By on April 11, 2014

2010_Dodge_Challenger_RT_Classic

The Ford Mustang is selling more frequently in 2014 than it did in the same period of 2013. Ford is also grabbing greater U.S. market share in the relatively high-volume muscle car sector.

This might seem surprising given that Ford is set to replace their fifth-gen pony car with a new edition for 2015 – don’t people want to wait for the new model? Yet such a turn of events isn’t unprecedented, and it’s not as though a few current Mustangs couldn’t be sold at this moment because their buyers find the next Mustang less desirable.

Unlike the Porsche Boxster’s class of European roadsters, the sales achieved by the Mustang, Chevrolet Camaro, and Dodge Challenger garner attention not just because they stir up the passions of automotive enthusiasts but also because the numbers are high. These aren’t rare cars; their ubiquity can be traced back both to their affordability and to their history.

Moreover, there may be no sports/sporting/sporty car sub-segment where the competitors are so easily identifiable. While it’s true that loyal Mustang owners may never consider the Camaro, the three cars in this group are still plotted on the same connect-the-dots map. The same can’t really be said of the Scion FR-S (hardtop, and a backseat) and Mazda MX-5 Miata (two-seat droptop), nor even the Honda Civic Si (two doors and a trunk) and Volkswagen Golf GTI (hatchback).

And so we compare rear-wheel-drive muscle. Even at the end of winter. Even in a transition year.

The Mustang, sales of which have improved by 2276 units through one quarter of 2014, is America’s 60th-best-selling vehicle overall, less than 1700 sales back of the Lexus RX, GMC Acadia, Jeep Patriot, and Subaru Impreza/WRX. It ranks just ahead of the Nissan Pathfinder, Chevrolet Camaro, Nissan Frontier, and Kia Forte.

Camaro sales have increased by a less impressive 370 units. The Camaro is America’s 62nd-best-selling vehicle so far this year.

Both the Camaro and Mustang have stolen market share from the declining, aging Dodge Challenger. Never capable of challenging the Mustang and Camaro in terms of U.S. volume, Dodge has nevertheless increased its Challenger sales volume every year since the car arrived in 2008. In 2013 there were twice as many Challengers sold in America as there were in 2009.

The first quarter of 2014 has seen the Challenger’s market share in the category fall to 22% from 28.5% one year ago. Meanwhile, the Mustang has outsold the Camaro by a grand total of 28 units in 2014 – 681 units in March, specifically – and its share in the category has grown to 39% from 33.9% in Q1 of 2013. Camaro market share is up from 37.6% to 39%.

To better understand just how common these cars are, however, consider the total sales from individual automakers. Ford, Chevrolet, and Dodge combined for 50,198 Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger sales in the first three months of 2014, 16,519 units more than the combined sales at Fiat, Mini, and Scion. The Mustang, Camaro, and Challenger’s total beats the whole Mazda brand by 8230 units; Infiniti by 18,977 units. The Mustang and Camaro, individually, outsell Volvo.

2014 won’t necessarily be a reliable barometer for American muscle car sales, with a redesign of the Challenger yet to be introduced, the aging Camaro, and the Mustang’s replacement. But the first three months of 2014 could still be an accurate gauge for what we can expect as the pages on this year’s calendar flip over.

And by the by, GM also sold 8179 Corvettes during the first three months of 2014, a 178% year-over-year increase.

—-

Auto
March
2014
March
2013
%
Change
3 mos.
2014
3 mos.
2013
%
Change
Chevrolet Camaro
8624 8102 + 6.4% 19,568 19,198 + 1.9%
Dodge Challenger
4882 6132 - 20.4% 11,034 14,540 - 24.1%
Ford Mustang
9305 7688 + 21.0% 19,596 17,320 + 13.1%
Total
22,811
21,922 + 4.1% 50,198 51,058 - 1.7%
Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

88 Comments on “Cain’s Segments: Muscle Cars...”


  • avatar
    challenger2012

    I would have no problem recommending a Challenger to anyone, V-8 Hemi, Auto, Sun Roof, Leather, all in a quite and comfortable ride. My car is like the one above only in Red, same black side stripes.

