The rivalry has been a-brewin' nigh on to 25 years. That boisterous upstart called Camaro has been tryin' to worm its way into the claim homesteaded by Mustang way back ta '64. The "pony-car" market, they used to call it.

There've been many a fast gun prowlin' around these parts over the past two decades. Big talkers with handles like Firebird, Barracuda, Challenger, and Javelin all took pot-shots at the one known as Mustang, but met with little success. In fact, they was all gunned down faster 'n' a wet-behind-the-ears kid at his first turkey shoot. Outta that wild bunch, only Firebird remains on the performance trail today, ridin' alongside it awnry cousin Camaro and lookin' to collect the bounty on the last of the original muscle machines.

Mustang has worn a number of hats during its lifetime on the range. First it was a ramblin' pup all full of spit and vinegar, ridin' into these parts in the early '60s lookin' for nothin' but fun. Mustang was a popular sort, 'specially with the ladies, and quickly gained a reputation of the one to team with for a good time. All was goin' along well enough until the fall of '66, when Camaro ambled into town. He'd made it known for some time he was on his way, and left no doubt as to what he was gunnin' for.

That was the last we saw of the good-time-lovin' Mustang. Quick as a Texas tornado changes directions, Mustang turned into a bad hombre. He spent his gold dust on faster horses and mightier sidearms, all the time keepin' a watchful eye on his rival. Camaro responded with similar armaments, and for a while, we weren't sure which one of them was the meanest.

There've been a number of fights between these two over the years, leadin' up to the big one that sent Mustang high-tailin' it out of town in late '73. When he returned the next year, he was a pitiful sight. A slumped-over shadow of his former self, with about as poor an excuse of a mount as could be had. He still wanted to be called "Cobra," but nobody could say it with a straight face. It was better for everyone when he quietly left not too long afterward.

Then one day in '82, the real Mustang reappeared. Camaro had become an unchallenged warlord in Mustang's absence, and fully expected to rule these parts for the rest of his natural days. Wearin' a fancy set of Eastern duds and actin' with the arrogance of a Carolina plantation owner, Camaro Z28—as he demanded to be called— was the undisputed ruler of Main Street. But Mustang was ready for him this time. Lookin' only slightly different from the fallen hero that got his tail chased out of here almost 10 years earlier, he was packin' a few surprises in the performance department. It didn't take long 'til they squared off on the road, and Mustang blew Camaro into the sticklebushes with his new cross-breed "GT" pony.

That was the last shootout this town's seen, but there's another'n heatin' up. Camaro's got hisself riled up to the point where he can't see straight, and he's gunnin' for Mustang with a vengeance. A mano-a-mano fight with no fancy weapons or frilly bib-and-tucker: a challenge between the Mustang LX and Camaro RS.

We've chosen these particular models, as opposed to the top-line "GT" and "Z28" derivatives, because they represent Ford and Chevrolet street performance in their most basic forms. They are the least expensive V-8-engined, rear-driven performance cars on the planet. And either is capable of inflicting some serious damage to the reputations of many big-name sports cars from Europe and Japan.

Chevrolet has chosen to install the 5-liter V-8 engine in the RS model for '91 ('90-model Camaros were only produced from September through Dec. 31, 1989, when Chevy's license to use the "IROC" name expired). Although not the top-gun 230-hp "LB9" version fitted in the Z28, this "LO3" derivative is a good performance step-up from the standard 140-hp 3.1-liter V-6. Producing 170 hp at 4000 rpm and 255 lb-ft of torque at 2400 rpm, the motor uses the same 9.3:1 compression ratio as the hot Z28 engine, but makes do with a les efficient electronic throttle-body as opposed to the tuned-port fuel-injection system of its big brother. The engine revs freely and has good low-end torque, but runs out of steam above 4500 rpm.

Ford forgoes offering an intermediate-level V-8 in its Mustang LX, and goes straight for the jugular with the tire-smokin' 5-liter H.O. Churning out a full 225 hp at 4200 rpm and 300 lb-ft or torque at 3200 rpm, this is the motor the put the late-model Mustang on the performance map. Fitted with a 9.0:1 compression ratio and sequential multipoint fuel-injection, this combination has remained essentially unchanged since its 1987 introduction. Big power is available at the touch of a toe anywhere in the 302's rev range, but it really comes on between 3200 and 5000 rpm. Buyers who don't feel the need for 225 hp, however, must make do with the only other Mustang powerplant: an 88-hp 2.3-liter 4-cylinder. A stallion or a shetland, take you pick. (A 6-cylinder is not available.)

The GT-level equipment continues under the flanks of the Mustang LX 5.0. A modified MacPherson strut front suspension is augmented by progressive-rate coil springs, gas-pressurized struts, and a 1.3-in.-diameter anti-roll bar. At the rear, a four-bar link with Quadra shocks controls movement of the axle assembly and is aided by progressive-rate springs, as well as a 0.79-in.-diameter anti-roll bar. Power-assist rack-and-pinion steering uses the GT's faster 14.7:1 ratio, giving a short 2.2 turns lock-to-lock.

