[TRZ06]

Originally Posted by LESS1

You most certainly did say LT1 was and I quote... "half ass engine development". You know what is halfassed? Frod and the half finished Mustangs they sell to the masses that cannot think without a collective decision. Cars that have issues, among them engines that use oil, make noises and then blow up, sounds exciting. Give me a min to catch my breath, too much excitement watching my Mustang blow another motor. Ok, all better now.

This constant development you mention is to fix issues and add PP1/2 to address major problems with these as Frod described early on "Track ready” cars. Well as we have seen that was BS. GT350/R same BS only now with Vooblew engines and other gimmicks. By now you’d like to think Frod would have collected enough data to identify these issues/gaps, but they didn't. So now we get new and improved GT350/R and 500. More BS and customers pay for this, unbelievable.

As for your comment regarding excitement and Camaro/GM, you are kidding right? Gen6 is much better car than any Mustang period. Frod is still trying to catch up to a 6 plus year old design. I guess GM should use Frod Engineering practices and this way Chevy can constantly “improve and innovate” to fix all the bugs just like Frod. Spin it how you want there but I’ll stick with my boring Camaro. One last comment for you. I bought a SS 1LE as a track toy. To date I am still waiting on one of these exciting and innovative Mustangs to pass me on track. I won't hold my breath but who knows it could happen right?

A lot of it is timing as well. The new Mustang was redesigned from the ground up and when they went to IRS, they did A LOT to the front end to match the rear-end. From the previous generation with the solid rear axle, they moved the mark A LOT.

The issue is that while they were doing that, GM with the Alpha chassis, took the Camaro to a true sports car level of performance and handling, so much so that from a at limit handling characteristics, it even bests the C7 Corvette. Ford just got left behind and got caught holding the bag. That shouldn't take away from Ford though for what they achieved from their solid rear axle days. They have come a long way, and this is their first generation of chassis with the IRS.

Charger/Challenger is pure muscle car, Camaro is now a pure sports car, and Mustang is right in the middle.

My final point is the Mustang just holds a special place with so many. The name (in general) means more to the mass population that the name Camaro does. Hell, in high school my dream car was a 67' Mustang.

I even looked at the PP2 Mustang before I discovered the SS 1LE, but coming out of my M3 that I was VERY disappointed with performance wise and being stuck with it on a 3 year lease, I vowed to not be caught in that situation again, because performance and handling trumps everything else for me, which is why I ended up in a SS 1LE, and briefly was looking at the ZLE.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by Craig

Go buy yourself a junker Mustang for $500-800, sit on the title for 30 days, then dump it on the dealer as a trade in and get the $2000. I agree it’s stupid of GM to keep doing this but you can still take advantage of it. For me at least it doesn’t seem like too much hassle to clear $1200-1500.

Don't think I haven't thought about that angle. The salesman said it has to be a 2008 or newer and registered (not just titled) to qualify.

[genxer]

The Mustang owner discount was a giant signal to the home team fans to wait for their turn. And now this.

The segment is cheap(ish), fun sporty coupes. Limit handling better than a Vette? Let that sink in... The autoX guys I've been around have all been willing to change tires/springs/dampers/bars to their liking.

The 5th gen move to IRS was a 1/2 step too far (i.m.o.). It shouldn't match the sports/lux crowd, but also not remind anyone of the appliance daily car they're expected to settle for. Utility-wise (for me): I want a folded seat pass through that holds a set of tires. No lift-back, can't un-see the 4th gen, but I still like them. I still hope for a 7th.

By not doing ads, GM is letting people think they want the car to fail. Streaming/Youtube ads & reviewers, targeted tv ads can't be a budget breaker. I don't think the average person knows how lame an ecoboost sounds versus a V6 or any 6th gen drives circles around a Dodge.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by hotlap

What percentage of Americans golf? Answer : ~8% , 6% men , 1/4 are avid
Only 0.06% of Americans buy Pony cars.
I think I would look elsewhere for the key to low Camaro sales.

