Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang? - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > General Car Discussion



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-04-2010, 06:45 AM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 40
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

How did the Camaro and Trans Am's sales fall so low that GM cut production?

For about the same price as the Mustang, the Camaro and Trans Am were always a bit more powerful. (Even the 1999-2004 Mustangs only had a 190 HP V6 and the a 260 HP V8, While 1998-2002 Camaros and Firebirds had a 200 HP V6 and a 305 HP V8 engine. Still the 2007 Mustang GT falls short of 5 HP than the 1998-2002 Camaro, which is several years older).

Mustang enthusiast had to buy the more expensive Mustang Cobra to have comparable times to the base Camaro z28 and Trans Am.

With the Camaros and Trans Ams being more powerful, how is it that they're production numbers fell?
twrgadarn8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-04-2010, 06:49 AM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

For one thing, some corrections are in order.

The question shoud be phrased with "Firebird" not "Trans Am" because that was what the base model was.

Additionally, you claim the Mustang was available with up to 260hp, but then you mention the Cobra. Why do you make that distinction, yet you don't make it for the WS6/SS packages? You're not comparing apples to apples, especially considering the Z/28 and Trans Am's base engine was around 285hp. This can also be argued when you point out the older Camaro makes more than the current GT. What about the Shelby GT? GT500? GT500KR?

The F-bodies sold in combined numbers that were not equal to the Mustang's. Why was that?

For one thing, the Mustang's core buyers were women. The Mustang was not overstyled like the F-bodies, so visibility was better, ingress/egress was better, and it was just a more comfortable car.

Meanwhile, the F-bodies were clearly targeted to men. And when they got that insurance bill, they often decided to get another vehicle - in many cases, pickup trucks with RWD.

The plant in Canada that built these cars were better utilized to building cars were GM could make a decent profit, which was very important because GM was not in great shape at the time. Blaming bean counters is not telling the whole story, and I don't blame GM for getting rid of the cars - they just didn't have the resources to redesign them, especially considering they needed to sell a certain amount that just wasn't happening. But time heals wounds, and we all know the Camaro is coming back.

Horsepower is not the clincher in the sales wars. The F-bodies were difficult cars for a large percentage of auto buyers, and their needs were better met by the Mustang or smaller, more practical sport coupes.
wilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 07:16 AM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 37
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

One of the reasons is the price of the Camaros were a little bit more than the Stangs. It was also more expensive for GM to make the Camaros than it was for Ford to produce the Stangs. With low sales,GM could not afford to keep on making them.
JosT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-04-2010, 08:06 AM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 42
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

gas prices
milward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 08:15 AM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 31
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

Ugly styling and higher prices.Also GM did nothing to promote them . They could make more money selling trucks that were cheaper to build and the stupid public was stupid enough to pay more money for.Now like back in the seventies with high gas prices and nothing but gas guzzling trucks in there inventory it biting them if the a s s.
anselm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 08:57 AM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 45
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

inagaddadavida pegged it. I do recall that the reason the cost was so high had to do with the benefit packages the workers were receiving in Canada, and they stopped making it until said contract expired.

Also, to Rooster, the newer LS engine that is in the Cadillac CTSV, Corvette Coupes, and the GTOs is the LS2, but the newest engine is the LS3, which is slated for the 2009 Vette, I believe. No official word has been given as to the powerplant for the new Camaros, which are no longer F-bodies. Since the whole design has changed, the Camaro is now being built on the Zeta platform, if memory serves me, thus the F-body monicor is no longer accurate.

That is all. Carry on.
chadburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 09:49 AM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 42
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

because the mustang seats more comfortably, but u want a fun car get camaro, i have an 85....cant be beatn by mustang in looks....Ever
jerad9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 10:29 AM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 28
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

People weren't buying them, they costed too much to produce, their quality and reliability was terrible, they were ugly, they rode and handled like a truck, they had poorly thought out interiors, the list goes on and on. Yes they were faster than the mustangs, but the mustang were far superior as a daily driver. And most people buying these cars bought them to drive them every day.