The Camaro RS used in our test was outfitted with the optional 235/55SR16 tire package, which includes the "F41" suspension package that brings with it plenty of good stuff from the Z28's parts bin. Gas-pressurized struts, coil springs, and a 1.4-in.-diameter anti-roll bar up front combined with the Salisbury axle with torque arm, Panhard rod, coil springs, gas-charged shocks, and 0.84-in. anti-roll bar out back. The Z28's quick-responding 14.0:1-ratio power steering, with 2.1 turns lock-to-lock, is also used. In fact, the only Z28 items the F41 package does not include are stiffer front springs and front strut mounts, harder lower control arm bushings, slightly firmer shock valving, and marginally larger anti-roll bars.

The big 16x8.0-in. alloys from the Z28 are wrapped with 235/55SR16 Eagle GA tires on the RS model. Although providing a smaller tread area than the 245/50ZR16 Gatorbacks fitted to the ultimate Camaro, these "ride-biased" Goodyears (the same design as used on the Lexus LS 400 and other top-line cars) give up surprisingly little in terms of road-holding. What they improve upon tremendously is the level of road-transmitted noise/vibration/harshness that finds its way into the cockpit—an incredible tire, and proof that performance, good ride quality, and all-weather traction can coexist is one tire design.

Ford chose to give the 5.0-equipped Mustang LX nearlyall the good stuff found on the GT model, including the 15x7.0-in. alloy wheels and brawny 255/60VR15 Goodyear VR60 Gatorbacks. Sixteen-inch wheels are not available. Backing up the wheel/tire combination are 10.8-in. power front disc and 9.0-in. rear drum brakes. The Camaro RS does not receive the 4-wheel-disc setup of the Z28, and must make do with 10.5-in. front discs and 9.5-in. rear drums. ABS is not offered on any model Camaro or Mustang.

While both cars can be had with 5-speed manual or 4-speed automatic transmissions, only a lily-livered carmint would drive anything but the manual. The Mustang's performance, particularly, is deleteriously affected by the use of the automatic, but neither of the cars is as much fun to drive as when it's equipped with its fast-shiftin' 5-speed. Ford auments its transmission with an optional 3.08-ratio Traction-Lok axle, while Chevy installs a similar 3.08-geared (Positraction optional) rearend in the RS. As a result of this tall gearing, 60-mph cruising equates to engine speeds of 1600 rpm in the Camaro and 1800 in the Mustang, aiding fuel economy, as well as engine life.

With wheelbases that are only 0.5 in. apart in length (100.5 in., Mustang; 101 in., Camaro) and with both cars sharing similar suspensions and driveline layouts, you might expect these two vehicles to have similar road manners. But it ain't ao. The Mustang is shorter (179.6 in.), narrower (69.1 in.), and sits higer (52.1 in.) then its competitor, and requires a firm hand onthe reins to control. The Camaro (192.6 in. long; 72.8 in. wide; 50.3 in. tall) is much more forgiving to operate, and makes the driver feel he's part of the machine rather then merely being astride it.

The battle for street supremacy has almost as much to do with style and attitude as it does with raw acceleration, and it's in this arena that the Camaro fares best. Looking like a high-fashion tux in its all-white livery and gray cloth interior, the RS model is spared the Z28's somewhat controversial hood "blisters" (fake air scoops) and large rear spoiler. Unless you peek atthe window sticker, there's no way you'd know this is a budget performance car. Choose the options carefully and you'll have a Camaro with $20,000 looks for much, much less.

The Mustang, on the other hand, takes a more conservative approach. Stripping off the GT's spoilers and fascias leaves the car with a plain countenance, under which lies the heart of a champ. Liken it to a heavy-weight boxer wearing an overcoat: You can't see the muscles bulging, but don't forget for a minute they're there. Only a fool makes fun of a Mustang LX with a 5.0 emblem on the fender.

Since the designs of both these cars originated a long time ago (1979 for Mustang and 1982 for Camaro), we've come to know them both well, inside and out. Mustang carries its understated theme into the interior, where four or (occasionally) five grown occupants can actually ride in relative comfort amid the pleasant, but not elaborate, surroundings. Our test car was equipped with sport seats featuring power-adjust lumbar support and movable lower cushion side-bolsters, which held us smartly in place during testing.

The dashboard layout positions all the necessary gauges (140-mph speedo, 7000-rpm tach, oil pressure, coolant temp, voltage, fuel level) directly in front of the driver, with switches for lights, hazard flashers, and rear window defroster located on a surrounding panel. Wipers are stalk-mounted, and the power mirror controls are on the center console. The driving position is a bit high for our tastes, and Ford's use of a driver-side airbag precludes the availability of a tilt wheel, which aggravates the condition. The excellent steering wheel-mounted cruise control switches have been retained, however, which are far superior to the all-on-one-stalk design of GM vehicles.

