If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
Hiya...
I've seen the pics of the concept Camaro. A lot of people think it is ugly. Other then the nose of the car, I like it :-) When I was in high school, (I'm 39 now), I was a Chevy fan. My favorite cars are 1960's-1970's Chevy muscle cars like the 69 SS Chevelle :-) My first car when I was 17 was a 1976 Chevy Monza with a V8 and a 4 speed. I had a few mods like an aluminum intake and a nice Holey 4bbl that was perfectly chosen for the small V8, a set of headers and a special exhaust system for V8 H-Bodies. I also had a nice set of American Racing rims with the dreaded but affordable BF Goodrich raised white letter TA's. Not a world beater, but for me, I absolutely loved it. I had the car for years but the typical H-Body flaws caught up with it. The doors were about to fall off the hinges and due to the design of the uni-body being made for a four cylinder, the frame sagged and the engine settled so low the cross member began rubbing a hole in the oil pan. The car had gone 11 years and could go no more. I couldn't afford a brand new car at the time as I was in college, so I purchased a used 1976 Olds Cutlass. It was in good shape and I paid little for it. It did it's job, but I never would have chosen to buy it... It was there and it was affordable. I drove it until late in 1989 when I could afford a brand new car. I had no idea of what I wanted, but I was sill in my 20's and I wanted a sporty car. A friend of mine suggested a Mustang. I was always a GM/Chevy guy, so I wasn't receptive to the idea. I went to test drive one for fun though. The first time I drove the LX 5.0 I absolutely LOVED IT. It was peppy, comfortable and I really liked how the LX looked. It wasn't over the top. For the first time since my 1976 V8 Monza, I was excited about a car. Best of all was the Price. Fully loaded, it was 14k. I also drove the 1990 Camaro. Although it could handle better, I didn't like it as much as the Pony. Not to mention, the top of the line Camaro cost considerably more money then the 5.0 LX. I thought.. Wow... A better car for less money.... And... I purchased one. I had it until 2001 when I traded it in, still running perfectly for a new 2001 GT. I'd have never guessed that I'd still have a Mustang at 39 y/o, but I cant bring myself not to have one :-) At any rate... I was a Chevy fan, knew from nothing about Mustangs, but I wound up buying one over a Chevy Camaro because it was a great car for an even greater price. I don't think the Chevy marketing people really kept in mind who the major market was for pony cars and what the pony car market was all about. A good solid, practical, not over the top sporty car that is good value and... AFFORDABLE. I bet if they bring the Camaro back, the base model V8 will be priced so only a hand full of people who would want it could also afford it. The people from age 65 to 35 who are established and want to relive old glory. If they want to sell Camaros they need to think about how to make a car that would be liked and bought by people who are just getting ready to begin their glory days. I don't think the younger crowd prefers decorated 4 cylinders with oversized spoilers and laughable exhausts, but what choice do they have ??? Michael |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
"Michael" > wrote in message
... > Hiya... > > I've seen the pics of the concept Camaro. A lot of people think it is > ugly. Other then the nose of the car, I like it :-) When I was in high > school, (I'm 39 now), I was a Chevy fan. I was 39 when I bought my '93 LX 5.0, and people said that it was my midlife crisis (at 39!). The fact that it was my 4th Mustang and that I'd driven Mustangs almost all of my adult life had nothing to do with it, I guess. In 1993, I tried a Camaro on for size, and went straight back to the Mustang. Didn't care for the low seating position in the Chevy - it just wasn't me. If Chevy builds that ugly prototype, they'll sell pretty well in the first year or so. Anything under $35K would be a good ballpark for a V8 Camaro. But V8 Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers, whatever were always a bit of a stretch for the working stiffs like you and me. Where your 5.0 was $14K, mine was almost $17K. Thirteen years later, you can buy a Mustang GT for somewhere around $26K, which is just about the same, adjusted for inflation. dwight www.tfrog93.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
