[mr02Z/28]

I bet the 7 or 8" touch screen is shared and I'm sure the MRC and LT1 is Corvette territory, it makes sense for being mass produced that parts are sourced from other areas ...

[Razzaa]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

I bet the 7 or 8" touch screen is shared and I'm sure the MRC and LT1 is Corvette territory, it makes sense for being mass produced that parts are sourced from other areas ...

Of course they are shared with other GM models.......Have you ever looked at the various parts shared throughout FCA's lineup? It is endless.

[mr02Z/28]

I believe you ....

[aestil]

@Posaune How confident are you in those Cars.com numbers?

I narrowed my search a bit and looked at 6 Chevy dealerships near me in Los Angeles. 330 Camaros in inventory.

I looked at 6 Ford Dealerships in a similar area and came up with 607 Mustangs on lots.

I'm assuming that the dealership websites have accurate counts for cars that they have in inventory. These inventory levels seem to really be the opposite of what Cars.com inventory levels are saying.

[Number 3]

Shared parts doesn't mean cheap parts.

And the Camaro is no more a parts bin car than the Mustang is.

Biggest shared part the Camaro has is the Alpha architecture. Yes Camaro gets the advantage of that development cost but it still has to live with the piece cost. The architecture with a sole purpose of destroying a BMW 3 Series is not also GMs best cost solution for a Chevrolet.

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Shared parts doesn't mean cheap parts.

And the Camaro is no more a parts bin car than the Mustang is.

Biggest shared part the Camaro has is the Alpha architecture. Yes Camaro gets the advantage of that development cost but it still has to live with the piece cost. The architecture with a sole purpose of destroying a BMW 3 Series is not also GMs best cost solution for a Chevrolet.

Agreed. Lots of suppliers required to build a car.

[Davy_Baby9]

It's not overpriced for it's equipment, but it is overpriced compared to the competition, which therefore makes it overpriced to the general consumer.

Typical customer wants a v8 at a decent price, cross shops a $30k RT Challenger or $32k GT Mustang to a $38k Camaro. Hell, you can get a Ecoboost Mustang for almost $2k cheaper than the base camaro without the V6.

[Red Chief]

Originally Posted by Raven87

Now, the Cars.Com is far from being totally accurate as to sales inventory but it is a decent measuring tool. And actually, there are probably more numbers out there than what C.C shows because a lot of dealers do not advertise/list on C.C.

But as of this morning, C.C shows 24,887 NEW 2016 and 2017 Camaros - of all trims and body types - available for sale.

Using the same filters for the Mustang, there are 16,671 new Mustangs. That is ~8000 more Camaros sitting on lots than Mustangs and yet the sales strategy for GM is to make more profit by selling less?

What does this really say? That having about 2 months more inventory is a good thing when you are already sliding backwards? Hopefully this will change but we know it won't. We are really coming to the end of the sports car selling season and there will be a lot of these cars still there come winter, especially with GM building more and more every day.

Yes, the Camaro is a better performance car. I agree 100%. But this strategy of GM's just does not make sense.

I used KBB to to price compare Camaros and Mustangs on the eastern side of Missouri and Mustangs are almost scarce comparatively. So far the best deal I've seen on the GT is 30k and the best I've seen for the SS is 37k.

The Camaro team figured out how to lower the body weight...now they need to figure out how to lower the price.

[Razzaa]

Originally Posted by Davy_Baby9

It's not overpriced for it's equipment, but it is overpriced compared to the competition, which therefore makes it overpriced to the general consumer.



Typical customer wants a v8 at a decent price, cross shops a $30k RT Challenger or $32k GT Mustang to a $38k Camaro. Hell, you can get a Ecoboost Mustang for almost $2k cheaper than the base camaro without the V6.

I test drove a RT. There is no comparison to the SS in my opinion. The RT felt sluggish. I also bought my SS knowing I would never have more than 1 passenger. Also, It isn't my only vehicle. The performance is what sealed the deal for me. Most people buy their vehicles for different reasons though, especially if it is going to be their only vehicle.