I can fit a 30” roller suitcase, a large computer bag and my gym bag in the trunk easily. I don’t give a F about two sets of clubs.

https://cdn.cybergolf.com/images/186...-in-the-US.pdf

You have ruled out a percentage of people like me that LOVE the Camaro but need clubs in the trunk. Glad it works for your suitcase. But it ruled it out for me.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Number 3, this was a very thought-provoking post, thank you. I have thought about these a few times, and despite my age, I am a recent Camaro enthusiast (the 6th gen is my first Camaro) with no long-standing nostalgic feelings to "cloud" my conclusions.

I am somewhat baffled by the drastic difference in sales volumes against the Mustang, to me it seems to stem mostly from nostalgia, but there must be more to it. The Challenger's popularity I understand, because it has a distinct personality, that of a cushy cow with gobs of HP in top trims, while lower trims have the same increased interior and trunk space.

Rather than ramble on forever, I just wanted to ask you about one point made in this thread, GM not making any meaningful design or powertrain changes to the 6th gen over its lifecycle. It seems to me that the top 3 issues brought up against the Camaro wouldn't be that hard to fix, namely

- raise the roof by 1" and lower the beltline by 1" -> visibility problem addressed, potentially the rear seat legroom/headroom problem as well

- split the taillights -> trunk opening problem addressed, all carry-ons and golf bags will fit through the larger opening

- advertise these changes along with best of class performance ad nauseam -> perception problem addressed, people will stop harping on the issues above and actually begin to consider the car again

Are these changes so impossibly difficult to make? Even without touching the powertrain (and let's be honest, the handling of the A8 torque converter issue was nothing but subpar), this would increase sales IMO. Or am I grossly mistaken or overlooking something obvious?

They are without a major overhaul. An ATS coupe has more practical rear seat leg room and trunk room than the Camaro. Now that ATS coupe also has a slammed roof so rear seat head room isn’t great. Plus the ATS still has a high belt line. I could tell you about the BMW 3 Series taped up to be an ATS......

The kicker is you would need to add 100 pounds or so to the Camaro to address these issues and a lot of people on this sight would have bitched up a storm if the Gen6 were an ounce heavier than a Mustang.

My greatest fear as a car enthusiast is it’s just too late for a great coupe. Even if GM came up with the greatness the current Camaro is and fixed all of its compromises, meaning the perfect coupe, the market is so small that GM still wouldn’t invest in it.

Advertising for low volume niche products is a losing proposition. Look at the TV ads for the Subaru/Toyota twins? A TV ad for the Supra? Even Mustang? Few if any. I honestly think people want a bad A$$ TV commercial just to validate the purchase of the greatest Pony Car ever made. It’s a 250,000 unit segment in a 15,000,000 unit market. You are going to pay money for TV ads to simply sway a portion of that tiny market to sway them to your brand. But I think people here think a cool TV ad will sway an SUV shopper into a sporty coupe. Just notgoingtohappen.com

[RTP]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Flat out, the Camaro is the best performing car in the segment. Regardless of not getting in a HP chase with Fiat and Ford, GM has outstanding engines. The Coyote in the Mustang is wildly more expensive than the LT1/LT4. And to get the HP Ford and Fiat are getting with the GT500 and Hellcat isn't cheap either.

Comments earlier about the Z/28 getting a 10 year old engine and Corvette CC brakes. Well at the time, NOTHING could touch that car. But it was horribly expensive and gave up every creature comfort (optional A/C) to dominate the track. And it did. And it sold like crap not meeting the 2,500 per year target in either year if I recall correctly.

So GM has elected to not pursue higher priced Camaros (LT5) with low sales volumes. Remember, they are about profit now. If people would line up to buy it, make GM more profit, then they would do it.

GM has fixed capital to invest, fixed resources to devote to projects and programs. Of course on this site we believe GM should devote those to the Camaro. But step back and ask why GM should pour more money into a car that is way under performing from a sales point of view and you can jump to the conclusion, not meeting profitability targets. If you could buy stock in Camaro today, would you?

Our only hope is that there is something in the works that fixes sales but that is likely an entirely different vehicle.

In the end, as I've said so many times, GM gave us the best Camaro ever. But in doing so they gave us a car that was compromised for many potential customers in visibility, trunk volume and rear seat room all done for the sake of performance. All 3 attributes made worse compared to the Gen5 with the exception of front visibility over the hood, which was a big improvement.

