[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by newmoon

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok let me get this straight. So if a vehicle marketed as a street vehicle and performs better in every aspect of street performance is a failure (anticipated 500). But a street vehicle that is marketed as a track vehicle that does not excel at anything street related is? LOL

So now the 500 has to be compared to the ZR1? I guess you are already anticipating what will happen in the ZL1 vs GT500 H2H comparison.

No. You asked if the 500 beat the ZL1 1LE in 1/4 0-60 does that make the ZL1 a failure. No it doesn't. The 500 had better be faster. If not then yes the 500 will be a failure. And since when is a 100k car off limits to compare to another 100k car?

I find it funny that the guys most adamantly defending the S550 drive 5 year old S197s.

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I drive this car most of the week for daily duty in addition to track days. I drove an SS over 1000 miles in 36 hours, and have had several long-term run ins with V6s and turbo 4s...I'm well versed in what all of the models offer in their function and ergonomics. Furthermore, the ZL1 1LE not only features the fastest tech, but the highest levels of luxury the Camaro lineup has to offer...So what "I want", and my ZL1 1LE is irrelevant to this conversation. You're still defending this ridiculous thought process that Ford is intentionally building a $hitty car!

Not all Camaro models are "track weapons". Maybe "competent" is the better word. But they are the best they can be in each form, and the best in the segment in terms of performance. And that is what BOTH of these cars are for.

Each vehicle in the marketplace has a purpose, and every other aspect is secondary. Trucks are built for working. SUVs are built for moving a lot of people and stuff. Sedans are built for commuting with several passengers, and coupes are built to be sporty.

The Mustang's purpose is to be sporty. And it is playing second fiddle to the Camaro in that aspect. Is has most of its existence since 1967, and today, even with the move to IRS (which everyone thought would be a game-changer); they still aren't putting in the effort to excel that they should be. It just seems lazy.

I won't keep arguing because this thread is going in circles...but it doesn't do anyone any favors to defend mediocrity as intentional.

lets just agree to disagree. The Mustang will be a fraction of a second behind the Camaro on a drag strip or road course (unsporty), but will offer silly things like reasonable outward visibility, useful storage, no cryogenic right fist freezer/warming oven. Sounds like a shitty car.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by Quinten_33

No, GM wants to make a less-expensive V8 Camaro to compete with the Challenger R/T. Having the least expensive V8 is a huge marketing point, as Dodge has proven time and time again. A $33,000 455hp v8 Camaro would sell like hotcakes if advertised on television. Buying a v8, alpha platform car for that price is a steal. And It needs those all-season tires to give the GT a chance at winning.

You didn't even read a lick of that article did you?

"Chevy product head Mark Reuss said yesterday that the automaker is considering a cheaper, stripped-out Camaro SS to better compete with the Mustang GT."

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...amaro-ss-base/

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

It's going to have ADM, and it's going to sell out. It sucks for regular buyers, but unless Ford steps in and attempts to do something about it, it's going to happen. Don't blame Ford, blame greedy dealerships and those with too much money for their own good.

I'm not entirely sure what Ford can do about it. Other than starting to produce cars that people are unwilling to pay AdjustedMarketValue on.

I've said before that FCA made a move to limit AMV by threatening to punish dealers that added to MSRP. So, the dealers simply used the work around of selling spots on their allocation list. So the cars were sold at MSRP or even a tad below, but the buyer still ended up paying a substantial bit more than that to the dealers when the smoke cleared.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

lets just agree to disagree. The Mustang will be a fraction of a second behind the Camaro on a drag strip or road course (unsporty), but will offer silly things like reasonable outward visibility, useful storage, no cryogenic right fist freezer/warming oven. Sounds like a shitty car.

Ok.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

You didn't even read a lick of that article did you?

"Chevy product head Mark Reuss said yesterday that the automaker is considering a cheaper, stripped-out Camaro SS to better compete with the Mustang GT."

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...amaro-ss-base/

It is funny how they both had such different entrance strategies this generation, but are both now starting to line things up and converge their strategies. Ford by increasing capability and equipment, which brings price in line now. GM talks of offering a cheaper stripped down V8 like Ford to hopefully take advantage of that sales segment.

Wonder if this was always the plan, or if they have both tweaked things a bit later to expand sales.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

I'm not entirely sure what Ford can do about it. Other than starting to produce cars that people are unwilling to pay AdjustedMarketValue on.

I've said before that FCA made a move to limit AMV by threatening to punish dealers that added to MSRP. So, the dealers simply used the work around of selling spots on their allocation list. So the cars were sold at MSRP or even a tad below, but the buyer still ended up paying a substantial bit more than that to the dealers when the smoke cleared.

All they can do is produce enough to meet demand. Its simple economics, more demand than supply and price goes up. The dealers instead of manufacturers control the price here, that is the only difference.

