3rd gen Mustang VS 3rd Gen Camaro - Page 2

1992RS · #16 12-31-2003, 05:22 PM

Hey I've got no beef against buick, well the older ones anyway. Great cars. Well the GN kicked much ass. But this is becomeing to much of a pissing contest here. We're a bunch of camaroholics in here and we're not gonna give in so there's no point.

Z28boy1991 · #17 12-31-2003, 05:24 PM

o yeah never said i was a mechanic... big difference when you help out at a garage then being a mechanic.. i dont think theres any 16 yr old mechanics and if theyre its very rare.. I just see tons of mustangs rolling through my dads garage... and i own a camaro and never ever gave me a prob.. but my friends always have issues with there mustangs.. i wonder why... begging my dad too help them.. and i aint sayin camaro is perfect either..

Hypsi87 · #18 12-31-2003, 05:58 PM

Sorry 'bout the GN post. It was a joke to show that is was turning into a pissing contest. Kinda like the "my dad can beat up your dad" kind of thing. Guess thats hard to show on the internet

1992RS · #19 12-31-2003, 05:58 PM

I started turning wrenches when I was 14 and rebuilt my first engine when I was 16.

Hypsi87 · #20 12-31-2003, 06:00 PM

I was 12 when I did my firs engine rebuid........ 5HP briggs and stratton

Z28boy1991 · #21 12-31-2003, 06:16 PM

heheh nah i mean as a professional... not rebuilding engines.. but yeah thats cool

1992RS · #22 01-01-2004, 01:34 AM

Hey that don't count. I did a weed eater engine when I was 11 or 12

89IROC&RS · #23 01-01-2004, 01:57 PM

lmao, yeah well i did a model engine when i was 8 :-P but ok, here i go on my litle piece of the action. the 305, from the factory, as a TBI will not take a 302 mustang. sorry, its true. not as much power, too much weight, and not as rev happy, its a torque motor, not hp. the TPI 305 had a better chance. but its still limmited,and with those long runners, is even more of a low rev torqe engine. while yet again, the 302 was a hgh winding hp motor. now the 5.7L TPI engine, would beat the 5.0 musting. now i hope i dont have to tell anyone on here that i am a little less than a mustang fan, i lvoe my camaros, thats why i own two of them (at leasat for a little while longer

) but the 5.0 mustang was no joke back in the day. the 302 is a solid motor, why im building the chevy 302 for my baby. (and yes, there was a chvey 302 long before ford had one circa 1969 for anyone who asks why im putting a ford engine in my camaro, thats so annoying) but yeah, the fact that all you do at your dads shop is little stuff on camaros and lots on stangs, is cuz chances are the camaro guys fix their own problems, not that nothing is going wrong with them. i mean, i work on probly ten vettes a week at work and have yet to see a third gen camaro. does that mean that the third gen is a better car than the vette??? hardley, it means that the vette owners dont want to get their hands dirty, so they pay me to fix it. while the camaro guys fix their own crap. it all has to do with the owner, not teh car. trust me, there is plenty to go wrong with the third gen camaro, my IROC is prime example. she needs alot of TLC (just bought her from a guy in arkansas, no state inspection or emmisions, ever, let your imagination roam as to the possible problems.) but yeah, id say that as far as V8 third gens, camaros and firebirds, the IROC and equivilent firebird were top of the hill. ive even heard of a TPI 350 firebird right off the showrrom floor in 1989 beating a saleen mustang. of the same year. so they were hot. but as soon as you get into the 305's, sorry to say it 92RS, it gets iffy. and the TBI 305, in stock form, is a truck motor, not a performanec engine. so the 5.0 stang would eat it alive. god i feel dirty just saying that.

Z28boy1991 · #24 01-01-2004, 03:45 PM

Hey iROC your right.. the 305 cant beat 302 but i like 305 better...

Z28boy1991 · #25 01-01-2004, 03:51 PM

yeah i see more mustangs then camaros thats all... But they do give lots of headaches as well... not saying 302 is a terrible engine i was just never into ford stuff

DVS LT1 · #26 01-01-2004, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hypsi87

My G-body buick eats them both for dinner. (stock for stock as well as modded)

In a straight line perhaps - throw in a few curves and I'll be wiping the floor with you. Top speed - that aerodynamic Brick, er, Buick would have a hell of a time keeping up on a top speed run.

Eh, I couldn't let you get off that easy man! This is just me getting in on the "sword" pissing wars.

But think about this one - how would a 350 V8 perform equiped with a Buick turbo-intercooler? Eh??