Not having seen the numbers, but I would guess that the SS sells very well against the Mustang GT. But I would also guess the higher Mustang volumes are coming from the less powerful variants. Because what people buying a 2.0T or 3.6 Camaro want is a more practical car than it is. There are a lot of people that just want a fun car that works every day. Most of you on hear will argue to your last breath that visibility is not an issue (it is) mostly because you are willing to make that trade off for the "Best Camaro Ever". In a previous argument on this topic one of us told me if it was ok for the Camaro to have poor visibility because a Lamborghini had poor visibility. Maybe, maybe not. But if a customer is in the market for a "sporty coupe" in the world of SUVs you need some practicality. And as much as the Camaro is the best performing car in this segment, it's also the least practical of the 3.

And lets get everyone started again on this on. You can't get a set of golf clubs in the trunk of the Camaro. You can in both competitors. Many have simply stated, "who the F needs golf clubs in the trunk of a Camaro". Well you have simply answered part of the sales problem. You can sell a car with a small trunk to someone doesn't care about trunk space, but you can't sell a car with a small trunk to someone who does care. It's pretty simple. To paraphrase Bob Lutz's old adage that "you can sell a young mans car to an old person, but you can't sell and old man's car to a young person".

I know this will stir that pot up again, but when you get a "Why can't the Camaro outsell a 15 year old Fiat" and your only answer is lack of advertising, we have a fundamental problem. Most making that claim have to discount how the advertising industry works. And you have to assume that the very same people that advertise the $hit out of the Silverado are the very same people that say no to Camaro advertising. The very same people are smart about one product but blind to another. And you would have to COMPLETELY ignore that these same people have their performance evaluations at least partly based on sales to not have a clue. And again, arm chair marketers, you have believe that you know more than people armed with data we can't see, and years and years of experience we don't have.

And for anyone that has posted "you can sell anything if you just advertise it", that is fundamentally a flawed argument. GM isn't advertising because they know what they have. A car designed for Camaro enthusiasts. Which is why this argument is HUGE here. We are all here because we love this car. What's missing is consideration for the buyer who could not care less if it was a Camaro or the best performing car in the segment. So for them to advertise, it would be advertising to the people it was designed for and already know about it.......us. And that would make a ton of you happy.......it just wouldn't make GM any more money.

So the fundamental question, and GM never looked at is this way in all the years I was there, is not why are people buying the Camaro, we know that. But why are people NOT buying the Camaro.

And watch the posts that follow this. They will be ripe with "it's a perfect car for me so it's a perfect car, how could anyone think otherwise" without the open mindedness that the Camaro may actually not be best for other coupe buyers (as evidenced by the sales numbers)

So go ahead and tear this up.

Truth.

I came from the GT86 world and it was the same thing with the car not selling, after Toyota gave the masses the light, rwd, affordable sports car they had pined for for years. Except, they weren’t masses, but journalists and keyboard warriors who didn’t buy one.

Al Oppenheiser was clear as to why they didn’t address the shortcomings. The focus group was the die hard Camaro enthusiast. BMW was also clear as to why the M3 was softer. They wanted to sell cars, and they were fine with low production and years of waiting for those poor bastards who dropped deposits after the M2 was announced (the enthusiast).

The point I’m making is that there is nothing wrong with the Camaro, these are niche cars in today’s world. Old men comfortable in mustangs, moms in SUVs, kids in Teslas, and a pandemic causing C8 preorders to vanish like the DOW.

The wonderful world we live in.

[rocket403]

The market for all 3 of these cars will not be the same when the dust settles in the next year to 2 years, and maybe more than one could be gone in the end. The word is that the current Covid situation could last up to 2 years from now. When that ends what will the car market look like is anyone's guess.

In Ontario 2.2 million people just applied for EI and how many will still have jobs to go back to, for the car company's it is going to be a lean year at least, Toyota was down 9% in Q1 along with Subaru -16%

With this pandemic hurting people and having to make the hard decision on how to pay the mortgage or rent I can see that the 1st thing to go would be the 3rd car that is only driven on the weekends.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Number 3

You have ruled out a percentage of people like me that LOVE the Camaro but need clubs in the trunk. Glad it works for your suitcase. But it ruled it out for me.

