Today, we’re throwing any sense of decorum right out the window. Noise? Vibration? Harshness? Yep, we’ve got all three, in the form of two cosmetically-challenged V8 pony cars with five-speed manuals. They both run and drive fine, but boy, are they ugly. Get ready to do some burnouts.
Yesterday I showed you two nice little trucks, and as I expected, both had plenty of fans. Most of you favored the Ford, primarily because it was fuel-injected, it sounds like. That’s a valid reason, but I don’t think there’s any real reason to fear the Nissan just because it’s carbureted. Carbs worked just fine for decades before EFI came along.
It was a tough call for me too, but my thinking goes like this: if I can’t have a full eight-foot bed anyway, I’d rather have some extra room in the cab. Single-cab compact trucks are awfully cramped inside. I’ll take the Nissan, and sell off the topper to recoup some cost.
There are some things I think we’re meant to outgrow. That may sound funny coming from a guy with a garage full of toy cars, but look, this isn’t about me, all right? I’m thinking of things like Cap’n Crunch, or silly fashion trends. At some point, you just stop wanting them, and that’s a good thing. It shows maturity.
But what about the thing you always wanted, but never got? Somehow, out of the thirty-five or so cars I’ve owned in my life, not one of them has had a V8 paired with a manual transmission. Nor have I had, despite being a fan of both of them, either a Camaro or a Mustang, of any description. I’m old enough now to realize I’m probably not missing a whole lot; such cars are usually coarse, cheaply-made, and not very appealing to drive every day, at least not in your fifties with a bad hip on one side and a bad knee on the other. Still, I look at cars like these, and I can’t help thinking I should own one someday, just to see.
1988 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 5.0-liter overhead valve V8, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Bartlett, IL
Odometer reading: 70,000 miles
Operational status: “Can definitely be used as a daily”
Seeing this car with an old-style Illinois license plate on it makes me think of high school. Our Big Man On Campus, a meathead straight out of a John Hughes comedy, whose name I can’t even recall, drove an electric blue IROC that we were all envious of – though I secretly made fun of him because it was an automatic. I can’t imagine he has weathered the years well; guys like that usually don’t, and if the car is still around, it probably looks a lot like this one.
Unlike the meathead’s, this IROC is optioned properly, with a tuned-port fuel-injected 305 V8, a five-speed manual transmission, and a 3.45:1 Positraction rear axle. It would probably get beaten by a Prius in a drag race today, but in 1988, it was the hot setup. It’s only on its second owner, and has just 70,000 miles to its name. The seller has done a bunch of work to it to bring it back up to snuff mechanically, and it now runs and drives just fine. It is a little loud; it has a crack in the exhaust somewhere that needs fixing, but a little extra V8 noise isn’t the worst thing in the world.
It’s all original inside, and in very nice shape, actually. I clicked on this ad expecting to see the typical trashed interior that so many used third-gen Camaros suffer from, and instead, I saw this. The upholstery looks good, the carpet is a little dirty but not bad, and check out that period-correct car phone. The seller says the radio no longer works, but I’m not surprised. Those old Delco stereos had a finite life. An aftermarket system will have you blasting Def Leppard out of it again in no time.
There has to be a catch, right? Yep. There is, and it’s one that residents and former residents of the Great Lakes region know all too well: rust. It still looks structurally sound underneath, but the front fenders and door bottoms are pretty rough, though mostly just on the passenger’s side. The driver’s side still looks all right. This one is never going to be a collector’s item. But it’s also not about to snap in two tomorrow, so you could just ignore the rust and enjoy it.
1997 Ford Mustang GT – $2,800
Engine/drivetrain: 4.6-liter overhead cam V8, five-speed manual, RWD
Location: Lewisville, TX
Odometer reading: 118,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
The meathead’s rival, of course, drove a Mustang, a maroon 1987 GT model that I liked better than the blue IROC because it was a manual, which my “Chevy guy” friends thought was scandalous. The Camaro-Mustang rivalry was still in full swing in those days, and there weren’t many people as agnostic on the matter as I was. I’ve always liked them both, and which one was “better” in my opinion went back and forth over the years as the two cars evolved. Back in ’88, I would have preferred the IROC – but only with a manual. But in 1997, there was no question: the Mustang was king.