    • 0 avatar
      gtrslngr

      You really do not like anyone now do you ? Either that or you’re a case of Misery Loves Company !

      From the rumors I’ve been hearing …. the Geneva Convention is seriously considering outlawing the recommending of any FCA product .. past or present . But especially the badge engineered – now decades old Mercedes E Class posing as a Challenger/Charger . Under the category of Cruel and Inhuman Punishment .. as well as willfully subjecting a fellow human being to abject automotive torture by intent

      • 0 avatar
        Ubermensch

        I really wish that the comments section offered a block function for specific users so I didn’t have to scroll through the troll spam all the time.

      • 0 avatar
        challenger2012

        You may think you are clever and witty, but sadly you are just a dullard. What a sad man you must be.

      • 0 avatar
        jpolicke

        GuttersLounger: Misery loves company? Yes, and ignorance is bliss, which puts you in nirvana.

        You’re free to dislike FCA or anything else you care to, but please try to construct a coherent argument, and not some sarcastic idiocy about (apparently the entire corporate line) having an inhuman ride. Hard to believe that all the wealthy people that buy Mercedes products are masochists. Who knew?

        The rear suspension was derived from an E-class, but you could at least call it a badge engineered S-class since that’s where the front suspension came from. Even though there’s not much similarity after the 2011 redesign.

        I find my Challenger quite roomy and comfortable as do all the people who have ever ridden in it. Although it’s not as roomy as the little bus that picks you up or as cushiony as the padded room in the, uh, “hotel” you recently left.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnnyFirebird

      There’s an R/T manual at the dealer I walk past on the way to the gym. Man, I want it so bad.

      • 0 avatar
        BobinPgh

        So why not go ahead and buy it? As long as you can keep from having any kids you can afford it. Or are you like our friend Thomas and already have them?

    • 0 avatar
      pragmatist

      The Challenger is a very competent car, but it suffers from the same problem as the Camaro … modeled (poorly) on predecessors that were among the sexiest American cars ever.

      70 Challenger, 69 Camaro were nigh close to perfect. Their replacements are bloated and by comparison, pretty ugly while at the same time being mechanically much more sophisticated.

      What were they thinking???

      http://photo.netcarshow.com/Dodge-Challenger_SRT8_392_2011_photo_01.jpg

      http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2011/08/18/05/09/1970_dodge_challenger-pic-3716980670565766327.jpeg

      • 0 avatar
        thelaine

        Agree pragmatist. These are good cars and I’m glad this segment exists, no question. However, I they do just look so round and puffy and fat. The Camaro, in particular, is blown up. They may get one angle just right, and you get excited, and then the car drives by and you’re so disappointed.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Poor visibility and oddly huge A pillars and the phrase “autobots assemble” kills the Camaro for me.

          The Challenger – never could get excited about it.

          I like the Mustang but how much longer can Ford mild the retro look? Probably as long as us babyboomer’s are willing to spend money we should be putting aside for retirement.

  • avatar

    I’m guessing that if Chrysler made a two door Charger like the one Casey Shane worked up they would kick Ford and Chevy’s ass. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/04/casey-shain-turning-pure-fantasy-into-virtual-reality/

  • avatar

    > Cain’s Segments: Muscle Cars
    By Derek Kreindler on April 11, 2014

    wrong attribution btw

  • avatar
    FormerFF

    While I’ve never been interested in these cars, I’m glad to see them doing well, sales-wise. Of the those cars in the sporty car segment that are actually performance oriented, these three, plus the Corvette, seem to be the only ones left with significant sales volume.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      I have seen several of these at the nearby military bases where I live and they are each piloted by men in the middle to late twenties, and I presume unmarried.

      The fact that these cars are still made and still sell, albeit to a niche market like the ‘stang and Camaro, speaks well of the US auto industry.

      Choice is what it is all about.

  • avatar
    raresleeper

    I remember watching European Top Gear and the one guy- can’t think of his name for the life of me- was elated to drive the Challenger for his drive.

    The other two blokes asked him to get in and smoke the tires.