>But V8 Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers, whatever were always a bit of a >stretch for the working stiffs like you and me. Where your 5.0 was $14K, >mine was almost $17K. Thirteen years later, you can buy a Mustang GT for >somewhere around $26K, which is just about the same, adjusted for inflation. > >dwight >www.tfrog93.com > I have been looking, don't know where the heck I saw it, but there's a website that adjusts prices for inflation. Point being, when surfing that website, if I remember correctly, a 1966 Mustang GT in "today's dollars" would cost a little more than $30,000. That seems a "terrible price" for a 66 pony, but when you look at the reliability of today's cars, the longivity of the tires, etc, today's $27,000 GT is a "steal" compared to the original mustangs. Now, if only I had one of each <VEG> Hmmmm |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
They've got no fallback. The original Camaros didn't look
as good as the Barracudas or Challengers and not nearly as interesting as the Mustangs. They had no choice but to do a modern (sort of) look. IMO, they should look for inspiration from their early 1970s (1973 or later) models. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
> wrote in message ups.com... > They've got no fallback. The original Camaros didn't look > as good as the Barracudas or Challengers and not nearly as interesting > as the Mustangs. They had no choice but to > do a modern (sort of) look. IMO, they should look for inspiration from > their early 1970s (1973 or later) models. Actually they did have a more aggressive look to them and I was happy to see the Stang follow up in '69-70 with something more agressive stance as well. If I were Chevy make the car low frills affordable, mimick the '67 and then some 5 years later mimick the '70's style. I would love to see the Mustang do something similar and eventually make ammends for the '74-78. Nick |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
"Nicholas Anthony" > wrote:
> > > wrote in message > ups.com... >> They've got no fallback. The original Camaros didn't look >> as good as the Barracudas or Challengers and not nearly as >> interesting as the Mustangs. They had no choice but to >> do a modern (sort of) look. IMO, they should look for inspiration >> from their early 1970s (1973 or later) models. > > Actually they did have a more aggressive look to them and I was happy > to see the Stang follow up in '69-70 with something more agressive > stance as well. If I were Chevy make the car low frills affordable, > mimick the '67 and then some 5 years later mimick the '70's style. I > would love to see the Mustang do something similar and eventually make > ammends for the '74-78. Sorry.. I dont agree on that... didnt then, dont now. A Muscle Car is one thing, a hot pony car, another... the 72-73 "Mach's" were muscle cars! Bet you liked the Daytona Aero's and Superbee's too. THEY DIDNT SELL! Those of us with TASTE loathed the bloated Mach styles. Over weight behemoths.. and the ONLY reasons the Mustang II's are an abomination, is the combination of market reading for economy, Over Smogging for effect, and the curious styling blend of lead-sled and pony. Not to mention..LANDAU ROOF! Gag! To prove my point... take a side view shot of a M II "Cobra{jr}" and have someone photoshop radiused wheel wells on it! Freakin' WHOLE different perspective! If you hadnt already had a 'bad taste' in your mouth you might think it was pretty cool! But then the 68 - 81 Vettes leave me cold, too. -- Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer..DEAL with it! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
Backyard Mechanic > wrote in
: > "Nicholas Anthony" > wrote: > >> >> > wrote in message >> ups.com... >>> They've got no fallback. The original Camaros didn't look >>> as good as the Barracudas or Challengers and not nearly as >>> interesting as the Mustangs. They had no choice but to >>> do a modern (sort of) look. IMO, they should look for inspiration >>> from their early 1970s (1973 or later) models. >> >> Actually they did have a more aggressive look to them and I was happy >> to see the Stang follow up in '69-70 with something more agressive >> stance as well. If I were Chevy make the car low frills affordable, >> mimick the '67 and then some 5 years later mimick the '70's style. I >> would love to see the Mustang do something similar and eventually make >> ammends for the '74-78. > > Sorry.. I dont agree on that... didnt then, dont now. > A Muscle Car is one thing, a hot pony car, another... the 72-73 "Mach's" > were muscle cars! Arguably, muscle cars were pretty much choked out by 73 due to smog laws. But all _four_ makers (yes, AM was in there as well) offered decent muscle cars through the late '60s and up through '71 or so. > Bet you liked the Daytona Aero's and Superbee's