You do not love the Camaro. You’ve made that clear from the beginning of this gen. You’ve also never own any Camaro.

Regardless. Had you actually been a perspective buyer, the percentage I referenced would have included you. My point was that buyers whose decision is based on carrying two sets of clubs is a minority percentage and not likely the cause for Camaro’s sales decline.

See #154

[AZCamaroFan]

having owned 3rd and 4thgens i have serious doubts that golf clubs would fit in those trunks under the glass hatch either. i'm not even sure a golf bag would have fit in my 68' without serious pushing and shoving.

[rocket403]

I respect the new Camaro for what it can do but the styling is polarizing, it is a love or hate thing. Many felt that GM dropped the ball with not addressing the design issues from the 5th Gen, I like the overall look better with the 6 Gen as i felt the 5th Gen was choppy, but in profile the Camaro now looks to much like the Mustang and has gotten smaller.

One friend had his 5th Gen Camaro another had a Mustang I was able to check out and compare my RT to both. Out of the 3 of us only my Challenger is still around both of my friends got tired of their cars and moved on.

[LESS1]

Originally Posted by Number 3

You have ruled out a percentage of people like me that LOVE the Camaro but need clubs in the trunk. Glad it works for your suitcase. But it ruled it out for me.

You passed on a Camaro because if you wanted to go to the golf course you would need to put the rear seats down? Really? My wife and I go to the course often and take my Camaro now and again. It's really hard putting the seats down, takes a full min to accomplish. But it let us take our clubs, guess if you want something bad enough you will overcome. It never ceases to amaze me how lazy we are becoming in this instant gratification world we live in.

[LESS1]

Originally Posted by TRZ06

A lot of it is timing as well. The new Mustang was redesigned from the ground up and when they went to IRS, they did A LOT to the front end to match the rear-end. From the previous generation with the solid rear axle, they moved the mark A LOT.

The issue is that while they were doing that, GM with the Alpha chassis, took the Camaro to a true sports car level of performance and handling, so much so that from a at limit handling characteristics, it even bests the C7 Corvette. Ford just got left behind and got caught holding the bag. That shouldn't take away from Ford though for what they achieved from their solid rear axle days. They have come a long way, and this is their first generation of chassis with the IRS.

Charger/Challenger is pure muscle car, Camaro is now a pure sports car, and Mustang is right in the middle.

My final point is the Mustang just holds a special place with so many. The name (in general) means more to the mass population that the name Camaro does. Hell, in high school my dream car was a 67' Mustang.

I even looked at the PP2 Mustang before I discovered the SS 1LE, but coming out of my M3 that I was VERY disappointed with performance wise and being stuck with it on a 3 year lease, I vowed to not be caught in that situation again, because performance and handling trumps everything else for me, which is why I ended up in a SS 1LE, and briefly was looking at the ZLE.

Agree. Having owned more than my share of Mustangs over the years. And I still own a ex-FHP coupe by the way. I grew tired of relying on the aftermarket to provide solutions to problems Frod should have identified and corrected. When it came time to shop for a new track toy I did look at GT350/R and if I hadn't driven Camaro ZL1 and SS 1LE prior I would have thought they were the car to have. Unfortunately for Frod the bar was raised to a level GT350/R couldn't meet. And for significantly less which didn't weigh heavily on my decision making. Ultimately my choice came down to wanting a car that would allow me to spend as much time as possible on track. Go fast, without having to worry about overheating, using oil or things breaking. And in the event something did go wrong it would be covered by a warranty. Very easy choice in the end.

[JeffFox]

I quite agree with this post.


I really enjoy my Camaro. Why do I need more people to buy them? I don't 😄. I am happy with my choice. Expensive advertising will likely not sell many more units but only serve to increase the MSRP of the Camaros that do sell as the money spent on advertising needs to be recouped. I really appreciate the track warranty and this forum. Rock on my fellow Camaro owners.


