Motor Trend compares 2019 Mustang GT Convertible vs Camaro SS Convertible

[EcoVert]

Did I make a wrong turn and wind up on c6g?

F ing camaro trolls trying to take over again. I guess c6g is to boring

Sponsored

 

[edco]

Camaro5 (Zeta) handling compared to Camaro6 (Alpha) handling is the biggest generational change I have ever driven in any brand of cars. I had a Camaro5 as a company vehicle in one rotation. Liked it. I drove a co-worker’s Camaro6 company car for a couple weeks and decided I had to have one. Drive better than any Mustang or Corvette I had ever owned. Never owned a Camaro until this one.

I don't have a C6G to test so I can't research what you are saying. Here is a Head to Head GT 350R v ZLI video :
It is worth a watch. The Camaro does all this great stuff you brag about, and shows better performance numbers, but both reviewers wanted the Mustang. I do too and share their reason.

 

[martinjlm]

I don't have a C6G to test so I can't research what you are saying. Here is a Head to Head GT 350R v ZLI video :
It is worth a watch. The Camaro does all this great stuff you brag about, and shows better performance numbers, but both reviewers wanted the Mustang. I do too and share their reason.

Saw that already. It’s all good. Both are great cars and it come down to preference. If I was making a purchase decision between the two I’d probably go for the GT350 too. That wasn’t the question I was answering though. That was in regards to HANDLING. If I have to choose one for track only, it’s the ZL1.

If I’m choosing an all around toy it’s the GT350 and I wouldn’t care that someone somewhere in a ZL1 could put down better lap times. I doubt I could push either to their limits. I like the looks of the GT350 more. At the level of performance of those two cars I don’t mind choosing for looks.

At the GT / SS coupe performance level I could flip a coin and just go for the better deal. When a convertible is the issue, no contest. Camaro SS Convertible gets my vote. Top up it looks closer to the coupe profile than the Mustang vert, which looks like a notchback to me and loses all the sweet lines of the fastback. Plus the Camaro has the no-stop droptop and HUD, both of which I really value. Mustang has the better cargo arrangement, but as I’ve said, I can make it work. Next time I have a gig I’ll take a photo of my gear going in the car.

 

[edco]

martinjlm: "When a convertible is the issue, no contest. Camaro SS Convertible gets my vote. Top up it looks closer to the coupe profile than the Mustang vert, which looks like a notchback to me and loses all the sweet lines of the fastback. Plus the Camaro has the no-stop droptop and HUD, both of which I really value. Mustang has the better cargo arrangement, but as I’ve said, I can make it work. Next time I have a gig I’ll take a photo of my gear going in the car."

Martin.
I never paid attention to the convertibles. Looked at pics of both with the top up and i think what you write is correct. The Mustang design is for head room and the Camaro style. Camaro soft top is streamlined, Mustng is notch or '66 TBird Landeau style. Nobody uses a convertible for performance models and rag-tops are only 6 out 100 units. My Mustang bias aside, beyond the roof there is little about the Camaro that draws. See pic. If I wanted a rag top it would be the Ford.

 

[Intrepid175]

Having to be fully stopped to raise/lower the top is a pain in my Mustang, but it's more than made up for by being able to carry a large range bag, ammo box, and bag of carbines to the local shooting spot with the top down.

Agreed. I'd love it if we could operate the top with the car in motion even if it was limited to 20 mph or so. There is this option available. I'm very interested but I'm not in a position to spend the money right now. There's also a thread on this little item in the forum somewhere. I'm sure someone might point to it. It has the usual concerns about the product but I don't think those are significant as long as we don't get stupid with it.

http://www.mods4cars.com/sms/shop/i...JyPTI=&action=products&cat=6&mode=view&id=166

 

[Jmtoast]

If you want to snap necks and drop panties buy a mustang. If you wear panties buy a Camaro.

