Sorry folks, GuionM is 100% correct.

How can you count Firebird sales as "F-Body Sales", but not count the Capri with Mustang?

The Capri was the SAME THING TO THE MUSTANG AS THE FIREBIRD IS TO THE CAMARO... the 79-86 version that is.

Same thing goes for the Cougar of long ago....

That's like doing a world's census, and counting Men and Women in the US, and only Men in India and then declaring that the US has a higher population!

 

IZ28,
With all do respect, do you realize that the '79 thru '86 Capri is EXACTLY the same car as a Mustang - save for nosepeice, tailights, and front fenders? There are oodles of car mags with guys who have converted Mustangs to Capris and vice-versa in 4 hours or less. (The "bubble-back" Capri hatches are actually more aerodynamic than the Mustang "flat glass" version - they are bolt-on swaps.) ALL engine/drivetrain components are exactly the same, from the 5.0 to the quarda-link set up. The chassis' were IDENTICAL. Interiors are IDENTICAL. They are off of the exact same line (Rouge River plant). The 5.0 Capri and the 5.0 Mustangs were also manufactured and marketed for the same class. Costs were a wash between them.

Given the circumstances and info above...
How can you think the Mustang/Capri pairing is so different from the Camaro/Firebird pairing?!?!

Likewise, the '67 thru '73 Cougars WERE Mustangs - no other way about it - but they had different tailight panels, front grills, and fenders. EVERYTHING interior was Mustang. Wheels were Mustang (save for hubcap emblems). Doors, floors, rugs, seats - all Mustang. Engine, trannys, and rear ends were all from Mustang.
Cripes - these cars are where I find most of my peices for resto's now that all "Mustangs" have long been stripped.

Again...
How can you think the Mustang/Cougar pairing is so different from the Camaro/Firebird pairing?!?!

Lastly,
The Mustang II. While nobody can even begin to accuse the M-II of being a performance car, it was still a Mustang - and a d@mn profitable one too. It was designed -intentionally- to be built with the Pinto. They shared the same 2.0, 2.3, and 2.8 engines throughout their production. They shared the same rear ends. They shared the same interiors(save for the dash and seating). They shared the same front ends (known throughout the HotRod community for their simple, bullet-proof rack and pinion steering set-ups). They differed most in areas of improved sound deadening, improved springs/sway bars, and the late addition of a 302 for the Mustang in '75. There were obviously some body differences too, like no coupe for the Pinto, and the tailight panels. But the hoods, front fenders, even headlamp bezels could be shared between some models with bolt-on ease. Again, both cars were intentionally built and marketed in like class to the same perspective buyer. Built on the same lines, with the same basic components.

So...
How can you think the Mustang/Pinto pairing is so different from the Camaro/Firebird pairing?!?!

This is not intended to be a flame or anything. I just think maybe you didn't know just how identical those car pairings really were. Except for '64 thru '66, the Mustang has almost always had a "twin" of some kind to help distribute line/tooling costs and appeal to a buyer who wanted something "slightly different" than the Mustang everybody else had.

BTW - There is a dooky-pot full of folks out there that have Cougar Eliminators, XR7's, Capri RS, ASC MacLaren Capris, etc. that would pose both verbal and physical contests to anyone that doesn't think their cars were anything but "performance cars", like the Mustang.

Sidenote:
In it's first year (1967), the Cougar sold over 150,000 units.
It was named MotorTrend "car of the year"
Above the base unit was the XR7, GT-E, XR7-G (Dan Gurney Special), and the bad boy, the Eliminator (of which some had the Boss 302).

For a little liveliness, here's a few pics of Mustang's cousins at work...
Cougar at Sears Point
Team Cougar at MidAmerica
A Cougar at Steamboat Springs
Dan Gurney Special
The 6.5L GT
The 429 Cobra Jet Cougar (drop tops?!?!)
The 428 CJ-R models
The ultimate Cougar... The Eliminator
The ASC MacLaren Capri Coupe
The ASC/MacLaren Capri Story
Lotsa Fox-body Capris

Sorry for the long ramble. I love pics...
Being from "the other side", I am probably more aware of these Mustang Stablemates than the average guy on this board. Just wanting to share some insight and history.

