Camaro VS Mustang sales

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

11-11-2008, 08:49 AM

#16

falchulk

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2004

Posts: 1,881

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTOJack

I'm looking at a full page color ad from The Detroit Free Press, Sunday, Nov 9, 2009 where Russ Milne Ford is advertising NEW 2007 Ford Mustang GT Convertibles that stickered at $32,230 for $23,757 (A/Z plan). 13 available at $8400 off sticker. 866-376-6601. Current Black Book value shows $22,195 trade in/wholesale with average miles of 12,000 to 18,000. Loan value is $23,775.

My fault, i should have got he was from Michigan by his name but paid no attention. the detroit area is no guage of the rest of the country as far as mustangs go. The dealers there have more mustangs then some lots have total cars. They also offer the best deals of any area I have been in.

11-12-2008, 12:01 PM

#17

tally114

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 12

Is it just me, or are were '79-'94 Mustangs the UGLIEST cars ever made. Maybe not EVER, but they were hideous.

11-12-2008, 01:59 PM

#18

guionM

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2001

Location: The Golden State

Posts: 13,711

Quote:

Originally Posted by tally114

Is it just me, or are were '79-'94 Mustangs the UGLIEST cars ever made. Maybe not EVER, but they were hideous.

Your opinion is likely in the minority or at least an extremely rare and extreme opinion....... how many were sold?????

11-12-2008, 04:56 PM

#19

Tsujin

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2008

Posts: 71

Quote:

Originally Posted by tally114

Is it just me, or are were '79-'94 Mustangs the UGLIEST cars ever made. Maybe not EVER, but they were hideous.

I don't like how they look either, but there weren't many cars that I did like that came out in the 80's.

11-13-2008, 05:41 AM

#20

christianjax

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2006

Location: Jacksonville Florida

Posts: 881

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsujin

I don't like how they look either, but there weren't many cars that I did like that came out in the 80's.

Wha? the 87 Grand National? the GNX? the 89 Turbo Trans Am? Those were definately incredible, sexy machines. Damn, I miss my 87 GN.

Last edited by christianjax; 11-13-2008 at 07:45 AM.

11-13-2008, 07:36 AM

#21

scott9050

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 1999

Location: Panhandle of West Virginia

Posts: 1,548

Quote:

Originally Posted by guionM

Coupes have a nortoriously short sales-life. Typically, a coupe lasts about 3 years before sales begin to tank. This was the case with the 4th gen Camaro, and even the famous Fox Mustang that came out in '79, but by '82 was but a shadow of it's 1st year. Same happened with the Probe (both 1 &2) the Cougar, the 80s era Daytona, and most other coupes you pull up the sales chart on.

The 2009 Mustang will mark the current design's FIFTH season.... yes, already.

The other thing about coupe sales is that they can suddenly skyrocket for seemingly no reason whatsoever. September 2005, Mustang sales jumpped 73%

Now....
For everyone's entertainment....
Camaro & Mustang sales:

Notes:
1. Cobra production from 1965-1969 is not included (it was counted as a separate line by Ford).
2. Numbers preceded by an asterik (*) designates a redesigned .
3. I didn't include Firebird or Capri figures though they are similar cars. With Ford having only 4000 dealers to Chevrolet's 5000, I don't need to!!

Year: Mustang/Camaro
64:*121,583/NA
65: 559,451/NA
66: 607,568/NA
67: 474,121/*220,906
68: 317,404/ 235,147
69: 299,824/ *243,065
70: 190,727/ 124,901
71:*149,678/*114,630
72: 125,093/ 114,630 (not a typo!)
73: 134,867/ 96,751
74:*385,993/ 151,008
75: 188,575/ 145,770
76: 187,567/ 182,959
77: 153,173/ 218,858
78: 192,410/ 272,631
79:*369,936/ 282,571
80: 271,322/ 152,005
81: 181,552/ 126,139
82: 130,418/*189,747
83: 120,873/ 154,318
84: 135,678/ 261,591
85: 156,514/ 180,018
86: 224,410/ 192,219
87: 159,145/ 137,760
88: 211,225/ 96,275
89: 209,769/ 110,850
90: 128,189/ 35,048
91: 98,737/ 101,316
92: 79,280/ 70,712
93: 114,228/ *39,755
94:*123,198/ 119,934
95: 185,986/ 122,844
96: 126,483/ 66,827
97: 100,254/ 95,812
98: 170,642/ 77,198
99: *126,067/ 42,098
00: 218,525/ 45,417
01: 155,162/ 29,009
(01 production stopped May 2001. 2002 Camaro had an extended run: June 2001-August 2002)
02: 142,404/42,089
03: 153,134/-0-
04: 141,907/-0-
05: *165,762/-0-

Total 1965-2001: 7,899,556/ 4,821,768

Ford plans to produce only 45,000 Mustangs for the shortened 2009 model year.

https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...uction+figures
Total 1965-2001: 7,899,556/ 4,821,768

Notice after the 85 refresh on the Mustang that the numbers went up. It was just a minor refresh, but not noted in your figures, and neither was the aero exterior and new interior of 87 and the increases in sales in 88-89.

11-13-2008, 08:43 AM

#22

tally114

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 12

Quote:

Originally Posted by guionM

Your opinion is likely in the minority or at least an extremely rare and extreme opinion....... how many were sold?????

They sold around 2 million.

11-13-2008, 11:03 AM

#23

Bearcat Steve

Registered User

Join Date: May 2000

Location: Cincinnati, OH

Posts: 210

guionM, thanks for posting the sales numbers. It certainly looks like f-body benefited from the "Smokey & The Bandit" movie in the late 70's.

