For me personally Ford has it backward. Give the GT and V6 models the IRS. Its better for daily driving and occasional track use. Give the most powerful Stangs, Cobra's Mach 1's and or Boss's the solid axle. While giving them the option to have IRS as a no cost option. This way the best performing Stangs have the advantage of the solid axle for track duty and for those who want the IRS can have it too. This will also put Ford in a position to use less costly parts in the IRS since it will used primarily for 200-300hp Mustangs. This will also help lower costs since the higher volume of Stangs will have IRS Ford can spread out the costs. After all a SC'd Stang is a better drag car than road racer. Leave that to the Boss or GT.

 

I look at it this way. The Mustang doesn't NEED IRS. Sure it would be nice, but not necessary. I for one will test drive it to see how much better/worse the new rear is. From what I've read and seen so far it looks like it will be very nice.

For those of you who think the Camaro will have the upper hand if it comes out in 2007 with IRS, I should remind you the Mustang was designed with IRS originally. What makes you think Ford would leave it solid when their competitor is using IRS? Ford could easily put IRS under the Mustang in 2007. The Cobra comes out in 2005 (as a 2006) with IRS. The IRS technology and parts will already be there! All they'll have to do is bolt it up on the assembly line. I just don't see GM pulling any fast ones on Ford as far as the Camaro goes. Other than possible DoD technology, there's nothing GM can add on extra that Ford can't have ready by 2007. The question is, would GM put DoD in a Camaro? I really think we'll have to see how that works first in other cars.

 

A different take on things, but I can't argue much.
After all, you said it was your opinion!

I basically agree. But I still have a hard time swallowing the added cost to the base cars for a marginal improvement in handling and ride. If it were a Lincoln or even Mercury - OK, no question. But a BASE MUSTANG? Hard call.

I think folks just want to look good, and pay as little as possible for it. That's my opinion!

 

It's not necessarily add-ons but just more or better of what is there already (ie more power, better chassis, ect). Do I know this for a fact, sure don't. GM has been pulling a fast one on Ford with the F-body for many years up to it's departure in 02' so don't think it can't be done. I think it is pretty much certain that the new Camaro will have IRS so I think the Mustang will have to follow if they want to keep up. This will drive the price up of the Mustang line. It has been said that a base 05' GT will start at about 25k, if that is true, add IRS, and other options and it will be close to 30k for a nicely equipped GT. We also know that the Camaro will get the LS2 which is far more powerful than the GT's 4.6 and if the two are even close in price, the GT is in trouble.

Maybe Ford is under the assumption that the Mustang does not need to compete head to head with the Camaro like before and they can get away with having less in many areas vs the Camaro. I don't know if they would actually do that or think in that way but as it seems right now, Ford may have to step it up for the 07 model year. Those special editions better start rolling out at a good price.

 

Let me introduce you to Mustang 101 - I'll be your professor....

Ford has - for the last 17 years no less - conceeded the performance edge to GM's F-cars, no question. Could Ford have made the Mustang faster - ooohhh hhaaayyelll yyaaeeessss. Ford has all the parts right in their own FRPP catalog - been available from Ford, made by Ford, sold through Ford, since the mid-'80's. All they had to do was put those parts in the car on the assembly line and bingo... faster Mustang GT or LX or whatever.

So why didn't they do it? They don't want to!!! Marketing has shown that most folks want a great sounding V8 or V6, they never race their cars, and the 0-60 times are of little or no concern. Deliver a basic car to these people for minimal $, and they are happy campers.

For the remainder of the crowd that DOES care about 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times, and track work, let them buy the basic car - cheap as possible - and it becomes the platform from which they can build the car the way they want it. They end up with exactly the car they want at a price they can absorb - no more, no less. They also get the thrill of doing a lot of the work themselves. Just how many real honest gear-heads buy a car and leave it stock? So why pay more for an original intake making 320 hp instead of 260, just to take it off and replace it with an intake making 360 hp? See the point?

One need look no farther than the last F-bodies to see that GM's obviously-faster and better-handling Z28 was outsold many fold by a lesser performing GT - and the GT owners are mostly tickled pink with them. Even the Bullitt and now Mach owners too. They didn't WANT 450hp cars, or they'd have bought Roushes and Saleens.

Instead of putting the performance goodies on the production cars and not giving the public an option, Ford has opted to invest in development of better race-inspired parts, engineer the cars to accept these parts easily and vice versa, and also to invest in aftermarket development and tuners that promote the sales of the stock cars as well.

I know this is a bizzarre concept for many to grasp - but it works. It has worked for 17 years now, so it is not a fluke. I want Ford to keep doing exactly what they have - making the basic cars cheap and accessible to the masses. Make them "mod-friendly", and keep pumping the aftermarket with money and support.
Honestly, I couldn't care one drop less if the next Camaro (SS or Z28 or WhAtEvEr) is faster than the GT off the showroom floor, stock for stock - just so long as they make one.
We'll see which one is faster at the track on Saturday night!

End of class.

 

That first sentence is kind of ironic. Isn't that what GM thought it was doing up until its departure? It didn't seem to work very well (don't misunderstand, I'm not bashing the Camaro/Firebird). It's almost as if you're saying people didn't buy it because it was better??? I understand what you're saying from a "performance" point of view. But that's not how most people think.

I don't think IRS will be that much more of a cost causing Ford to go bankrupt trying to put it on the Mustang. With 10 other cars coming out on this chassis, I'm sure some of those will have IRS (Lincoln/Mercury). That will spread costs out nicely. What I don't understand is why you say, "add IRS, AND OTHER OPTIONS"??? What does that have to do with the additional cost of IRS? The same options on a possible 2007 Camaro will no doubt put it into $30k territory as well. I agree the possible base V8 2007 Camaro (Z/28) will probably have a more powerful LS2 motor compared to the base V8 Mustang's 4.6L, one must take into account any special edition Mustangs (Mach1, Boss, Cobra) that will no doubt have similar power. Even with comparable prices, Camaro will have to appeal to the general public in order to compete with the Mustang sales wise. My hope is that the possible 2007 Camaro will do very well. Whether or not it will do as well as the Mustang has yet to be seen. I don't think GM will be able to beat the price (option for option) of the Mustang. 2007 is too far away to know, so we'll have to wait and see.

Actually, I'm glad you brought this up. How will a two year head start affect a new Camaro? Will Ford need to produce special editions? I heard discussion a while back that Mach1 (or some variant) could become an option package for Mustangs. From what I understand, the special edtions were orginally produce to help keep interest in the Mustang, not to compete with or other cars (Camaro/Firebird). Obviously Ford found a new niche with these cars and demand was quite high for them. I for one hope they keep making them.

What I think is interesting is the possibility that a new Camaro will be MORE like a Mustang. If they make it like a Mustang AND if they make it more powerful, then there's a possibility that it can compete nicely with the Mustang as far as sales are concerned. We'll have to wait and see if this happens (let's keep our fingers crossed). It's been said that only Ford can make a Mustang. I have a feeling that GM might make a "copy" close to it called Camaro. 1967 all over again.

 

I am very aware of all that but, you can't just plan on people buying Mustangs over other cars just because they are Mustangs or a Ford. You missed my point, they may be right that they don't need to do anything to these cars to make them compete in the sales race, that is a very real possability. Mustang and Ford people will continue to buy Mustangs no matter what, no matter how much of a performance disadvantage they are at, BUT times do change and the reasons that some got turned off by the Camaro and went to Mustang will be addressed in the new Camaro so Ford can not plan on winning sales based on the old assumption that the people who want a more daily-driver friendly car will buy a Mustang.

Also, the only time I think the too much power argument comes into play is in a situation like if a parent is buying thier daughter a car and doesn't want her to have something she might not be able to control or something like that. I have never believed the whole "too much power" hypothesis when you are talking about 2 cars that are supoosed to have power and are not that far apart (260 vs 305).

