2007, the Mustang will have Competition, Camaro is Alive AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Discussion in '2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-' started by GM Dude, Jul 31, 2004.

  1. No they have other places to go. It's just the dumbest of them can't find the proper forums. :rlaugh: So they troll around trying to start an argument in a forum that includes cars with 8 cylinders.
  2. Hahaha. That was coming from an SRT-4(Shouldn't Read Threads), wow a car with the owner IQ value embedded(4). Nice try troll. I've had two friends with modified Neon's, they are the sukz. SRT-4 is comparable to a dressed up Yugo. (Pound chest, U da' man) http://www.allpar.com/neon/neon-srt-4.html
    Now you can run back to the SRT-4 forum and tell them the 215HP, Pep Boy sticker infested Duuudge my ride rocks boyz and tell them U Rooole. :rolleyes:
  3. I think what a lot of you guys are forgetting is that the 2002 Camaro Z28 had 310HP and the SS had 325HP. Both of those are higher than the 05 Mustang GT. GM will have to have atleast that much power in the 5th Gen Camaros.

    That said. I love the looks of the 05 Mustang GT. They are both American Muscle so they both rock. :D

    Edit: I really hope that GM does the retro styling.
  4. I don't think anyone is forgetting what hp levels any of the f-bodies had. We just temper that with the knowlege that according to GM. They did not sell well enough to stay alive. The 01 Cobra had approximately the same "rated" hp. And sold well. But it was a "limited" production run. Which may speak to the fact that high hp is not the only factor people look for in a car.
  5. If they model the '07 after the first gen.('67 - '69 with an RS, SS, Z28), they may gain fans. '68 is my favorite bodystyle. Definately first gen. atleast.
  6. That's the key, keeping everything in correct context. Just because you prioritize a, b & c in a car, doesn't mean that you can ignore x,y & z. The Mustang was a far better balance than the Camaro/Firebird across the entire demographic that it was built to appeal to. People who only care about e.t.'s and trap speeds don't buy a ton of cars. We're the hyper-enthusiasts, we're the most fervent of fans.....but if Ford only focused on us because we screamed the loudest, they would be making an ENORMOUS mistake, just as Chevy did with the F-bods. Ford has the recipe pretty well down-pat, and GM will likely copy that recipe alot more closely the next time they take a stab at the pony-car wars. It's more than just making it fast. It's quality, refinement, practicality, IMAGE, feature content, etc.etc.etc... you've got to have the total package to be a success. All of those attributes cost money and resources, portions of budget and manpower, to optimize to their fullest. Imagine the car being a pie, and all of the facets of the car being pieces of that pie. It's getting that pie chart right that seperates the winners from the losers. And you've got to sell that pie at a targeted price. To throw all of your budget into hyper-performance, you'll either have to rob available resources away from other slices in the pie, OR, you'll have to build a bigger (more expensive) pie. Any way you go, you start alienating customers away from the pie. Or, you learn how to bake pies more efficiently. Daimler-Chrysler is currently running the clinic on how to bake a pie more efficiently. Ford's not too far behind I think. The new Mustang GT is not meant to be the fastest car Ford could conjure, it's meant to fit a large demand in the lineup. It's a great balance for the price. Ford will use special editions to satisfy the smaller niche of customers that demands more performance and prestige, and for those who can't afford s.e.'s, the aftermarket will kick in to help those GT's out just fine. I don't foresee GM pulling a 400 h.p. Camaro out of their hat. For a special edition, sure, but not for the mainstream V-8 version. You've got to ask yourself, what insurance company would insure a 400 h.p. car that was priced to sell to young people? It's an unrealistic car to build in vast numbers, because nobody could justify the insurance expense. They'll build a stinking-fast special edition to fight with Ford for bragging rights, but they would probably build a low-300's h.p. V-8 for the mass-sales market that wants AFFORDABLE performance. Back in the 60's you could get anything from a 250 6-cyl up to a 427 in a Camaro. They probably sold 20 small blocks for every ONE big block back then. I don't think that would be any different today. We just don't understand that, because we're all the types of people that would be stepping up for the big blocks.
  7. Not to worry. Pontiac has the GTO... which GM will keep in the lineup for at least a half a decade, unless sales pick up, which could make it a staple of the Pontiac lineup.