Now moving onto the new Camaro, it won't be produced until 2009 at the earliest. There is already stiff competition from the Mustang, which will get an update in 2009. The Challenger will also be released in 2008 or 2009. The Challenger will come with a more powerful engine (425hp vs 400hp), and probably be available at a lower price due to being cheaper to build (based on existing cars). The Camaro had better be extremely good, otherwise it won't make it to 2011. Although you can always count on the GM faithful to keep buying the inferior products that they produce.
Lindsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 10:51 AM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 37
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

Sales slipped to less than 35,000 so My D.A. company (GM) decided to drop them for reasons unknown(price probably) and made in Canada(Not exactly baseball apple pie and the Chevrolet)Dodge has come up with a retro Challenger that looks like one and they will outsell any Camaro rolling off the line in 2008 or 2009. Ross Perot said in 1986 when GM announced closing several plants (Including Norwood assembly) that they were laying off their best customers. And when GM shut down Van Nuys Cal . and sent production to Canada . Well all us F car owners who worked for GM said NO MORE! Ya see most of these cars were sold in the Mid West and along the Eastern seaboard!
Felten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 10:56 AM   #10
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 39
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

I agree with you that the Camaros and T/A's are more powerful than Mustangs. I am a little disappointed with GM for stopping production in 2002.

But, the good news is that Chevrolet has a new F-Body in the pipeline. Have you seen the new Camaros? I am not exactly sure, but I believe that they are going to start being manufactured in late 2008. I am considering buying one...although I am fond of the older Camaros too.

I believe that the new Camaro is going to have a 400HP aluminum engine...one similar to the LS1 and LS2 engines. Actually, I don't know if the 'newer' ones are called LS2, but I think so. Sorry that I don't have all my facts correct.

I love the Camaros. I also love the Trans Ams, too.

I don't think that the fact that sales were supposedly poor has anything to do with the fact that the Camaros and T/A's are more powerful.

I think that there are multiple reasons for the fall of production numbers and sales. A few years ago, SUV's starting getting extremely trendy. Personally, I hate SUV's. But since SUV's were some sort of "status symbol", folks started wanting to buy those vehicles left and right. It almost seems like a contradiction, because I was under the impression that people wanted better fuel economy...but as you probably know, SUV's are gas hogs.

I drive a V6 Firebird. It doesn't get good gas mileage- maybe 17 mpg city, and 20 mpg highway. Actually, though, the V8 models get better gas mileage, and have about 100 or more horsepower! Strange. I want a V8 Camaro or Firebird when I get my next vehicle. I don't mind if the gas mileage is not all that great. Having the good performance is worth that sacrifice.

GM made a grave mistake...well, okay...maybe it wasn't all THAT serious of an error...but I think it was wrong to pull the plug (even if only temporarily) on the Camaros and Firebirds back in 2002. If a GM fan wanted a fast car, he was left with few options. I personally can't afford a Corvette. They did manufacture a few Australian Super cars...the Pontiac GTO was resurrected for a few years...I think it was from like 2004 to 2006. But, again, those were and are expensive, too.

I think that the economy played a part in GM's decisions. Gas prices, the economy, inflation, the automobile marketplace, the SUV craze, and so forth. I think that they exaggerated when they claimed that Camaro sales were down.

I am looking forward to the new Camaros. They look pretty cool! They sort of have a slightly retro look/stance, kind of similar to the first Gen Camaros. And with a 400 horsepower small block, they will also be beasts on the street, as well.

Good question, by the way.
arlen44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 11:12 AM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 21
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

maybe its because the 4th generation of camaro's styling was boring and uninspired while the mustang retained the muscular, mean attrative look. as the owner of an 88 Camaro, i think its a damn shame what they did with the styling. i think if they had made the newer ones resemble the 3rd gens more, they would have been a lot more sucessful. and the new camaro is a joke. its hideous. at LEAST, with 400 horsepower it will smoke the gt500, which has over 500. that new gt500 is a bigger joke than the 09 camaro.
Shadoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 11:29 AM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 21
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

The Mustang and Camaro were not the same price. the Camaro was more expensive. I tend to think it was that lack of price competitiveness that killed the Camaro. Price will win out every time even thought the Camaro/Firebird whipped the Mustangs in every other category of speed and handling.
imported_Kodey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 11:51 AM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 41
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

THERE JUNK THATS WHY
ayawamat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 12:50 PM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 44
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

didnt really...they were still making 125,000 yr when killed...F ing bean counters
lucca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 12:53 PM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 52
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

