Scene Stealer-Maybe I'm a sucker for a black paint job, but this 2000-model Camaro SS simply exudes the subtle intimidation befitting a classy musclecar. Exhibiting far less "look at me" attitude than the bilious yellow Mustang or quadruple hood-scooped Trans Am, the Camaro has an aloof yet unmistakably cool look backed by above-average performance. Its brilliant 5.7-liter LS1 (a barely detuned Corvette motor) is a wonderfully versatile engine that, unlike some others in this test, is as happy pushing a tall gear at 1200 rpm as revving to a 6000-rpm redline shift. And, as remarkable as they are in go-power, the two single-minded trucks just don't push the right buttons for me.-Chris Walton
Smoke 'em if you got 'em-As the saying goes around this office: "Burnouts are cool." But if burnouts are fire, then traction-control systems are water. They're great if you don't know how to drive and never want to spin the tires, but they suck if you want to burn rubber. Lesson one: Real musclecar drivers don't use traction control. Lesson two: Trucks are trucks, not musclecars. I'm against anything that can haul a 4x8-foot sheet of plywood being called a musclecar. Lesson three: No self-respecting musclecar has front-wheel drive. As much as I like the 2000 Grand Prix GTP as a daily driver, it's not a true musclecar. This leaves the real players: Trans Am, Camaro, and Mustang. Of these, the seating in the Mustang is too upright, and, to me, it drives more like a sport coupe, not a musclecar. That leaves the F-body twins. Both do huge burnouts (the hallmark of any great musclecar), but because, to my eye, the Camaro nose is a tad on the homely side, I'd have to choose the Trans Am out of this ground-pounding group-Chuck Schifsky
...
>>next page