65gtfastback

I’ve seen the photos of the new Camaro and Challenger, and other than the diehard gear heads, I don’t understand who the target market is for these cars?
Don’t read this as an “everything that’s not Ford sucks” post, as you can see by my sig I don’t think that the world begins and ends with the blue oval…
I love all types of cars from every era and country, I would like to some day own a nice E-Type or maybe even a Giuiletta spider? For sure I'd like to see a nice C2 small block roadster in my garage sometime before I die...
As for daily drivers, when it’s time to trade my ’05, it may be for the next Mustang if they don’t tackyfy it, or, the Acura TL is very sharp… You’ll notice no mention of the Camaro or Challenger, because quite frankly they both strike me as very bubaish?
Despite the great performance of the last Camaro, I never would have bought it for the same reasons… It was big outside, small inside and looked too in your face in a cheesy sort of way. It’s not that it was outright ugly, like say a new Cadillac, but it definitely had a Budweiser aura to it. Like I said, I know that the gear heads will snap up all the first big motor versions, but do you see the “secretaries” wanting V6 Camaros and Challengers like they do Mustangs?
The thing about the ‘05+ Mustang is that it is a very handsome car in its own right. It does not look like some scowling snarling caricature of a previous version, it looks like a very attractive contemporary sports coupe with some retro styling cues. I am convinced that even if someone had never seen an old Mustang, they would think that the current one is a very attractive car; what would the same person say about the new Camaro or Challenger had they never seen the previous versions?
A lot of import buyers have crossed to the new Mustang, do you see them buying Camaros and Challengers? It was the lack of a broader customer appeal that killed the last Camaro, why would it be different this time?
I’ll finish by saying that I love ‘67~’69 Camaros, I think that their size, proportions and clean styling have been right on the money since day one. That being said, IMHO this new snarling cartoon car is far more the spiritual cousin of the late unmissed ’02 than of any first generation car? Again it’s only my opinion, but I don’t see these cars having the needed legs beyond the aforementioned gear heads, what do you think?.

Paul

blaster

A long time ago I had a 1967 Camaro SS 350. That was the year with the hide-away headlights. It was one of the best cars I ever had. I was wondering if they would go retro with Camaro and was hoping it would look like the 67-68 era. If these prototype photos of Camaro are what is coming out then I think I'm a little dissapointed. I do kinda like the looks of the Challenger however.

unnoticedtrails

yeahh, i've been wondering about costs. Because the camaro and challenger will have an IRS, and they are already on platforms that are more expensive that the mustang's to produce, how are they going to get them out to compete with the Mustang?

2k5GTC

I just read in Autoweek that the Dodge boys have decided NOT to produce an entry level Challenger due to not being able to come close to the price of the V6 Mustang. Figures. Chevy is also in a bind to get costs down for an entry level Camaro. IMHO, only die-hard Mopar and Chevy fans that have LOTS of cash will be buying these two cars. Nothing new really, the last generation Camaro/Firebird were way over-priced and were trounced in sales by the Mustang. History is going to repeat itself.

LBJay

IIRC, I read the Challenger will start around $31K and to be 20-30K cars a year. I think it's really just a halo car to try to get people in the showrooms.

As for how GM will handle the Camaro, last I head they were have the same problem trying to figure that out. I think they got the cart before the horse. They announced production before they figured out how they were going to market it.

I hope they do a better job than they did with the Solstice, lots and lots of problems with that program so far. It was announced for production long before it was ready.

karman

The Camaro will do better than the GTO did.
I almost never see a GTO on the road. I've actually seen more in the local dealer than on the road.
The Challenger will sell better than that.
I'll bet that the total sales per year for both will equal that of the GTO, Corvette and the SSR together.

jjcastle

I had a 68 Camaro that I really liked. Always was a Chevy guy, in fact this is the first Mustang I have liked since the 60's. I saw the new Camaro at an auto show and it didnt interest me much, just doesnt look like that old 68.

That Challenger looks great though. I read that they put the designers in a room and told them to design it like they remembered the old Challenger - without looking at any pictures of the original car. The idea being that they would remember the good parts and not the bad (fit and finish, etc).

