We had a hard time deciding what to do with the Chevrolet Camaro and Ford Mustang. Should we include them in the mix and have an eight-vehicle comparison test? Let them duke it out against each other? Just blow it all off and go do doughnuts at the local mall's parking lot until the rear rubber burns off? These are the type of tough decisions that we face every day. Yes, we know. Our jobs are rough.
Ultimately, we decided to put the Mustang and Camaro in a room, close the door and, you know, see what happened. While their pricing and two-door formats fit the parameters of this test, it's too difficult to compare the Mustang and Camaro to the other cars when their designs and intended audiences are so radically different.
While we separated these cars from the rest of the pack, this doesn't mean that they are lepers. By all means, if you are considering a purchase of a sport coupe, you at least owe it to yourself to read up on these two cars. Who knows, you might decide that one of them just might be for you.
The initial plan for this test called for a basic Mustang GT but we were unable to get one due to scheduling conflicts. We ended up with the more expensive but more feature-laden Mustang Bullitt GT. This special-edition Mustang derives its name, obviously enough, from the notorious film
Bullitt, starring Steve McQueen and featuring a 1968 Mustang GT Fastback. The Bullitt costs about $3,700 more than a regular GT. In return, it comes with minor visual tweaks, a lowered and a more stiffly tuned suspension, a bit more power and larger brakes.
Is the Bullitt worth the extra price? From a get-up-and-go standpoint, the $3,700 doesn't seem to add much. The 4.6-liter SOHC V8 makes 265 hp at 5,000 rpm and 305 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm, an increase of just 5 hp and 3 lb-ft of torque over a regular GT. Of course, this is still plenty of oomph, and the Bullitt does produce more useable power in the midrange as well as a fantastic burbling V8 soundtrack thanks to specially tuned mufflers. But as has been the case with the Mustang over the past decade or two, it finds itself getting whooped when it stands up head-to-head against the Camaro.
The Chevy's 5.7-liter OHV V8 makes 310 hp at 5,200 rpm and a brutish 340 lb-ft of torque at 4,000 rpm. Of the engines in this test, this is one you want if you have a fetish for sickening acceleration. NHRA-like power is available from idle all the way up to redline. Even in sixth gear and the engine turning below 1,500 rpm, the Camaro has the libido necessary to accelerate up hills. If you're at a stop, just keep the wheels straight, bring up the revs a bit and then release the clutch as you hammer the throttle. The Camaro blasts forth like Marshall Faulk breaking through a weak defensive secondary.
With our timing equipment at the ready, we found that the Z28 accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in 5.5 seconds and passes the quarter-mile in 13.8 seconds at 105.4 mph. Yes, boys and girls, this is quite fast for a car that starts at just a bit more than $22,000. It is faster than any of the front-drive cars, and faster than the Mustang, too. The best we could get out of the Mustang Bullitt was a 5.9-second 0-to-60-mph time and a quarter-mile of 14.4 seconds at 99.5 mph. The Camaro also has the best binders; stops from 60 mph take just 116 feet, compared to the Bullitt's 125 feet.
So the Camaro has the muscle, but the Mustang typically has more grace. So what happens when the road gets twisty? To find out, we took these cars to Willow Springs Raceway along with the other sport coupes. The Vegas betting line (you can bet on anything in Vegas, right?) favored the Mustang. Because of its lowered suspension, Tokico shocks and subframe connectors, the Bullitt is arguably the best handling Mustang for 2001. And yes, we're including the SVT Cobra.
But after the tire smoke from the power slides cleared and the lap times were averaged, the Z28 sneaked out a slight edge over the Bullitt. Its average lap time was a 1:24.9 compared to the Mustang's 1:25.3. Round Two goes to the Bow Tie boys.
Now things get tricky. When asked which car they liked better on the track, our editors favored the Mustang. Why? It's certainly more fun to drive. It is more controlled, and it feels better connected to the pavement through its steering and suspension. The Camaro certainly has the ability to handle; it's just that it doesn't communicate well and therefore the driver has to just trust that the big 245/50R16 tires are doing their job properly.