 

Until there is actually a camaro, why would Ford try to compete with a so far mythical car? And what makes you think that the same people who were responsible for saving the Mustang in 1989 are going to buy a camaro even if it's the best car in the market for it's price? This gap in time is only going to hurt the Camaro in my opinion because more GM enthusiasts with no other option are going to choose the Mustang in the meantime.

 

Some people on here think that faster automatically means better. Rental car companies like the V-6 Mustang just fine and teens who can not afford a GT or it's insurance like the pony as well. The Mustang offers so many options of vehivles made and aftermarket support that it is a hard car to beat sales wise in the segment. I think that this trend will continue even if another Camaro is made.

 

Mustang II anyone?




I am curious that with the Mustang never leaving the market how many people will actually go in to test a new Camaro, especially if it continues the trend and is more expensive than the current Mustang it competes with. Ford will already have the aftermarket for enthusiasts, and the car will be entrenched for 3 model years into the public with all reviews, opinions etc already in their minds. The GM crowd will nontheless buy the new Camaro if it's out, but I doubt that no matter how good it is that it will overtake the Mustang in sales.



Rental car companies for insurance reasons as well and the Image that the V-6 Mustang is an entry level car and that the camaro is a brute. Before you laugh, I have heard this argument in many places. Do you remember the State Farm commercials that showed the spinning Camaro and the car wrecks saying that they were too fast for teens? Public perception often times does not match reality.

 

Quite honestly, I think the majority of people actually are afraid of cars with as much power as the LS1 Z's had.
I often hear comments like, "what do you need that much power for, the speed limit is still only 55.." Or, "if so and so had a car like that he'd get himself killed"..and ofcourse, "he couldn't afford the insurance on that thing"..

I think by Ford keeping the Mustang stradling the proverbial "fence", it has attracted sales from both sides. Those who want a "sporty looking" economical car, and those wanting a not so "hard core" , sports car, retaing good street manners and ride or comfort at an affordable price. BUT, by doing this it has also competed among its own company and hurt sales of its similar type cars. And most people I have talked to like the look of the Mustang over the 4th Gen Camaro's. I personally think by eliminating the "Side Mirror Cowls" they would've sold more cars..(MPO)
I think Chevy has to diversify its models of Camaro's to compete with the Mustang for sales.(when or if it returns..)And not just in power plant or performance options, but "Levels" in "ride", "handling", "comfort", and "appearance" and options...
From having a base model V6 Camaro w/o spoilers & ground effects with different wheel/tire options etc...to an ALL OUT "G-Machine" equipped with the latest hardware to compete with the best of it's class in performance!...

Posted by scott9050
You're forgetting about the GTO, definitely an option...but I agree, it will hurt the Camaro by heavily shifting focus to the Mustang who recently gained a huge share of the market from the loss of its main competetor(s).

On the IRS subject, if it is a part of the platform used to revive the "F-Bodies" I can definitely see it coming standard, but with a small improvement in ride as compared to costs and added complexity, and set up required to produce. I can't see it justified on an "affordable" sports car, which the Camaro was already inflating out of...

 

I don't think the Camaro will overtake the Mustang in sales either and I have no doubts that even if the Camaro is superior in every way, the Mustang will still outsell the Camaro. As it seems now, the Camaro will not be made to be as high volume as the Mustang so that is another limiting factor.

I don't think the time delay of the release of the Camaro will have any effect on people buying the vehicle. People trade in vehicles like crazy to get a new model. I think the average duration of a car for a person is like 2 years which would put a Mustang buyer right at that point. Not to say that all of them will jump ship, some will, many won't. The bottom line is what matters to the consumer is a better product and what matters to the manufacturer is sales and profit so for me, I don't care about sales, I care about the product.....................just as long as GM can sell enough to keep it in production.