]QUOTE=Number 3;10760028]Flat out, the Camaro is the best performing car in the segment. Regardless of not getting in a HP chase with Fiat and Ford, GM has outstanding engines. The Coyote in the Mustang is wildly more expensive than the LT1/LT4. And to get the HP Ford and Fiat are getting with the GT500 and Hellcat isn't cheap either.

Comments earlier about the Z/28 getting a 10 year old engine and Corvette CC brakes. Well at the time, NOTHING could touch that car. But it was horribly expensive and gave up every creature comfort (optional A/C) to dominate the track. And it did. And it sold like crap not meeting the 2,500 per year target in either year if I recall correctly.

So GM has elected to not pursue higher priced Camaros (LT5) with low sales volumes. Remember, they are about profit now. If people would line up to buy it, make GM more profit, then they would do it.

GM has fixed capital to invest, fixed resources to devote to projects and programs. Of course on this site we believe GM should devote those to the Camaro. But step back and ask why GM should pour more money into a car that is way under performing from a sales point of view and you can jump to the conclusion, not meeting profitability targets. If you could buy stock in Camaro today, would you?

Our only hope is that there is something in the works that fixes sales but that is likely an entirely different vehicle.

In the end, as I've said so many times, GM gave us the best Camaro ever. But in doing so they gave us a car that was compromised for many potential customers in visibility, trunk volume and rear seat room all done for the sake of performance. All 3 attributes made worse compared to the Gen5 with the exception of front visibility over the hood, which was a big improvement.

Not having seen the numbers, but I would guess that the SS sells very well against the Mustang GT. But I would also guess the higher Mustang volumes are coming from the less powerful variants. Because what people buying a 2.0T or 3.6 Camaro want is a more practical car than it is. There are a lot of people that just want a fun car that works every day. Most of you on hear will argue to your last breath that visibility is not an issue (it is) mostly because you are willing to make that trade off for the "Best Camaro Ever". In a previous argument on this topic one of us told me if it was ok for the Camaro to have poor visibility because a Lamborghini had poor visibility. Maybe, maybe not. But if a customer is in the market for a "sporty coupe" in the world of SUVs you need some practicality. And as much as the Camaro is the best performing car in this segment, it's also the least practical of the 3.

And lets get everyone started again on this on. You can't get a set of golf clubs in the trunk of the Camaro. You can in both competitors. Many have simply stated, "who the F needs golf clubs in the trunk of a Camaro". Well you have simply answered part of the sales problem. You can sell a car with a small trunk to someone doesn't care about trunk space, but you can't sell a car with a small trunk to someone who does care. It's pretty simple. To paraphrase Bob Lutz's old adage that "you can sell a young mans car to an old person, but you can't sell and old man's car to a young person".

I know this will stir that pot up again, but when you get a "Why can't the Camaro outsell a 15 year old Fiat" and your only answer is lack of advertising, we have a fundamental problem. Most making that claim have to discount how the advertising industry works. And you have to assume that the very same people that advertise the $hit out of the Silverado are the very same people that say no to Camaro advertising. The very same people are smart about one product but blind to another. And you would have to COMPLETELY ignore that these same people have their performance evaluations at least partly based on sales to not have a clue. And again, arm chair marketers, you have believe that you know more than people armed with data we can't see, and years and years of experience we don't have.

And for anyone that has posted "you can sell anything if you just advertise it", that is fundamentally a flawed argument. GM isn't advertising because they know what they have. A car designed for Camaro enthusiasts. Which is why this argument is HUGE here. We are all here because we love this car. What's missing is consideration for the buyer who could not care less if it was a Camaro or the best performing car in the segment. So for them to advertise, it would be advertising to the people it was designed for and already know about it.......us. And that would make a ton of you happy.......it just wouldn't make GM any more money.

So the fundamental question, and GM never looked at is this way in all the years I was there, is not why are people buying the Camaro, we know that. But why are people NOT buying the Camaro.

And watch the posts that follow this. They will be ripe with "it's a perfect car for me so it's a perfect car, how could anyone think otherwise" without the open mindedness that the Camaro may actually not be best for other coupe buyers (as evidenced by the sales numbers)

So go ahead and tear this up.[/QUOTE]

[Drews]

Wow... great post JeffFox!