I doubt either of those cars will be able to compete with the 6 cylinder mustang, but they might give them a run on the 8. In any casecompetition is a good thing, and the Mustang hasnt had much lately.

Hollywood_North GT

Well, first off, I don't agree with you about the looks of the Camaro and Challenger. Personally, I think they both look great. I also think the Mustang looks great. I think all three look pretty bloody good, actually.

I also think all three will appeal to different demographic groups, even though they are all technically "retro inspired" muscle cars.

The Challenger will be a limited production halo car, that much I'm pretty certain about. And it will be BIG. So the buyers for that will be the nostalgists. But if they can generate the same kind of feeding frenzy as currently exists for the GT500, that may be all Chrysler is looking for.

The Camaro is the more direct competitor for the Mustang, for sure. And as I mentioned, I like the style. It's retro to a point, but borrows from the past much less than the Mustang does. GM may move the car a bit upscale from the Stang and still enjoy strong sales.

Two markets for this car as I see it:

- The Camaro fans, especially the baby boomers with tons of disposable income who fondly remember the original car. We know they're out there, because of all the clowns willing to drop ridiculous sums of money on the Shelby GT500 - and the Camaro won't be priced as stratospherically.

- Other high performance car shoppers. Think about it: if the Camaro improves upon the Mustang in key areas - engine power, suspension (yes, that's right, IRS) and interior quality, then it will immediately cut itself a niche. I believe it's based upon the new Zeta platform developed Down Under, and according to everything I'm reading, that's being touted as one of the best platforms coming from ANY automaker right now. If they can price a 400 HP Camaro with the aforementioned attributes around $52K CDN (which is still well above the Mustang), then why would I even bother buying a similarly priced Nissan 350Z, when I can get a car with much more history, equally great or better design (IMO), a lot more power, and equivalent fit, finish and amenities?

I see that as the CONTEMPORARY target buyer. Those who would buy the mid-priced Japanese sports cars, but who will get a lot more power and heritage by moving to a Camaro - provided, of course - and this is KEY - that the car is of sufficient quality. In other words, those looking for an American muscle car that offers 21st century quality and technology will give this car a serious look...if GM can deliver the goods.

Bullitt995

For looks:

1. Challenger
2. Mustang
3. Camaro

The challenger and camaro's will more than likely be compeditive with the GT500 not the regluar mustangs.

Mongoose

Wow I have wanted one of those for years also. I thought it was the RS that had those headlights. Spoiled kid of single mom across the street had a cherry one and beat it to crap. . Almost made me cry.

Flippn

I was invited to attend a survey a few weeks ago. Turns out it was to review the new Challenger. It was held at the Anaheim convention center in California. Looked like Dodge was surveying for quite a few of their vehicles but you can only attend the one you were selected for, other type vehicles were sectioned off with tall curtains. I'm no expert on the history of muscle cars, actually I know very little. I've always like Mustangs though.

Anyway, I thought the Challenger looked good.........definitely retro. According to the specs they gave in the survey entry level was to be priced at $31K give or take. This for a V6...........I got my GT Premium for $29K out the door. Other cars on the floor for comparison were; Mustang V6, Chevy Monte, Pontiac, BMW 325, Infinity, and a couple of others.

Out of the hundred or so questions asked were, "would you buy this car" and "why". With regards to the Challenger, I answered no....due to price. It was a pretty cool experience (never done it before). Made it an even better experience when they handed me a $150 check after I completed the survey.

hi5.0

Had GM used the "'05+ Mustang formula" for the upcoming Camaro's looks, it would definitely rate as a very serious threat to the Mustang. A lot of "ifs" involved with this one, but I could see myself buying one if the car can deliver on its promises as far as content, quality, and performance goes. Unlike the Mustang's DC2 chassis, the Zeta platform is more sophisticated and it will be utilized for other models in the GM lineup which may help costs and pricing, though how much so remains to be seen. Label me as one of those "other high performance car shoppers" who could care less about brand loyalty.