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I drive this car most of the week for daily duty in addition to track days. I drove an SS over 1000 miles in 36 hours, and have had several long-term run ins with V6s and turbo 4s...I'm well versed in what all of the models offer in their function and ergonomics. Furthermore, the ZL1 1LE not only features the fastest tech, but the highest levels of luxury the Camaro lineup has to offer...So what "I want", and my ZL1 1LE is irrelevant to this conversation. You're still defending this ridiculous thought process that Ford is intentionally building a $hitty car!

Not all Camaro models are "track weapons". Maybe "competent" is the better word. But they are the best they can be in each form, and the best in the segment in terms of performance. And that is what BOTH of these cars are for.

Each vehicle in the marketplace has a purpose, and every other aspect is secondary. Trucks are built for working. SUVs are built for moving a lot of people and stuff. Sedans are built for commuting with several passengers, and coupes are built to be sporty.

The Mustang's purpose is to be sporty. And it is playing second fiddle to the Camaro in that aspect. Is has most of its existence since 1967, and today, even with the move to IRS (which everyone thought would be a game-changer); they still aren't putting in the effort to excel that they should be. It just seems lazy.

I won't keep arguing because this thread is going in circles...but it doesn't do anyone any favors to defend mediocrity as intentional.

Question:

If a car has interior performance in certain aspects, yet is utterly dominant in sales, what motivation does a company have to sacrifice those sales and profits to make the under performing car be dominant in performance?

After how many years does it become "lazy"?

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

I'm not entirely sure what Ford can do about it. Other than starting to produce cars that people are unwilling to pay AdjustedMarketValue on.

I've said before that FCA made a move to limit AMV by threatening to punish dealers that added to MSRP. So, the dealers simply used the work around of selling spots on their allocation list. So the cars were sold at MSRP or even a tad below, but the buyer still ended up paying a substantial bit more than that to the dealers when the smoke cleared.

Valid point.

Originally Posted by ST1LE

It is funny how they both had such different entrance strategies this generation, but are both now starting to line things up and converge their strategies. Ford by increasing capability and equipment, which brings price in line now. GM talks of offering a cheaper stripped down V8 like Ford to hopefully take advantage of that sales segment.

Wonder if this was always the plan, or if they have both tweaked things a bit later to expand sales.

Very interesting indeed. Not that we’ll ever find out, but it would be interesting to know which method paid off the most in profits.

Originally Posted by ST1LE

All they can do is produce enough to meet demand. Its simple economics, more demand than supply and price goes up. The dealers instead of manufacturers control the price here, that is the only difference.

That works, unless of course those particular vehicles have a very slim to zero profit margin. With the price of those carbon fiber wheels, I doubt Ford is making much money on the GT350R. The last thing they want to do is steal sales from their (likely more profitable) GTs.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Question:

If a car has interior performance in certain aspects, yet is utterly dominant in sales, what motivation does a company have to sacrifice those sales and profits to make the under performing car be dominant in performance?

After how many years does it become "lazy"?

I get what you're saying - but I don't believe they would need to make that sacrifice to deliver a competitive performer.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Funny, the Camaro has never offered the variety of model lineups as the mustang. As of right now, the PP1 lines up with the SS, the PP2 lines up with the 1LE and the GT500 lines up with the ZL1. Ford doesn’t offer anything that lines up with the ZL11LE, but GM doesn’t have anything that lines up with the GT, Bullitt, GT350 or GT350R. And we haven’t even got to talking about Roush, Steeda, Salleen or Shelby.

Never offered the variety of model lineups? What in the hell are you smoking?

To start, I'll exclude the aftermarket/co-op jobs.... let's just start with models...

Camaro - 1LS, 2LS, 1LT, 2LT, Berlinetta, RS, RS/SS, IROC-Z, RS/Z28, SS, ZL1, 1LE V6, 1LE SS, 1LE ZL1

You also have had every generation of Camaro EXCEPT the 2nd generation car be a Indy 500 pace car model as well.

Now, let's discuss those aftermarket jobbies...

Lingenfelter, Callaway, Yenko, Saleen, Nickey, Hennessey, SLP, Foose, and I'm sure I'm missing more too...

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

it worth adding that you can fix the performance shortcomings of the mustang through the aftermarket , but how do you fix the ergonomic issues of the Camaro?

LOL @ Ergonomic issues.... What ones? If you give me the typical "you cant see out of it" response, I'm going to slap you. Adjust your mirrors and learn to drive. I've driven all 3 of the current muscle cars, and all 3 have the same issues. Sure, the Mustang/Challenger have better upfront visuals, but they all suffer from the same in the rear...

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Yeah, this seems to be the case to me as well. GM should offer a more base GT style V8 option, that's much cheaper than the current base SS as well as more versatile(all seasons etc).

GM did this with the 5th gen, it was called the 1SS....and while it sold well, more people bought the 2LT/2SS... My old 1SS was one of like 30 with the options it had, and only like 1 of 150 with the transmission/paint code/engine choice.

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Because the only thing unique to the 1LE is the wheels. Everything else was taken from another car.

As I'm not 100% on the current 6th gen setup, I know with the 5th gen, there was a lot more unique items than the wheels. Different trans, suspension, gears, tires, wheels, etc...

Originally Posted by newmoon

So is the ZL1-1LE a fail if the 500 smokes it in: 0-60, 1/8, 1/4, 1-mile, top end, street, roll, ride quality, comfort, etc, etc? You know all the stuff that is important in a street car, which is what you are purchasing. Or should Ford give all that up to make sure the 500 can run a Ring Lap?

Well, I can't forsee it smoking it in much other than perhaps the 1/4 mile and perhaps top speed. Truthfully, as with the SS 1LE, I'd expect it to lose to a car unencumbered with track aero. Additionally, the standard ZL1 has already cracked 200 mph....and it is officially recorded at 198.3 MPH...

I'll add here as well, GM build two ZL1's...one for street...and one for track....although both can do either.... so really, the question is, what will Ford do? Go fast in a straight line...or hit a crowd on the first curve?

Originally Posted by newmoon

Also is the present manual ZL1 or ZL1-1LE a failure because it can't match the straight line performance of the 13/14 GT-500?

In what way? The current manual ZL1 (even with the TQ nanny issues) has produced on the Camaro6 list, an 11.6 1/4 mile time...which matched or bested most of the recorded times for the 2014 GT 500 from the magazines. We can certainly agree that people got faster times in the hands of private owners, but for the sake of discussion, it's pretty even. Add in the fact that the car really needs GM to either fix the nannies or fix it with a tune, and all of a sudden you have a car that's very much a low 11.1-11.2... very easy..

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

Question:

If a car has interior performance in certain aspects, yet is utterly dominant in sales, what motivation does a company have to sacrifice those sales and profits to make the under performing car be dominant in performance?

None. Car manufacturers dont care about us, they care about money. This is why I don't understand brand loyalty. It isnt like Ford is doing anything for you. They dont give a damn about you or me. They are not somewhere on some manufacturer's forum defending you for buying a Mustang. "But he doesn't care about performance!!"

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

After how many years does it become "lazy"?

Day 1. Doing the bare minimum is ALWAYS lazy. Just because it works doesn't change that fact. They could do more and choose not to. It works in that it allows them to offer a car for fleet sales, greatly improving overall car sales numbers. GM made a mistake there I think.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Never offered the variety of model lineups? What in the hell are you smoking?

To start, I'll exclude the aftermarket/co-op jobs.... let's just start with models...

Camaro - 1LS, 2LS, 1LT, 2LT, Berlinetta, RS, RS/SS, IROC-Z, RS/Z28, SS, ZL1, 1LE V6, 1LE SS, 1LE ZL1

You also have had every generation of Camaro EXCEPT the 2nd generation car be a Indy 500 pace car model as well.

Year per year, the mustang has consistently offered a bigger variety of different model options. I have excluded Indy editions (both mustang and camaro), California special editions, premium interior trim levels etc. as they don’t represent a significant difference in models.

1979-93 Mustang (third gen):

“L, GL, GLX, LX, GT, GTS, Turbo GT, GT-350, SVO, Cobra, Cobra R, and Ghia.

1982-1992 camaro (third gen):

Sport Coupe, Berlinetta, Z28, IROC-Z, LT, RS

93-04 Mustang (fourth gen)

Mustang (v6), GT, GTS, SVT Cobra, Bullitt, Mach1, Terminator

93-02 Camaro (fourth gen)

Camaro (v6), Z28, SS

04-14 Mustang (fith gen) (excluding premium interior packages)

Mustang(V6), GT, Track Pack, Bullitt, GT500, Boss302, Boss302 Laguna Seca

09-15 Camaro (fith gen) (excluding up-level interior options)

LS, SS, Z28, ZL1

15-present Mustang (sixth gen) (excluding up-level interior options)

V6, EB, GT, PP1, PP2, GT350, GT350R, Soon to be Bullitt and GT500.

16-Present Camaro (sixth gen) (excluding up-level interior options)

LS, LT, SS, 1LE, ZL1, ZL11LE

As you can see, the mustang continuously produces more options than the Camaro.

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Now, let's discuss those aftermarket jobbies...

Lingenfelter, Callaway, Yenko, Saleen, Nickey, Hennessey, SLP, Foose, and I'm sure I'm missing more too...

Let’s compare the sheer volume of aftermarket parts available for each. Just through summit racing…

Mustang third gen.
Air and fuel -426
Brakes -331
Chassis and suspension -842
Engine and components -382
Exhaust -300

Camaro third gen
Air and fuel -211
Brakes -381
Chassis and suspension -794
Engine and components -385
Exhaust -233

Mustang sixth gen.
Air and fuel -241
Brakes -168
Chassis and suspension -154
Engine and components -133
Exhaust -280

Camaro sixth gen
Air and fuel -108
Brakes -135
Chassis and suspension -96
Engine and components -76
Exhaust -142

Again, the performance parts available for the mustang has always greatly outweighed camaro.

[2Bowties]

Lol

https://youtu.be/wBnD2hDbSOQ