[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

The MT and R&T visuals give a good side by side comparison between the Alpha Camaro and S550 Mustang.
The R&T image shows their belt line about the same height. Camaro roof and seating position is lower.

We've seen review after review criticizing the Camaro for its visibility and the Mustang's high seating position. You sit in a Camaro. You sit "on top of a stack of phonebooks" in the Mustang

My experience is that the high beltline vs seating position makes an intimidating first impression. It throws your perception of the surroundings off.

Your senses adjust to it quickly but its a hard sell to a passive buyer.

boom. So that is something that can't be overlooked. There is the preconceived notion of bad visibility from every review on the camaro. Then you get in it and on a limited test drive it can be overwhelming. Adn thsoe are your words, someone who has owned 3 sixth gens and a first gen. Yes you can adjust to it, and most cars require an adjustment. but that initial shock could throw a lot of people off course.

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

So, a lot of the conversation, not all but a lot, here seems to lean in on the lack of advertising being a huge contributing factor in Camaro sales faultering vs Mustang and Challenger numbers. Now, I don't really watch TVs so likely I'm just out of the loop but I don't really recall any memorable ads for Challenger or Mustang in the last decade, if not longer. Can someone post the most recent ones? I've heard the formerly FCA ad team was pretty good at what they did.

Mustang has had 3 ads that I remember in the last 5 years. There was the one with the microphone held up to the exhaust, there was one where the mustang was featured in the beginning of an ad for trucks and SUVs but it was there and one where a class room of kids were shocked to see their teacher get into a Mustang GT.

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

Camaro sales and the lack of them doesn't hurt GM bottom line as much.


Now lets say if sales totally tanked on the Silverado, Equinox or Trailblazer GM would be pulling out all the stops to stop the bleeding. That's their main revenue generators there. That's why GM puts all their efforts into those vehicles.

Camaro sales don't hurt the bottom line much, but camaro was supposed to be a volume car at the plant it's built at. Sharing a platform with Cadillac, a chevy is supposed to be the one that keeps the lights on by keeping everyone busy.

Originally Posted by Chevelle vs Camaro

You keep on bringing base models up but the are a small part of the market share. Most people want the extra’s.... they build what the dealers order and dealers order what sell. Pricing of base models is not a factor....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

60-70% of the cars sold in this segment are equipped with the base engines. So maybe not base models, but the base engine is a huge part of the market share

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by samurai

You can't compare these channels at all. Stangmode is releasing a video every few days with a lot of the typical Vlog stuff and talking about every car he founds.
Lethal in comparison only focussed on his Camaro projects, installation guides and some news here and then, but overall releases much fewer videos for a way smaller target audience

That's just it the vlog stuff is what gets people's attention nowadays. Every Stangmode video there is a Mustang somewhere in the video. Hell Ford even had Stangmode come out to check out the Bronco. Both Ford and Dodge do a better job at marketing their sports cars to a younger crowd looking to buy. Nowadays you need some sort of social media interaction to help your product sell and get your name and product out there.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Puddin

That's just it the vlog stuff is what gets people's attention nowadays. Every Stangmode video there is a Mustang somewhere in the video. Hell Ford even had Stangmode come out to check out the Bronco. Both Ford and Dodge do a better job at marketing their sports cars to a younger crowd looking to buy. Nowadays you need some sort of social media interaction to help your product sell and get your name and product out there.

I think the visibility doesn't help as well. I mean, that's not a huge chunk of it but it's certainly hurting sales too a bit I think.


The Camaro and even TransAm lack of sales dates back to the 90s.


Remember when the Mustang in the early 2000s and late 90s was crushing the Camaro and Firebird, Trans Am even though the Camaro and Firebird both blew the Mustang way performance wise? That's one I could not understand because the Mustang was inferior in many ways to those two cars. Even the chassis was fugly I think.


I couldn't understand that because when I was in high school in 98-2002 we all loved the Camaro and Firebird. A couple guys at school had the Camaro SS. I ended up with a Mustang GT, 1999 cause my dad thought the SS and Transam had too much power for me. Guys didn't like the newer Mustang GT as much, but the 5.0 because it was smaller and could be modded easier to be faster.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

I think the visibility doesn't help as well. I mean, that's not a huge chunk of it but it's certainly hurting sales too a bit I think.


The Camaro and even TransAm lack of sales dates back to the 90s.