Also, while we are on the issue of "stablemates"...
I think it would be a mistake to bring back the Camaro without a Firebird, or vice versa. While there are many who love both cars equally, there are also many who prefer one over the other for whatever reason. To offer one without the other WILL alienate some buyers, like it or not. I therefore beleive that the cars should be reintroduced as a pair - like they have been for decades now. Besides, it could only help distribute the costs of tooling, etc, while offering a larger array of appearances and options on a common platform.

To those who did, Thanks for Reading!

[This message has been edited by ProudPony (edited September 10, 2002).]

 

Proud Pony...great pics!!!!

BTW, while we're on the subject...what scuttlebutt do you hear about a future RWD Cougar?

 

Good debate going on here. I feel you are wrong as can be , but I still enjoy the exchange.

I don't get your point. When I think Camaro, I don't think Firebird. My co-worker bought his Firebird, he surely doesn't think Camaro. That's about standard for all Firebird (and Trans Am) owners I've ever talked to. Firebird owners (and you all can chime in anytime you want) tend to like their cars as unique.

Firebird is identifiable as Firebird by just about anyone from any distance. Yet from more than 50 feet or so most people can't identify a 84 Mustang fron an 84 Capri.

But since the logic of combining Mustang/Capri/Cougar if you combine Camaro/Firebird, let's look at it in this angle:

If you heard Camaro was gone for good & only Firebird came back, how would you feel? Would you simply go over to Pontiac and buy a Firebird feeling they are the same car anyway, so what's the difference?

 

P.S., I'm not the only one:

http://members.tripod.com/~Camaro33/camarovsmustang.htm

 

I would be intrested to see how combined Mustang and Capri sales compared to the F-body.

Also didn't the Capri only get the 5.0HO for one year?

Here is how I see it...

Second Gen-
Here the Firebird and Camaro were very much different cars, from powertrains to major engine components. Also it was the only generation (In the late 70's part at least) that Firebird sales neared the Camaros's. For this era I think that Mustang vs Firebird vs Camaro would be more acurate than combining the F-cars. As for the Pinto of this era, I highly doubt that many people wen't into dealers looking for Mustangs and ended up with Pintos, and vice-versa.

The Third Gen-

It is fair to compare F-body to Mustang/Capri sales IMO. However since the Capri didn't enjoy all the performance goodies that the Mustang had it was at a severe disadvantage. I seriously doubt that the Capri sold well enough to make a huge difference anyways. However I will be the first to admit I have never seen the numbers.

The Fouth Generation-

Here it is fair the compare the F-body to Mustang because Ford clearly decided to use only one entry into a market where GM had two. Also towards the end of the third gen GM cut a shift at Ste. Therese leavng a limited number of cars that could be made. From 98 on it wasn't a matter whether GM could sell enough Firebirds and Camaro to keep pace with the Mustang. The simple fact is they decided they would cut thier ability to do so and sell a limited number of cars....

Also I have a funny feeling that GM sells alot of Grand Am GT's to people who otherwise would look at a Camaro.


Where Avis uses the Grand Am and Malibu has thier midsized car, Hertz uses the Mustang has thier midsized car. Ford has made teh Mustang appeal to a wider market.

------------------
Branden-Founder- GMInsidenews and NewAgeGTO
1995 Firebird White with Red Leather!- 2002 TA exhuast, JVC Head unit, 350 watt amp pushing two 10" subs..
Slow can be sexy

 

Until we build a quality Fbody not just engine wise but the whole car we will not see a 5th Gen. Plus Ford doesn't have a Vette to contend with. Fbodies can't be better than a Vette so they are lower quality.

------------------
95 Formula M6, Cags, SLP shifter, Grant SFC,Hooker Catback.

 

Sometimes being TOO technical messes with what makes sense. And thats what I feel is happening with this, but I'm not gonna repost things I've already said.



[This message has been edited by IZ28 (edited September 11, 2002).]

 

Branden,
The Fox-bodied Capris had every option available to the Mustang - all engines/trannys included. The V8-cars were 4bbl carbed from '79 'til '85, they got a 4bbl-TBI unit in '85 only, and went full EFI w/ roller tappets in '86 - which was the final year for Fox-bodied Capris. Both manual and autos were available. The Fox-body redesign of '87 left Mustang standing alone on it's platform. I speculate that was the first physical signs of Ford's intent to eliminate the Mustang (or sell it to Mazda) and retool the assembly plant for something else (Explorers were in development at that time... hmmmm.)

Anyways, to answer your question, YES - the Capri came with everything from the 2.3 I4, to the 2.3 turbo, to the carbed 5.0HO to the EFI 5.0HO, and many others too.
A few quick examples... (again, I love pics!)
Car and Driver - '82 carbed 5.0HO.
An '85 5.0 RS carb/TBI car
An '86 RS with EFI5.0HO, roller rockers, T5, Hurst, etc. - factory.


Well, the Mustang II released in '74 had ONLY choices of a 2.3 I4 or a 2.8 V6 engine. That IS NOT performance - even ads for the car touted them as "economical" and "sporty" - the term "performance" was just not applicable. Therefore it was marketed in line with the Pinto for sales. I think people DID go looking for Mustangs and end up in Pintos and vice versa. If they wanted performance, they bought T/As, Camaros, or Dodges in those years... look at guionM's production figures and you can see how the F-cars had a surge in sales between '74 and '78. They even came out with Mustang II/Pinto models called "MPG" models!
(Check out the first link, that pretty much markets Pinto and Mustang together I think!)

Here's a few links through the time machine to paint the picture for you about how the M-II was received back then...
Pinto and Mustang MPG models go on sale...(click on the running horse at the bottom of the page to index forward through the brochure)
Article from HotRod magazine - Jan '74
MotorTrend - Feb '74
Popular Science - June '73

While I don't necessarily think it is appropriate to include Pinto production figures in on our little game, I was trying to make a point about including twins' production numbers based solely on claims that they were "made on the same line" or "marketed towards the same crowd". The Mustang II in particular, is largely misunderstood not just by average people, but by car enthusiasts too - Mustang collectors even! I really think the lack of acceptance - even in the Mustang hobby - of the Mustang II is that it flies in the face of the performance-based ponycars we all think of... it is not, nor was it intended to be, a performance car... so it gets "left-out" of drag races, shows, cruises, etc. and never gets the opportunity to make impressions on people like Mach 1s, GTs, etc. did.
OK - 'nuff rambling about the M-IIs.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by formula79:
It is fair to compare F-body to Mustang/Capri sales IMO. However since the Capri didn't enjoy all the performance goodies that the Mustang had it was at a severe disadvantage. I seriously doubt that the Capri sold well enough to make a huge difference anyways...[/QUOTE

Again, it actually did get all the Mustang goodies, plus a little more... you gotta check this one out!
Capri designed to dominate Trans-Am... via Jack Roush

Branden, I agree with pretty much everything else you said in your post. I was not wanting to isolate your comments for scrutiny, I just wanted to point out a few stigmas about Capris and M-IIs that +90% of car people aren't aware of. Your conceptions of these cars was actually very common - and understandable. It's actually kind of sad that even Ford/Mustang purists don't even know much about these issues - they seem to remember the most popular or best performers and just ignore the rest - despite the fact that these "other" cars really helped the popular ones to even exist (especially financially?!).

We can all learn from these points if we choose to...
(--hints to a Gen V there--)

Peace.

Had to edit a couple links... sorry! I think they all work now. -Proud


[This message has been edited by ProudPony (edited September 11, 2002).]

 

Z284ever,
Sorry for the late reply on this. I have a lot going on in life right now... just don't get to the boards often.

The latest rumors - and I emphasize rumors - that I got were at the Grand Nationals in Charlotte on Aug 31. There were several Ford guys around the "Living Legends" truck that were saying Ford is looking to consolidate several models on the DEW platform like GM is with the Sigma. It will help justify costs and efficiencies greatly. "Several models" were then broken down into the Mustang, a "new" Lincoln LS - or similar type sedan (to replace the continental maybe?), and the Cougar. This would at least make sense in speading out costs, and give the company an entry level, mid-level, and luxury high-end car all off of the same platform - a RWD V8 platform.

I also know that most Cougar Club members love their vintage 289s, 302s, 351s, 428s, and 429s. Even the '80's model Cougar XR7s could have 5.0s. So the responses have leaned towards a RWD V8-capable platform.

I doubt if we will see an SVO Cougar anytime soon, but I think an "upscaled Mustang" type Cougar is getting serious scrutiny right now at Ford. It would also reposition the Cougar beside is original stablemate like back in '67 - I think that would be cool, IMO.
It would be lame to reattach the Cougar to the new T-bird, and besides - I think Ford has tried to clearly separate the Cougar/T-bird ties with the current Cougar offering anyhow.

That's the latest dicussion I was a part of recently - and I restate... that's just talk, nothing written. But fun nonetheless!

Take Care! -Proud

BTW, A Mustang Teaser for you...

 

I think that Ford would be better off just killing off the whole Mercury brand (like GM has done with OLDs). Mercury is one of those brands that stuck in the middle, its neither a luxury brand nor an entry level brand and Mercury just gets lost in the competition.

I think Ford would be better off keeping the new Mustang affordable and create a seperate car with a entirely different appearance and call it the "Cobra" (not: Mustang-Cobra) to try to compete with the Corvette head-on because a $35,000-$40,000 Mustang-Cobra is just a lame idea.

 

I agree with you that the firebird and the camaro are both unique, but they have just as much in common. I mean how can you deny the fact that when you think of one, you dont think of the other? Im not saying that when you look at a firebird you think, damn, thats one sweet camaro-looking car... or vice versa, but I mean its a car that you can appreciate just as much as your own because they share so much of the same internal and external design..

I know that if the camaro was gone for good, and a new trans am came out that totally blew me away(and they always do), I would be one of the first in line to get it! Ive always loved both cars, I always thought that the T/A's had the appreance of a more sexy, suave sense of power, as to where the camaro seemed to have a look of more of a raw sense of power.
But if I had my way, I would have a 67Camaro, a 71 Z28 with the RS appearance package(split bumper), and a 2002 T/A with the WS6 package.

but lastly, I saw the pics of the capri's and I cant deny that they look almost exactly like the mustang. But I dont know how much I agree with others about the cougar...
------------------
My 2 Babies:
94 black Z28-5.7 k&n cold air induction, performance MAF,air foil & flowmaster exhast. new pics w/ SS hood & spoiler. Custom hvac&light covers and custom storage bin covers for sale
94 Z28 pics
86 laser red IrocZ - k&n air filters,full msd setup, flowmasters, modifed MAS & air foil,92 hood, Ground Effects & spoiler
86 Z28

[This message has been edited by ReznorZ28 (edited September 11, 2002).]

 

Capri was identical to Mustang right down to it's option lists including the 5.0, the turbo 4, and every performance & aftermarket item. If Capri somehow was at a disadvantage, so was Firebird. Firebirds also have been outsold by Corvettes for the past few years. If Capris don't make much of a difference in sales, do Firebirds?

GM cutting a shift at Ste. Therese is irrelevent. Towards the end of B body production, GM slowed down the line. Should Roadmasters, Caprices, & SSs be combined so we can say we beat Crown Victoria sales that year? Also irrelevent are references to Mustangs in the rental car business. I rented a few Camaros from National Car rental before I bought my Camaro. Last I heard, they still had them.

The 3rd gen Firebird, believe it or not, not only had a different interior, but also had diffetent sheetmetal (compare the continuing crease from the side window to the rear hatch on the B-pillar to Camaro's which begins just infront of the hatch).

As for the 4th gen, there is NO exterior pieces at all that can also be interchanged between Camaro & Firebird besides the rims & tires. Beyound the gauges and console, same goes there is no surfaces that are common to both cars.

Therefore, anyone who combines both Camaro and Firebird against Mustang instead of separately is doing much the same thing as taking Impala, Regal, and Grand Prix and combining them against a Taurus.

I'll agree with you on Pinto though because they were sold from the same dealer for a completely different market...much like if Chevy actually had made an F based Nomad.

Finally, just looking at GrandAm, Mustang, and Camaro (you didn't say "F-body" when you said that, did you? You also didn't mention the same brand as GranAm Firebird. Inconsistancies??) I'm more inclined to think Pontiac stole far more Mustang sales than the few thousand per month sales of Camaro, and most certainly the roughly 2K per month sales of Firebird, though why we are saying Pontiac GranAm are stealing sales from Chevrolet Camaro is beyound me.