too. THEY DIDNT SELL! IIRC, the Daytonas were made so they could be raced. Had to have a production version out there.. > Those of us with TASTE loathed the bloated Mach styles. Over weight > behemoths.. Gotta love that fastback with the baking-glass rear window. > and the ONLY reasons the Mustang II's are an abomination, is > the combination of market reading for economy, Over Smogging for effect, > and the curious styling blend of lead-sled and pony. Not to > mention..LANDAU ROOF! Gag! Ford should've developed a Pinto GT instead of bringing the Mustang II to fruition. > To prove my point... take a side view shot of a M II "Cobra{jr}" and > have someone photoshop radiused wheel wells on it! Actually, that would be the Pinto GT. > Freakin' WHOLE different perspective! If you hadnt already had a 'bad > taste' in your mouth you might think it was pretty cool! With the landau roof too? > But then the 68 - 81 Vettes leave me cold, too. I liked the C3 'Vette because of its resemblance to the Mako Shark. But the C4 left me cold by comparison. The C5 was awesome and the C6 is beyond awesome. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
"Joe" > wrote >> Those of us with TASTE loathed the bloated Mach styles. Over weight >> behemoths.. > > Gotta love that fastback with the baking-glass rear window. Hence the nickname "flatback" instead of fastback. -- Scott W. '68 Ranchero 500 302 '69 Mustang Sportsroof 351W ThunderSnake #57 http://home.comcast.net/~vanguard92/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
Joe > wrote:
> Ford should've developed a Pinto GT instead of bringing the Mustang II > to fruition. > Uh... that WAS the Pinto GT >> To prove my point... take a side view shot of a M II "Cobra{jr}" and >> have someone photoshop radiused wheel wells on it! > > Actually, that would be the Pinto GT. No, it would have flairs on the wheel wells, too. > >> Freakin' WHOLE different perspective! If you hadnt already had a 'bad >> taste' in your mouth you might think it was pretty cool! > > With the landau roof too? > When did you ever see the CobraJr MII with a landau?.... i was speaking of the 'numpty' versions. -- Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price you pay..DEAL with it! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Camaro wont sell....
"Backyard Mechanic" > wrote in message ... > "Nicholas Anthony" > wrote: > >> >> > wrote in message >> ups.com... >>> They've got no fallback. The original Camaros didn't look >>> as good as the Barracudas or Challengers and not nearly as >>> interesting as the Mustangs. They had no choice but to >>> do a modern (sort of) look. IMO, they should look for inspiration >>> from their early 1970s (1973 or later) models. >> >> Actually they did have a more aggressive look to them and I was happy >> to see the Stang follow up in '69-70 with something more agressive >> stance as well. If I were Chevy make the car low frills affordable, >> mimick the '67 and then some 5 years later mimick the '70's style. I >> would love to see the Mustang do something similar and eventually make >> ammends for the '74-78. > > Sorry.. I dont agree on that... didnt then, dont now. > A Muscle Car is one thing, a hot pony car, another... the 72-73 "Mach's" > were muscle cars! > Bet you liked the Daytona Aero's and Superbee's too. THEY DIDNT SELL! > > Those of us with TASTE loathed the bloated Mach styles. Over weight > behemoths.. and the ONLY reasons the Mustang II's are an abomination, is > the combination of market reading for economy, Over Smogging for effect, > and the curious styling blend of lead-sled and pony. Not to > mention..LANDAU ROOF! Gag! > > To prove my point... take a side view shot of a M II "Cobra{jr}" and > have someone photoshop radiused wheel wells on it! > > Freakin' WHOLE different perspective! If you hadnt already had a 'bad > taste' in your mouth you might think it was pretty cool! > > But then the 68 - 81 Vettes leave me cold, too. > -- > Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer..DEAL with it! Not sure were you missed it but I like the 71-73 Stangs too. I would love to see Ford do a retro straight up the line fox and all. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AWA [OFFER] chevy camaro parts cars | [email protected] | General | 0 | February 17th 06 04:51 PM |
1974 CAMARO RS | plainoldmechanic | General | 1 | November 8th 05 06:03 PM |
1974 CAMARO RS | plainoldmechanic | Technology | 4 | November 5th 05 04:22 AM |
Any Camaro fans out there? | arocars | Technology | 2 | July 15th 05 10:49 PM |
A Next Camaro Takes A Step Forward? | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 22 | April 16th 05 01:34 PM |