[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

And I’m not saying the Camaro numbers are great. They are not. Fact is that a closer look shows all three aren’t doing great.

Ford is subsidizing Mustang’s volume with low ATP and canceled it’s new platform. Challenger/Dodge will survive until it’s no longer cheaper to keep her. Camaro will likely survive to see another generation because it’s paid for and part of the Cadillac strategy.

If buyer preferences don’t turn around, I wouldn’t bet on the longer term future of any.

The way I read your posts was Camaro numbers are fine because ATP is highest in the segment.

They switched S650 to go on a different platform. So I guess sort of canceled or more switched around. Instead of a dedicated platform Mustang will now share a platform which from a business side makes a lot of sense.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by shaffe

The way I read your posts was Camaro numbers are fine because ATP is highest in the segment.

They switched S650 to go on a different platform. So I guess sort of canceled or more switched around. Instead of a dedicated platform Mustang will now share a platform which from a business side makes a lot of sense.

I responded to your post about Camaro’s slide since gen5 by pointing out they all have slid and all three manufacturers are signaling weakness. Sorry it wasn’t more clear but I assume my follow up did.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by shaffe

The way I read your posts was Camaro numbers are fine because ATP is highest in the segment.

They switched S650 to go on a different platform. So I guess sort of canceled or more switched around. Instead of a dedicated platform Mustang will now share a platform which from a business side makes a lot of sense.

I’m seeing information that shows this as being the other way around. It seemed like Mustang S650 was going to be part of a plan to produce both FWD (Edge, Aviator, Nautilis) and RWD (Explorer, Lincoln Conti replacement, Mustang) off the same basic architecture. With the cancellation of Conti, it appears that Ford may have rescoped S650 to be a large scale upgrade to S550 and that it would be alone on that architecture. From what I could tell, plan is still to do Explorer as RWD of the flexible platform, so I don’t get why Mustang would not have stayed on it.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

I responded to your post about Camaro’s slide since gen5 by pointing out they all have slid and all three manufacturers are signaling weakness. Sorry it wasn’t more clear but I assume my follow up did.

All good now

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m seeing information that shows this as being the other way around. It seemed like Mustang S650 was going to be part of a plan to produce both FWD (Edge, Aviator, Nautilis) and RWD (Explorer, Lincoln Conti replacement, Mustang) off the same basic architecture. With the cancellation of Conti, it appears that Ford may have rescoped S650 to be a large scale upgrade to S550 and that it would be alone on that architecture. From what I could tell, plan is still to do Explorer as RWD of the flexible platform, so I don’t get why Mustang would not have stayed on it.

I guess I have to trust you from being in the business lol but I thought S650 was cancelled and that Mustang was moving to the platform that the Aviator and next gen Explorer are on

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by shaffe

All good now




I guess I have to trust you from being in the business lol but I thought S650 was cancelled and that Mustang was moving to the platform that the Aviator and next gen Explorer are on

We could both be wrong. Taking it off CD6 and leaving Explorer on it makes little sense. Unless they changed their mind on Explorer going RWD. And Aviator. I think in the last post I suggested Aviator would stay FWD. It goes as Explorer goes.

[torqueaddict]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I don't think its the driving part of the car, its the daily part.

If the 'daily' part is mostly about ergonomics, visibility and storage space for an owner, then they bought the wrong car, plain and simple. The Camaro was designed around the 'driving' part. If the owner couldn't live with the other 'shortcomings', they should have moved on before purchase.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by Prodogs

Although number of units may look disastrous if you look at an overall profit perspective things may be as bad as they seem on the surface.

Difficult to factor in revenue from fleet as I really have no idea what trim and options are sold and at what price. Anecdotally when I get a rental Mustang it is always a V6 whereas Challenger and Camaro are a mix of V6 and V8.

Originally Posted by shaffe

True, but without knowing what the profit is or cost of each vehicle, ATP to me isn't a great stat to throw around. It only tells part of the story.

It's the only part of the story we'll ever know. Very few at GM or FoMoCo could even give you accurate profit margins on models/trim levels.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Also yes they are holding on their plan of less fleet sales and that is great for them holding strong. But to me, you can tell by the amount of unsold cars though, they expected to sell more than they are. I think they might have expected slightly less sales, but not like this.

Cars.com lists 16k new Camaro's, 14k new Mustangs and 12k new Challengers for sale. Bump Camaro fleet sales up to Mustang/Challenger levels for a few months and the inventory difference is moot.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Even just retail sales, the Challenger, a 10 year old car on a 20 year old platform, with no convertible option is outselling the Camaro so far this year. that has to sting no matter what way you slice it.

