Could GM build a distinctive Pontiac coupe/sedan on the same platform as Camaro? Yes. The best way to start is to invent a new nameplate.

Could they go back the failed strategy of doing an obvious brand job to make a "Firebird". No.

 

If it is just a reskinned Camaro, then I'd prefer not to have Firebird brought back. But how was it such a failed strategy in the 1st place? I beleive if it was updated every 3-4 years instead of the decade long restyles, both Camaro and Firebird could have done better.

Anyways, I've said this in previous posts, why couldn' Pontiac bing back Firebird (or Trans Am) back and have i be is halo car? As Guy has mentioned before, Firebird owners have been known in the past to be willing to spend a pretty penny or the top performers, so why not try it in that aspect? Make Firebird a 450 HP+ vehicle with good build quality, good options, and start it under $40k and move it up. To me, Firebird and Trans Am have a longer and much more richer history than GTO.

 

Two unique front and rear bumpers for Firebird & TA on both sub-gens (93-97 & 98-02), hoods, I believe they both used the same hood (except the WS6 cars, which you can discount because of the SS getting a different hood and rear spoiler). Interiors? I think they stayed pretty much the same 93-02, I know the dash did. Seats were carryovers from the 3rd gen models with minor changes. Wheels? Again, I think the Firebird had the same number of wheel updates that the Camaro had. The only "extra" wheel I can think of is that ugly 17" wheel that was short-lived in 2000. I'm not even sure you can count the last 17" wheel because it was the same wheel used on the Comp TA only polished, I don't think Pontiac spent much money on that design. So, after all that... I think the only difference is the extra front and rear bumper skins for the Firebird and TA.

Production? I'd have to say 30/70 off the top of my head. I don't see a problem with that. The bird has always been a little more expensive and a little more exclusive. Don't get me wrong, I own both, love them both and would buy a Camaro if there were no Firebird. However, I've yet to be convinced that the Firebird "ate-up" most of the f-car budget. Until I see cold hard facts to back that argument up, I'll contend it is just the blathering of die-hard Camaro fans who do not want any "inside" competition.

 

Thank you for typing that which I lacked the energy to type for the third time. But the myth lives on. Some speak as if the Firebird was redesigned yearly and it all came from Camaro's purse. I need the smiley that plays the little violin...

Correct on all points. The Firebird actually sold closer to 40% of total Fbody production in the 4th gen. See #s here Yet some here claim it sold only 15k a year, as if their computer can't reach google..

 

I was banned from google

 

Charlie's 100% correct. Firebird ate up a very disproportionate amount of the F-body budget. Although f-bodfather will no doubt explain it if he drops in, it doesn't take much to see how disproportionate it was.

First, a certain amount of money is allocated for each body. The W body will get a certain budget just like the F-body. Then the person at that level decides on how to distribute that money. He or she may decide that one car's sales cycle may be longer than the other, so sends the money that way, or another car sells in greater volume, so money goes the other.

Now, look at Camaro's and firebirds's sales numbers. Camaro typically outsold Firebird by at least 2 to 1. This means Camaro generated twice as much money as the Firebird when it comes to the entire F-body line. Therefore, Camaro should have twice the restyling and refreshening budget as the Firebird. However:

Camaro got 1 new set of tail lights and new instrament panel in 1997, one new nose & hood in 1998. Camaro came in V6, Z28, and SS (after '97). You can add in the SLP SS' hood if you wish, but gotta do the same for the Firehawk.

Meanwhile, Firebird had 4 front bumpers (base & Trans am for both pre and post '98 models), at least 4 hoods, a minimum of 2 different rear bumpers, at least 3 different tail lights, and a model lineup that included Base/Formula/Trans Am (and Trans Am GT till '95), the WS6 package, and the Firehawk (which along with the Camaro SS was made by an approved aftermarket company) .

The money that went into these changes and variations far exceeds what was allowed for the much higher selling Camaro. Summary: Camaro generated 67% of the F-body sales, but less than 33% of the refreshenings and between 38 and 43% of the model variety, depending on if you want to add the WS6 (which Camaro had no option like this) to the mix.

Did Firebird eat up a disproportionate amount of the F-body budget?

You betcha.

 

The fundamental question still remains... would the Fbody program have gotten the Firebird money if there was no Firebird?

 

F-body program did get the money. It was allocated between Firebird and Camaro.

I think your question is: Would Camaro have goten the entire budget?

If it wasn't for Firebird, and assuming Camaro's sales were unchanged (unlikely, but lets assume so for this purpose) then Camaro would probally end up with 2/3 of what the F-body budget would have been with Firebird since it had 2/3 the sales.

So though in theory Camaro wouldn't get all the money, but it would get twice the amount it actually did. And probally more if it's sales were greater.

 

Ok, so here's another question. Who exactly did allocate the resources for both Camaro and Firebird? It would seem somebody at the top would look at the numbers and say "Geez, Camaro should be receiving more of the money." Why didn't this happen? And it seems like it wasn't much of a big deal to GM (though we know how that system works) but more so to Camaro enthusiasts.

 

"Brand Jobs" was not just a failed strategy for Camaro/Firebird, but for GM as a whole. It probably made some sense in the 60s, when GM had 50% marketshare and dozens of performance models. But once you get into the niche pony car market in the 90s, having two identical cars in the same market just made them seem generic and less distinctive.

 

I have never disputed that, and I have read Scott's statements on it as well... however.........


That was the F-Platform, with onyl two vehicles.

This will be a new platform with MANY vehicles.

It should make for a huge difference.

 

OK, but why would the 5th gen have to be that way? Also, it seems to me that the Camaro guys would have raised a stink about not getting their fair share. Is it possible the Camaro program did not want two different bumpers or tail light panels, etc. and that freed up cash for the Firebird program? I have a hard time believing the "Firebird" guys came in, pushed the "Camaro" guys around and said "Give us your budget money or else!"

I would love to hear from Red Planet about this topic.... whadda ya say Scott?

 

Exactly one of the reasons I started this thread. I'd love to know who set the allocations for the resources? Considering Camaro sold more, you'd think whom ever was in charge would have allocated more resources to it. I doubt Pontiac would have ahd the clout to demand more resources than Chevy.

Come on Scott, we need some input.

 

The Firebird is dead and the sister car to the Camaro, if it gets a green light, will be the GTO. GM is in a fight for survival, and the new Camaro could get axed at any time.

 

Others have said that Firebird sold mainly on the high-end (eg, high-margin). So they may have made the decision to put more resources into Firebird becase the traditional T/A customer wouldn't purchase unless there was a steady stream of new aero effects and spoliers. If you looked at the high-performance program as a whole (Camaro+Firebird), they may have felt they needed to keep the high-end Pontiac models moving so that they could justify shared engines etc.

That's all just speculation tho.