Ok I'm done pulling your chain bros. Regarding the 3rd gen Fox & F-Body Camaro's, I grew up driving in both cars - I love 5.0L Mustang GT's and LX's (have never given me any competition though) and I simply worship '87-90 IROC-Z's - and I can remember both cars being fairly even. Some days the General got the Horse and other days the Stang ran away. Not that magazines are always to be taken as fact, but pick up any Motortrend or Road & Track from back then and you'll recall the old saying that the 302 cars were lighter and faster than the 305's but not quite as fast as the 350's.

There have always been exceptions of course - factory freaks, lemons, and just driver ability. Again, we're talking about fairly even cars - any olde stories of blowing away one or the other most likely had something to do with the above mentioned circumstances - no two ways about it.

Hypsi87 · #27 01-01-2004, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DVS LT1

In a straight line perhaps - throw in a few curves and I'll be wiping the floor with you. Top speed - that aerodynamic Brick, er, Buick would have a hell of a time keeping up on a top speed run.

Eh, I couldn't let you get off that easy man! This is just me getting in on the "sword" pissing wars.

But think about this one - how would a 350 V8 perform equiped with a Buick turbo-intercooler? Eh??

Ok I'm done pulling your chain bros. Regarding the 3rd gen Fox & F-Body Camaro's, I grew up driving in both cars - I love 5.0L Mustang GT's and LX's (have never given me any competition though) and I simply worship '87-90 IROC-Z's - and I can remember both cars being fairly even. Some days the General got the Horse and other days the Stang ran away. Not that magazines are always to be taken as fact, but pick up any Motortrend or Road & Track from back then and you'll recall the old saying that the 302 cars were lighter and faster than the 305's but not quite as fast as the 350's.

There have always been exceptions of course - factory freaks, lemons, and just driver ability. Again, we're talking about fairly even cars - any olde stories of blowing away one or the other most likely had something to do with the above mentioned circumstances - no two ways about it.

the 350 tpi could not handle the GN turbo and intercooler setup. That is if your just talking about putting one directly on. That motor in stock form would not handle 14 PSI. They used G-body cars in nascar so it's not that much of a brick, I undersand the camaro/trans am has better aerodynamics, The 3rd gen trans am is one of the more areodynamic bodys that GM made. Stock for stock a GN can outrun a 3rd gen on the topend. They did put my engine in a Trans am for the 20th anniversary. It was the pace car for the indy 500. It is the only car to have paced the indy 500 with the only mod being stobe lights and a couple decals. As far as the handling goes..... you got me, But hey it's a street machine not a corner hugger. Besides most of the racing that goes on around here is in a stright line.

Throw in a few curves ill just get you in the straight away

P.S. last comment was a little friendly fun. Nice car (assuming that your aviatar is your car.) I really like the silver camaros

1992RS · #28 01-01-2004, 07:42 PM

Ok Iroc, a little trivia. Why was the CHEVY 302 manufactured??? 10 points if you get the right answer.

boosted331 · #29 01-01-2004, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1992RS

Ok Iroc, a little trivia. Why was the CHEVY 302 manufactured??? 10 points if you get the right answer.

302 was created for trans am racing in the late 60's, to meet the 305 cid limit. 283 crank + 327 block, same bore and stroke as a ford 302

syr74 · #30 01-01-2004, 08:53 PM

Well, I am a Ford guy 1992 RS, but I am going to guess it was to meet Trans Am's displacement guidlelines.

BTW, back in the day my brother had two different 305 3rd gen Trans Am's ( I honestly couldn't tell you if they were TBI or TPI...I never asked or wrenched on them.) I had a 91 5.0 LX notchback automatic for a while and in every imrpomptu drag race I absolutely decimated him every time. (No offense intended at all to the Camaro guys)

I drove both of his cars on several occasions, and while they were much better suited to twisty roads than the Mustang, the power difference was more than noticeable.One was obviously "tweaked" when he bought it, and felt much stronger for it. But, he still wasn't faster than me.

A couple years after I got rid of my LX he ended up with a late eighties GTA. 5.7L and a very, very good looking car I might add. Much better looking than any 4th gen F-body IMO. That car would, IMO, have taken my Mustang as it felt much stouter than the 305 cars. However, get unfair and throw in the five speed for LX and I think the race just got a lot closer. IMO, just about even.

He had a chance to buy a "rebuildable" but wrecked 20th anniversary T/A once, and I begged him to do it. But, he was "scared" of the turbo six. Weiner.
Now THAT car would have kicked my......well, you know.

POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD