[QUOTE=Brangeta]
I'll see if I can get the demographics for Mustangs later. I've never looked for it, so don't know if it is available. I'd imagine the demos are nearly the exact same as Camaro demos, except with the addition of "buyer must appreciate an inferior looking and slightly more expensive automobile"
[QUOTE]

You forgot slower and less comfortable and poorer handling and...

... I would appreciate more accuracy in such posts in the future.

 

Have you tried to find a C6 for "base price"? Besides, if you want to compare base prices the 350Z is under $28K.

No question, if you are talking about straight-line acceleration a 'Vette will win every time but I can tell you from personal experience that a bone stock base 350Z will hold it's own and then some with a stock a Z06 on an autocross course all day long.

Don't misunderstand...I love the "Vette and have all my life...the C6 is a great car for the money (and pretty much at any price) but that doesn't mean I'm willing to part with 50 grand to get one.

Apart from all that, I've always suspected that 95 out of 100 'Vette owners are card carrying AARP member sunny-sky-Sunday only drivers who couldn't tell you how many cylinders their engine has. And as to their chosen profession prior to retirement, I'd bet a fair number were interior decorators.

 

Mustang drivers are the same as Mustang demographics. The idea of someone buying their 16 year old a brand new car is not only false, but a pretty bizzare assumption. Parents typically co-sign for their kids for a car to use at college or until their 21st birthday. If you do it, then you are a very very small minority let alone percentage (think percentage of a 747 dropping on your house... possible, but not likely).

Mustangs demographics are similar to Camaro's (I still have both of them in my files & posted them plenty of times here).

The big difference between Mustang & Camaro's demos:
*Mustang Drivers tend to be slightly younger than Camaro buyers were.
*Mustang's overall Male/Female split is around 60-65(M)/40-45(F). Camaro's tend to beonly about 8-10 higher.
*Camaro drivers tend to be wealthier & have more money. ESPECIALLY when comparing Z28 vs Mustang GT.

You can also look at demographics and sales profiles and see what killed Camaro as well:

*The majority of Camaro sales were Z28, the majority of Mustang sales were V6s, meaning Mustang appealed to a broader market.
*Mustang buyers had higher percentages of "do-it-yourselfers", reflected by it's far greater aftermarket.
*MORE MALES BOUGHT MUSTANG GT's THAN ALL F-BODIES SOLD TO E-V-E-R-Y-B-O-D-Y the last few years. I wanted to stress that point for the few of you guys with way too much testrosterone in your diet.
*Although more males bought Mustangs than Females, Mustang had a higher female percentage of buyers than Camaro. Females currently make up about 55% or more of new car buyers today, and influence at least 70% of all new vehicle purchases.
* Pricey Camaro SS's still sold well, while Z28s selling in the low 20s didn't sell! With discounts and rebates, a new base Z28 ordered could be had for under 20 grand, but no one bought them. To top it off, insurence wasn't much different (and in some cases less) than Mustang GTs.

Remember that if anyone bellyaches about how cheap performance sells.

 

This might also be because Camaros were more expensive than Mustangs.

No one bought them because no dealers ordered and stocked them. When I was looking, all I saw were loaded Z28s or SS's.

Randy

 

That's so true. GM did a great job of "weening" the F-bodies out of the market. For as long as I can remember, it was a rare occasion to see even ONE F-body out on a GM car lot, let alone a line-up of them. Drive by a Ford dealership though, and there are lots of Mustangs (usually at least 4 to 6, with a 50/50 split of V6's and GT's). While I hate to admit it, FORD KNOWS HOW TO MARKET THEIR PRODUCTS. The radio commercials they've got around here say "the Ford Mustang.....built for life in Toronto". Hell, by the end, I think people forgot that the F-bodies were built.

...ok, [/rant]

Hey "Robert_Nashville": *please* don't buy a 350Z. I would rather be driving a nice used C5 than a 350Z. I'm sure the price is the same, and you get a way better car. Maybe in auto-x the 350Z is competitive, but who really auto-crosses their 350Z / C5 / C6 on a regular basis? Not if it's your daily driver.

 

Camaros were cheaper than Mustangs after the Mustangs went through that body style change in '99. But back in '97 a Mustang GT (215 horsepower) was only about $18,000 but a Z28 (275 hp) was about $20,000. In 2002 a Z28 (310 hp) was barely different, only about $21,000, but a GT Mustang (260 hp) was 23,000 for Deluxe and 24,000 for Premium.

I don't understand how the Mustangs were ever such strong competition though, the horsepower was always over rated (the salesmen would always pump it up when talking to me) and they were stinkers of cars. It just makes me wonder if the majority of people have bad taste. The new Mustang is a pretty beautiful design, but that last generation and especially the '98 and older were such flimsy looking cars.

There is one thing that affected Mustang sales quite a bit over the last decade or so that hasn't been mentioned. And that is the rental car sales. There were never any Camaros sold as rental cars, but just about every Budget rent-a-car has at least 3 V6 Mustangs available. I don't believe the B4C police Camaro sales would amount to such a dramatic effect on sales as Mustang rental car sales.

It sure is a shame though, but if you look at it in perspective, the Camaro and Firebird have lasted a LOT longer than just about any other early or mid-nineties car. The quantity of nice early 4th gens on the road today is still pretty high; you don't see many early to mid nineties Mustangs still on the road. For that matter, when was the last time you've seen an '80s Mustang? I see an '80s Camaro nearly everyday, but not Mustang.