Remember when the Mustang in the early 2000s and late 90s was crushing the Camaro and Firebird, Trans Am even though the Camaro and Firebird both blew the Mustang way performance wise? That's one I could not understand because the Mustang was inferior in many ways to those two cars. Even the chassis was fugly I think.


I couldn't understand that because when I was in high school in 98-2002 we all loved the Camaro and Firebird. A couple guys at school had the Camaro SS. I ended up with a Mustang GT, 1999 cause my dad thought the SS and Transam had too much power for me. Guys didn't like the newer Mustang GT as much, but the 5.0 because it was smaller and could be modded easier to be faster.

Yep I remember and it's as if Gm never learned anything from it. Same mistakes except this time both of the other competitors are just as fast in a straight line.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Puddin

Yep I remember and it's as if Gm never learned anything from it. Same mistakes except this time both of the other competitors are just as fast in a straight line.

Not sure about it. I don't remember those three cars being advertised much.


I guess the cost and gas mileage might have also tipped the scale to the Mustang.


However I remember test driving a 1998 Mustang GT ragtop and man did that feel slow as balls. My 99 was much faster even though still not that fast of a car.


because the 1999 Mustang GT still was not in the same class for performance as the Firebird and Camaro.


I'm thinking a lot of people didn't buy the Mustang GT just for speed though.



Ford finally made a respectable car in the 2005 GT, the S197 platform. That really helped kick off the current muscle car war. I had a 2006 and in the 0-60 they're quick cars, 5 seconds, but the quarter mile they're not very good cars.


But anyway, those 1999 to 2004 Mustangs were utter garbage though. Looks, performance, reliability and so on.

[Puddin]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

Not sure about it. I don't remember those three cars being advertised much.


I guess the cost and gas mileage might have also tipped the scale to the Mustang.


However I remember test driving a 1998 Mustang GT ragtop and man did that feel slow as balls. My 99 was much faster even though still not that fast of a car.


because the 1999 Mustang GT still was not in the same class for performance as the Firebird and Camaro.


I'm thinking a lot of people didn't buy the Mustang GT just for speed though.



Ford finally made a respectable car in the 2005 GT, the S197 platform. That really helped kick off the current muscle car war. I had a 2006 and in the 0-60 they're quick cars, 5 seconds, but the quarter mile they're not very good cars.


But anyway, those 1999 to 2004 Mustangs were utter garbage though. Looks, performance, reliability and so on.

https://youtu.be/fSofPi7FaZw
Here's one and there were plenty more.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

But anyway, those 1999 to 2004 Mustangs were utter garbage though. Looks, performance, reliability and so on.

The entire Fox/SN95/New Edge Mustang family line was never the equal of the 3rd gen F-body. The biggest offender was probably its triangulated 4-link rear suspension . . . a design that was geometrically very similar to a late-1960s Chevelle.

Yeah, the S197 made for a huge improvement handling-wise. Though to get the most out of its potential the final suspension calibration was really left to careful selection of aftermarket parts by the consumer. That's basically what put me in my 2008 GT. That, and no acceptable alternative at the time.


IIRC, even the quarter mile ETs weren't all that shabby for only 300 HP and 3500 or so lbs.


Norm

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

The entire Fox/SN95/New Edge Mustang family line was never the equal of the 3rd gen F-body. The biggest offender was probably its triangulated 4-link rear suspension . . . a design that was geometrically very similar to a late-1960s Chevelle.

Yeah, the S197 made for a huge improvement handling-wise. Though to get the most out of its potential the final suspension calibration was really left to careful selection of aftermarket parts by the consumer. That's basically what put me in my 2008 GT. That, and no acceptable alternative at the time.


IIRC, even the quarter mile ETs weren't all that shabby for only 300 HP and 3500 or so lbs.


Norm

I personally liked the look of the 2005-09 GTs as well. I still can't get over how the late 90s Mustang sold more for being a big turd. They really were terrible.



the 2005-2010 Mustang GTs are still a bargain if you can get one in good shape cheap. Just slap on a super charger and you have a very fast car for cheap!

[CamaroSSStlfan]

The 99Z28 just blows the Mustang GT away.

[Silveradoss573]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

The 99Z28 just blows the Mustang GT away.

And yet ford sold more mustangs than gm did with the Camaro and firebird...combined. And while ford was looking into the future with new mustang models and packages the Camaro....well we all know how that turned out.

