General LSX Automobile Discussion Non-technical LSX related topics.

Camaro vs Mustang (but not in a race)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-11-2007, 11:41 PM
  #1  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Mac93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Camaro vs Mustang (but not in a race)

Not trying to start a fight here because I like both cars, but why does it seem like Mustangs hold their value so much better than Camaros?

For example a decent 2000 SS (not just a Z28, but the top of the line) might sell for 12K, a Mustang GT of the same year will sell for around 14K. The Camaro started at a higher MSRP, comes w/ a 6-speed, bigger engine. Why do you think they cost less? IDK I just thought about it and it confused me..
Old 01-11-2007, 11:42 PM
  #2  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
 
KameleonTransAm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: JAX, FL
Posts: 600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Really its all about demand. Most people don't know about F-bodies whereas mustangs are EVERYWHERE
Old 01-11-2007, 11:48 PM
  #3  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Mac93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Shouldn't that bring the price down for the mustang? More choices for potential buyers?
Old 01-11-2007, 11:49 PM
  #4  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (10)
 
BayAreaSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA (Pittsburg)
Posts: 4,240
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Prices vary depending on location as well.
Old 01-11-2007, 11:50 PM
  #5  
NKAWTG...N
iTrader: (3)
 
StoleIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 4,760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Where you getting your info from?

Just searching autotrader I found a:
2000 Camaro Z28, 40k miles, $11,588
2000 Camaro Z28, 55k miles, $14,995
2002 Camaro Z28, 44k miles, $15,000

2000 Mustang GT, 44k miles, $11,950
2002 Mustang GT, 41k miles, $14,995

this was just copy paste. But I don't see the trend you see. Obviously alot of things effect the price of the car, but judging from that, even if you ignore the highly priced 00 Z28, they are pretty much on par.
Old 01-11-2007, 11:56 PM
  #6  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Mac93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I was comparing prices of cars on enthusiast sites, Autotrader is mostly, not all but mostly dealers. I probably should have mentioned where I got this idea from.
Old 01-12-2007, 12:01 AM
  #7  
NKAWTG...N
iTrader: (3)
 
StoleIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 4,760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Well dealers will still mark their prices up accordingly. So a Camaro will be marked up the same as a Mustang. So the prices should both seem inflated from dealers, equally.

Anywho, I will be keeping a watchful eye on this thread since most Mustang vs Camaro threads don't go very far before getting out of control.
Old 01-12-2007, 12:09 AM
  #8  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Mac93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Sure, yeah I didn't make this to start a fight. Actually I have someone coming in a week to buy my Mustang, so I'm not just trolling thinking Mustangs rule.

What I was trying to get at is either why aren't Fbods more expensive or Mustangs cheaper? I mean I'm totally cool with how it is now because I would like to own a Z28 in the future. It just seems like the Fbody has more +'s than similar year stangs. idk, just a thought.
Old 01-12-2007, 12:11 AM
  #9  
Syn
On The Tree
 
Syn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hm, I always thought Mustangs had a lower resale value than F-bodies. That's the trend I've noticed in my area. LS1 cars hold their value pretty well compared to most sports cars, probably because they aren't made anymore. I'm just guessing though.
Old 01-12-2007, 12:13 AM
  #10  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (36)
 
Magnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Fort Myers Florida
Posts: 4,075
Received 69 Likes on 50 Posts

Default

yea honestly it has always seemed like mustangs were cheaper...
Old 01-12-2007, 07:59 AM
  #11  
On The Tree
iTrader: (3)
 
echo3313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jasper, GA
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I agree, i have both a SS and a mustang and i have always found F-bodies to be higher than equivient mustangs. When people start modding mustangs to get the same amount of power you get out of a bolt on f body is when you will see the price jump. The not-so-inteligent will mod the hell out of a mustang to see 350rwhp and ask for the blue book price plus every penny they have put into it. Here is where you will see mustangs higher...
Old 01-12-2007, 09:19 AM
  #12  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
 
LS1Formulation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 2,461
Received 444 Likes on 355 Posts

Default

I own both a '98 Formula and a '98 Mustang GT. I paid $6500 for the Formula with 128K on it and $7200 for the Mustang with 109K on it. Both are in the exact same shape. I don't see either one being more valuable than the other except for when it comes to mods. Then the F-body has a huge advantage. I've been collecting parts for the Mustang and if I did all the equivalent parts on the Firebird, I'd see a much higher gain. I've bought a 75MM TB, plenum, P.I. intake, cold air intake, timing adjuster, and an off road H-pipe. With all of those parts and expense, I will be lucky to see 30 HP. Lucky for me, I've been shopping eBay for deals and I don't have a lot into parts, but I have seen the expense some people go to to make their Mustangs faster and to me, it's not worth it. F-bodies FTW!
Old 01-12-2007, 09:33 AM
  #13  
TECH Resident
iTrader: (4)
 