    The Challenger wouldn’t smoke ‘em. He tried. They laughed.

    Pity.

    EDIT: Where’s good ole’ boy BTSR to tell me I’ve been drinking Haterade?

    Anyone? Anyone?

  • avatar
    gtrslngr

    Gee … now this really is a surprise ! Consumers finally coming to their senses : leaving the Camaro on the lots … the Challenger for the mullet crowd and buying the Mustang despite the fact theres a new one on the way ?

    Wow ! Will miracles never cease ?

    Golly ! Whats next ? TESLA finally being branded as the Tax Payers ripoff of the 2010′s ? GM actually being FINED by the Government for its recent actions rather than the pretense of being fined [ lets face it .. all bets being Mary Baras annual shoe budget is no doubt larger than that ludicrous fine the NHTSA just levied on GM ] … Formula One finally going back to being F1 instead of the Spec Series flagellating Doodle Bugs it is ?

    Gosh … I can barely imagine

  • avatar
    mikey

    The numbers for the Challenger , are pretty good , considering they don’t offer a convertible .

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      I’m not sure the Challenger was ever offered as a convertible. It’s based on the Plymouth Barracuda, and that model DID have a convertible option, but I guess by 1970 the popularity of convertibles was on the wane, and it cost too much to modify the Challenger shell.

  • avatar
    redliner

    One issues with the Challenger (aside from no convertible option) is that you are forced to buy a V8 if you want a manual transmission. That great pentastar V6 is buried behind an outdated (but robust) transmission. On top of the that, these cars are set up like SUVs from the factory. The ride height is SO HIGH. To get it back down to an ascetically pleasing level you have to option in the “Trak Pack” or get the Mopar lowering springs. …shameless money grab.

  • avatar
    PeteRR

    I’ve driven all 3 of them and the Challenger, IMO, is the last hurrah of the cars our fathers and grandfathers drove after WWII: Full size 2 door coupes. It has the interior room the Mustang, and especially the Camaro, do not. If you want a car to cruise in and commute in, buy the Challenger.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      Seems to me these cars are mostly emotional purchases. Which is the better of the three for whatever reason or reasons is completely irrelevant. For me, I wouldn’t even bother looking at or test driving the Mustang or Camaro. I’d just get the one I want & head over to my Dodge dealer and buy the Challenger.

      • 0 avatar
        PeteRR

        I drove the Camaro in spite of it’s awful looks and that’s when I discovered the tiny cave-like interior. The Mustang’s interior is similar but definitely roomier than the Camaro.

        • 0 avatar
          hubcap

          Neither the Ford or Chevy is what I’d consider roomy. The Camaro’s high belt line will hopefully be lowered a bit when it moves to Alpha.

          For me, I’d take a ZL1 over any of the others. Orange w/black wheels. The power-train and suspension goodness more than make up for its not so redeeming qualities.

        • 0 avatar
          jimbob457

          @PeteRR
          I had the same reaction to the looks of the newest Camaros – awful. However, styling is somewhat subjective, and I am not a prospective Camaro buyer.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    I was going to say I wouldn’t kick any of them out of bed for eating crackers but the Camrao still looks overly cartoon-ish to me. Can’t wait for the Alpha platform version just to see if they can make the car look better and not quite so bunker-like.

    Does Chrysler have plans to update the Challenger? It is very soon going to be the “old man” in the segment.

    • 0 avatar
      Kenmore

      “It is very soon going to be the “old man” in the segment.”

      Isn’t that sort of the point?

      Colt 1911s, American Stratocasters, M-series Leicas… some designs were so right the first time around that later iterations can do no better than keep the iconic appearance while updating the internal tech. Fuselage bodied Challengers are among those.

      An “update” will only send it down the same path as the ludicrous, cartoon Camaro.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        If you are going to do a Retro-Camaro for god’s sake do the 1970 to 1981 model. At least that was good looking. The original 1967 to 1969 model was so “ME TOO” it wasn’t even funny.

        Of course I’m biased because I own a 1967 Mustang and I think the 67-68 models are the pinnacle of the breed.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          I agree.I will never for the life of me understand the popularity of the first Gen Camaro. Which is why I don’t care for the current Camaro. Give me a second Gen split bumper.