The familiar Camaro interior remains intact on the '91 models, but has been updated with a new gauge cluster and "softened" features on the instrument panel. To force more than three people into this car for any period of time is still considered an act of heinous sadism, but that's the price you pay for trick styling. The seats in our test car were covered in a nice quality gray fabric and proved sufficiently grippy, even though they were not the top-dollar buckets available. The new instrument cluster includes a large 110-mph speedometer and a 7000-rpm tach, plus easy-to-read smaller dials for oil pressure, voltage, coolant temp, and fuel level. A tilt wheel is optional with Chevy's airbag-equipped steering wheel.

It was high noon on a hot, dusty western day when the two squared off on the road leading to the 5.0 Corral. Eyes locked. Trigger fingers twitched. Mothers pulled their children inside and hid them behind closed doors. The tension was thick as blackstrap molasses, but it'd all be over soon. With fifth-wheel computerized testing equipment affixed to their flanks, our two highway bandits were preparin' for a redline shootout of their own.

The countdown began and engines revved. Both machines leaped off the starting line in a cloud of tire smoke and roar of exhaust. The Mustang was in front by a nose at 30 mph, then widened the gap ato arrive at 60 mph in 6.2 sec versus the Camaro's best of 7.9 sec. The distance grew further as the Mustang's 225 hp went to work, and the Ford covered the quarter mile in a blistering 14.8 sec at 96.0 mph. The Camaro put up a valiant fight, but came in 2nd with its 16.1-sec/86.9-mph pass.

The Camaro won bragging rights to the braking competition with a best 30-0-mph stop of 33 ft and a 60-0-mph distance of 143 ft. Each stop was straight and predictable, but the car's overly firm brake pedal required lots of push during high-g deceleration. Only a couple feet separated the two in this contest, however, with the Mustang stopping from 30 mph in 36 ft and from 60 mph in 145 ft. A spongy brake pedal and prematurely locking rear wheels kept the Ford from earning higher marks.

On to the skidpad, where the Camaro ran flat and stable to a stellar 0.90g lateral acceleration score. The higher center-of-gravity Mustang siffered more with understeer, but still returned a very good 0.88 g. In the 600-ft slalom, the Mustang surprised everyone by clicking off a 64.2-mph trap speed, beating the Camaro's best of 63.3 mph. In a given situation, the Camaro's chassis handles better, but the Mustang make up for a lot with its power, as it was able to do in the slalom.

Once the challenge left the test track and headed up into the foothills, things really heated up. It's difficult to be a smooth, fluid driver in the Mustang during hard canyon running, but the tremendous power makes up for its lack of balance and finesse when compared to the Camaro. Moderate-speed (30-60 mph) corners are where the Ford excels, and savvy drivers will use the 302's abundant torque to kick the car's tail out and counteract its tendency to understeer. but know when to say "when", because you can suddenly have too much of a good thing.

The Camaro tackles the turns with a vengeance and eats up ribbons of asphalt in big mouthfuls. On-camber, off-camber, decreasing radius; you name the turn, and this car takes you through it without so much as raising a howl from a tire. Even with the less-aggressive Eagle GA radials, the Camaro is totally impressive. Go into a turn and get on the gas, and you'll come out with race-car-like flatness and predictability. Trailing-throttle oversteer can be induced, but you really have to work at it to get the car out of shape. Everything about this Camaro inspires confidence. It has, without a doubt, the sweetest Amarican-car suspension this side of a Corvette.

The 305's power is better than adequate, but you'll wish for more on long grades or passing situations. The gearbox, like that of the Mustang, is smooth as precise, and the pedals are placed perfectly. Only a general "looseness" of the car's body and an annoying clunking noise from the front suspension on sharp, low-speed full-lock turns marred our impression of the Camaro RS.

The Mustang LX 5.0 is as close as it gets to a '90s version of a '60s muscelcar. Basic styling, a bare-bones interior, and room for five combine with a powerful, thumpin' "mill" and a grabbin' set of "weenies" to make this Mustang the best performing car in its price class. With a base price of $13,007, and an as-tested tally of $14,724, you're getting true value for your money.

Few car designs have aged as well as the now 10-model-year-old Camaro. Although there are zillions of them on America's roads, each new one we drive still draws admiring glances from passers-by. By offering the 305 in the lower-price RS model, Chevrolet has opened up V-8-powered Camaro fun to a whole slew of folks who can't handle the extra bucks it takes to get a Z28. Our test car based at $11,454 and bottomlined at $14,722. That's about two grand less than a Z28.

In the parlance of the Old West, these two are a good pair to draw to. Both are as comforting to compete with as having an ace in the hole during a game of five-card stud, and either can take home the whole pot at the end of any given game. The age-old rivals have finally come to an agreement. This time around, no one has to leave town.