 

[Hack]

I’ve driven them and will probably get one some day. From my own calibrated butt dyno the GT350 handles quite a bit better than the base SS. Compared to an SS 1LE it’s a driver’s preference. Compared to a ZL1, I’d land on the ZL1 every time. The main difference (in my opinion) is that the seated position in the GT350 is higher than the seated position in the ZL1. Even when wedged into the Recaros of the GT350, it led to more body lean (me, not the car). The ZL1 kept me wedged in place and provided a bit more of a secure feel. Otherwise, they were both very solidly placed on the track.

I haven't driven a ZL1 so I don't know what they are like. I only have what the magazine reviewers have said to compare. I frankly think the GT350 suspension setup is nearly perfect in that chassis.

I get what you are saying about seating position, but that's separate from how the car handles. I initially felt the Mustang seating position was too high, but I noticed immediately that especially in the GT350 forward visibility is terrific. So - in my opinion the slightly higher seating position helps the car for track use because the driver can see better. After driving the 944 on track a little I found visibility to be key for hitting apexes and putting the front wheels exactly where I want them in a corner. It's a significant advantage for the Mustang.

I can't argue with your other statement about convertible sport cars being where things started, but in my opinion I think a hardtop is much better for any performance driving. I don't feel safe driving a convertible hard. Frankly I think it's unwise. When I was young and immortal I pushed my 1970 Mustang convertible in corners. Now I feel I was being foolish when I did that. I guess the more experienced I get at track driving and pushing closer to the limits of the car and myself the more I realize the importance of safety equipment. A roof being primary and most important.

martinjlm: "When a convertible is the issue, no contest. Camaro SS Convertible gets my vote. Top up it looks closer to the coupe profile than the Mustang vert, which looks like a notchback to me and loses all the sweet lines of the fastback. Plus the Camaro has the no-stop droptop and HUD, both of which I really value. Mustang has the better cargo arrangement, but as I’ve said, I can make it work. Next time I have a gig I’ll take a photo of my gear going in the car."

Martin.
I never paid attention to the convertibles. Looked at pics of both with the top up and i think what you write is correct. The Mustang design is for head room and the Camaro style. Camaro soft top is streamlined, Mustng is notch or '66 TBird Landeau style. Nobody uses a convertible for performance models and rag-tops are only 6 out 100 units. My Mustang bias aside, beyond the roof there is little about the Camaro that draws. See pic. If I wanted a rag top it would be the Ford.

Wow, that thing is FUGLY!!!

 

[EcoVert]

martinjlm: "When a convertible is the issue, no contest. Camaro SS Convertible gets my vote. Top up it looks closer to the coupe profile than the Mustang vert, which looks like a notchback to me and loses all the sweet lines of the fastback. Plus the Camaro has the no-stop droptop and HUD, both of which I really value. Mustang has the better cargo arrangement, but as I’ve said, I can make it work. Next time I have a gig I’ll take a photo of my gear going in the car."

Martin.
I never paid attention to the convertibles. Looked at pics of both with the top up and i think what you write is correct. The Mustang design is for head room and the Camaro style. Camaro soft top is streamlined, Mustng is notch or '66 TBird Landeau style. Nobody uses a convertible for performance models and rag-tops are only 6 out 100 units. My Mustang bias aside, beyond the roof there is little about the Camaro that draws. See pic. If I wanted a rag top it would be the Ford.

I'm sorry but that's one ugly Fing POS

 

[martinjlm]

martinjlm: "When a convertible is the issue, no contest. Camaro SS Convertible gets my vote. Top up it looks closer to the coupe profile than the Mustang vert, which looks like a notchback to me and loses all the sweet lines of the fastback. Plus the Camaro has the no-stop droptop and HUD, both of which I really value. Mustang has the better cargo arrangement, but as I’ve said, I can make it work. Next time I have a gig I’ll take a photo of my gear going in the car."