          • 0 avatar
            nrd515

            I loved the first gen Camaro, but I liked the second generation even more. I can’t stand the current one though. It’s the only car I can think of that starts out ok at the front, and then gets progressively more hideous as you move back. I hope GM doesn’t screw up the new design. But I have little actual hope that they won’t, judging by the new Silverado.

          • 0 avatar
            Kenmore

            “Give me a second Gen split bumper.”

            So, so true. I’ll never forget the first one I saw. Hopped off a bus and walked through my favorite restaurant’s lot… there was a red ’70 coupe backed into the owner’s slot.

            Elegance and ballsy-ness blended like nothing I’d seen since hopping off the schoolbus in ’67 and finding a ’68 Vette in the neighbors driveway.

            I should maybe ride buses more often.

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            I even like the “slant nose” 2nd gens with the “sugar scoop” headlights, even if the Firebird did the look better…

            Now that I think about it, I think I’ve always liked the Firebird more than the Camaro. Too bad Pontiac’s dead.

    • 0 avatar
      MrIcky

      Challenger update will be shown on 4/17. Same basic car but front and rear will be reflect the 71. New interior and the auto is changing to the 8 speed. They aren’t confirming anything else quite yet. Sticking with the tribute car vibe.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    I’m thrilled that these cars sell in the numbers that they do. I recall the Challenger getting hammered here when if first came out…limited appeal, etc. These are really the last bastion of what autos used to be like, only in a modern wrapper. Not a damn thing wrong with that. And all those plain-jane models? Well, they tend to get wrecked less, so there will be plenty of good sheetmetal in the yards as the years go by to restore the fire-breathing models. This story alone says there’s hope for car people, even it these are not their cup of tea. That said, how about a significant diet for the next generation of these models….but keep the 8 as an option. I figured that sooner or later Big Truck would add that so, now he does not have to….

  • avatar
    joe_thousandaire

    New Challenger being unveiled soon in NY. Could go over very well, since Challenger fans are actually ready for an all new version unlike Mustang fans.

  • avatar
    hubcap

    I like the looks of the Challenger but it wouldn’t be my first or second choice. I’m glad it exists because it gives buyers an option that’s a bit different from the Chevy and Ford. Still, for me and my tastes the Barracuda can’t come soon enough.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    These cars are only considered to be in the same class because their predecessors 45 years ago were in the same class. Really, the Challenger and Camaro are full-size coupes and the Mustang is a somewhat unwieldy sporty car. The Challenger and Camaro, for me, are just too big to make any sense whatsoever with 2 doors. If I’m going to drive something that big it should be a sedan. (And I do, in fact, drive what amounts to a Camaro SS sedan, and employ the large, comfy, and convenient back seat often.)

    • 0 avatar
      PeteRR

      The Camaro is almost as big as the Challenger on the outside, but is more cramped than the Mustang on the inside. And the trunk has a ridiculous opening that won’t take big suitcases. I ended up jamming mine into the back seat.

    • 0 avatar

      > These cars are only considered to be in the same class because their predecessors 45 years ago were in the same class.

      Actually all 3 retromobiles are remarkable true to their ancestry, except bigger & heavier all around as cars have come to be.

      Even back then the mustang was a decent sized sports coupe, and the other two slightly larger and more unwieldy versions of the same thing. They even managed to preserve the mustang, camaro, challenger size ranking.

      • 0 avatar
        BobinPgh

        One reason why these 3 might be popular is they probably took some drivers who had “personal luxury” coupes. I liked the Monte Carlo I inherited because I could sleep in the passenger seat if I was too tired to drive. It also held a lot of luggage. Chevy had the Monte Carlo and Ford had the Thunderbird and Chrysler didn’t have any car like it before so these cars are filling a niche.

        • 0 avatar
          Zykotec

          I think we need a revival of the Thunderbird and MonteCarlo to battle the Charger now. And as a bonus, Lincoln could do an upscale Thunderbird too, both cars using a stretched Mustang platform should make the development costs bareable for Ford. And it would give Taxidrivers and cops more to choose from.

