[GotSSmoked]

Heck yea man! Look at those stickers! Only thing you’re rolling is that car on those coastal highways with those ridiculous tires.

[Godfatha]

MotorTrend should have a category for "Sporty Grocery Getter of the Year" so Mustang guys will feel better.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Gunmetalmissle

“alignment and aero tweaks specified in the owners manual.” A lot of high performance cars have been coming with different alignment specs for the track and the street. You can have the dealer adjust this before taking delivery if you want max performance or longer tire life. I don’t think that qualifies as not stock. Does turning the dial to track mode make the car not stock since it sat on the showroom floor in sport mode?

My take is that there's a difference between adjustments the average buyer who hardly knows one end of a wrench from the other could make from the driver seat, and adjustments that require tools and a technician's level of skill to achieve. Otherwise you could call things like headers or a big wing supplied as a trunk kit "stock", and some sanctioning bodies are adamant that they aren't. SCCA for Solo/autocross in particular.

Now if they were actually able to find a "factory freak" with the supplement alignment settings from the supplement on it the way it rolled out the production line door I'd be willing to consider that situation stock if it could be verified.

Just so you know, the Mustang in my sig was exactly that kind of factory freak at least with respect to camber - both sides were outside the factory range (more negative than 'max negative'), and no I didn't have it "fixed".


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Very fair assessment Norm.

There is no doubt that some people are scared off of the Camaro because of all they have heard about the sight lines, gun slits, turret, etc.

Thanks.

It could be the change from sedan and SUV windshield heights that is making it more noticeable and more objectionable to many drivers. Coming out of a Mazda 626, a Maxima, and a '79 Malibu the view out even the Mustang's windshield was enough shorter to notice.


Norm

[Fraxum]

Funny! This is a great thread. I did see someone say in general Mustang owners were less into owning a serious good handling car and less involved with modding. I will have to disagree there. Just look around at the mustangs you see every day and at the track(s) and talk to the owners.

I do think as both cars get more expensive owners are more reluctant to start modding and their payments get in the way as well.

And both cars are so good modding gets you less than before. As to the overall handling advantage the Camaro has, the gap is getting smaller. And while we still argue about it, acceleration looks equal to me. If something happened to my SS I would be sure to look at both cars. But I would wait to see the Camaro refresh.

But if all the above is true, then what is the point of this thread?

Come on, admit it pony fan boys, Mustangs Suck!!

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Typical? Show me one person who made that argument about sales. Or change the subject if you want.

Again, the Mustang has always outsold the Camaro. You can blame visibility but that doesn't explain the 4th Gens and 3rd Gens now does it? Loyal fanbase? That is debatable for sure. Appearance? That again is debatable. Ford gets people into the Mustang much cheaper. They throw better deals out there. And they are eager to push sales. Dealerships were getting crazy incentives from Ford to push the EBs. One dealership could not keep EBs on the lot because they were getting rid of them soo cheap. You could almost walk in and name a price and walk out with one. But that cheap price comes with a compromise. You will not get the same performance. That much has been obvious.

BTW, are you bringing up sales as a last ditch effort to walk away feeling like you got people rattled? LOL! If so then good try but you're coming up short. We all know the Camaro does not sell as much nor has it ever. Let me ask you, do you think the Mustang will continue to outsell the Camaro now that the price is equal?

Yes. Its funny the price point keeps coming up, but let me ask you this. If the 6th Gen design is not the problem why was the 5th Gen sales much better even late into the model year build? IMO the slight refresh Chevy did with the 14/15 models was enough to keep interest in the vehicle. The 6th Gen never garnered that interest.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Well if GM decides to add those items onto the car the problem solved. I don't know if that is the case or not. They did add them so I wonder if it was out of (performance) necessity or for track safety regulations or as a safety precaution or what. Maybe the lap time they achieved required extra safety equipment which would contradict their story about NOT trying to beat any records. I would like to know for sure.

Are you sure about that or is your "most likely" statement a guess? Is it possible that the Ford GT also had an alignment and other setup tweaks when it ran at the same track? Is it possible that they both did but the ZR1 just had a better alignment/setup tweak? Curious.

Again, Mustangs have ALWAYS outsold the Camaro on average. You will never find one person who disagrees with that. Back when the Camaro stopped production it was because the Mustang was outselling ALL 4th Gen F-Bodys combined. That means Firebirds, Camaros, and Trans Ams combined. But it should also be noted that Mustangs have always been much cheaper. What will happen now that the prices are equal is anyone's guess. Maybe the Mustangs will continue to sell. Maybe people will flock to the better performing Camaro. Who knows.

But when you think about it, people who have the money to afford more expensive cars will probably bypass a $52K-$55K GT that underperforms and go for a ZL1 or a base C7 Stingray. Chevy has cars all across the spectrum that perform extremely well. Ford has the GTs and then you get the underperforming Shelbys with markups. And now you won't even have the GT350s anymore since the GT500 is about to hit. Which means there will be a huge market that Ford has not tapped into. $55K convertible PP1 GT Premium to a (possibly) $70K GT500 with markups, an unknown release date, and no substantial performance data at this time. With those prices and that wide of a variance in performance the ZL1 and STingrays are going to start looking a lot more appealing.

Like I said, just mentioned it because this forum as a thing for 100% stock when it comes to something Ford does. GM goes out tests the ZR1, says they added those things but then says "other than that it's all stock" and no one here bat's an eye lol. Had Ford done that, people would have been screaming bloody murder haha.

I think it's great what the ZR1 did. With 100 more hp, 100 more ft/lbs of torque, more aggressive aero and the whole life of the C7 to get things dialed in for the ultimate Vette I am not shocked it beat the GT. Corvette has always punched way above it's weight class. I can't wait to see the take down some of the ACR track records.

Originally Posted by AJL13

I really don't understand the practically argument mustang guys are putting forth regarding visibility, interior space, etc.

If you are buying either a Camaro or a Mustang, you are already pretty much forgoing any and all reasonable practicality as far as your typical automobiles go.

"Man, I really want a fast car with only two doors and no space to haul either things or people...but by God, visibility and trunk space are absolutely imperative in my decision-making process!"

It's called making sacrifices. Take me as an example. Married, and kid #1 on the way. Don't have the ability for 3 cars so only 2. If I was dead set on getting something sporty I would for sure have to make sure it was the most liveable out of my choices. That is when stuff like trunk space, visibility ease of access can make or break or sale.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Perceived visibility. Effective visibility. In the Mustang you can see more stuff around you and the car. How much of that stuff you can see will impact your driving is up for debate. But it is perceived as an issue.

Example: If you're walking in a straight line with nothing on your head or face then you can see everything around you. Now ifI put a helmet on your head you can still walk in a straight line. But going from no helmet to having a helmet you would feel that your visibility is compromised even if you're still just walking in a straight line. You can still see the ground and everything in front of you that you need to see to walk safely. But you have less visibility.

My argument is that the Camaro has less visibility, but none of that visibility has an actual impact on driving the vehicle. It simply seems like you can't see out of it. I can drive my ZL1 at any time of the day or night in heavy traffic and zigzag in and out of lanes without a worry at all. And it is because I can see everything that I need to see to operate the vehicle safely. Just because it has less visibility doesn't mean it doesn't have enough visibility.

Very well said sir.

Originally Posted by newmoon

Yes. Its funny the price point keeps coming up, but let me ask you this. If the 6th Gen design is not the problem why was the 5th Gen sales much better even late into the model year build? IMO the slight refresh Chevy did with the 14/15 models was enough to keep interest in the vehicle. The 6th Gen never garnered that interest.

It is an interesting discussion to be had. The 6th gen is worlds better than the 5th gen, yet it's sales are really lacking compared to 5th gen. IIRC this January was the worst month of sales for the Camaro since it came back from the dead. Why?