Martin.
I never paid attention to the convertibles. Looked at pics of both with the top up and i think what you write is correct. The Mustang design is for head room and the Camaro style. Camaro soft top is streamlined, Mustng is notch or '66 TBird Landeau style. Nobody uses a convertible for performance models and rag-tops are only 6 out 100 units. My Mustang bias aside, beyond the roof there is little about the Camaro that draws. See pic. If I wanted a rag top it would be the Ford.

And that is exactly why there are so many brands. Features that some buyers have to have (for me it’s HUD, for others it’s trunk space) others could care less about, and vice versa. Personally, I agree with you that the white car you are showing is pretty damn ugly. I wouldn’t buy it. But I think mine looks pretty damn good. And I don’t have to call Mustangs ugly just to make myself feel better about my Camaro. Not saying you are doing that, but some seem to feel that way. Whatever. Most Mustangs are really good looking. Especially fastbacks. Notchback and convertibles not so much. At least not to my taste. And I say the same thing about Corvettes. The profile of the Corvette convertible is “meh” to me for the same reasons I don’t dig the Mustang convertible.

 

[martinjlm]

I haven't driven a ZL1 so I don't know what they are like. I only have what the magazine reviewers have said to compare. I frankly think the GT350 suspension setup is nearly perfect in that chassis.

I get what you are saying about seating position, but that's separate from how the car handles. I initially felt the Mustang seating position was too high, but I noticed immediately that especially in the GT350 forward visibility is terrific. So - in my opinion the slightly higher seating position helps the car for track use because the driver can see better. After driving the 944 on track a little I found visibility to be key for hitting apexes and putting the front wheels exactly where I want them in a corner. It's a significant advantage for the Mustang.

I can't argue with your other statement about convertible sport cars being where things started, but in my opinion I think a hardtop is much better for any performance driving. I don't feel safe driving a convertible hard. Frankly I think it's unwise. When I was young and immortal I pushed my 1970 Mustang convertible in corners. Now I feel I was being foolish when I did that. I guess the more experienced I get at track driving and pushing closer to the limits of the car and myself the more I realize the importance of safety equipment. A roof being primary and most important.

Wow, that thing is FUGLY!!!

In my original comparison, what I was trying to get across is that the handling of the two is probably on par, but that the higher seating position of the GT350 allows my body to lean more in the curves and transitions than the ZL1. So while the handling of the two was probably too close to call, the seating position in the ZL1 provided me a more secure feeling and that would allow me to drive the car faster, more comfortably. Certainly I can see more from the seat of the GT350. But I can see everything I need to see from either one. So again, it comes down to individual preference and level of confidence with the configuration. For me, the better fit in the lower seat position was more important than being able to see more sky. FWIW, I drove them back-to-back at the GM Proving Grounds when I led GM’s Powertrain Competitor Intelligence team.

 

[EcoVert]

That one looks a hellva lot better than the white one but I still wouldn't own one.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Looks are subjective. I think the 5th and 6th gens look fantastic. I just think the Mustang checks more boxes for more people. Hence the huge sales advantage.

 

[Arthonon]

Exactly, looks are completely subjective, as is most stuff, really. You can say a car has less visibility or a smaller trunk opening, but whether that matters to someone is completely subjective.

I'm not a fan of the 6G Camaro looks (although there's a few I thought looked good), and I don't like the interior or visibility, but that's just, like, my opinion, man.

And I don't like most convertibles for the reason martinjlm listed - they just don't look right with the top up. I think the Camaro looks the closest to the hard-top version, but I still don't care for it. But again, that's just my opinion.

 

[Strokerswild]

If that look was available brand new I wouldn't have bought my mustang.

Ugh. In essence, that's what both the C5 and C6 Camaros emulate.

They should have done a modern interpretation of the '70-'73 instead of upchucking the '69 time and time again....

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Ugh. In essence, that's what both the C5 and C6 Camaros emulate.

They should have done a modern interpretation of the '70-'73 instead of upchucking the '69 time and time again....

Yes or a 79-81 Z28.

Sponsored