</p>


Yeah you are mistaken on the gas mileage. My car even with mods gets 24 miles to gallon on the freeway. The Z28 get's slighty better because it's a 6 speed.</p>

EDIT: LANGUAGE

~Amanda<edited><editID>Admin</editID><editDate>38028.3877546296</editDate></edited>

 

</P>


Amen, enough said...You tha man. No need to try and prove your point to 3owndbyyou, he's just an idiot who wants to argue with everyone and has nothing to stand on, i would kick his *** any day of the week and still get 24 mile to the gallon doing it. All they can do on here is brag on Johnny. <IMG src=smileys/smiley1.gif border="0"></P><edited><editID>00banditv8</editID><editDate>38004.5420717593</editDate></edited>

 

</p>


Um...alright...you call me names, and then prove my point for me even better. lmao</p>


Well Let me bow to you because you're right and I'm wrong, yet all I did was post facts. (note the sarcasm there please)</p>


Anyway, I wasn't talking about freeway mpg...I was talking about city. But if you wanna talk about highway miles, then fine. I made 28.xx the other day doing 80-90 all the way from Detroit. <img border="0" src=smileys/smiley2.gif border="0"> Now if these numbers are right, then the Automatic 2002 Z28 even makes 1 mpg better than a 5 speed GT.</p>


<font size="2">Automatic: : 18 mpg / 25 mpg</font> </p>


You just proved my point that a Z28 makes better gas mileage, yet I was still posting ludicris BS? WTF? Will you ever make sense? <img border="0" src=smileys/smiley5.gif border="0"></p>


Now who looks stupid? Who wants to argue? You do, why? Try this, grow up. Kthnx</p>

EDIT: LANGUAGE CONTENT

~Amanda<edited><editID>Admin</editID><editDate>38028.3889351852</editDate></edited>

 

</p>


My point to you was the mustang is a much better car. The Z should put down better gas mileage being it has one more gear to work with. Idiot. Now let's talk facts. A 93-95 LT1 and 99+GT are nearly identical in performance. But the stang has a overall better ride and handling capabilites which makes it more suitable for everyday driving. </p>


98+LS1 are faster than the 99+GT's but are very poorly constructed and not good for everday driving. 99+LS1's hit the 1/4 in 13.8 seconds. 99+ GT's hit the 1/4 14.0 seconds, that can easily be made up with something as little as different exhaust system which would set you back about $500. So which do you think is the better car? Mustang Hands down. </p><edited><editID>Admin</editID><editDate>38028.3896527778</editDate></edited>

 

Thats funny. haha </P>


You compare the 93-95 LT1 (which is really 93-97, just 96 and 97 have a hotter cam and 10 more hp) to a 99+ GT and say it's"nearly identical in performance" </P>


... <IMG src=smileys/smiley5.gif border="0">...</P>


I'm confused as to how are you saying the Mustang is a better car if a carthat isn't even built anymoreis STILL just as good as a newer Mustang??? </P>


98+ LS1s make the 1/4 in anywhere from 13.2 to 13.8 It just depends on the car, Trans Ams are slightly slower than that of Z28s becauseThe T/Ais the "luxury version." Put exhaust on your Mustang and you will see 13.8, put exhaust on your LS1 Z28 and you'll start seeing 13.5. </P>


The point is the Camaro is a better car to modify &amp; start off from because it's cheaper, faster, and a HELL of a lot easier to modify from the factory, especially when doing it yourself. Admit it damnit, I'm not pulling this out of my ***. Look at the facts.</P>


98+ LS1s aren't very poorly constructed over that of 99+ Mustangs. I have seen first hand of what happens to the interior of an 01 GT over only 7 months of ownership. I've seen the 6 cd indash player fall right out of the console, door handles broken off, etc etc. Try to convince me otherwise and you are wasting your time. When I get My Z or SS I won't waste my time crying over poorly constructed interior, I'm going to spend most of my time under the hood making sure no GT will ever beat me, and I'm fairly sure no GT ever will when I'm done with the car. Period.</P>

 

You know what...You would argue with a brick wall. No need for me to continue this. Mustangs are much better cars end of story. If Camaro's were so great why did they stop making them. Oh let me see. More people like the Mustang so they bought the Mustang. Point taken. R.I.P Camaros were good but not good enough.

 

</P>


I already explained to you why Camaros were discontinued. If you'd open your eyes and paid attention, you would have seen that. It's funny because Mustangs almost died off in the Foxbody generation, but Ford pulled together a team and built the SN95 which ended up saving the Mustang and the company. </P>


If you lived in the real world you would see that Chevy didn't base it's sports car theme around the Camaro, never had. So killing it off to give more spotlight to the new Corvette they were planning in late 01 and early 02 on up to its introduction wasn't a problem to do. Chevrolet is about the Corvette. The Camaro was NEVER advertised. The people who bought one got the point. But other than that, you can't attract new customers if you're not out there marketing to them. </P>


Which is what Ford did. It has based it's entire sports-car line up around the Mustang, with the GT being the only centerpiece between production years of the "ground breaking" SVT models. 1993 Saw the first Cobra R when SVT was introduced. 95 saw another ground breaking Cobrawith the 2nd iteration of the R...nothing spectacular happened with the Cobra until 2000 with the 5.4 Triton made it's appearance in the very first Mustang EVER to have a 6 speed Tremec and an IRS. Chevy has had 6 speeds in the Camaro since 93. whoopty do there. Nothing happened again until 03 when Ford supercharged it's 281 small block and made history again.</P>


What was the spotlight between those years of the Mustang SVT? The Mustang GT. There was nothing to take the spotlight away from the Cobra in those years (save for maybe the Lightning, but that was for a different group of enthusiasts) except another MUSTANG! </P>


Don't you see it? The Mustang is Ford's Centerpiece. You'll never see a 300 hp Focus, or 300 hp Cosworth Escort like you will in England. THAT is why the Mustang survives and the Camaro didn't. </P>


NOW GET OVER THAT LAME *** ARGUEMENT BECAUSE IT IS NOT VALID.</P><edited><editID>own3dbyyou</editID><editDate>38004.7128240741</editDate></edited>

 

Why can't we just like Camaro's AND Mustangs?</P>


I do, but I suck . They're both American and Both V8 What's not to like? I'd say out of the two its just a matter of what you want your car to look like. IMO lets get along! We're both boosting the American Economy!</P>

 

I'm with you. I like them both. but to me the Camaro seems like the better deal. However, if I found the right Mustang before the right Camaro, I'd buy it. <IMG src=smileys/smiley2.gif border="0">

 

</P>


</P>


You say that because you never owned a Z28. I've actually owned both cars, and as anti Ford as I was at the time, that '99 Z28 was a pile of s**t. There were parts falling off that car from the day I drove it off the lot. It was completely uncomfortable, you had to climb in and out of the thing, and then lay down under the dash to drive it. The clutch couldn't hold the 305 hp from the factory, itleaked oil, the rear end startedto make noise at 10,000 miles, The T-Top leaked, andit rattled worse than ANY Mustang I've ever seen, and I know that Mustangs are rattle traps. I'll give you that it was fast as hell, and fun to drive, but the fit and finish of the Mustang is 100X better, and it's a hell of a lot more comfortable to drive.</P>


</P>