ZFan88's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I always see Mustangs going for a lot cheaper than Camaros around here, especially if it's an SS. People who don't know the cars think they're sooooo much better
Old 01-12-2007, 11:22 AM
  #14  
Launching!
 
stokedporcupine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

"Prices vary depending on location as well."

i think this hits it right on. i'd imagen there's far to many things to consider before you could say a mustang goes for more then the same yr F-body. time of year and location would be very important. also, just because you see people asking for X amount of dollars for something on a site like this doesnt mean its going to sell for that. same for auto trader and the like.

so basicly, unless you are going to gather 1000's of examples from all over the country of actual selling prices (not what people are asking, or not prices of cars that dont sell), i dont think you can say much with certainty about what how these cars prices compare.

taking just a few samples from a few sites like this or from auto trader certainly wont answer the question. i'd imagine though that if you did do some sort of complete study on the selling prices of f-bodys vs. mustangs you'd probably see a big range that the same yr cars will sell for. (ie, you'll see a few 2000 SS that sell for really low and a few that sell for really high, and some in between, just like you'll see the same for a 2000 GT) this range will make any direct comparison impossible, and will make the averages meaningless. i'd guess that if you did average it all together and compare it, the prices of same yr cars would be very close. i dont think you'd see any real pattern of a stang or f-body selling higher or lower then the other. but maybe, who knows. my point is i doubt you can make such a sweeping statement at all since there are SOOOO many factors involved in what a car sells for.
Old 01-12-2007, 11:51 AM
  #15  
12 Second Club
 
gyrene2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chesapeake va
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

well, i would have to agree with Zfan88 on tthis one completely, their are way to many variables to make an assumption like that without some SERIOUSE research first. But in my persenal experiance ive noticed here in my area right now it seems f-bodys are a few thousand more than mustangs of the equivalent. This also seems to be in part, atleast in my area, because for every 10 dealerships i pass, thier are atleast 2 mustangs in each lot while in those same 10 dealerships i would be hard-pressed to find atleast 1 V8 powered f-bod.
Old 01-12-2007, 11:54 AM
  #16  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (13)
 
Rowdy94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Yea, there are way too many variables, and the prices are so close to begin with that they always intertwine. Impossible to really make that judgement.

If you want to say a Ferrari costs more than an equivalent year SS, fine. It's obvious. But you just can't say which goes for more across the country or even in your area with Mustang vs. Camaro because there's no way to tell.

Now the only way to settle this battle is NADA...same zip code, same options, same year. It's in no way the ultimate answer, but it's the best you will get.

2000 SS....75000 miles.....$13475 avg. retail
2000 Z28...75000 miles.....$12075 avg. retail
2000 GT....75000 miles.....$11100 avg. retail


Take that simply for what it is.
Old 01-12-2007, 11:56 AM
  #17  
12 Second Club
 
gyrene2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Chesapeake va
Posts: 2,213
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by Mac93
Shouldn't that bring the price down for the mustang? More choices for potential buyers?
No, in-fact quite the opposite, if their is a demand the dealerships will mark up the product, example, new Z06 went for way past its MSRP cause of so many dealer mark-ups cause they were in such demand. Most people who no nil abou cars see a mustang and a camaro and automatically think the mustang is the better of the two mainly in part to advertisment.
Old 01-12-2007, 11:57 AM
  #18  
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (22)
 
TAtoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

if you're going to compare an SS to a mustang, shouldn't it be the Cobra instead of the GT?? in that case, yeah i've seen cobras priced higher than SSs or WS6s.
Old 01-12-2007, 11:57 AM
  #19  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
JerseyLS1TA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 1,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Around here when I just browse the for sale ads, autotrader and autoshopper Trans Am's and Camaros are more than Mustangs of the same year. The only Mustangs that are higher are the 04-06 GT's with low mileage, Mach 1's and 03-04 Cobra's.
Old 01-12-2007, 12:21 PM
  #20  
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Mac93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gyrene2003
No, in-fact quite the opposite, if their is a demand the dealerships will mark up the product, example, new Z06 went for way past its MSRP cause of so many dealer mark-ups cause they were in such demand. Most people who no nil abou cars see a mustang and a camaro and automatically think the mustang is the better of the two mainly in part to advertisment.
I wasn't talking about the demand, I was talking about the supply. With few GT500s and many people wanting them, the price is way up. If there are a ton of mustangs and the same amount of buyers, the price is not likely to be high. I wish I could go into a little more detail as I took 2 years of Economics (micro/macro) but I'm at school right now so I don't have much time. Both supply and demand play a part as to what the price will be for a certain car.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:26 PM.