I find it hard to believe that your coworker owns a GT coupe that's 50lbs heavier than an automatic convertible. I have posted NOTHING that shows a coupe weighing close to 3,700lbs, so I don't know what you're talking about saying that I'm supporting what you're saying.

 

You know what dude...believe what you want. I've given you every benefit of every doubt in this discussion and you wander around like a lost dog. First you're telling me that a GT coupe weighs under 3400lbs, when even a V6 coupe isn't that light. Then you prove that a particular GT coupe weighed in the upper 3500lbs range...which I completely buy (despite the fact that you are disproving your own previous claim). Then you present an automatic convertible that weighs almost 3700lbs. What are you trying to prove exactly? If one automatic convertible weighs 368Xlbs, then certainly a better equipped model could easily be pushing 3800lbs. If one GT coupe weighs in the upper 3500lbs range, then 3722lb for a fully loaded automatic GT coupe sounds right on. Deluxe 10-way power leather heated seats will bridge that gap alone...let alone the big stereo system, traction control...etc. There are many possible combinations.

Regardless, i'm done with this particular argument. There's nothing to be gained by taking it any further.

 

Wow you're ******* dense. What competition has the mustang had since 02? THE CAMARO ISNT ON THE SALES FLOOR YET.

I was talking about ford not changing the Mustang. When a car continues to sell w/o major revisions, leave it alone. GM's cars didnt sell was the problem.

To understand why ford has done what it does, you have to put yourself in the mindset of selling cars; you cant seem to understand this.

 

Show me. You're not going to have a coupe that weighs as much as an automatic convertible with leather.

 

I'm ******* dense? You're the one who doesn't seem to have a basic understanding of WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

It's one thing to understand motivations behind various corporations actions (and trust me you have no clue despite what you may think)...quite another to not even comprehend what you are reading here.

You can continue with the sales argument if you want. Fine...i'm not arguing about what sells. I've already addressed that with you in a previous post and you made no mention of it. So if you are just going to conveniently overlook things that make your argument more difficult, i'm not wasting my time with you either.

GM was giving enthusiasts what they wanted. Ford was doing what it had to to sell cars. If your opinion is that performance should be qualified based on which car sells the most, then there's no sense in me wasting my time on you because we obviously live in different worlds. To me, and (from what i've seen in my years here) to most people on this site, performance is qualified based on which car PERFORMS the best ON THE ROAD. There's no arguing that in the timespan in which they were both sold, the Camaro solidly held the title of the highest performance car between the two. GM seemed to be happy with that aspect...but they did make one big mistake...trying to sell the Camaro as a high-volume car in the late 90's early 00's. Had they pinned it as a low-volume enthusiast car, we may still have Camaros/Firebirds today. Ford simply watered down their muscle car to the point where they knew it would sell. This conceded the performance edge to GM, but meant that Ford wouldn't have to kill off the Mustang. In the time where Ford stood as pretty much the only player in the muscle car game, you'd expect that they would have made the adjustments necessary to make sure that when the Camaro returned (as everyone knew it would, at some point), the Mustang would be ready for it. Well here we are, and the Mustang is not ready for the Camaro.

Now if you insist on hitting the "quote" button and replying to this point, please make sure you actually READ it first.

 

His point was that most people would rather have the option of buying a car that they liked NEW if they wanted to, rather than being forced to buy something that's atleast 7-8 years old. Being the fastest in a straightline is all well and good, but it's more beneficial to everyone if you can actually sell the cars that are being made.

 

Ok...I see the point there. But it's not that the f-bodies weren't selling AT ALL. They just weren't selling to the level that GM wanted. My issue with this is that they should have never been expected to sell at that level (100k units/year) to begin with. They were cut because they didn't reach a bar that was set way too high to begin with. At least that's my perspective. F-bodies were 2k-4k more expensive than Mustangs from the onset. However they gave you alot more than that in value over the Mustang. As it turns out, that didn't matter...price ended up being the deciding factor...now i'm not saying it takes an expert to see this, GM certainly knew it...and I find it admirable that they decided to kill off the car rather than devalue it to compete with the Mustang. It's a shame it had to be that way though, they could have simply produced the f-body platform for one more year and gave the Monaro platform a retro design somewhat like the new Camaro has anyway, and realeased that in 04...or even skipped a year and released it in 05 if the time was needed. They only planned to sell 30k GTOs in a year...this would have been perfect for a holden-based Camaro. That's where I believe these cars should be...not in the watered down state that the Mustang is in, or the wow-nice-but-will-it-sell state that the new Camaro is in.

I guess my point at it's most basic is - these cars (Mustang/Camaro/Challenger) should not be rated on sales. Sure sales matters, but why are guys in an enthusiast forum discussing sales? These are performance vehicles that carry alot of history, and when their history is reviewed, no one talks about sales...they talk about performance. When you talk about Impalas/Malibus/Tauruses/Fusions, sales is a big part of the experience. But not so for a retro-design muscle car.

 

Agreed, but the only way that you can successfully market performance versions of a car is to get a good sales platform for the regular versions of the car.

 

I'm not disagreeing with this, I completely understand your points as we're all enthusiasts.

You blast the mustang for not performing as well or making revisions the past several years; my point is that ford is driven by sales and they do what they think is best for sales, whether the car performs first or last in its class it needs to sell. From this point of view the mustang's progression makes sense.

 

So what about the price of the new Mustang LOL?

 

And that, my friend, is exactly why I rate the Mustang as one notch below the Camaro despite their relative performance numbers.

So hopefully this has helped you to understand my point of view. Of course this argument was about the cars too, not just my point of view, but obviously my own opinion is a part of it.

 

Where have you seen these "figures" ??

 

 

No. The V6 Camaro makes 304hp and 273 lb ft. The GT makes 315hp and 325 lb ft.

As I've said, the GT will be faster, but the V6 Camaro will be no slouch and it offers features that you can't get on a GT - namely, 27mpg, IRS, and a MSRP that's $6,000 less. I can easily see some potential GT buyers opting for the V6 Camaro.

 

You don't know for sure that the GT is going to be faster than the V6 Camaro. You may be surprised...just like we all were when the 500hp GT500 could only muster a 12.5 in the quarter.

Now I will agree that I THINK that the GT is going to be faster...however, at best, it's only going to be A LITTLE faster...like a fender or so on the highway. That, along with all of what the Camaro V6 offers over the GT, is the problem. ALL it would take is a 400hp motor in the GT and all would be right again.

 

You're out of your mind. The '05-09 GTs were running mid 13s and trapping over 100mph. The '10 cars have better suspension tuning and available 3.73s from the factory. Those cars are gonna be knocking on 12s once owners get a little time with them. Even magazines are running 104mph trapspeeds with them. If you think a V6 Camaro is going to run within "a fender or so on the highway" of one, you must have some REALLY big fenders.

 

I suppose we'll see...even though I agree with all the numbers you posted...you don't seem to have considered how fast a 300hp V6 Camaro is going to be. While the new GTs should be running very low 13's, the V6 Camaros should be mid-high 13's with average drivers. That's going to amount to a fender, or maybe fender and a door on the highway.

 

Road and Track weighed their 2010 Mustang GT.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d...stangGT_dp.pdf

It came in at 3,755lbs.