Hollywood_North GT

I don't know if it's fair to say that the Mustang's DC2 chassis is inherently less sophisticated than the Zeta platform. The DC2 is all new, and I don't think Ford has come even close to tapping its full potential yet. Take the buggy axle out and swap in a modern IRS, THEN let's see what the DC2 is REALLY capable of.

The Zeta is world class, though, from everything I'm reading.

black sunshine

I think both Challenger and Camaro are pretty cool. Hope they both get put into production. I think the camarop is pretty nasty looking. Like to see it with more refined body lines and in black.......

exgto

I like the Camaro and the Challenger. I beleive they will both meet or exceed their sales goals based on the receptions they have gotten.

Who's going to buy them? Are you kidding? Witha retro car so true to it's heritage, the 35-50 y/o's (typically the age group with disposable income)will be out in droves.

I'm on the list for a Challenger, and can't wait for that car to be in my garage!

tx2005gt

have you seen what a hemi powerd challenger, cuda or roadrunner sells for at a berret jackson auction. 150,000-175,000 and guys are just waiting to drop the cash on them. i have a friend in chicago that has 4-hemi power cars & i know he will want to be the 1st in chicago to be driving a challenger. there will be plenty of people who want them they just need to get them out.

HOTLAP

Mongoose - I believe it was the 1969 Camaro RS's that had the hidaway headlights. One of my high school friends had a 67 Camaro and it didn't have them......it was a VERY basic car - especially the interior - my mom had a 67 Mustang 289 V8 coupe and it was a far better looking car both interior and exterior - but in all fairness, GM had rushed out the 67 Camaro and Firebird and the 67/68 models showed it.....but the 1969's were a different story....I wouldn't mind having a 69 Camaro RS vert in my garage.....bright orange with the white top and white stripes....

MilStang

Yep, my dream car for a long time was an '69 SS Camaro, but I always thought I was going to get my father's '65 fastback as well. He sold it 5 years before I got my license so now I am reclaiming that loss with my Shelby GT. Now the new Camaro I wish looked a little more retro, it is ok but I would prefer less of a beak and the grill to be opened a little bit more. The Challenger I really like, I have seen it in person and it is very nice.

SMG

That's not entirely true. The 4th-gen f-bodies' problems were more complex than not having a broad customer appeal.

1. They weren't cheap. Granted you could get a low-optioned Z28 or Formula in the mid-20s, but the prices shot up quickly with a few options.
2. The Camaro's styling got a little bland when they switched to the Chrysler Concorde-esque front end. It was kind of like the '04-'06 GTO. People would always respect them for their power, but they weren't the most aggressive or handsome thing on the road. The Trans Am was just the opposite. The styling (especially the WS6) was cool when it first debuted, but just became way too OTT for most potential buyers after the novelty wore off.
3. The cars were large (huge overhangs, loooong hoods), but couldn't carry people or gear very comfortably. Ever sit in the passenger seat of an F-body? The hump on the passenger side footwell made you feel like you may as well rest your legs on the dashboard. And for their size, they could never carry cargo as easily as a Mustang could. It sounds like a silly argument, but people such as myself use their pony cars as daily drivers.

And to address your original point. I don't think Chevy or Dodge are aiming to sell as many Camaros/Challengers as Ford does Mustangs. For one thing, they never have. You'll have the enthusiasts and power junkies buying them. But I think you'll find a lot of people buying the cars simply for their looks alone. My fiancee practically did back flips when she saw the Challenger at the auto show last year, and she's hardly what you'd consider an automotive enthusiast. I think the competition will be great. If Chevy and/or Dodge deliver the production models as well as they did with the concepts, I'll be the first to try and jump ship.

blaster

Maybe I'm mistaken but I thought all 67 Camaro's had the hide-away headlights. Also the 67 had the reverse lights mounted below the tail lights. In 68 they ditched the hide-aways and put the reverse light together with the tail lights. That's how I could always tell them apart from the rear.
I'll never forget what my Dad said one day after driving it. He called it "the car with 4 first gears".