GM tried that with the Camaro. It did not stay true to its ponycar roots, unlike the Mustang which did. The result, we got an awesome performance car that couldn't sell if its' life depended on it...opps it did and it went on "hiatus". When the camaro was more of a pony car, it did compete more for Mustang sales and even IIRC beat the mustang on a few occasions.

So this is your list of GM alternatives for the Mustang: "Corvette, GTO, G6 coupe/convertible, MonteCarlo, Cobalt Coupe". With all that why bring the Camaro back?!? There was an uproar from all of us when someone from GM mentioned this (I can't remember who right now)

A little different is good...a completly different type of car is bad

 

This is what I have been saying as well.

I want a Camaro that is different than the Mustang, that is what drove me to this car in the first place. I think the Camaro should not try to be all things to all people or you will have a not-so-special, maybe genaric coupe. I think that a lot of poeple think that if the 5th gen is anything like a 4th gen, then it will fail, but I don't think that is true at all. Packaging seems to be the main problem so fix that and make sure the mechanicals and interior are fully modern and competitive with the industry leaders. Mix in the segment leading performance of the Camaro and some kick-*** styling and you have a big hit on your hands.

I also agree that the Camaro should strive to be different than the Mustang but also better. I have always said that there is a great oportunity here to really break away from the Mustang's shadow and really soar. How about a Camaro that is an alternative to the Mustang, not just in name, but in experience, looks, performance, ect. That is what the Camaro has been and I think should remain.

 

I totally agree, and I have many time myself said I don't want a "Chevy Mustang"...

That said, if the new Camaro has similar dimensions or weight to the Mustang... that doesn't by any means it's a "Chevy Mustang"...

 

Your forgetting that the Camaro has a wide range of models that spans a large segment of the population, we are not just talking about a Z28 or SS here. I think that all the cars mentioned could be alternatives to a Camaro for a particular buyer.

I am always surprised when peole say that the Mustang has always stayed true to it's roots more than the Camaro. What would you call the Mustang II or the fox bodies? Just because Ford decided to dust off one of thier old designs doesn't mean that they have always stayed true to thier roots.

 

I agree.

 

If you are referring to the 4th gen...that's not exactly what I had in mind. It's performance could not overcome it's lack of appeal to most people.

Also, I'm sure you can imagine someone cross shopping a G6 convertible with a Mustang convertible, or base Mustang with a Cobalt. Heck, I know people who cross shopped GP GXP with a Mustang GT even.

 

I said this before...........I dont see why someone would cross shop those cars.....................

 

You're right, I forgot that the factory offered a wide range of models in the last gen. a SS and Z28 which were pretty much the same car with different badges and a base V6 model. Didn't the RS option die with the redesign? The Camaro started out with a wider range of models back in the 60s and 70s and most of the 80s but that seems to be where it started going south. The fox bodies and the SN95 Mustangs were more true to the original ponycars than the 3rd and 4th Gen ever hoped to be. The new Mustang still stays true to that and I'm not talking about styling.

Yeah, with a Cobalt SS and a Monte Carlo with V6 and V8s available, Who needs a Camaro? Right?


Ford did make some deviations along the way. The Mustang II came about because (at least this is one reason I remember hearing about) Ford realized the Mustang had grown to big and they wanted to make it smaller like the original. The mustang II was a horrible car IMO but Ford didn't stay with something they knew wasn't going to work.

 

My grandmother owned one. I believe it was even a 4 cylinder automatic. What a POS.

 

First year it was only available with a 2.3 I4 or a 2.5 or 2.8 V6. That was a great move Mr. Iacocca.

 

Agreed. Even if the wheelbase stretched to 113.4 and the overall length to 185.

 

I owned a Cobra II with a built 302 that put just over 300hp to the wheels. It was a fun little car if a little dangerous feeling. It has a bad rep. Nothing was too good during those dark days.

 

Monzas were pretty good. Especially the Cali 305s.

 

And yet it happens.

RP has told us that the second choice for many buyers on the previous V6 Mustang wasn't a V6 Camaro but a Grand Am coupe.

BTW, rlsedition once posted that Pontiac saw the GP GXP as an alternative to the guy who wanted a Mustang GT but also had kids.

 

Very good point! Getting a car that has similar dimensions to its main competitor does not have to be a negative thing or a compromise. It does not have to drive the same way or look the same either. It can still be its own car with its own unique qualities.

As Guy alluded to, we ( a relatively small group of hardcore ethusiasts on an internet message board) constitute the minority of Camaro buyers. Does that mean that opinions and wants shouldn't be brought forward? Absolutely not! I would hope that GM would stick out their ears and listen to some of "our" wants and maybe put them in the suggestion box. But, to expect that the majority of the car will be tailored to this group is unrealistic IMO. Would I love for it to happen, sure! Maybe that would happen if enthusiasts accounted for a much larger percentage of new sales, but we do not. The guy down the street or the lady at the bank are the ones that will keep the car alive. Getting purchases from the general pubic is the key.

Let's, just for a second, take off the enthusiast glasses and look at things from GM's point of view or even from that of the often hated beancounters. On one side (choice 1), you have a competitors rough sketch (it doesn't have to be an exact copy) of a vehicle that has proven to be a success in the marketplace. On the other hand (choice two), you have the choice to deviate heavily from the "other guy's" plans and make something unique. Choice #2 is certainly the more glamorous and exciting choice, and it could pay off big if the car is a sucess and creates its own niche........on the other hand it could fall flat on its face. At this time, also consider that your company is experiencing serious financial difficulties. Choice #2 offers the chance to either hit a home run, or strike out. Choice 1 affords the opportunity to arrive at second or third base standing up. I don't think it's too difficult to understand why GM may be leaning towards choice #1. Again, this isn't based on any facts, it's simply my personal view of the situation. GM may or may not actually use the Choice #1 or Choice #2 setup complete with baseball analogies.

As to those who state that they will not purchase a 5th gen if it does not meet every one of your requirements, I applaud your resolve. It certainly is your right not to purchase the car if it isn't everything that you want. However, I doubt GM will lose too much sleep if it loses ~15,000 hardcore enthusiast sales yet picks up 60,000 additional sales to the general public. Just my $.02.


-Mike