running out to a blunt front end.
    In both cars, the driver is surrounded by interiors and instrument panels that are efficiently laid out, but the Mustang's clean design is easier to look at. The Camaro's gauge cluster is garish by comparison, but at least its instrument faces are now marked in white rather than the jarring yellow of last year.
    Seat comfort is better in the Mustang, even with some pressure points at the lower back and under the thighs. The Camaro's seats are flatter and feel less well made, offering little retention in hard cornering, and they move around annoyingly due to frame flex and mounting slack. Neither back seat offers more than minimal room, but most passengers preferred the higher cushion location of the Mustang.
    Light off the V-8 engines and they give vastly different impressions. The Mustang's 302 almost suggests the quiet "adequacy" of a Bentley Turbo R, while the Camaro's rowdy 350 sounds straight out of an old Can-Am car. Both are flexible, strong, and smooth-running, with lively throttle response and good fuel efficiency (both are projected to get 17 mpg on the EPA city cycle). When you want to get out of town, or just out of a corner, neither V-8 cares much whether it's turning 2500 rpm or 4500.
    Ford's venerable "5.0-liter" engine (which, as we've noted before,

actually rounds to 4.9) is unchanged for 1994 except for some repackaging of the inlet manifold to fit under the new hoodline. Chevy's Corvette-derived LT1 goes to sequential fuel injection for 1994 and employs a mass airflow sensor in place of the previous speed-density system.
    Under the whip, the Chevy 350 has bite to match its bark. Between its 325 pound-feet of torque at just 2400 rpm and 275 horsepower at 5000, it delivers loads of sheer grunt anytime, anywhere. The Mustang's numbers are tamer (285 pound-feet of torque at 3400 rpm, and 215 horses at 4200), and so is its personality. But reinforcements are waiting in the wings. A 235-hp version of this engine appeared last year in the Mustang Cobra (and ran third against a '93 Camaro Z28 and a Firebird Formula in our February 1993 issue). In spring of 1994, a 240- or 245-hp Mustang model will be available.

Mustang Versus Camaro
in Car and Driver

July 1968: The mother of all Mustang-versus-Camaro shoot-outs. After C/D throws down the gauntlet, Ford brings a "Tunnel Port" Mustang with unheard-of 60-series tires and Chevrolet marches in a faster Z/28. Speed wins. Advantage: Camaro.

August 1982: After the fuel-frenzied Seventies subside, C/D revs up the muscle-car face-off once again. Mustang GT, Camaro Z28, and Firebird Trans Am slug it out with Germany's finest, the Porsche 928. This contest of "Red Speed" puts the Deutsche treat a mile away in acceleration, top speed, and price. Among the domestics, the Camaro edges the Mustang by a point. Advantage Camaro.

June 1983: A high-output 190-hp Z28 and a Mustang GT boosted to 175 ponies square off again for the GT championship. Testers find fault the Mustang's drop-throttle oversteer and steering feel: "It feels like a Mafia triggerman," notes Michael Jordan. The Camaro's extra speed and better braking give it the nod. Advantage: Camaro

May 1984: C/D staffers search for the best-handling sports car amont Chevy Corvette, Dodge Daytona Turbo Z, Mustang SVO, Camaro Z28, and Pontiac Fiero 2M4. The Camaro runs away with honors. Advantage: Camaro.

May 1985: A V-6 Camaro Berlinetta and a Mustang SVO compete for best sports-coupe honors. The Camaro ranks eighth out of eight, while the Mustang ties for fifth. The winner is the Audi Coupe GT, a blip on the radar of sports-coupe history. Advantage: Mustang

July 1896: A two-door blood-red Mustang LX V-8 takes on a limited-run Corvette-engined Camaro in "Dearborn versus Goliath." Winding by beautiful Santa Barbara, sunny San Luis Obispo, and Jimmy Dean's splat spot near Cholame, we vote the Mustang tops despite soggy brakes and a top end 10 mph slower than the Chevy. Advantage: Mustang

June 1987: Looking for revenge, Chevy supplies us with a standard-issue 5.0-liter Camaro. "These cars have fought off corporate purges the way social diseases resist penicillin," says Chevy engineer Jim Hall. A ten-pony advantage over the Camaro--and a curb weight one hundred pounds lighter--lets the Mustang zip circles around the IROC-Z. A half-second quicker in the autocross, the Mustang wins by a nose. Advantage: Mustang.

February 1993: The brand-new Camaro and Firebird take on the twelve-year-old Mustang, updated in 235-horsepower Cobra form. Though it's relaxed and refined at cruising speeds, the Mustang gives up pure speed to the GM pony cars. The Camaro edges out its stablemate by a hair, based on lower price and sleeker styling. Advantage: Camaro.

---Martin Padgett Jr.

On the Track

    We took the Z28 and the Mustang GT to Waterford Hills, a 1.5-mile road-course near Pontiac, Michigan. Despite many tight turns and one steep hill, the track has a straightaway long enough that both cars attained speeds between 100 and 105 mph at its conclusion. The circuit is also a cruel test of brakes.
    In fact, what we noticed first was that the Camaro's brakes required less pedal pressure than the Mustang's and were easier to modulate. Having said that, the Z28's anti-lock system suddenly quit anti-locking at the end of the straightaway, giving Kevin Smith a moment in which to mentally review his last will and testament.
    At ten-tenths, the Mustang's steering was more linear and suffered less kickback than the Camaro's. The Z28's is more heavily assisted--usually a plus at a tight track like this--but it tended to evoke too much initial turn-in. So you spent the rest of the turn making minute corrections to the Z28's wobbly line.
    The Mustang's seat was also a winner, offering good thigh support on max-lat turns. In the Camaro, on the other hand, you have to scrunch up your left leg and wedge it as stiffly as possible against the door panel, then brace your upper body by desperately clutching the steering wheel. Or onto that huge medicine ball on the tip of the shifter.
    Pushed to its limit, the Camaro didn't understeer as much as the Mustang, in part because, with all the Z28's torque, a punch of the throttle helped rotate its tail. That same torque carried the Camaro up Waterford's steep hill with less effort than the puffing Mustang expended. That section of the course alone may have given the Camaro a half-second advantage.
    The Camaro's suspension was always quicker to settle after bumps and ham-fisted maneuvers. And the Z28's grip was marginally higher when the chassis was unweighted, which is about always at hilly Waterford. It feels like the Z28 has a center of gravity far lower than the Mustang's.
    Still, both cars were benign, predictable, and easy to drive to their limits--particularly the Mustang, perhaps because it's slightly slower, goes into understeer earlier, and felt as if its platform flexes much less.
    The winner? The Camaro, with an average lap of 1:26.1, compared with the Mustang's 1:27.2. But given the Z28's 60-hp advantage, we were surprised it prevailed by a measly 1.1 seconds. Which says a lot for Ford's savvy chassis tuners, among them a wee Scot named J. Young Stewart. He may sit on a pillow, but he seems to know what he's doing.

---John Phillips