mustang vs. comaro (handling)
03-23-2006, 03:35 PM
#3
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 133
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
I can't tell you any technical stuff about the differences, but I have owned both body styles. If I had to choose I would say my 88gt handled better than my 89 trans am...same body as camaro...the camaro body style is low but feels big. I had fatties and skinnies on my 88 as well which really worsened my handling. So stock for stock, in my opinion your stang has an edge, but neither one was great. Once Ford went to the unibody the stang was definitely better. Hopefully some more knowledgable guys will chime in on the specs of each type for the body style you're looking for.
03-23-2006, 03:54 PM
#4
6th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: new jersey
Posts: 6,635
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
i have an 84 gt and it out handles my friends 95 which shocked the sh*t out of both of us. i dont know what it was with the 20th anniversary's but they handle amazingly. maybe ford left out some changes they did and said it was the same as everything else?
03-23-2006, 04:55 PM
#5
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 552
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
03-23-2006, 05:12 PM
#6
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 133
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
I think he's asking about the fox body, which only went to 93.
ORIGINAL: RawGtPower
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
03-23-2006, 05:17 PM
#8
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 5,263
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
94 and 95 wasnt mustang best year for handling or speed
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
ORIGINAL: RawGtPower
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
03-23-2006, 05:20 PM
#9
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 133
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
Are you crazy? The only reason 94-95 are a tick slower is because of the weight and my 94 cobra handles way better than my 88gt did. The fox body 5.0s were pretty slow stock too if I ermemerb correctly.
ORIGINAL: r.barn
94 and 95 wasnt mustang best year for handling or speed
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
94 and 95 wasnt mustang best year for handling or speed
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
ORIGINAL: RawGtPower
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
03-23-2006, 05:25 PM
#10
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location:
Posts: 5,263
RE: mustang vs. comaro (handling)
guess I'm just biased, just dont like the 94-95's for some reason.
like that older boxy body style
like that older boxy body style
ORIGINAL: blk95snake
Are you crazy? The only reason 94-95 are a tick slower is because of the weight and my 94 cobra handles way better than my 88gt did. The fox body 5.0s were pretty slow stock too if I ermemerb correctly.
Are you crazy? The only reason 94-95 are a tick slower is because of the weight and my 94 cobra handles way better than my 88gt did. The fox body 5.0s were pretty slow stock too if I ermemerb correctly.
ORIGINAL: r.barn
94 and 95 wasnt mustang best year for handling or speed
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
94 and 95 wasnt mustang best year for handling or speed
not a "true" 5.0 in my book.
ORIGINAL: RawGtPower
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
Camaro definatley. I had a 94 z28, and it handled awesome. It sat lower, wider body, better stock suspension, tighter steering. I have now, a 94 mustang gt and the handling pretty much sucks. I havent yet ugraded my suspension or lowered my car, but as soon as i do, im sure it will be awesome. I dont know what it is about fords, but they have a lot of play in they're steering. If i even touched the steering on my camaro, the car would respond instantly.