Taken off the racetrack and placed on public roads, the Mustang continues to hold the advantage in ride quality and stability (though neither car is able to match the nimble feel provided by the Celica or the RSX). The Camaro, in particular, feels like a ham-fisted lout when asked to thread its way over tight canyon roads. The Mustang is more maneuverable, but both cars' solid-axle rear suspensions can be upset by mid-corner bumps.
In city environments, more of the Camaro's faults are revealed. Outward visibility is poor due to a long dash and hood and small side mirrors. Camaro drivers will also encounter front seats that lack headrests or any real head support. Our editors ranked them as the least comfortable of all the cars' in the test. We also were not impressed with the Camaro's controls or the quality of its interior materials. Both the window switches and the optional steering wheel-mounted audio controls have a toy-like feel that makes them hard to operate, and the gray cloth on our test car had a depressingly cheap look to it.
In terms of refinement, the Mustang is clearly better than the Camaro. It's interior, while still no match against cars like the RSX or GTI, isn't so obviously low-grade like the Camaro's. The Bullitt trim certainly helped the Mustang in this regard, as it adds nice retro touches like charcoal-colored leather seats, a '60s-era font for the gauges, and metal highlights for the shifter, pedals and doorsills. It is also the better-looking of the two cars thanks to its subtle but effective Bullitt exterior trim. What minor complaints there were revolved around the awkward clutch and shifter and a fussy power driver seat that kept blowing its fuse.
Looking at the final rankings reveals a landslide victory for the Mustang Bullitt GT. Despite being slower and more expensive (two adjectives that no sport coupe will ever want to be associated with), our editors unanimously picked the Mustang over the Camaro for what they would personally buy and what they would recommend to consumers. The Chevy
is fun to punt around in for a few days, and Lord knows it's fast. But it's too unwieldy, too boisterous and not something you want to make a long-term commitment to. Wondering why the Mustang outsells the Camaro (and its Firebird sibling) almost three to one? Now you know.
SECOND OPINIONS FOR CAMARO:Editor-in-Chief Karl Brauer says:Like the Prelude, the Camaro is going away soon. But unlike the Prelude, I won't be missing this vehicle. While the car has hung on like a trooper despite GM's lack of investment in it over the past nine years, the simple truth is that it needs to either die or be redesigned. Apparently, it's going to do both. I still like the powerful V8 and competent brakes, but there's not much more to praise on this vehicle. The seats are absolutely horrid, the shifter is clunky (and still has that annoying 1-4 skip shift "feature") and the steering lacks adequate feedback. Trying to hustle it through tight canyon turns betrays its high curb weight and mediocre suspension tuning, though it remained relatively composed at the track.
Driving this car back-to-back with the others made me realize how far performance coupes have come. Interior design and materials, functionality, comfort and even cupholder placement have all improved tremendously in the last 10 years, though you wouldn't know it from driving a Camaro. With this car it seems like GM is saying "The car makes great horsepower so you must forgive all other sins." If all you care about are lap times, GM may have a point. But if you care about
anything else, they're wrong.
Road Test Editor Ed Hellwig says:It's hard to knock a performance car that offers such an incredible powertrain for such a reasonable price. The LS-1 V8 is easily one of the best engines available in any production car right now, let alone one that costs just $25K. On the track, the Camaro proved to be every bit as fun as the Mustang, although the more cumbersome steering and slightly awkward proportions made for trickier maneuvering. The Hurst shifter was a welcome companion for quick shifts and the vise-like brakes made for extremely fast entrances into the corners.
On the street, the Camaro loses some of its luster as the poor visibility and shaky ride make for a less-than-thrilling commuter car. The cheap interior materials don't help much, and misaligned dash panels don't bode well for long-term reliability. There's barely enough room in back for a couple of toddlers, and the limited cargo space would be a burden for weekend getaways.
But like the Mustang, the Camaro isn't about practicality. It's a car you buy because you like the feeling of blasting down a freeway onramp at full thrust. For this, the Camaro rules. Unfortunately, those moments are all too brief, leaving the stellar drivetrain overshadowed by subpar ergonomics and poor build quality.
Associate Editor Liz Kim says:When I first got into this bad boy (my first experience with an F-body), I was filled with contempt and ire. "Why the heck doesn't the ignition key go in, why is the interior so damn ugly, what the hell is wrong with the shifter?! And why would anybody buy this thing?" I had heard the usual admonitions of it being really large and heavy. However, after driving on our loop, the big lug had grown on me. You simply can't argue with that much horsepower. It was rumbling along the freeway at speed in fourth gear — I never really had to go into fifth, let along sixth, but I did just for kicks. And the exhaust gurgle — OK, I'm not really a fan, but I can see how it would be a symphony to a fan's ears.
And oh, how it rips down the road on a deserted strip of pavement. The engine belts to redline in a joyous aria, and the car warps to triple-digit speeds, leaving your innards permanently etched into the seat. Now, excuse me while I go frost my hair, buy some spandex outfits and date Joey Buttafuoco.
SECOND OPINIONS FOR MUSTANG:Editor-in-Chief Karl Brauer says:Unlike GM, Ford continues to invest money in its pony car, with an associated payoff in the sales race. The Mustang has outsold the Camaro (and the Firebird, and the Camaro and Firebird, combined) for almost a decade. And this is in spite of the fact that it costs more than the GM F-bodies while offering less horsepower. So what gives? Superior comfort, better steering, a more rigid chassis, higher-quality interior materials and, last but not least, better build quality (though our test car had a problem with the power seat controls and blown fuses).
The Bullitt is the first in a line of "special edition" Mustangs planned for the next few years. It shows Ford's commitment to the model and gives owners the option of getting a Mustang that is a little bit different from the standard rental car version. This one has only slightly more peak power (though it has a noticeably broader powerband) along with slick wheels, improved suspension tuning and one of the coolest exhaust sounds this side of Maranello.
Sure, the Camaro is quicker in a straight line, but as our lap times show, the F-body gives up most of that power advantage when the road gets twisty. And when you aren't going for lap times or quarter-mile times, the Mustang is better in every way. If you spend more than 50 percent of your time on public roads instead of racetracks, it's pretty obvious which is the better car.
Road Test Editor Ed Hellwig says:After hours on end driving nothing but rev-happy four-cylinders and the occasional V6, getting behind the wheel of the Bullitt reminded me why they built big, burly pony cars in the first place. With rear-wheel drive, acres of torque and an exhaust note that matches any "premium" audio system I've ever heard, the Mustang was pure joy no matter how poorly the cheap plastic dash panels were aligned.
Out on the track, the Bullitt displayed a balance and poise that the Camaro just couldn't match. The miniscule horsepower gain over the standard GT barely registered, but the broader torque band certainly made itself known. On the down side, the shifter is still a little awkward with its long throws, and the brakes didn't inspire quite as much confidence as the Camaro's supreme binders.
Back in the real world, the Mustang again proved itself a cut above the antiquated Camaro. Visibility was superior, the front bucket seats offered a greater range of adjustment and better comfort, and the rear seats were somewhat usable if not comfortable.
Then again, some would say that these cars aren't meant to be around-town cruisers, that speed is all that matters and therefore the Camaro wins. But after a couple weeks with the two modern-day muscle machines, the Mustang proved that sometimes being good at everything is better than being great at just one thing.
Associate Editor Liz Kim says:From its hood scoop to its red calipers, this car looks like it's been ladled with grade-A testosterone. The engine makes a naughty noise, and it feels so much more nimble than its American muscle competition. They're no match in terms of horsepower, however.
I was annoyed by our problem with the seat (the fuse kept going out), and even when it was working, like all Ford products, I could never get comfortable because the seat doesn't go down far enough. And what's with the power control mounted at the front of the seat? If you're unlucky to be stuck in traffic like I was both nights I had it, you'll curse the heavy clutch engagement, and fit and finish of the interior is no match for the Japanese cars (save for the ill-behaved Mitsu).
But get the equine out on a open highway and let 'er rip; the Mustang will be here long after the demise of the brutish F-bodies.
Stereo Evaluation - 2001 Ford Mustang Bullitt GTStereo Evaluation - 2001 Chevrolet Camaro Z28
Add A Comment »