 

Don't take what I said above as a flame, it's just the way I talk (too much time in the military )

Proudpony, Very good Capri links. I forgot about those racing Capris & the higher top end of those bubblebacks.

Capri is a very misunderstood & forgotten car. IMHO, it was a bit of a mistake for Ford to bring it out as spitting image of a Mustang, because it went for the identical market. Firebird, on the other hand, moved upmarket from Camaro over the years and courted a slightly different buyer than Camaro with a completely different exterior & interior.

I've been stock piling ammo for the next debate (should Barracuda & Challenger sales be combined) so watch out!

FYI, Challengers had longer wheelbases than Barracudas.

 

guionM,
I admit that you suprised me here... Do you think they really marketed Pinto and Mustang separately?

I think people perceive ALL Mustangs (and Camaros too) as "performers" in general becuase they see one on a dragstrip, a kid peels a wheel at a stoplight, or one blows by at 90+mph on the highway sometime. This "stigma", or paradigm, about these cars precludes and post-dates (but does not include) the Mustang II. When was the last time you saw a M-II blow by you doing 90+? When have you seen an M-II peel away from a light? Ever see stock M-IIs at the dragstrip running quick-8 or StreetStock?

Really, those cars were economy cars. Designed and engineered to be that way - and to share many parts with Pinto. The Pinto was the economic entry level car (Camaro-like for f-cars) and the Mustang was the slightly upscale version (Firebird-like for the f-cars).

Like the prior post, I've got oodles of links to old ads from '74 thru '77 touting the Mustang as economic... the word "performance" is almost never seen. And there are many ads in which the Mustang II and Pinto both appear together. I was not of car-buying age back then, but I really think the marketing push was for Mustang II = economy = "upscale luxury Pinto".

Just a few more ad links... look at the number of times "economy" is written... geez!

Hot Rod magazine - Mar '74
A corporate ad that ran in many mags in '74/'75
Mustang II and Pinto in same ad

I find this one most interesting... (it's 5 pages long)
This is an actual Ford memo sent to all dealers and salesmen, telling them how to market the Mustang II. It identifies competitive models and specifies marketing strategies to the salesman. It clearly tells salesmen to tout the economical benefits of the car foremost.

Now granted, they did have the Camaro listed as a competitive model, but they also had a Celica and Beetle in there too. They had the audacity to compare the 2.8 V6 Mustang II Mach 1 against the Camaro LT AND Camaro Z/28! This is so typical of a sales/maketing guy who knows NOTHING about an enthusiasts emotions...
Here was the sales pitch... AND I QUOTE," The Z28 does hold a power advantage with a 350 CID 4V engine and can boast some performance advantages such as a posi-traction rear axle and sport suspension. But so can Mach 1 with its BR70 x 13 RWL steel belted radial ply tires and the precise handling of rack and pinion steering."
OMG!!! So we (Ford) say the Camaro is faster and better performing, but the Mustang has 13" "toy" wheels and rack and pinion steering. PLEASE.

While I readily admit that most of us still associate a natural rivalry between Camaro and Mustang through all years, that rivalry is really unfounded concerning the Mustang II, IMO. It was not a performer IN ANY WAY, it was economical... ONLY. The V8s in the Camaro/Firebirds clobbered the V6 performance-wise, who can contest that?

We enthusiasts just have a hard time breaking the mind-set that Mustang and Camaro were always competitors in the PERFORMANCE MARKET. Knowing the development issues and history behind making M-IIs smaller, adding 300lbs of sound-deadener, killing the V8 options, offering a lame 2.8 V6 as max engine, putting cat-cons on it, etc. - I cannot agree that M-IIs were intended performance market cars.

No flames intended in any way! In fact, I think we are still +99% in agreement about all other things in this thread. I just wanted to try to "expose" some hidden knowledge - or something like that. Doh!

And guionM - you will get no contest from me on your next round of competition! Re the Challenger and Charger R/T's. I am 100% behind you there, too! Javelins? 'Cudas? GTX or GTO or LeMans maybe? LOL!!

Regards,
-Proud

[This message has been edited by ProudPony (edited September 12, 2002).]