For its first couple of years, the SN95 Mustang carried over the old “five-point-oh” V8 from the Fox-body era. But in 1996, Ford replaced it with the 4.6 liter overhead cam “Modular” V8. It made 215 horsepower – less than the contemporary Camaro Z28 – but it came with a regular old Borg-Warner five-speed manual instead of the dumb “skip-shift” six-speed in the Camaro. This one may or may not be stock; at the very least, it has an aftermarket aluminum coolant expansion tank and a K&N air filter. The seller says it has no mechanical issues, but doesn’t go into any details.
This is what makes me suspect the engine in this car might not be stock: it has Corbeau racing seats. This is the only photo of the interior, so I can’t see what else might not be stock. The seller does say that the air conditioning works, which is something.
It looks a bit rough outside; the front bumper and fenders are in primer, and the rest of the paint isn’t in great shape either. The hood has been replaced, I think; it looks like it used to be white and was painted flat black. There’s a good chance this car was in a minor wreck up front – which, now that I think about it, might account for the aftermarket coolant tank. It might have been cheaper than a genuine Ford plastic one. A good, careful inspection is in order, I think, to look for other signs of damage.
It seems to me that if you want a car like this just to play with and see what it’s like, this is the way to go: look for a scruffy one that runs well, and you’ll spend a lot less on it than a nice shiny one. You can’t see the outside from the driver’s seat anyway. So here are your choices: a highly original but somewhat rusty Camaro, or a potentially modified and possibly wrecked Mustang. What’ll it be?
IROC I guess. Mainly because I have no use for what appears to be an attempt at a race setup in the Mustang, and it isn’t nice enough everywhere else to bother trying to find some regular seats for it.
But the IROC lacks T-Tops, is almost twice as much $$, hopefully that rust hasn’t made it too far.
I’m on team mustang with this one. Even with potential front end damage. At that price, who cares?
Never liked that gen of Camaro. Double the price and rusty certainly isn’t helping. Even if the rust is not structural, turning fasteners is a nightmare with rusty parts.
Mustang.
I’ve never owned one of these. I’ve driven a few. They were terrible.
But I owned 3 3rd gen F-bodies and they were f’n terrible. Even as someone who grew up thinking these cars were sex on wheels, I cannot bring myself to buy one. They are the sloppiest handling machines that have ever been produced.
Dammit, at some point I’m going to end up with a notchback GTA. I make bad decisions.
I’ve owned several Mustangs and two Camaros. IROC and roll this time. Generation 3 Camaros are the best looking. Fight me.
Neither of these have any redeeming features. I’ll skip the junkyard yard cars and hope a Camry shows up tomorrow
Definitely the Mustang, that is just way to much for that rusty of a Camaro, if it wasn’t from rustville then yeah it could be worth that much and would be a reasonable project. The Mustang’s hood seems to match the rest of the car so the front end hit was probably pretty light and thus the inner structure is probably fine. Find some other seats, sell those and profit. Send it to Macco and have the V8 5sp weekend toy for not that much money.
Definitely the Camaro,that Mustang is fucked up.
Gotta go Mustang. It’s a hot mess, but I didn’t like the looks of those late ’80’s Camaros back then and I can’t say I’ve warmed up to them since. Put a really cheap paint job on the Mustang, drive it until something important breaks, and then part it out and get my money back.
Neither of these cars offers a hint of fun. They are incredibly slow, uncomfortable, drive like garbage when new, and represent the nadir of build quality for both Ford and GM. Now, after having spent their lives doing the bidding of some combination of meth-heads and dead-beat dads, I wouldn’t pay a penny for either.
Yes, $5000 does seem a bit steep for a rusty Camaro even if the interior and drivetrain look good. But a couple of days ago, people were moaning that $5000 was too much for an eerily minty Corsica LTZ with basically zero rust. Which is it?
That said, it’s the Camaro for me, hopefully after some haggling. I was just never a fan of the SN95 Mustangs. Now, if it were a Foxbody, it would be a different story.
Now, if I actually had 5K and the garage space, the answer would be “neither” and I’d be driving that Corsica home right now.
The contrast between the Corsica and Camaro is enlightening.