They've continued to improve the cosmetics, and the drive trains are no slouch despite the aging platform. More room, comfortable ride, broader appeal. Drop the Camaro price $2,600 to the Challenger average and I suspect the retail volume would be a toss-up.

Originally Posted by shaffe

The Camaro IMO is going to need to pick up some extra volume, especially if the future Cadillac on Alpha2 struggle like the ATS/CTS.

You mean like ALL sedans are struggling? Best bet is to build a Cayenne fighter on Alpha to get some volume

Originally Posted by shaffe

I am not trying to paint it as doom and gloom I am just saying I would bet behind closed doors they aren't exactly thrilled with the numbers. Not panicked or worried just not thrilled.

I suspect they are far more focused on rolling out new CUV's to meet market demand. There will always be a niche market for performance cars even though they are not wildly profitable (except 911 lol).

Originally Posted by shaffe

I don't think its the driving part of the car, its the daily part.

I wouldn't consider any of the pony cars "practical" daily drivers but the compromises we make for love...

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

We could both be wrong. Taking it off CD6 and leaving Explorer on it makes little sense. Unless they changed their mind on Explorer going RWD. And Aviator. I think in the last post I suggested Aviator would stay FWD. It goes as Explorer goes.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/linc...concept-facts/

According to that the Aviator will be RWD. There was another article that mentioned an up close look of the IRS looked like it borrowed a bit form the S550. So From what I have read. It looks like the Explorer, Aviator and Mustang will share a platform.

Originally Posted by torqueaddict

If the 'daily' part is mostly about ergonomics, visibility and storage space for an owner, then they bought the wrong car, plain and simple. The Camaro was designed around the 'driving' part. If the owner couldn't live with the other 'shortcomings', they should have moved on before purchase.

True, but I suspect that can also steer people away. Try to remember the people that buy the base and mid level models probably care more about that stuff than the full performance.

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

Difficult to factor in revenue from fleet as I really have no idea what trim and options are sold and at what price. Anecdotally when I get a rental Mustang it is always a V6 whereas Challenger and Camaro are a mix of V6 and V8.



It's the only part of the story we'll ever know. Very few at GM or FoMoCo could even give you accurate profit margins on models/trim levels.

Also true, which is why I don't think ATP really tells us a whole lot other than what consumers are paying

Cars.com lists 16k new Camaro's, 14k new Mustangs and 12k new Challengers for sale. Bump Camaro fleet sales up to Mustang/Challenger levels for a few months and the inventory difference is moot.

Dig a little deeper. Cars.com still lists 2015, 2016, and 2017 NEW models for both Camaro and Mustang. If we just look at 2017 Models, according to cars.com Mustang has 636 2017s still listed for sale. Camaro has 3,930. 2018 Camaro Production started in June of 17 I believe.
That tells me they anticipated selling more, and it's not moving as well as anticipated

https://www.cars.com/for-sale/search...31936&zc=60634

https://www.cars.com/for-sale/search...31936&zc=60634

They've continued to improve the cosmetics, and the drive trains are no slouch despite the aging platform. More room, comfortable ride, broader appeal. Drop the Camaro price $2,600 to the Challenger average and I suspect the retail volume would be a toss-up.

Fair point

You mean like ALL sedans are struggling? Best bet is to build a Cayenne fighter on Alpha to get some volume

hahaha, yes all sedans are struggling


I suspect they are far more focused on rolling out new CUV's to meet market demand. There will always be a niche market for performance cars even though they are not wildly profitable (except 911 lol).



I wouldn't consider any of the pony cars "practical" daily drivers but the compromises we make for love...

Responses in red.

No pony cars aren't the most practical daily drivers, 2 of the 3 in the segment make much better cases for it though

[torqueaddict]

Originally Posted by shaffe

True, but I suspect that can also steer people away. Try to remember the people that buy the base and mid level models probably care more about that stuff than the full performance.

There is no way that GM would've looked at the obvious compromises and expected mass appeal. It's a niche car. Buyer beware.

[DirectTo]

Originally Posted by torqueaddict

If the 'daily' part is mostly about ergonomics, visibility and storage space for an owner, then they bought the wrong car, plain and simple. The Camaro was designed around the 'driving' part. If the owner couldn't live with the other 'shortcomings', they should have moved on before purchase.

If you ignore those owners looking for a daily driver you might as well shut the line down today.



Some of the people on this forum seem to forget that people do daily drive these cars. Probably 75% of them are daily driven year round and probably 95% are daily driven at least during the summer. This board may make it seem otherwise but you have to remember the people who care enough to find a message board about their car are either enthusiasts or people with problems they're trying to diagnose.


The Mustang made a nice little niche as V6 cruising car back in the 90s and they sold the crap out of them. They're continuing to do it these days. The Challenger may look the same as 10 years ago but it's the size of a freaking 80s boat Cadillac on the inside. The Charger gives people the 4 door capability while having the fun of some performance - same thing the SS tried to do but at a much, much higher price point (and notice it's gone and the Charger continues to chug along).


If people who are at least somewhat of automotive enthusiasts sit down and thinks "man this feels restricted" and thinks the fit and finish looks and seems crappy, how do you think the 30 year old IT guy who makes the money to buy a ZL1 feels when he sits down in one? The retired old man who's looking for a car to cruise his days away in?


You can't sit here and look at the people on this board as a cross section of the market - it goes way, way beyond that, and Chevy either doesn't know or doesn't care while Ford and Dodge are capitalizing on that market.

[torqueaddict]

Originally Posted by DirectTo

If you ignore those owners looking for a daily driver you might as well shut the line down today.



Some of the people on this forum seem to forget that people do daily drive these cars. Probably 75% of them are daily driven year round and probably 95% are daily driven at least during the summer. This board may make it seem otherwise but you have to remember the people who care enough to find a message board about their car are either enthusiasts or people with problems they're trying to diagnose.


The Mustang made a nice little niche as V6 cruising car back in the 90s and they sold the crap out of them. They're continuing to do it these days. The Challenger may look the same as 10 years ago but it's the size of a freaking 80s boat Cadillac on the inside. The Charger gives people the 4 door capability while having the fun of some performance - same thing the SS tried to do but at a much, much higher price point (and notice it's gone and the Charger continues to chug along).


If people who are at least somewhat of automotive enthusiasts sit down and thinks "man this feels restricted" and thinks the fit and finish looks and seems crappy, how do you think the 30 year old IT guy who makes the money to buy a ZL1 feels when he sits down in one? The retired old man who's looking for a car to cruise his days away in?


You can't sit here and look at the people on this board as a cross section of the market - it goes way, way beyond that, and Chevy either doesn't know or doesn't care while Ford and Dodge are capitalizing on that market.

People are wishing the Camaro was the jack of all trades it wasn't meant to be.

Also, any car can be a DD. It doesn't have to fit a certain mold. Miatas are daily driven as well as Vettes. What about a Smart car? Can it qualify? After all, it only fits two and can barely carry a lunchbox.

The Camaro is a perfectly fine DD for many including myself.

I'll let Chevy worry about sales.

[Gen6_1Le]

Originally Posted by DirectTo

How many of the 'American middle class' you refer to give a crap about the 1LE? They want a 'muscle car' to cruise around in, probably hit the gas to the floor once every few weeks on an on ramp.


They want an LT or SS with good options for a reasonable price. When they can get a Mustang for $30K what costs $35K in a Camaro, why would they get the Camaro?


Everyone here beats up how amazing the 1LE, ZL1, etc. are while ignoring how small of a market those actually apply to. For the touring crowd they're being more exposed to the Mustang/Challenger and then seeing better price points.

Every generation of Camaro that is looked back on is known for those cars that are in that small market , and will always be remembered that way . In 1969 there were 243,000 some Camaros built , only 99 COPO ZL1s and that is the emblem on the Camaro flagship now . Its those cars that always have been the bench marks in Camaros . In 50 years when people talk about the 5th and 6th gen Camaros it will all be about the ZL1 ,Z28 and 1LE for how they pushed performance and handling , Just like nowadays looking back at 1st and 2nd . It will always be the SS,RS and lesser models that make up the bulk of sales and given the performance level that they carry i would say a bargain price at that .
If people want that muscle car vibe then the 6th gen Camaro is not for them to start with . I don't feel Camaro should ever come down to the level of a Mustang or Challenger for the sake of sales , you get what you pay for .

[Gunkk]

Originally Posted by Gen6_1Le

Camaro should ever come down to the level of a Mustang or Challenger for the sake of sales , you get what you pay for .

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by Gen6_1Le

I don't feel Camaro should ever come down to the level of a Mustang or Challenger for the sake of sales , you get what you pay for .

God this is so cringe.

The Camaro isn't anything special, it's the same class. It's not a special car, it's not a unique car, it's not a status symbol.