Certified Benz & Beemer Compares 2013 Ford Mustang VS 2013 Chevrolet Camaro Near Phoenix, AZ

The Mustang’s blind spot mirrors use wide-angle convex mirrors mounted in the corner of each side view mirror to reveal objects that may be in the driver’s blind spots. The Camaro doesn’t offer a system to reveal objects in the driver’s blind spots.

Both the Mustang and the Camaro have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, front seatbelt pretensioners, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control and electronic stability systems to prevent skidding.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Ford Mustang is safer than the Chevrolet Camaro:

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Ford Mustang is safer than the Camaro:

More stars indicate a better overall result. Lower numbers indicate better individual test results.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does side impact tests on new vehicles. In this test, which crashes the vehicle into a flat barrier at 38.5 MPH, results indicate that the Ford Mustang is safer than the Chevrolet Camaro:

New test not comparable to pre-2011 test results. More stars = Better. Lower test results = Better.

The Mustang’s corrosion warranty is unlimited miles longer than the Camaro’s (unlimited vs. 100,000 miles).

For smoother operation, better efficiency and fewer moving parts, the engines in the Mustang have an overhead cam design, rather than the old pushrod design of some of the engines in the Camaro.

The Mustang has a standard “limp home system” to keep drivers from being stranded if most or all of the engine’s coolant is lost. The engine will run on only half of its cylinders at a time, reduce its power and light a warning lamp on the dashboard so the driver can get to a service station for repairs. The Camaro doesn’t offer a lost coolant limp home mode, so a coolant leak could strand you or seriously damage the car’s engine.

A reliable vehicle saves its owner time, money and trouble. Nobody wants to be stranded or have to be without their vehicle while it’s being repaired. Consumer Reports predicts that the Mustang’s reliability will be 22% better than the Camaro.

J.D. Power and Associates rated the Mustang first among midsize sporty cars in their 2012 Initial Quality Study. The Camaro isn’t in the top three.

J.D. Power and Associates’ 2012 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Ford vehicles are more reliable than Chevrolet vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Ford 8th in reliability, above the industry average. With 11 more problems per 100 vehicles, Chevrolet is ranked 13th.

As tested in Motor Trend the Ford Mustang V6 is faster than the Camaro LS/LT 3.6 DOHC V6 (manual transmissions tested):

As tested in Motor Trend the Mustang Boss 302 5.0 DOHC V8 is faster than the Camaro SS Manual 6.2 LS2 V8 (manual transmissions tested):

As tested in Motor Trend the Ford Mustang V6 is faster than the Camaro LS/LT 3.6 DOHC V6 (automatics tested):

On the EPA test cycle the Mustang gets better fuel mileage than the Camaro:

The Mustang has a standard cap-less fueling system. The fuel filler is automatically opened when the fuel nozzle is inserted and automatically closed when it’s removed. This eliminates the need to unscrew and replace the cap and it reduces fuel evaporation, which causes pollution. The Camaro doesn’t offer a cap-less fueling system.

The Mustang stops much shorter than the Camaro:

The Mustang has standard front and rear gas-charged shocks for better control over choppy roads. The Camaro’s suspension doesn’t offer gas-charged shocks.

The Mustang’s drift compensation steering can automatically compensate for road conditions, which would cause the vehicle to drift from side to side, helping the driver to keep the vehicle straight more easily. The Camaro doesn’t offer drift compensation steering.

The Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca handles at 1.02 G’s, while the Camaro LT Coupe pulls only .85 G’s of cornering force in a Road & Track skidpad test.

The Mustang GT Convertible handles at .91 G’s, while the Camaro SS Convertible pulls only .89 G’s of cornering force in a Road & Track skidpad test.

The Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca goes through Road & Track’s slalom 7.6 MPH faster than the Camaro SS Coupe (74 vs. 66.4 MPH).

The Mustang GT Convertible goes through Road & Track’s slalom faster than the Camaro SS Convertible (69.1 vs. 68.4 MPH).

The Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver 2 seconds quicker than the Camaro LT Coupe (24.6 seconds @ .81 average G’s vs. 26.6 seconds @ .67 average G’s).

The Mustang GT Convertible executes Motor Trend’s “Figure Eight” maneuver quicker than the Camaro RS Convertible (26.1 seconds @ .69 average G’s vs. 27 seconds @ .66 average G’s).

For better maneuverability, the Mustang’s turning circle is 4.3 feet tighter than the Camaro’s (33.4 feet vs. 37.7 feet).

The Ford Mustang may be more efficient, handle and accelerate better because it weighs about 250 to 400 pounds less than the Chevrolet Camaro.

To almost totally eliminate engine vibration in the passenger area, the Mustang has liquid-filled engine mounts. The liquid helps further dampen engine harshness. The Camaro uses conventional solid rubber engine mounts.

For excellent aerodynamics, the Mustang has standard flush composite headlights. The Camaro has recessed headlights that spoil its aerodynamic shape and create extra drag.

As tested by Road & Track, the interior of the Mustang GT Coupe is quieter than the Camaro ZL1 Coupe:

The Mustang Coupe has 1.1 inches more front headroom and 1.2 inches more rear shoulder room than the Camaro Coupe.

The Mustang Convertible has 1 inch more front headroom, .8 inches more rear headroom and 2.5 inches more rear shoulder room than the Camaro Convertible.

The Mustang Coupe has a much larger trunk than the Camaro Coupe (13.4 vs. 11.3 cubic feet).

The Mustang Convertible has a much larger trunk with its top down than the Camaro Convertible with its top down (9.6 vs. 7.8 cubic feet).

The Mustang Coupe’s standard folding rear seats are split to accommodate bulky cargo. The Camaro Coupe’s standard single piece folding rear seat is not as flexible; long cargo and a passenger can’t share the rear seat.

In case you lock your keys in your vehicle, or don’t have them with you, you can let yourself in using the available exterior keypad. The Camaro doesn’t offer an exterior keypad entry system, and its OnStar ® can’t unlock the doors if the vehicle doesn’t have cell phone reception or the driver can’t contact the service.

To shield the driver and front passenger’s vision over a larger portion of the windshield and side windows, the Mustang has standard extendable sun visors. The Camaro doesn’t offer extendable visors.

The Mustang’s optional dual zone air conditioning allows the driver and front passenger to choose two completely different temperatures so people with different temperature preferences won’t have to compromise. This makes both the driver and front passenger as comfortable as possible. The Camaro doesn’t offer dual zone air conditioning.

The Mustang’s optional automatic temperature control maintains the temperature you set, automatically controlling fan speed, vents and temperature to maintain a consistent, comfortable environment. The Camaro doesn’t offer automatic air conditioning.

With optional SYNC, the Mustang offers the driver hands free control of the radio, climate controls, cell phone and the navigation computer by simply speaking. The Camaro doesn’t offer a voice control system.

Insurance will cost less for the Mustang owner. The Car Book by Jack Gillis rates the Mustang with a number “1” insurance rate while the Camaro is rated higher at a number “3” rate.

According to The Car Book by Jack Gillis, the Mustang is less expensive to operate than the Camaro because it costs $357 less to do the manufacturer’s suggested maintenance for 50,000 miles. Typical repairs cost much less on the Mustang than the Camaro, including $766 less for an alternator, $68 less for front brake pads, $158 less for fuel injection, $148 less for a fuel pump, $112 less for front struts and $173 less for a timing belt/chain.