11-13-2008, 12:19 PM

#24

Tsujin

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2008

Posts: 71

Quote:

Originally Posted by christianjax

Wha? the 87 Grand National? the GNX? the 89 Turbo Trans Am? Those were definately incredible, sexy machines. Damn, I miss my 87 GN.

Don't mean to offend, but I think the 87 Grand National was pretty ugly...I do like the Trans Am, and the Camaro, but again, there aren't many that I do like. I guess I'm just too young to appreciate them.

11-13-2008, 01:34 PM

#25

Ed 2001 SS

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2002

Location: Miami, Fl USA

Posts: 499

Quote:

Originally Posted by tally114

Is it just me, or are were '79-'94 Mustangs the UGLIEST cars ever made. Maybe not EVER, but they were hideous.

I'm not a Mustang fan by any stretch. Ok, I can appreciate them, but generally I just hate them. That being said, 86 GT or SVO or an 88-92 LX 5.0 hatch are pretty good looking cars.

11-13-2008, 03:39 PM

#26

ZZtop

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Location: Greenville, SC

Posts: 1,217

guionM, could you post a similar year-by-year breakdown of the sales numbers showing the F-body (including firebird) vs. Mustang.

Most people I know would include both the Camaro and Firebird when comparing the two and I think that is pretty fare. I bet the numbers look a little different when you look at it that way. Thanks.

11-13-2008, 03:41 PM

#27

ZZtop

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Location: Greenville, SC

Posts: 1,217

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed 2001 SS

I'm not a Mustang fan by any stretch. Ok, I can appreciate them, but generally I just hate them. That being said, 86 GT or SVO or an 88-92 LX 5.0 hatch are pretty good looking cars.

I agree. They surely weren't ugly, but they definitely weren't pretty either. I would say they were mean looking. Definitely not a car you look at and say, "damn, that's sexy".

11-13-2008, 07:38 PM

#28

Rob V

Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2005

Location: British Columbia, Canada

Posts: 554

Mustang / Camaro + Firebird = Total F-Bodies
64:*121,583/NA
65: 559,451/NA
66: 607,568/NA
67: 474,121/ *220,906 + 82,560 = 303,466
68: 317,404/ 235,147 + 107,112 = 342,259
69: 299,824/ *243,065 + 87,716 = 330,781
70: 190,727/ 124,901 + 48,739 = 173,640
71:*149,678/ *114,630 + 53,124 = 167,754
72: 125,093/ 114,630 + 29,951 = 144,581
73: 134,867/ 96,751 + 46,313 = 143,064
74:*385,993/ 151,008 + 73,729 = 224,737
75: 188,575/ 145,770 + 84,063 = 229,883
76: 187,567/ 182,959 + 110,775 = 293,734
77: 153,173/ 218,858 + 155,736 = 374,597
78: 192,410/ 272,631 + 197,285 = 484,085
79:*369,936/ 282,571 + 211,454 = 494,025
80: 271,322/ 152,005 + 107,340 = 259,345
81: 181,552/ 126,139 + 70,889 = 197,028
82: 130,418/ *189,747 + 116,362 = 306,109
83: 120,873/ 154,318 + 74,884 = 229,202
84: 135,678/ 261,591 + 128,304 = 389,895
85: 156,514/ 180,018 + 95,880 = 290,481
86: 224,410/ 192,219 + 110,463 = 302,682
87: 159,145/ 137,760 + 88,612 = 226,372
88: 211,225/ 96,275 + 62,455 = 158,730
89: 209,769/ 110,850 + 64,404 = 174,984
90: 128,189/ 35,048 + 20,553 = 55,601
91: 98,737/ 101,316 + 50,234 = 151,550
92: 79,280/ 70,712 + 27,567 = 98,279
93: 114,228/ *39,755 + 14,112 = 53,867
94:*123,198/ 119,934 + 45,992 = 165,926
95: 185,986/ 122,844 + 50,986 = 152,941
96: 126,483/ 66,827 + 30,097 = 96,924
97: 100,254/ 95,812 + 30,754 = 126,566
98: 170,642/ 77,198 + 32,155 = 109,353
99: *126,067/ 42,098 + 32,209 = 74,307
00: 218,525/ 45,417 + 31,826 = 77,243
01: 155,162/ 29,009 + 21,436 = 50,455
02: 142,404/ 42,089 + 30,690 = 72,779
03: 153,134/-0-
04: 141,907/-0-
05: *165,762/-0-

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...duction-61258/ for the Firebird production numbers.

Last edited by Rob V; 11-13-2008 at 07:45 PM.

11-13-2008, 08:23 PM

#29

azfan

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2006

Location: arizona

Posts: 145

Ford sold 369,000 79' mustangs'??

i think everyone is giving the general public too much credit about waiting for next years mustang freshening. The general public has no idea of such things. the drop off is because all cars are not selling right now with the summers gas prices, and the bank situation.

11-14-2008, 10:30 AM

#30

ZZtop

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Location: Greenville, SC

Posts: 1,217

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob V

That's more like it! I get so tired of hearing how the Mustang always dominated the "Camaro" in sales. Well,if the Firebird did not exist, many more people would have bought Camaro's. In my opinion you have to compare F-body sales to Mustang sales, but that is just my opinion. When you do that, the F-body is king in just about all but the last years.

Thanks Rob V.

Reply Share

First
Prev
2 / 3
Next
Last