The camaro sales started to slip in the '80s due to lack of power and in the '90s they got to be more feminine, besides GM looked at the numbers and decided to go with the truck and SUV market instead......BIGGG MISTAKE.. now they think about catching up with what will be a car that looks good,but will be too pricey for the average camaro(poor) guy...that challanger is a really goooood looking RETRO car.
ruhleah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 01:44 PM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 36
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

Alright, there are several reasons why the production of the F-car was ceased. But first to discuss the points the asker brought up. Raw horsepower is not the #1 selling point of a car! It is obvious in the eye of the consumer that the power advantage of the F-car over the mustang was not enough of a reason to pay more for an f-car.
The correction made of the asker by some answer was wrong, the asker specifically marks the 98-02 f-cars w/ the ls1 as being the 305 horse car (Z28 and T/A)...even though he/she missed the power increase in '01-02 from the change in cam design and intake manifold. Horsepower numbers aren't everything in performance, torque and gearing are other MAJOR factors to be taken into consideration. The answer given about the 285horse cars were the LT1 dual cat 96-97 cars as the 93-95 single cat LT1s had 275hp.
Bench racing aside, the mustang appealed to a much, MUCH broader market than the f-car. The mustangs were cheaper, as ford usually always has been cheaper than GM. The mustang was more comfortable to the masses, and appealed visually to most buyers. Saying the 4th gen f-cars were uninspired and lacked flash, while i respect your opinion, i don't believe to be true. The LT1s might lack luster in comparison to the LS1 successor, but the 4th gen was low, stretched, and looking like it was doing 100 sitting still. The mustang hardtop/moonroof option seemed to be more popular than the mostly t-top f-car. In addition the long, slung out f-car is not very appealing to the mass being as how you couldnt even see the hood (unless it had the SS/WS6 hood) and the mustang had a better viewing position. If you look at the sales, most of the sales were the V6 variation, with an automatic trans. and especially so in the mustangs case were these facts true, also with the % of female buyers being striking. so saying the f-car was increasingly feminine...i don't know about that one either.
Another thing to point out, like someone else did, was that the GM execs are to blame for alot of GMs troubles, for a very long time GM was on top of the automotive world, but they kicked up their feet and passed time instead of working to stay in front. This is especially true in the commercial trucking market. The 'bean counters' as many people feel have been in GM lately did cut off the f-body finger because of the slowing sales. And while people say oh the '01 and '02 had good sales, this may be in part to the fact the f-body was already in the gallows so to speak and people wanted one (all of a sudden) since they were going to be gone. But fear not, the Camaro is coming back. And with the GTO on the cutting block, there is hope for the firebird. You can find alot of articles/press releases on the end of the f-car run in '02 by searching. In addition the new camaro will not be an 'f-car' by definition as one answer pointed out, but hopefully still will be at heart. That being said, hopefully the 'demand' for the camaro isn't gone by the time it comes out, and ford better be ready for it considering the new camaro should have the LS2 hopefully (or maybe a newer LS3 development) bringing some 400hp with the v8 camaro, and going back in styling to the '69 being the most popular camaro of its history. In addition the new Camaro will have IRS which should help bring a better ride than the solid axle, and hopefully its a good system similar to that of the Vettes and not the crappy IRS in the blown Cobras 03-04 that couldn't handle the motor. Our only hope is that GM doesn't outprice itself once again.
Berwick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2010, 02:18 PM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 28
Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

Not to fear the Camaro's will be back in '09.

Nice info, from a couple of you guys. Thro, I think the insurance deal is a cop out. Being the proud owner an 02 Camaro Z28(purchased in 04). I know the insurance is NOT any bigger of a birden than the insurance on my '04 Silverado(purchased last Oct).

IMO, it was in fact that bean counter did NOT see the #'s to keep the production line in operation. Trust me, the f-body gang did not like this decision by GM to shutdown the plant in Canada. Where the f-bodies were producted.

Oh yes, they were the same price basically. The base model f-body w/o the t-tops or the V8(LS1 in the later yrs., 98-02) was just under 20K, just as the tangs(someone correct me if, I'm wrong, here). It's when you got into the hi-performance and addition of the T-Tops that jacked the price on up there.
bitten is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > Off Topic Forums > General Car Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


» Like Us On Facebook



05:09 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.