[z28guy30]

Originally Posted by Doc

Chevy has managed to put themselves in a bind with this car. The performance team wanted it to perform like a $66K+ car and they nailed it. It is now without question, a high-performance sports GT. The style team however, wasn't willing to stray too far from the 5th gen and that's where the bind is. The price reflects what the performance team created, but that's not something you see when you look at the car.

If they want to move the Camaro upscale to compete with something like a BMW, they're going to have to upscale the looks. It's nice as it is, but nice isn't enough. Even though it performs like a $66k+ car, it doesn't look like one...it just doesn't. Regardless of what the apologists want to say, the looks don't match the public's perception of what a car in that performance category should look like, and that's the bind Chevy is in.

I'm sorry to have to say, that regardless of what it costs, they have to completely redesign the body and interior IF they want it to truly move upscale. Where it sits right now, it has completely lost the blue-collar impulse buyer, which is why there's such a backlog of inventory. Buyers are looking at what clearly looks like a slightly upgraded 5th gen Camaro, and then they look at the sticker price and go....nope.

Now if it looked like something that should have McLaren or Aston Martin on the side, then that would be a different story. Once you hit a certain price point, and the Camaro has clearly reached that point, looks and style become dramatically more important than just performance. I think the Camaro team focused on catering to the 20% of the customer base who wanted performance, and they nailed it. And that's where the bulk of the sales have been. But it doesn't appear they've pulled anybody from the higher levels of affluence who are the BMW sports GT customers. So they're somewhat stuck. Too expensive for the 80%, not stylish enough for the upper affluent types, already sold to the loyal 20%. Where do they go from here?

My recommendation would be to either come out with a much more affordable base model, or go all-in on upscale and redesign the body and interior to match what the performance team has (and is) delivering. Although unfortunately, I don't think that even with an upscale look, they'll get the blue-collar worker back. It's already out of their price range and market segment. If leaving them behind is their plan, well okay but get serious about being truly upscale, and that absolutely includes looks. If you want to appeal to the supercar segment, it better look like it or they won't even give it a second look.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. They need a revived pony car, like the original Camaro. The 80% of the market they're leaving behind might not be the most affluent, but they buy a LOT of cars and there's a lot to be said for marketing and street presence. Street reputation among that crowd counts for a lot when it comes to buying decisions. The words "too expensive" are a sales-killer, and unfortunately that appears to be where the 6th gen is sitting right now.

Everyone talks about how the 6th generation Camaro has not strayed too far in terms of styling from the 5th generation Camaro, but has anyone paid attention to BMW? Every BMW model for the past decade or more looks pretty much the same. lol

[Tmcbigblue]

I paid 36,000 for my 1ss npp 6speed car. I think that was a heck of a deal. I drove a loaded gt mustang 6speed that sticker price was around 43,000. The Stang was nice but the ss kicks the crap out of it in how it drives. Most of the Mustangs everyone is referring to are the ones that don't even have the performance package(brembos brakes, better suspension, bigger radiator all the good stuff). The one I drove was totally loaded and it didn't drive anywhere near as good as mine. I would rather pay more for car. It costs more because it is a better car. Engine, wheels, brakes, transmission, chassis, ext. everything performance wise is better! The mustang still has a damn rod to hold the hood up when you pop the hood, has the battery in the front. Little stuff like that on the mustang is just not as nice a car. The new Camaro is the best performance bargain out and people complaining about the price well buy a base gt mustang and have a pretty quick car in a straight line, but not much else. My car drives and feels like a sports car.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Tmcbigblue

I paid 36,000 for my 1ss npp 6speed car. I think that was a heck of a deal. I drove a loaded gt mustang 6speed that sticker price was around 43,000. The Stang was nice but the ss kicks the crap out of it in how it drives. Most of the Mustangs everyone is referring to are the ones that don't even have the performance package(brembos brakes, better suspension, bigger radiator all the good stuff). The one I drove was totally loaded and it didn't drive anywhere near as good as mine. I would rather pay more for car. It costs more because it is a better car. Engine, wheels, brakes, transmission, chassis, ext. everything performance wise is better! The mustang still has a damn rod to hold the hood up when you pop the hood, has the battery in the front. Little stuff like that on the mustang is just not as nice a car. The new Camaro is the best performance bargain out and people complaining about the price well buy a base gt mustang and have a pretty quick car in a straight line, but not much else. My car drives and feels like a sports car.