My point is that you and a few others just won't ever get it through your heads that there is more to a fun V8 coupe than just 0-60 times or how fast it went around a certain track. And this again is part of the reason why ford has a loyal fanbase and the sales reflect this year after year, decade after decade.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Silveradoss573

And yet ford sold more mustangs than gm did with the Camaro and firebird...combined. And while ford was looking into the future with new mustang models and packages the Camaro....well we all know how that turned out.

My point is that you and a few others just won't ever get it through your heads that there is more to a fun V8 coupe than just 0-60 times or how fast it went around a certain track. And this again is part of the reason why ford has a loyal fanbase and the sales reflect this year after year, decade after decade.

What is so special about the 1999-04 GT? I had one. Chassis sucks, slow, cheap interior, very unreliable and dated looking.


Camaro and Firebird faster, better styling, better interior (I know still plastic)


I can easily see why the S197 and current Mustang sell more than Gen 5 and Gen 6 though, better visibility, similar performance numbers and is cheaper than the Camaro. But those late 90s Mustang turds boggles my mind.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

What is so special about the 1999-04 GT? I had one. Chassis sucks, slow, cheap interior, very unreliable and dated looking.


Camaro and Firebird faster, better styling, better interior (I know still plastic)


I can easily see why the S197 and current Mustang sell more than Gen 5 and Gen 6 though, better visibility, similar performance numbers and is cheaper than the Camaro. But those late 90s Mustang turds boggles my mind.

The SN95s likely just kept the public's interest better. Between the options provided by Ford (Cobra R's, Bullitt, Mach1, Terminator) and the 3rd party (Boss Shinoda, Roush, Steeda Q-series, Saleen S-series, etc) there was always something to catch someone's eye.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

What is so special about the 1999-04 GT? I had one. Chassis sucks, slow, cheap interior, very unreliable and dated looking.


Camaro and Firebird faster, better styling, better interior (I know still plastic)


I can easily see why the S197 and current Mustang sell more than Gen 5 and Gen 6 though, better visibility, similar performance numbers and is cheaper than the Camaro. But those late 90s Mustang turds boggles my mind.

Ford constantly updates the Mustang with new packages and special editions that actually bring performance updates. Camaro rolls out 1 or 2 performance variants and the rest are sticker packages.

Ford builds what the customer wants. GM builds what they can from the parts they have. Are the GM parts better? Absolutely but its formulaic and gets stale after a few years.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Ford constantly updates the Mustang with new packages and special editions that actually bring performance updates. Camaro rolls out 1 or 2 performance variants and the rest are sticker packages.

Ford builds what the customer wants. GM builds what they can from the parts they have. Are the GM parts better? Absolutely but its formulaic and gets stale after a few years.

The late 90s and early 2000s didn't bring much performance updates. The Bullitt wasn't much faster.


I agree about the Current Mustang. They're fast, and they have trim levels for everyone. As I said, offering the base model GT helps their sales a lot and cost thousands less than the Camaro and similar performance numbers.


Chevy should push the LT1 a lot harder, especially the lease option and sales would go up. The 2015 and newer Mustang the Ford dealers carry a lot of the base model GTs and they sell well and you can get good deals on used ones. Chevy dealers hardly ever carry the equivalent LT1 and when they do they usually fly off the dealer lots fast.


The rare times I see a SS on the dealer lot down here it's always a 2SS, loaded up and has LPO options on it and the price is jacked up and it sits for months on their lots during normal times.


If one can get a Mustang GT for $34,000 with rebates but no dealer has a Camaro V8 unless you want to spend 50k, not hard to figure out there.


Hell, some dealers don't even carry the Camaro SS or LT1 and only carry the 4 cylinder or 6 cylinder models. The Chevy dealer down there street rarely ever carries the Camaro SS or LT1. When they do order Camaros for the lot it's the 1LT.


Not all the blame can be placed on GM when it's the dealers not wanting to carry the V8 Camaro models on their lots.


I know I was considering a used Scatpack Challenger if I didn't find my 2016 Camaro SS because I could not find any LT1s within 100 miles of me when looking for new.



Chevy would have made a new car sale from me if the dealers would have had an LT1 on their lot. Even before the Corona shortage none of the dealers within 100 miles had good selections of new v8 Camaros. All had the cheap priced v6 and 4 cylinder Camaros and the occasional $55,000 rag top loaded up 2SS or LE.


How do you expect to have sales if the dealers don't want to carry the car on the lot while the large ford dealer has 12 different Mustang GTs sitting on their lot or the Dodge dealer has 6 Scatpacks sitting there similar priced to the 2SS and similar performance numbers.