          • 0 avatar
            Lorenzo

            If only Lincoln had built the Mark IX coupe and Mark X convertible concepts!

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            If Ford does make a new Thunderbird, they better not make it overpriced and needlessly retro like the last one…you know, the one that didn’t sell worth a damn.

  • avatar
    Xeranar

    I’m always excited to see the muscle car survive. It’s an American ‘thing’ we do well. Though the fact that all three are compared so closely is always difficult to understand. Especially with the two resurrected models all three seem to serve a slightly different demographic. Though my personal choice is always going to be a mustang. Nothing is quite like it, nothing quite has that panache and I understand the subjectivity of it all. The threats of an FR-S were tempting but I’m practical and while I want two doors I’ve grown to enjoy not dropping $100+ a month in gas to get around. The mustang could fit that bill and remain a nice buy.

    Though the Challenger in Kowalski/Vanishing Point livery is truly tempting. It’s probably the better fit of the lot for my frame but the 5.7L Hemi is just overkill in most cases and it isn’t going to out handle most lighter cars. But a nice R/T model could work its way into my heart if I could get it in White with a scooped hood… >.>

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      American thing?

      South Africa, Australia and the UK I think also were involved in the muscle car era.

      • 0 avatar
        Xeranar

        I appreciate your sense of nationalism but it’s pretty safe to say like Jazz it’s an American invention. It doesn’t mean other countries didn’t do it and do it well but it’s roots are in hot rods and the factory ideas of ‘personal cars’.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          @Xeranar
          Performance cars and music aren’t inventions.

          I would say muscle cars were arrived at because of compacts in the 60s.

          How many countries sold V8 and 6 cylinder 60s and 70s style compacts?

          The comment I referred to was ‘it’s an American thing we do well’.

          It isn’t just an American thing and probably some of the best muscle car examples have come out of Australia.

          Even the UK with it’s Capri GT and the German Zakspeed Capri are quite nice examples.

          We made muscle cars that can steer and be used for racing, not ‘rods’.

          • 0 avatar
            rpn453

            “How many countries sold V8 and 6 cylinder 60s and 70s style compacts?”

            You tell me! I honestly don’t know. I thought muscle cars actually were an American thing. What affordable and powerful V8 coupes were available in other parts of the world around the time of the 1964 GTO?

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @rpn453
            I think muscle cars were manufactured in years other than 1964.

            I suppose you don’t have adequate skillsets to manipulate the www to find information.

            Just google, Aussie Muscle Cars or if you want to see some nice Aussie and US muscle cars and rods google ‘Summernats Canberra’.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    What constitutes a muscle car?

    US V8 or any V8?

    Two doors or 4 doors or even an estate?

    So, where are the Audi, AMG, M Series and Chev SS numbers?

    I do think at least the Chev SS should be there, or does TTAC consider this on par with a Euro performance vehicle?

    • 0 avatar
      PeteRR

      The classic definition is a medium sized (within the manufacturer’s range) two door with a big block. Minimal options are best. You could order the ’68 Road Runner with no carpet and the only engines offered were the 383 big block and the 426 Hemi. YMMV.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        That’s your definition.

        My comment was sort of a spin on what people think muscle cars are.

        Your definition isn’t that of a muscle car, but a big block muscle car.

        Muscle cars actually ranged from 6 cylinders up.

        From what I can gather the term ‘muscle car’ is quite broad and ambiguous. I varies from country to individuals.

        • 0 avatar
          PeteRR

          I did say classic definition.

          • 0 avatar
            Lorenzo

            The first GTO was a ’64 compact Pontiac Tempest that DeLorean dropped a big block V8 into. In just a couple years, the body style stretched into mid-size range. The Mustang was originally the Falcon, the Challenger was built on the Barracuda platform which came from the Valiant.