    Actually, I was hoping Chevrolet would make a new Chevelle, also based off the Holden Monaro, but with more of a retro muscle car aesthetic, as opposed to the GTO's more conservative, classic Grand Tourer styling.

    Well, looks like the ultimate Mustang-wannabe will be back in 2007. It will, of course, win in performance, due to Ford's reluctance to seriously compete, but, true to Camaro form, will be unable to match the Mustang's style, mystique, and ability to appeal to non-enthusiast drivers. Unless Chevrolet makes a complete turnaround from the past 3 decades of Camaro development, I don't think the Camaro will still be around by 2012. It has been, and always will be, a Mustang WANNABE!!!!! :p
  8. I think the concept looks stupid! I love camaros but What I have seen with this new thing chev is doing... I hate all these new old cars! Ford chev Dodge. create something new. and make something different!

    Here is a link(it has prob already been posted, but oh well)
  10. Since there's zero mechanical difference between a Formula and a T/A, then exactly how much weight advantage do you have with the Formula? Maybe 50 pounds??? Beyond the Formula being devoid of the t/a skirting, foglamps and batman spoiler, both models could be optioned with the exact same luxury equipment. Methinks you're splitting hairs claiming to be "faster" ;) , but if it makes you like your car better, knock yourself out!!
  11. does anyone have any design pics of this stang? it must have some design set by now, thats only 3-2 years away, a very short time for automakers
  12. 300 pounds less, much better airflow. As a Pontiac dealer put it a few years ago: "TA is for show, Formula is for GO!!!" Yes, they are both Firebirds, with similar options available, but as the old song goes "Little things mean a lot!" :o)

    Just proves that skirts, a ridiculous spoiler and a flat nose don't make it faster.

    .... and I did NOT say "A lot faster!!" :o)
  13. ... and by the way - GM killed the Camaro and Firebird, not Mustang. GM did less than 1/10 the advertising that what Ford did, they did not produce the cars the customers wanted (quit making manual transmissions in April, for example) and did all they needed to make sure the sales were low. Mustang won the sales battle, but mainly because GM made sure they would. Don't ask me why, I don't have that info. But it is obvious from their marketing that they wanted it that way... then. But if Mustang posts great sales numbers, you can expect them to get back in the fray.

  14. Not just that but GM needs to drop the price, a lot of individuals need to remember mustangs cost less to buy and mod. Granite a mustang has less hp but put in the same amount of money to buy a camaro brand new the stang can be quicker. I do agree a retro style Z28 will be bad a** hopefully the price stays low for ya.
  15. Not really. The main reason I bought my Firebird was that compared to the Mustang, the Bird was faster, better ride, much more expensive looking interior (with better fit and finish and a worlds-better shifter), more versatile (with the true fastback, I can haul all kinds of stuff) and cost LESS. I'm talking street price, not sticker. Sticker is basically meaningless, anyhoo. The Camaro might have cost more, because of the greater demand at the dealer, but you could buy a 'bird for less. Of course, all that is moot now.