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Yes. Its funny the price point keeps coming up, but let me ask you this. If the 6th Gen design is not the problem why was the 5th Gen sales much better even late into the model year build? IMO the slight refresh Chevy did with the 14/15 models was enough to keep interest in the vehicle. The 6th Gen never garnered that interest.

My thought on this, there wasn’t enough change between the two looks wise for many not to change. And as you have said many times, most don’t care about performance, so there just wasn’t enough to change. The Mustang totally changed in looks, so many wanted the new Euro look. I read many who bought a 14 Mustang and soon after reveal of the 15 they were trading in car taking huge hits in loss money, but wanted the irs and looks of the new one. Imho this bit GM in the arse. I had a 13 Camaro and when I saw the 16 it just wasn’t enough for me to upgrade as to many would think I had the same car. So I bought a Vette.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Yes. Its funny the price point keeps coming up, but let me ask you this. If the 6th Gen design is not the problem why was the 5th Gen sales much better even late into the model year build? IMO the slight refresh Chevy did with the 14/15 models was enough to keep interest in the vehicle. The 6th Gen never garnered that interest.

6th Gen was a significant jump in price over 5th Gen due in large part to the expense of the Alpha architecture, just like 2018 Mustang is a significant jump in price over 2017 due to adding Magna-Ride, dual fuel injection and other tech.

[Quinten_33]

Originally Posted by SDG23

Who cares if the Mustang outsells the Camaro and what does that have anything to do with how good or bad a car is?? Mustangs are cheap, that's why people buy them. When I'm driving down the road and pass two dozen v6 automatic convertible Mustangs (half of them with huge dents in them) on my way home, I don't see a special car, I see a cheap cookie cutter piece of mediocrity. I really enjoy my 6th Gen and the fact that I don't see very many of them makes it cooler, I think.

I agree. I once counted twenty s550 mustangs in a day out at Jax beach, and all of them were different. You kinda begin to ignore them because they're more common that Subarus at this point(in the south, NOT up north). There's about 20 6th gen Camaros in my entire area. And guess what? half of them are well equipped SS's! 2LTs are the other common spec around here. There are 3 SS 1LEs and a ZL1 as well. But 75% of the mustangs I see are either an Ecoboost or V6. Half of those are convertibles. Not a singe GT350 or 350R within 25 miles that isn't sitting on a lot.

Mustang just aren't special enough. I'd rather get a Scat Pack than fit in with the dozens of GTs around town. Camaros stand out, and win on the track.

[Martinjlm]

Photos from North American International Auto Show. McQueen Bullitt and 2018 Bullitt side-by-side

[Martinjlm]

....and this was right across the aisle

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by 13vertss/r's

My thought on this, there wasn’t enough change between the two looks wise for many not to change. And as you have said many times, most don’t care about performance, so there just wasn’t enough to change. The Mustang totally changed in looks, so many wanted the new Euro look. I read many who bought a 14 Mustang and soon after reveal of the 15 they were trading in car taking huge hits in loss money, but wanted the irs and looks of the new one. Imho this bit GM in the arse. I had a 13 Camaro and when I saw the 16 it just wasn’t enough for me to upgrade as to many would think I had the same car. So I bought a Vette.

I think Chevy nailed it with the 14/15, best design year of the modern Camaro. Myself I went the other way I thought the 13/14 Mustang was the best design years, I really don't care for the 15-18 Mustang Looks other than the GT350.

[keon718nyc]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I think Chevy nailed it with the 14/15, best design year of the modern Camaro. Myself I went the other way I thought the 13/14 Mustang was the best design years, I really don't care for the 15-18 Mustang Looks other than the GT350.

Chevy nailed it with the Gen 6. Your brain is still in the modern days with your thoughts. And the 15-18' Mustang looks better then previous years. At least from when its in my rear view mirror LOL.