[Posaune]

Originally Posted by xray

Thank you for this. You're the only one I've seen who actually has some proof that what they're saying is correct. Haven't known what to believe otherwise.

I do make an effort not to post BS.

[aestil]

Originally Posted by Posaune

I do make an effort not to post BS.

Do they idle the plants during winter months typically? I read somewhere that they stop production on these cars in winter, but I found that to be very suspect. Is that accurate?

[Posaune]

Originally Posted by aestil

Do they idle the plants during winter months typically? I read somewhere that they stop production on these cars in winter, but I found that to be very suspect. Is that accurate?

I've never heard or seen anything about idling the plants in the winter "just because". The last time I heard of LGR being idled, it was for three weeks in 2014 (Aug IIRC) because of an over abundance of ATS and CTSs sitting on dealer lots.

I wouldn't be surprised if they did shutdown around the holidays for a week or two. I know of a few manufacturers (not automotive) who do that.

[HogsFan75]

Originally Posted by nvrsatisfied

Me thinks you're an idiot. You are just so upset that your Gen5 is a has been. You need to enter every monthly sales thread to try and make the Gen6 sound so awful. You accuse Gen6 owners of getting butt hurt when you post negative BS about their cars, but you and your non owner posse are really the ones that get butt hurt just because we have the cars and you don't.

You should get the dickhead of the year award.

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by nvrsatisfied

He specifically named me in his post to another forum member. I didn't attack him, I posted my response

While calling him an idiot, which is a personal attack, and against the forum rules that you agreed to.

[triggerjerk]

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

Overpriced because it's a parts bin wonder? Umm, okay.. It uses BETTER parts, hence the higher price. It's pretty simple actually.

The car doesn't wheel hop like a mother****er. The transmission is better. The car is lighter than competitor all while having a bigger gas tank. The car is lighter than competitor while running on heavier 20 inch wheels and heavier run flat tires. The car is lighter than competitor while having a heavier and better transmission. The car has 55 more torque and 20 extra horsepower while getting the same fuel economy as Mustang manual to manual. Camaro doesn't have a floaty feel due to the suspension like Mustang does. Camaro has a better instrument cluster. Camaro doesn't have buttons on dash galore on the base v8 model. It kills the base Mustang on the strip and the track.

These things may not be worth an extra 4k over the base Mustang to most people or 1.5 more over a GT PP to most people, but it doesn't make it overpriced for what it offers.

You can fix the suspension issues issues and lack of tires on the base Mustang with aftermarket and it'll probably be a great performer. 1200 for handling package and whatever it costs someone to install it if you're not doing it yourself.. You can probably pick up somewhat decent wheels and tires for 2,500, but nothing high end.

Higher resale values may help GM by potential customer purchasing new instead of used due to prices.

No, what is simple is that parts are SHARED with other cars which usually (historically in the 50 years of the Camaro until now) leads to lower prices.

Originally Posted by DenverTaco07

Go tell it to GM, it's their strategy...maybe you can be CEO.

Maybe I should, after all their strategy isn't working.

[nvrsatisfied]

Originally Posted by HogsFan75

You should get the dickhead of the year award.

You got it for 2016, I'll have to wait for 2017.

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy

Overpriced because it's a parts bin wonder? Umm, okay.. It uses BETTER parts, hence the higher price. It's pretty simple actually.

The car doesn't wheel hop like a mother****er. The transmission is better. The car is lighter than competitor all while having a bigger gas tank. The car is lighter than competitor while running on heavier 20 inch wheels and heavier run flat tires. The car is lighter than competitor while having a heavier and better transmission. The car has 55 more torque and 20 extra horsepower while getting the same fuel economy as Mustang manual to manual. Camaro doesn't have a floaty feel due to the suspension like Mustang does. Camaro has a better instrument cluster. Camaro doesn't have buttons on dash galore on the base v8 model. It kills the base Mustang on the strip and the track.

These things may not be worth an extra 4k over the base Mustang to most people or 1.5 more over a GT PP to most people, but it doesn't make it overpriced for what it offers.

You can fix the suspension issues issues and lack of tires on the base Mustang with aftermarket and it'll probably be a great performer. 1200 for handling package and whatever it costs someone to install it if you're not doing it yourself.. You can probably pick up somewhat decent wheels and tires for 2,500, but nothing high end.

Higher resale values may help GM by potential customer purchasing new instead of used due to prices.

Great points. My only concern is when folks say the new Camaro is overpriced when they don't peel back the layers of the onion and try to find out why it may be more expensive than some of its competitors. I call that being a lazy buyer.

You mentioned a number of great reasons that the price is justified. You really have to drive all of the cars to get a better feel for the differences. When you feel the A8 rip through the gears like a wild banshee or experience what Active Rev match is like on the Tremec M6 (not an MT82) and hear the NPP exhaust bark between shifts it is a glorious thing. The first time you hit your first turn in the Camaro vs. the Challenger or Mustang you will realize it right away. Plus, if you are getting older like me you will appreciate the ability to soften or firm up the suspension with MRC with the flip of a switch.

I buy these types of cars for the driving experience they offer. The looks to me are actually secondary. I personally think the Challenger Scat Pack looks the coolest rolling down the road but I would never own it because it does not drive like the Camaro SS. The looks eventually get dated but the driving experience doesn't, at least not for me.

So, the Camaro is not overpriced, it is just more than some are willing to pay. You have two choices, settle for something less and pay less or pay a little more and get more. On a large dollar purchase like a car I am not going to let $3-4k over a 4-6 years cause me to settle for something less.