You got your car for just a tick over employee pricing. Ford employee pricing for a GT with Performance Pack and Recaro seats is $34,000.

Most people in the know will also say the Mustang handle very well, not like a sports car probably because neither is really a sports car.

Everyone has different tastes and needs especially in a car. We on this site tend to assume that what is right for us is right for everyone. it isn't.

For many people buying a Chevrolet still has a stigma. Buying GM still has a stigma. Many people will still pick a Ford simply because of that.

For some that $2,000 is part of the decision. If you aren't taking your car to the track and you aren't looking to street race or prove yourself on Woodward Avenue, a 4.5 second car is still REALLY FAST.

For some people the simple fact the Camaro has a 2/3 of the trunk space matters.

For some, the gun slit windows in the Camaro are a turn off.

For some, the BA aggressive styling is a turn off.

And I hate to tell you but many of the things on your list that make it a better car for you, don't matter one bit to the people buying non SS and non GT cars. And in fact a prop rod and a rear battery (which is harder to jump and replace) probably do very little in the purchase decision.

Yes, I've walked around a Mustang and I can pick nits over many areas of the body for fit and finish. I am very picky in this regard, most likely more than anyone you know. And I can assure you, most people can't tell the difference.

The guy I know that just got that $34,000 GT is happy as a clam and has not a single complaint in the world. Loves his Mustang as much as I think you love your Camaro.

Also not quite sure how a comparison of your base 1SS vs a loaded GT is a comparison at all. The point everyone is making is that YES, the loaded GT is $43,000 and a well equipped 2SS is $47,000.

People still pick Porsche over Corvette and pay twice the money for the pleasure of doing so. Has little to do with the wonderful interior and world class performance the Corvette now has or what magazines pick it over the Porsche.

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by Tmcbigblue

I paid 36,000 for my 1ss npp 6speed car. I think that was a heck of a deal. I drove a loaded gt mustang 6speed that sticker price was around 43,000. The Stang was nice but the ss kicks the crap out of it in how it drives. Most of the Mustangs everyone is referring to are the ones that don't even have the performance package(brembos brakes, better suspension, bigger radiator all the good stuff). The one I drove was totally loaded and it didn't drive anywhere near as good as mine. I would rather pay more for car. It costs more because it is a better car. Engine, wheels, brakes, transmission, chassis, ext. everything performance wise is better! The mustang still has a damn rod to hold the hood up when you pop the hood, has the battery in the front. Little stuff like that on the mustang is just not as nice a car. The new Camaro is the best performance bargain out and people complaining about the price well buy a base gt mustang and have a pretty quick car in a straight line, but not much else. My car drives and feels like a sports car.

You and I have seen the light. I think GM new exactly what they are doing with this car. They already had the mass rush of sales on the G5 due to pent up demand. How do you attract new buyers or get existing G5 users to upgrade? You need to build a better car and they did.

[Tmcbigblue]

I could care less if someone like the mustang better than the Camaro. Hell I like the new mustangs and almost bought one. I bought I v8 because I wanted a performance car. I'm not talking trunk size or how you can see out of it. Straight up performance. and the the Camaro is better driving, handling, accelerating hands down. Now I'm talking performance, that what I was looking for. I would never criticize someone who has a mustang and likes their car. Different strokes for different folks. All thee are awesome cars! I'm just tired of hearing they are overpriced because they aren't for the performance they provide. They are bargains really. Def not a car for everyone though.