 

I have to agree with this statement. However Camaro very well could overtake Mustang in sales but not consistently over a long period of time. The biggest reason Camaro cant do it is because its the Mustang. Not because it may be faster, better quality, or better looking. None of that really matters too much. Its the Mustang and thats it. That fact alone limits Camaro's potential. Its like buying Quilted Northern or Charmin. Both wipe your *** just the same but more people buy Quilted Northern and thats how it is (hypothetical example). Its just the way things are. Plus Mustang has more special editions and Camaro has anniversary models which is about all, no more no less . But I too dont care at all as long as Camaro is good, is what it is supposed to be and is here to stay. I will buy it because I love Camaro, Chevrolet, and dislike Ford and I'm not a fan of Mustang whatsoever nor shall I ever be, but I respect it nonetheless.

 

I would like to test drive it then make my final thought.

 

As a 4 time Mustang owner before buying my current Z28, let me say that you are wrong in your assesment that people buy Mustang only because of the name. There are people here who buy Camaros just because of the name. The assumption that just the name Mustang alone accounts for it's success is wrong in my case, and I feel the case of alot of people I met at Mustang meets.

The thing with Mustang is that it does everything well. It's fast, handles well, is comfortable, practical, simple (almost prehistoric), insanely simple to maintain, and most important: do-it-yourself-friendly!!!

It's rare to find a Mustang GT (or even old LX 5.0s) that hasn't had at least one modification. Ford's performance books all but encourage you to buy their aftermarket products. You walk by a newsstand and there are no fewer than 3 magazines that specifically deal with Mustangs and performance.

Camaro's problem IMHO is that it became nothing more than a barroom brawler in performance. While that appeals to our "engine-in-a-box" members here, it doesn't really stand out with anyone else. There's a pretty surprizing number of people here on this board that simply doesn't get it.

Camaro plainly outhandles Mustang. But how often you you actrually use that difference in handling between a GT and a Z28?? Chances are that outside a race track, you don't! 4th gen Z28s out accelerate and have a much higher top speed than GTs. Again, how often do you use that difference?? Current Mustangs can outrun everything in it's class except LS1 F-bodies. Is it worth the downsides?? To many people, it isn't.

From a quality standpoint, speaking from my own personal experience, my Mustangs were better made and more durable than my Z28 Camaro. Period! As far as living day to day with the car (ease of parking, ease of entry & exit, driving a car in traffic that doesn't feel as wide as a Hummer) the Mustang simply is a more liveable ride.

I came to my Z28 when Ford began going backwards in performance, began recalling cars with alarming regularity, and seeing dealer service start going down the tubes. My sister was happy with her Mustang but Ford's customer service of the late 1990s (she dealt with them in 2 states and 6 dealers, so it wasn't an isolated event) ran her away from Ford. She also turned to Camaro as well. In both cases, if Ford hadn't screwed up, we'd probally still be driving Mustangs.

I know that some of you like to cop-out on Mustang's success by calling it a "girls" car, clueless that men buy Stangs by a more than 2 to 1 margin over Camaros. Although it is convienent having a "ready made" performance car that sits low & wide, and has all these capabilities like the Camaro, speaking for myself I miss having a small, tossable car that I have a ton of things I can do to it. I can guarantee you I'm nowhere near alone on this.

In short, Camaro's problems have zilch to do with it's power. It has little to do with it's name not being "Mustang" (Camaro has outsold Mustang on quite a few occasions). It isn't because it appeals to women (the only cars that attract more men buyers are Hummers, F-bodies, Corvettes & Vipers... even SUVs attract more female buyers by % not to mention volume).

Camaro's problem is that it became nothing more than a no compromise performance vehicle that's unfrendly to do-it-yourselfers. That's the image that was cultivated, and that's why you have so many wrong views of Camaro:
*It's too expensive. (false-it costs roughly as much as comparable Mustangs)
*It's too powerful. (false- if you can handle a Mustang GT, you can handle a Z28)
*It's insurence is too high. (False- with very few exceptions, Camaros are cheaper to insure than Mustangs of the same year despite more powerful engines).

If the next Camaro has improved quality (it will), improved ease of entry & exit (it will), more do it yourself friendly (it seems like it might), is styled sporty without looking like a doorstop of an F16 (it will ) and looses the "No Compromise" attitude (works good with the study hall crowd, but doesn't translate well to sales) then it stands a very real chance compeating very well with the new Mustang.