[nvrsatisfied]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

Great points. My only concern is when folks say the new Camaro is overpriced when they don't peel back the layers of the onion and try to find out why it may be more expensive than some of its competitors. I call that being a lazy buyer.

You mentioned a number of great reasons that the price is justified. You really have to drive all of the cars to get a better feel for the differences. When you feel the A8 rip through the gears like a wild banshee or experience what Active Rev match is like on the Tremec M6 (not an MT82) and hear the NPP exhaust bark between shifts it is a glorious thing. The first time you hit your first turn in the Camaro vs. the Challenger or Mustang you will realize it right away. Plus, if you are getting older like me you will appreciate the ability to soften or firm up the suspension with MRC with the flip of a switch.

I buy these types of cars for the driving experience they offer. The looks to me are actually secondary. I personally think the Challenger Scat Pack looks the coolest rolling down the road but I would never own it because it does not drive like the Camaro SS. The looks eventually get dated but the driving experience doesn't, at least not for me.

So, the Camaro is not overpriced, it is just more than some are willing to pay. You have two choices, settle for something less and pay less or pay a little more and get more. On a large dollar purchase like a car I am not going to let $3-4k over a 4-6 years cause me to settle for something less.

I really like the look of the Challenger as well, it's just doesn't handle well enough. I wouldn't mind having it as a third car

[ssrs2lt]

Wow tough place lately..need focus on topic. The sales which are down..

[aestil]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

Great points. My only concern is when folks say the new Camaro is overpriced when they don't peel back the layers of the onion and try to find out why it may be more expensive than some of its competitors. I call that being a lazy buyer.

You mentioned a number of great reasons that the price is justified. You really have to drive all of the cars to get a better feel for the differences. When you feel the A8 rip through the gears like a wild banshee or experience what Active Rev match is like on the Tremec M6 (not an MT82) and hear the NPP exhaust bark between shifts it is a glorious thing. The first time you hit your first turn in the Camaro vs. the Challenger or Mustang you will realize it right away. Plus, if you are getting older like me you will appreciate the ability to soften or firm up the suspension with MRC with the flip of a switch.

I buy these types of cars for the driving experience they offer. The looks to me are actually secondary. I personally think the Challenger Scat Pack looks the coolest rolling down the road but I would never own it because it does not drive like the Camaro SS. The looks eventually get dated but the driving experience doesn't, at least not for me.

So, the Camaro is not overpriced, it is just more than some are willing to pay. You have two choices, settle for something less and pay less or pay a little more and get more. On a large dollar purchase like a car I am not going to let $3-4k over a 4-6 years cause me to settle for something less.

These are basically my sentiments [except I don't care for the Challenger looks that much]. If I'm spending around $40k for the car, I better be getting exactly what I want, and if ends up being about $3k or $4k more, then that's fine with me.

I do think that the poor visibility and maybe to a lesser extent the tiny trunk opening have turned people off though. For some people all they want is a V8 or the looks of a 'sports car'. For those people they go, 'yeah all these cars look good, let me get the one that gives me the most value'. For them, the value is not in the ridiculous track performance you get in the SS. The value is in a nice burbley V8 or muscle car looks or whatever. There fore the Camaro is a 'compromised' vehicle for them. It compromises space, or visibility or economy. Those people buy a Mustang or a Challenger precisely because they don't see the value in the track performance of the Camaro, because that type of performance was never that important to them anyways.

For me, the Camaro is the first 'american muscle car' I have ever been interested in, and it is for the reason that it is more like a true sports car. To me it's an incredible value at around $45k for what I'm getting and for what I value. But I think clearly a lot of people would rather get the GT Premium Mustang and pay around $35k or something for that. Both the $45k Camaro and the $35k GT Premium tick all the same boxes for this type of person, so why should they spend $45k.

The big argument in this thread is, 'was that to be expected?'. I think, it HAD to be expected, but there are valid arguments being made about the extra production and apparently high inventory levels that seem to indicate that GM thought more Camaros would be sold than are being sold.

From my perspective, if you increase the price of the new generation over the older generation by around 10%, you should expect to sell less. And if they sell around 60k units a year, that seems like a success. But based on current production and stock levels, I think they are probably selling around 800-900/mo less units than they thought they would, which would mean they probably thought they would sell around 10k more units [annually] then they are on track to. I don't know if that means that the Camaro isn't profitable, or if they have a very large range of possible outcomes which keep the program profitable. I'd say no one could know that except the executives at GM.

But I hope that they get their production under control, if in fact it is a problem.

[ssrs2lt]

Good point production is initially set then flexed accordingly..how reactive manufacturers are creates the manufacturer flex plan..kinda locked in, esp if the process has been optimized..complicated to the point where suppliers may not enable manufacturers to slow or speed up production..

[ChefBorOzzy]

Originally Posted by triggerjerk

No, what is simple is that parts are SHARED with other cars which usually (historically in the 50 years of the Camaro until now) leads to lower prices.

Maybe I should, after all their strategy isn't working.

So, GM's better engineered car (minus usability) should cost less than an inferior product because it shares parts with some other GM cars? LOL.

From what I remember, Camaro has pretty much always been more expensive than Mustang.. So, yeah..

[Marty McFlew]

Originally Posted by newb

I made the statement months ago that GM appears to be attempting to move all of their cars upscale a notch in price and quality. Does that leave the Mustang to it's own segment? Who knows. But clearly Camaro is not trying to stay on the Mustang level. They are faster, higher quality, and more expensive. That tells me they aren't trying to play to the same crowd as the mustang. Maybe in the lower trims, but not in the SS and up.

So that just means that Mustang will again step up there game and probably raise prices too and we all lose. People want Mustangs and Camaro performance cars, if they want to step up then get a Cadillac.