            Your classic definition came after the first muscle cars, earlier referred to as pony cars after the Mustang – sporty compacts. The Charger later was built on the Dodge Coronet platform, and the SuperBee on the similar Plymouth Satellite, both mid-size (for the era, now full size) because the engines were getting too big to fit into compacts. The Plymouth Duster remained a compact, based on the Valiant, and its engine compartment limited it to the 340 cid engine, but due to its weight advantage it could keep up with the big boys.

            It’s true there were full size coupes with those big blocks, buckets and center consoles, and the same engines were dropped into the mid-size platforms making them faster, but it all started with bigger engines being put into compacts a half decade earlier.

          • 0 avatar
            PeteRR

            Lorenzo,

            -The ’64 – ’67 Tempests were all basically the same car with sheetmetal differences. And they were all mid-size cars. The ’64 GTO variant is considered to be the first muscle car.

            -The Challenger in ’70 was a unique car (E-body) that shared the same underpinnings as the ’70 Barracuda and neither shared anything with the previous incarnation of the Barracuda(A-body).

            -Pony cars are not muscle cars and muscle cars are not descendants of pony cars.

            -The Superbee is a badge derivative of the Dodge Coronet coupe and has nothing to do with it’s cousin the Plymouth Satellite.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @PeteRR
            Again, it is your take on the definition.

            Pony cars were in fact muscle cars.

            I would think pony cars are more or less a class within muscle cars.

            The E49 Valliant Charger is considered a muscle car. It had a 265 Hemi, six cylinder.

          • 0 avatar
            PeteRR

            Pony cars are pony cars. They are not muscle cars. They run small blocks and generally have tiny back seats. Find me anybody besides you who sez otherwise.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @PeteRR
            You are trying to lay down the definition of a muscle car.

            The best fact I can find is 10lbs to the horsepower.

            http://www.carsdirect.com/car-buying/muscle-car-definition-understand-the-requirements

          • 0 avatar
            PeteRR

            The first thing is, they don’t make muscle cars anymore. So 10 lbs to the HP is just a self-serving definition so that modern cars can be included. If you’re running around with power mirrors/windows/locks/seats/etc. it’s not a muscle car. The ’66 and ’67 Chargers, with full luxury interiors, weren’t muscle cars.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “The first GTO was a ’64 compact Pontiac Tempest that DeLorean dropped a big block V8 into.”

            The Pontiac 389 was not a “big block” engine. Every Pontiac V8 from 1955 to 1979 had the same external dimensions.

          • 0 avatar

            The Tempest that became the GTO was not a compact car. While the original Tempest in the early 1960s was developed alongside the Corvair, by 1964, the Tempest was on GM’s intermediate platform, like the Chevelle.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The GTO was about two feet longer than the Mustang. Not the same size class.

            The GTO was an intermediate car with a large displacement (although technically not a “big block”) V8. The Mustang was the first pony car, and was based upon a compact. I would personally dispute the notion of a pony car being a “muscle car” due to its smaller size, although there is no authoritative definition.

    • 0 avatar

      I’ve seen the original 409 powered 1961 Chevy Impala mentioned as the first “muscle car”. “She’s real fine, my 409″.

      FWIW, as far as “pony cars” go, the Plymouth Barracuda went on sale before the Mustang did.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Speaking of muscle cars, this vehicle in this link is possibly the best ever of the 60s/70s muscle car era.

    Fantastic vehicle.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_XY_Falcon_GTHO_Phase_III

    • 0 avatar
      Dimwit

      Nice! Have you ever driven one? What’s it like?

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @Dimwit
        I wish I could have taken one for a drive, or even been a passenger in one.

        An extension of the muscle car era in Australia was our V8 panel van culture. Fantastic vehicles as well, we used to call them Shagging Wagons.

        I hope these links work.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE7_qocyNx8

  • avatar
    MrIcky

    I’m so glad these cars are still alive and kicking with V8s. Things were looking so bleak not too long ago.

  • avatar
    AoLetsGo

    I have had the Mustang and Camaro V6 coupes as rentals recently, but not the Challenger yet. They were both interesting rentals but not the best for seeing the world outside with their small windows.
    It was a bit of game driving the back roads and small towns of the deep south in a bright red Camaro with NY plates without getting a ticket from Sheriff Buford T. Justice.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India