The Corsica is expensive at $5000, because aside the manual and excellent condition, it was early 1990s GM mundanity encapsulated. It was an unloved pile back in the day, still asking $5k for a 30 year old ‘remember how bad the 1990s were’ car is a big ask. There’s a potential audience of like…six…people who might bite at it for the good memories.
The Camaro at least has the hint of nostalgia for fun youthful times. A car built on smiles, burnouts, and suspended driver’s licences, if you lived during that time. However, this one has some pretty bad rust issues; its condition is the major demerit against the asking price. If it was 60% closer to the Corsica in condition (i.e. about 60% less rust), maybe $5k is a decent starting ask.
Maybe I’m just picky though.
Well $5k might be pricey for the Corsica but $5 is pricey for the Camaro.
Both.
Does that make me a bad person?
One bad decision doesn’t define a person.
A lot of bad choices, however, does tend to define a person.
The open question is where to draw the line in between…
Is two enough? Or maybe it matters how grievous those two bad decisions are? (For the record, these two are pretty bad, but given your user name, you can be forgiven for one of them. 🙂 )
I’m sure I’ve made worse decisions than buying either of these two, if that’s worth anything. Besides, you’re here among friends.
Verdict: Not a bad person.
Cheap? Camaro: Not at $5,000 for that rusty pile. Mustang: Yes, but because a pounded to hell car should obviously be cheaper than $3k. Even now.
Ugly? Camaro: Yes, with rust, and Mustang: Yes with SN95 sadness plus crash
damage.
Loud? Camaro and Mustang: Yeah, the exhausts are probably ruined on both.
Fun? Both, in a redneck sort of way, I suppose. Wind sucky V8s out through the gears to get modern four-cylinder mid-size sedan acceleration. Burnouts for distance can be fun until the clutch (or rear diff) frags.
These aren’t worth saving or restoring. They’re something you hoon until a major drivetrain failure happens. Does the car or your driver’s licence give up first?
For me, the Mustang. Might as well save the $2,200 for the tickets and legal problems you’re going to have.
The thing is, if I bought a V8 manual car, I wouldn’t need it for very long because my license would probably be toast.
These are both $2K cars here in the South… but at least the Mustang got its last owner to their Community Service work days, apparently.
That fluorescent green object in the back seat sure looks like the kind of thing one might wear while working with a group of guys picking trash up along the side of the highway. (Although I don’t think the sheriffs usually let you take them home with you.)
The Mustang just throws up too many red flags for me. Probably in a collision, stupid seats, and if you’re only going to bother taking one interior photo you should at least shovel your crap out of it first. It’s pretend money anyway so I’ll take the IROC and the cheapest paint job MAACO has to offer.
I’ll take the IROC, a case of rattle cans, and a roll of painters tape for the win.
The F-bodies of that era, and the ones that came after, are just so uncomfortable for me to sit in let alone drive that there is no way I can vote for one.
I guess the Mustang. If I have to pick one. My mom suffered with an ’82 Camaro for a couple of years. And it was awful the couple of times I drove it.
A buddy of mine had a GT from somewhere in that era. And it was laugh-inducing. He has since done much better in life and now drives an Audi S4 with the same reckless abandon.
But these are both incel-mobiles.
From what I could find with 30 seconds of googling, the five-oh IROC-Z did 0-60 in about 7 seconds (when new).
2025 Prius
FWD- 7.2 seconds
AWD- 7 seconds.
PHEV- 6.6
Tough one because my first car was an 89 Firebird and I’m definitely a bow tie kinda guy, but i think id have to go Mustang when comparing these exact two. Man.. hurts to say that outloud!
I’m a Ford guy but I’d take the IROC.
I like how you call out that the engine is overhead valve, just in case I thought it was a flathead.
Owned a similar vintage Mustang once, didn’t enjoy it. I’ll take a turn with that Camaro
I’d take that totally bitchin’ Camaro.
SN95 Mustangs are terrible, and thus terribly cheap. Iroc’s are also terrible, but at least they are starting to get collectible, not many came with the 5 speed, but the rust repairs needed here means you have to really want and Iroc to sink that money into it. Still I guess I would go Iroc in this case. Unless I just needed an SN95 shell to plop an LS in and go street racing I suppose.
I’d get the mustang because it has seats you can do stupid things in more easily.