If the Camaro comes back and finally has up-to-date available options, I bet the sales will be huge. The majority of buyers don't want a car muchless sports car that has the same technology in the interior as a 1980s car. Those who do, well, they are that rare guy driving that Lotus Elise around while on his cell phone getting driving directions from his wife...

 

Even after 99, i believe the Mustang was cheaper. You could get one with a good list of standard features for less than a base z28 with roll-up windows. Atleast that was the case when i priced both cars out back in 2002.

Hp lagged behind in the GT, but it still sold well. I loved my old 94 5.0L GT and i picked that over a 95 T/A which had a heck of lot more in the performance department. I liked the overall package better than the Lt1 T/A, and was willing to give up the stock performance advantage. A lot of people are probably in that boat as well. You also gotta remember, 260hp was more than enough for the general public. Heck, stepping out of an accord, my 215hp GT actually felt fast for the first couple of months. My friends actually thought it was blazing fast, lol. The general public is in that same boat and so while the GT came off as weak to most enthusiasts, the general public had different perception. That and those who wanted more either modified the GT's or put down the extra dough for something like the Mach1 or Cobra. They had options outside of the regular GT.

Camaro's were sold as rentals as well, but not in the numbers the mustang was. Even when looking at total production figures, rental/fleet mustangs make up about 10% of total mustang production. @ 150,000 units a year, about 135,000 mustangs would have been sold to the general public with 15,000 going towards fleet/rentals. Not that huge of an affect since the regular sales figures are still tops in its respective class.

I've actually seen alot. I almost never run into 3rd gens here. People are restoring the early to mid 80's early fox's, and the 87+ fox's are still out and about and alot of them see mods of all sort. My 94 Vibrant Red 5.0L GT was pretty clean when i sold it middle of last year. Clean mustang are plenty and the fox craze has yet to die down. I'd like to pick a notchback Lx in a couple of years myself.

Camaro has the potential to do that. I loved my 4th gen and if i didn't need a more practical all-weather car, i wouldn't have sold it. But huge sales numbers will have to mean a camaro that is more suited for the masses. The v6 will definitly have to be more appealing as well since it is supposed to make up the bulk of production. v6 sales will pretty much make or break the 5th gen in terms of sales.

 

See this link:
http://moutons.org/sccasolo/Lists/2004/stockc.html

What the heck are you talking about. See what class the C5 Corvette is in, not to mention the C6 is even better.

Then look what the 350Z is grouped with.

You think the 350Z is going to hang with a Z06 in a autocross coarse? Sorry, you need to do your research first.

Dan

 

Who autocrosses anyway? Buy what you like, you don't have to make excuses. Don't buy something just because you think other people will like it. If you want a pink Miata, go for it, as long as you like it you shouldn't have to explain why you bought it. Well... ***holes will mess with you, but that's just because that's the way people are...

If a 350Z is what you really want over any other car get it. If you're just using it as your everyday driver who really cares how it handles? We live in America, streets are practically geometric, you don't need a car that is made to take the twisties of England or Japan unless you want it to.

::ends self-confidence speech::

 

No.... kind of.

Base V6 Camaros were slightly more than V6 Stangs, and base Z28s were within a coupe of hundred dollars of base Mustang GTs.



Very true, dealers sold so very few of them on average (8-10 per year per dealer) that they tended to load them up to boost their profit. Also, Camaro buyers tended to load their cars to the teeth anyway ($1000 T-tops, Monsoon stereos, power everything, etc...). But, you could always order them yourself.

Camaro was a pretty well equpted car to begin with. If you could avoid checking anything on the option list (including those chrome rims and leather interior), cough up a 10% deposit ($2300 tops), and could survive a wait 3 months, with taxes and license the price wouldn't be over $23K.

 

Actually, rental car sales are actually a pretty small part of Mustang sales. Being very generous, and say that Ford sold 12-15K cars to Hertz, that's still over 100,000 cars last year, and over 150,000 cars just a couple of years ago (it's mid & full size sedans that rental companies stock up on in any quanity).

Also, new rental Camaros were readily available at Dollar Rental.

 

its the exact opposite for me man. in highschool, everyone had brand new vw's and brand new suvs's. now in college, everyone seems to like my car

 

Weird, when were you in highschool though? SUVs hadn't caught on with highschool kids in my area back in 2002. Most people had Hondas and Toyotas and there were quite a few riced cars.

 

I've done my "research"; thanks

I won F-stock in my Z28 in 2002 and was second in SM in 2003. Where a car is classed is not what I"m talking about and is immaterial anyway - I'm talking about respective ETs on the same course/same day. Our region has 4-5 Z06s and twice that many other "Vettes of various ages on any given Sunday with several drivers who compete in the Nationals every yaar; the 350Zs hold their own very well with a competent driver behind the wheel and regurarly take FTD (after the shifter-carts anyway ).

 

Who autocrosses??? Well, I don't have exact figures at my fingertips but quite a few thousand compete Nationally every year and many times that regionally in SCCA (and I'm not counting autocross events not sanctioned by the SCCA).

Not everyone is concerned only with how fast a car will go in a straight line.