    I hope the new Mustang does return to the quality we seem to be expecting. I do love Mustangs, and will NEVER sell my '65. But in '97, the Bird was truer to the Ponycar tradition than the 'stang, in my opinion. I understand they have improved since then, but face it, it will be better for us on the road if there is some competition.
  16. This is the same reason i got my 01 SS. they were a hell of alot faster then gts and pretty close to cobras, but cost less. i love the T/A's also, my bro had one of those, but they were WAY to flashy for me. i mean come on, that snout thing on the front is outragous and that big @$$ wing on the back just looked stupid, to me. i loved my camaro, but a little incident with an eagle talon put that car into its grave, and instead of getting another one i bought an 03 GT, and you know what? i wouldnt go back. the camaro had more power but the mustang has more soul(if that makes sense) and handles alot better in my opinion. but i do belive they should bring back both, not just the camaro :rolleyes:
  17. Please, are you KIDDING me?? Who gave you that line of $hit??? Totally, absolutely untrue. Pontiac's published curb weight for a 2001 WS-6 6-speed Trans Am was 3417 lbs. So you're saying your Formula is 3117 pounds?? Impossible. There is NO MECHANICAL difference, and if you took a T/A and removed all the interior except the driver's seat, dropped the sway bars, removed all soundproofing, dropped the spare and jack, MAYBE you'd come close to losing 300 pounds. Tell me what is bolted to a T/A that is not bolted to a Formula that adds up to 300 honkin' pounds. You can't. There's no real difference in weight on the bodies of the cars, except for the side ground effects and the larger rear spoiler. The side effects are feather-light, and the difference in weight of spoilers is neglibible. Like I said, MAYBE 50 pounds, and that's being damn generous.
    1. Dealers are "mostly" car-retarded idiots, and that's just a b.s. greasy-hair-cheap-suit sales pitch, and...
    2. The Formula was a more "sleeper" looking appearance package for the performance-minded customer that wanted the "go" of the T/A, but didn't want all the "look at me" cladding. So in that respect, the "show/go" line would make marketing sense. It's really the same deal as when Ford offered the GT and the LX 5.0 in the 80's and 90's. The GT hatchback and the LX hatchback weighed within 50 pounds of each other. The only real lightweight in the mix was the LX 5.0 COUPE, because the coupe body (that wasn't available in GT form) was indeed significantly lighter. The LX 5.0 hatch wasn't really any quicker than the GT hatch, it just offered the GT mechanicals without the boy-racer styling for customers that liked the sleeper approach, or simply didn't like the gaudy stying of the GT. The Formula just doesn't "look" as showy as the T/A, it's the same deal. I'm not dogging your car at all, I prefer the Formula styling. But the Formula was just a tamer styling option, not an ultra lightweight alternative to the T/A. It didn't save hardly a lick of weight, and performed virtually identical. If you've been flying down the road for years under the assumption that you've got a 300 pound ultra lightweight advantage over those T/A's, you've been misled I'm afraid. 300 pounds is a heaping TON of weight, that would make big honking differences at the dragstrip. If the T/A weighed that much more, Pontiac wouldn't have sold any. Everybody would have said "screw that" and bought Formulas.
    Not really...
    300 pounds is far from little. A 300 pound disadvantage would be about the same as a 30 horsepower disadvantage. You really think that all those WS-6 T/A owners gave up that much performance just so they could look like batman? It all sounds great when you pull a bunch of cliche's out of a hat, but they are not based in reality. Not trying to get you riled, just want you to check your facts..
  18. Ricer?? Dodge is just as much american then ford, so before you go call someone ricer know what your talking about.Second you say i can brag about my 14 sec, car. What the hell do you have to say about your 14.3, and the funny part is you have twice the amount of cylinders. So if everyone is looking for a laugh lets all laugh at that. O and if theres any hating going around its you ford boys that cant handle a 4 banger handing your asses to you :lol:
  19. Learn how to type correctly. Dodge is half german owned now isnt it? Im not really sure how it works out with that merger. The srt-4 is NOT handing a gt's ass to it. They are pretty equal cars. One just looks better. Guess which one.
  20. Tell me more about the Mustangs you're "handing their asses" to.... In order to "hand" somebody their "ass", you've got to actually win a race. I'm not aware of anybody on this site having posted "SRT4 hands me my ass!!! Read on!!!". Having a chest puffing contest over who's 14-second car is quicker is like having a penis size contest and only needing to use a toothpick for a ruler. Ever hear of Napolean Complex?? It's fairly troll-ish to talk smack regarding 4-cylinders vs. 8 cylinders, when you've got to boost the bejesus out of your 4 little stovepipes just to get the car to a point where it offers what you could only classify as a mild thrill. My supercharged S351 runs high 11's on Z-rated radials with only 8 pounds of boost, through catalytic converters. When you get your peppy zippy little cutie-pie-"HI"-mobile down into that territory, call me and tell me how much dough it took to accomplish it with that 4-banger.....and how long it lasted before it blew up or broke the transmission...:rolleyes: