By on July 8, 2016

2016 Chevrolet Camaro

After TTAC delved into the details of the sixth-generation Chevrolet Camaro’s gradual decline last month, General Motors reported the worst sales month for the Camaro since November 2014.

June 2016 sales of the Chevrolet Camaro fell to a 19-month low. With only 4,969 sales — a huge number by the standards of most sporting cars but a 40-percent drop compared with the Camaro’s five-year June average — U.S. Camaro volume fell below 5,000 units for just the second time in the last 18 months.

Newly launched this past winter, the latest Camaro’s sales have fallen well below the totals achieved by the six-year-old fifth-gen Camaro in its final — and worst — year on the market. In the first-half of 2015, GM reported 42,593 U.S. sales of the Camaro, a 9-percent year-over-year drop. Yet one year later, the new Camaro is down 14 percent to 36,834 units, a drop of 5,759 sales.

GM says that retail consumer demand for the Camaro isn’t falling, but rather it’s increasing. GM’s desire to chop Camaro fleet sales in half, we reported in June, was married to a 13-percent increase in retail demand in the first five months of 2016.

2015 Ford Mustang GT dirt road

Ford, on the other hand, which sees less harm in providing daily rental fleets with iconic pony cars, sold nearly twice as many Mustangs in June as Chevrolet sold Camaros.

But even the far more common Mustang was down compared with the same period one year ago. June 2016 Mustang volume dropped 17 percent to 9,776 sales. Year-to-date, compared with its first full year in sixth-gen form, U.S. Mustang volume is down by 5,325 sales.

The Mustang wasn’t the only Detroit coupe to outperform the Camaro in June. Like the Camaro and Mustang, Dodge sold fewer Challengers in June 2016 than in June 2015. Challenger sales slid by a fifth to 5,479 units.

GM, of course, does have in its quiver another surprisingly high-volume sports car. Chevrolet Corvette sales are falling in 2016, not an unexpected turn of events given the massive figures achieved by the two-seater last year. But GM nevertheless added 2,483 Corvette sales to the Camaro’s tally in June; 14,668 in the first-half.

No high-end sports car sells anywhere near as often as the Corvette in the United States. A bundle of European sports cars – 4C, TT, Z4, F-Type, SLK, Boxster, Cayman – combined for fewer than 10,000 U.S. sales through the first six months of 2016. Porsche sold 5,026 911s. Dodge sold 298 Vipers.

[Images: GM, Ford]

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures. Follow on Twitter @goodcarbadcar and on Facebook.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

91 Comments on “Camaro vs. Mustang June Update: Camaro Crumbles, Mustang Mopes...”


  • avatar
    whynot

    When exactly did the new Camaro hit dealerships?

    I see next to no advertising for it, granted GM’s advertising in general is bland at best and atrocious at worse so I might have just missed it.

    I have only ever seen one out in the wild, granted it looks just like the last Camaro especially from afar, so I might have just mis-id some as the last gen.

    • 0 avatar
      Jimal

      Much like the SS, there hasn’t been much (any?). It is a shame too. I got a ride around in a new Camaro, and at the higher trim level (ironically I think it was an SS) the interior is really good. Like Audi good. Particularly in the color combo I was in (dark grey with a tan/saddle leather interior)

    • 0 avatar
      dukeisduke

      I’ve only seen two or three (here in the DFW area), but I see LOTS of 2015-2016 Mustangs. The new Camaro is visibly smaller. It’s clearly a better car than the fifth-gen, so I would think it would sell. Unless it’s that people prefer the Mustang.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        dukeisduke,
        The new Mustang is a far better looking package.

        The bonus is Ford has discovered IRS and the Mustang has left the 1960s.

        The Mustang is no longer “classified” as an accessory for a farm.

        Ford has made the Mustang far more appealing than the Camaro. If the Camaro was good enough GM would try to export them.

        • 0 avatar
          IAhawkeye

          When was the Mustang classified as an accessory for a farm?

        • 0 avatar
          IAhawkeye

          Rustic: made in a plain and simple fashion

          Are they not still? 2 doors, long hood, short rears, RWD, available stick shift, cheaply available V8 power. Just like they always have been.

          Yeah, they finally updated the solid live axel into an IRS and they’ve became way more refined. But their barely even close to the top in those area’s and these days consumers demand a lot more out of thier vehicles then in the past. There are no true plain and simple cars anymore. Ford did a pretty dang good job with the sold axel anyways.

          I live in a place covered in farms, I doubt Mustangs were ever a farmers accessory, most I know are way too practical for something like that. Although I’ll admit they still look as good as ever covered in dust from a gravel road (:

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            IAhawkeye,
            I don’t think they are quite as simple now as you’d think.

            Overall the Mustang has been a more attractive vehicle than the Camaro. But, some Mustangs models do look rather average.

            One thing, I think Ford can do a better job overall with their interiors, as could Chev and GM.

            Cheap, yes. Great no. Good value yes.

      • 0 avatar
        raph

        Just parsing comments here and elsewhere for people who aren’t either into the performance numbers or are Camaro nutswingers it appears the Mustang trumps the F-car as a better day to day driver. More usable trunk space, better sight lines, more head room and so on plus the car has a cheaper price of entry.

  • avatar
    LS1Fan

    GM screwed up again.

    What was the lesson of the 1990s-2000s F car vs Fox Body Mustang?

    American consumers don’t care about actual performance, as long as the car is comfy , looks moderately cool and sounds mean.

    GM doubled down on performance, apparently forgetting few to no one in a new showroom cares about that. The old car sold well because it was boxy and looked like the Ye Olden Camaros.

    What they should have done; let Ford have the performance crown at the pony car level, and made the Camaro into (God Help Me) a rebadged Monte Carlo. Or even just killed the Camaro totally and brought back the Monte as a grand tourer.

    It rends my bowtie loving soul to say it, but GM made exactly the car enthusiasts wanted, which is why it’s destined to be a sales flop.

    • 0 avatar
      whynot

      They shouldn’t have made it into a Monte Carlo, but I agree with you that they focused too much on the performance aspect of the new car and not enough on fresh styling.

      Image is ultimately what matters in this segment, not track performance. Leave that to high margin special trims for the people who actually care.

    • 0 avatar
      AK

      Nah, they should have made it a compact crossover.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Interestingly enough, I think GM styling might be becoming a problem at the same time that their mechanicals are becoming first rate. The new Camaro looks just like the old one, and this segment is definitely styling-driven, so why would buyers opt for the Camaro, particularly when the Mustang down the street is mad sexy?

      It may be the same problem at Cadillac – their styling isn’t great either.

      • 0 avatar
        bumpy ii

        Cadillac’s problem is that the angular skew of Art & Science has run its course without any catchy replacement, and they need to have fairly anodyne style to satisfy the predilections of the Chinese market.

      • 0 avatar
        LS1Fan

        The styling isn’t a problem, in my view. The new car looks pretty nice.

        Problem is GM shrunk it for performance reasons, seeing as how the outgoing car was panned for being relatively large when it came out.

        It’s great from an enthusiast, go-fast perspective. The other 99% of car buyers see a coupe that’s barely got room for an iPad mini.

        By contrast, the Mustang is a much more practical car to drive every day. That matters a lot more then skidpad G ratings in the real world.

        I’m gritting my teeth typing this, but from a mass market business perspective GM should have made the 2016 Camaro larger- bigger trunk, more comfortable interior, and saved the go fast bits for a dealer option book.

        For all the hype about pony car horsepower wars, most of the iron moved have V6 engines. That’s the market GM should have targeted.

        • 0 avatar
          TonyJZX

          Its a balance. I actually like this Camaro more than the last fat one but the problem for GM is Ford really knocked it out of the park. Granted they were started from a live axled low bar.

          GM should have made more concessions to liveability. We have seen that making stuff more hardcore and niche doesnt work.

          By the same token I dont think making things into a 4,400lb Challenger is what people want either.

          How about making a car you can see out of? How about making a trunk with a normal sized opening? How about more attractive interior design?

          This is where the Mustang succeeds.

          Ford aimed the Mustang at the more sophisticated global audience and won in the America too.

          Funny.

        • 0 avatar
          whynot

          The new car doesn’t look bad. The problem is it looks too much like the old one (albeit nicer).

          It is too stale in a segment that values image and styling. It looks like the same car that has been on the streets for 7 years now (and previewed in movies and concepts even longer). That doesn’t impress people anymore and doesn’t draw them into the dealership.

          Compare that to the Mustang. The Mustang still looks like and is easily identifiable as a Mustang, but the current car looks clearly different than the previous model, so you can easily show off that you have the newest model.

        • 0 avatar
          sportyaccordy

          They didn’t have to make it bigger. A freaking 2 series is roomier from the B-pillar back and in the trunk while literally being over a foot shorter. The Camaro is about the size of a Camry with the interior space of a BRZ. There is probably 15-25 cubic feet of wasted space somewhere in that car. It’s an idiotic and bewildering exercise in terrible packaging. You would think with a brand new platform GM would address that but if anything it’s worse than the 5th gen. I was amazed when I found all this out.

          GM has to recoup on the Alpha platform so I don’t think they should have switched. But they have to have been smoking crack to think people would drop 40-50 large on a Camaro that is way bigger but almost not at all more practical than a Corvette.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          LSI Fan,
          The Camaro is not a great looking vehicle. Good enough will not get sales.

        • 0 avatar
          nrd515

          I disagree about the styling, it’s a HUGE problem for me anyways. I just hate it, and have hated it since the 2010 car appeared. But I agree with the rest of your post pretty much 100%. I wouldn’t, and didn’t, and won’t buy a Camaro, or a Mustang, because of one single reason. The lack of trunk space. I use the trunk every day, I have a couple of things I need to carry and neither of them fit in the Mustang or Camaro. They do fit in the Challenger though, with room to spare. I just wish they would make these cars hatchbacks and solve my problem, at least I would have a choice. It looks like it’s going to be another Challenger for me about a year from now.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          “GM should have made the 2016 Camaro larger”

          One Challenger is enough, thanks.

          Large mainstream passenger cars are falling out of favor generally. The domestic personal luxury coupe market is dead and it’s going to stay dead for the foreseeable future.

      • 0 avatar

        Despite a better, lighter and more nimble chassis which few general buyers care about, the Camaro looks WAY too much like the last one. That is the Kiss of Death.

        This is a fickle segment. The latest styling is what sells. The design of the current Camaro has been with us since the first “Transformers” came out in 2007. That is nearly 3 times as long as the first-generation Camaro/Firebird.

        I think what GM should do is another retro design – the second-generation 1970-1981 F-car, which was Chuck Jordan’s take on an early Sixties Ferrari 250. Take a look at the re-interpretation of the Bandit’s 1977 Trans-AM. Tacky as it is, it is something of a template for how to do this.

        All of the above may be meaningless because…no matter how much things improve, there is a widely-held perception that GM still makes crap. Sitting inside a Camaro does little to change that, no matter how great the driving experience may be.

        And yeah, Marketing. They Don’t Know How To. That is one thing I agree with Buickman on.

        How many years has GM not had a CMO to scream “that’s the stupidest idea ever! Do it over or clean out your desk!”

      • 0 avatar
        bd2

        So the current Mustang doesn’t look much like the prior gen?

      • 0 avatar
        raph

        Agreed Freed, my initial complaint about the Camaro was that it aped the 5th gen’s styling to much which for this incidental GM fan (I say that because I’m a Ford guy at heart but I like a good many of the General’s performance cars from the 60’s onward) was a big turn off plus the whole “69 ‘maro” look to me had run its course well before the 5th gen showed up ( in the 80’s and early 90’s you didn’t have to look far if you were a 1st gen F-body fan and wanted to see some magazine coverage as practically everybody was showcasing them along with the same tired tech articles on how to repair, restore or mod your 69 Camaro ).

        Its too bad GM hadn’t considered evolving the Camaro more along the lines of the 2nd gen cars. That would have given me serious pause in my Mustang addiction as I absolutely love the early 2nd gen F-cars (especially the Formula and Trans-Am Pontiacs) and consider those cars the high watermark in F-car styling. Also a fan of the 3rd gen F-cars to a lesser extent.

    • 0 avatar
      Superdessucke

      I think they should make a luxury Berlinetta or Type LT version with all-wheel drive and a soft and squishy ride. I bet that would sell.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Bingo!

      The problem with the new Camaro is the same underlying problem as with the Cadillac ATS and CTS – the Alpha platform.

      The Alpha platform, while making the each of the models using it among the leaders, if not the leader in handling – does not allow for competitive passenger/trunk space which is a prime US consumer want.

      The rear seats in the new Camaro are virtually worthless.

      Sure, the Camaro in the performance trims is seen as something that can out-handle the M4, but for the majority of buyers, that means little if they can’t use the rear seats or fit much in the trunk.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Well, the new car a) looks just like the old one, and b) it’s even worse to see out of than the old one, which is a real accomplishment.

    Meanwhile, the Mustang is gorgeous and offers similar performance.

    Not a big mystery…

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      *ding*

      Previous Camaros were instantly recognizable as “not the old one”. This one looks like a modest refresh, despite the new platform and engines. Epic fail for a segment that lives and dies on style.

  • avatar
    Snail Kite

    I think Ford’s right to keep up rental sales as I don’t think they tarnish these kind of cars. When I see a rental Mustang I think “that person rented a Mustang because they wanted something fun” not “the Mustang is an unsellable turd like the 200.”

  • avatar
    mustang462002

    Surprise surprise.
    I own a 2002 mustang Gt that I do not DD. I really like the car. At 14 years old I am starting to appreciate the size and no nonsense interior. It has a decent trunk, great seats, great visibility and in 2002 a kicking stereo. The car was $25,000 new and adjusted for inflation about $30,000.

    If the Camaro wants to succeed it needs to get away from trying to appeal to baby boomers that want huge fast cars. Let’s get back to basic with a $20,000 starting price, great visibility, relatively small size, great suspension, decent speed and a durable engine. Let’s get over being the fastest car and latest gizmo. I would definitely replace my 2002. I have not see a replacement for my 2002 mustang that feels the same. The new Mustang is enormous, expensive and very thirsty.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      Are you kidding? A new gt manual goes for 29,999 with no options. That’s an incredible deal and a great reason to buy a new stang. I am waffling between that and a challenger r/t at the moment.

    • 0 avatar
      IAhawkeye

      Mustangs are an absolute STEAL. Yeah their a bit bigger, and a bit heavier. They also are way nicer then your 02 could’ve dreamed of being. $30k for the 5.0 is a dang good price, it’s faster, and sounds better then ye old 4.6 too. Kudos to Ford, for knocking it out of the park. Although the 09-14 gen will always have my heart, I can admit the new generation is miles ahead in refinement and quality.

    • 0 avatar
      Shawnski

      Dude, I have owned an ’99 GT and ’03 SVT Cobra, the new car is leagues better everywhere accept its larger footprint.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        I’d rather have the ’03 SVT Cobra. The new Mustang GT is heavier, same power, China trans, no supercharger whine. $20,000 gets you a sweet, low miles ’03 or ’04 SVT Cobra, drive the balls off it daily, sell it for $10,000 with high miles, dings, lots of wear. Find another $20,000 SVT Cobra, repeat, rinse.

        A simple pulley and tune gets you 450 hp and 450 lbs/ft.

    • 0 avatar
      Superdessucke

      And when you’re 18 years old you will realize how small it is and will probably buy a crossover.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      The S-197 and later Mustangs are really true GT cars (the S550 even more so now that it has the IRS helping to soak up bumps and provide greater confidence. Nice cars to take on a long trip. The prior Mustangs aren’t bad but you can really stretch out and get comfortable in the newer cars plus you get the added benefit of good handling and decent power especially in V8 trim.

      and I say this as a guy who has logged 21 hours straight in an SN95/New Edge and well over 12 hours in an S-197. Unfortunately I never got a chance to take a super long trip in the S550 when I owned it I think maybe 4 or 5 hours tops.

      Frankly other than sitting up high and if you need considerable luggage/people space I can’t find a good reason to take SUV, CUV or Mini-van on a trip.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Just putting this out there: the new Camaro, IMO, is FANTASTIC looking. It’s like they put the 5th Gen on a diet and Bowflex regimen. This is how you do evolutionary car design.

    I don’t care if you can’t see out of it, as I will probably never own one. I also don’t care that the Mustang is currently outselling it; that just means the Cammy is more EXCLUSIVE! XD

    Note I’m not saying anything bad about the Stang. I love the Stang too. But I’ve always loved Camaros a bit more.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Bring back the Zeta kill the alpha already, and competitively price the Camaro to the Mustang, it shouldn’t cost $8k more to buy a Camaro over a Mustang.

  • avatar
    Whatnext

    I can only concur with the critiques above. The new model’s styling is too close to the old, and that wasn’t great to begin with. Some of the impracticality should have been dialed out with the restyle, instead it was enhanced.

  • avatar
    suspekt

    Couple of thoughts:

    1. After seeing the new Mustang and Camaro in the flesh the past few months, I gotta say the Mustang is the better looking car. It looks like an Adult car whereas the Camaro just doesnt come across as grown up…. And I suspect the Mustang (based on looks alone) is conquering sales from other brands (BMW, Audi, etc) whereas the Camaro probably isn’t.

    2. We need a 4 door Chevrolet built on the Camaro’s chassis… ideally with the new 10 speed auto, LT1 motor, and a torque vectoring AWD setup… I would really really want that…. and I DO NOT WANT it to be a Cadillac

    • 0 avatar
      dividebytube

      Gotta agree with this. I’ve seen a number of new Camaros on the street and I think they look like overgrown hotwheels. I respect their performance but I don’t want one.

      On the way to work yesterday I was behind the latest version of the Mustang GT – black – and I felt covetous, wishing I had one for myself. Someday – when they hit the used market in the 15k – 18k range.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge (bball40dtw)

      We have three four door Camaros, two Cadillacs and one Chevrolet, and they don’t sell well. The Chevy one is on the last Camaro platform though.

      Why would GM want to offer another product that would take away higher dollar Cadillac sales?

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        “Cadillac sales”

        Surely these two words don’t belong together?

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Adam,
        I don’t believe that the Camaro will take sales from Cadillac.

        Kia doesn’t really take sales from BMW and as 28 Cars stated, Cadillac and sales, just don’t mix, emulsify possibly at best.

        The Camaro is not as good a vehicle package as the Mustang, especially in the “looks” department. I had a look at a GT a guy has at work, as well as one in the showroom.

        Ford really needs to improved the interior build quality if it expects to sell vehicles competing globally and for the dollars Ford expects to gain from these vehicles globally.

        The drawback for the Camaro is it’s looks. There will be many who like the Camaro look, but overall I’d say the Mustang is superior from that perspective.

        It would also be nice for a 2.7 EcoBoost for the Mustang. This is the size vehicle the 2.7 should be fitted to, not a F-150. The 2.7 will then, (in real life) show it’s potential as an economical engine.

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge (bball40dtw)

          I’m not talking about the Camaro. I’m talking about a four door CTS with a V8 branded as a Chevy. It would make the ATS and CTS even more irrelevant. The Cadillac version of the Camaro, the ATS Coupe, has already been made completely irrelevant by the existence of the Aplha platform Camaro. I’ve driven both and the Camaro is a better vehicle.

  • avatar
    AK

    I was interested in the new V6 camaro. I test drove one with a few limited options (still had cloth seats, no nav and it didnt even have the active exhaust) and it was good.

    It also cost as much as a base GT Mustang.

    That’s a problem.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Yeah, the 2SS I test drove cost $15K more than the Mustang GT Premium I bought. Chevrolet dealer wasn’t budging off of MSRP. Even an 1SS would have cost $7K more. Chevy is following the Cadillac strategy. It’s winning all the magazine laurels, but no one’s actually willing to pay more for one.

    • 0 avatar
      bswanny

      Exactly! The new Camaro with any thing other than cloth and a 1 inch screen is $40K even in the V6 model. Just way too expensive compared to the Mustang

  • avatar
    JEFFSHADOW

    No Mustang required

    No Camaro required

    I bought the 2016 Challenger SXT Plus in Plum Crazy. It still looks properly retro and has more room and comfort than the Ford or Chevrolet.
    And gets 27 MPG on the highway at the 3,000 mile mark.

    Getting into the Challenger is similar to my 1975 Riviera. Lots of room, big doors and style as well!

    • 0 avatar
      Shawnski

      The new Mustang is also very comfortable to stretch out in up front and has an excellent trunk as well. Don’t tell me you bought yours for the rear seat, styling fine. That is your choice.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      I’m 6’2 and weigh about 275 pounds and I have no problem fitting into the S550 Mustang (I haven’t tried the 6th gen Camaro but the 5th gen was a tight fit in base trim at least. I had to lay the seat back at the B-pillar to get head clearance).

      Granted the Challenger is definitely better on trips with more than two passengers but the S-197 and later Mustangs are very generous when it comes to leg space. Doubly so in my case since I favor a longer torso over leg length.

  • avatar
    mustang462002

    Yeah a new manual GT is $30k. It’s really fast but gets 19mpg has “Land Speed” on the speed indicator has all of these fake chrome and trim bits along with the horrible ford stereo that looks like an jet plane computer. Give me a GT with 30mpg, no fake bits and an independent suspension at 80% current size and at a minimum 250hp. I’m sold!

  • avatar
    FordMan_48126

    Tim;

    The sales numbers you mention just include North America, correct? What about comparing 6 month global numbers for Mustang vs. Camaro? Is the Camaro even sold outside North America??

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the Mustang was the best selling performance car in the EU market the first 6 months of this year. Trust me, no one in Dearborn is worried at this point regarding Mustang sales…in fact, it is just the opposite. They are all happy with the results.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    I bought a new ’16 Mustang GT Premium on Saturday. This is my first Ford, after previously owning an ’84 Trans Am and a ’00 Camaro SS. So I don’t have any particular loyalty to a brand.

    First, some problems with the Camaro. I test drove one, two weeks before buying the Mustang. The V8 cars in stock are all loaded 2SS models, stickering at $45-$48K. Even in the extended inventory, the dealer couldn’t find a model with cloth seats for under $40K. Every single SS being produced is automatically getting optioned out with an extra $4K in options. It already starts at $4K more than the equivalent trim Mustang, and they think people reaching for the SS model are automatically willing to drop an extra $900 for an upgrade exhaust system. Meanwhile, base, no-option Mustangs are thick on the ground and moving off dealer lots for under $30K.

    As I’ve said before, the SS is just to “hard-core.” It’s designed for track use. All that stuff you have to pay extra for in a Mustang Performance Pack is standard on the Camaro. But standard doesn’t mean free, so the basic V8 Camaro cost thousands more than a basic V8 Mustang. Most people who want these cars are planning to drive them on the street, where GM’s over-engineered chassis and high performance brakes are wasted. That stuff’s useful on the track, but not necessary for most buyers.

    The Mustang is simply a better street/highway car. The Camaro was notably louder in wind and tire noise. The Mustang doesn’t have quite the engine note the Camaro does (Ford really muffled the exhaust on the Mustang), but it’s a lot easier to live with if you have to drive a few hours.

    I test drove the Camaro. The interior was just traumatizing. It’s such a mess, and GM contemptuously double-down on visibility, making it even worse than the prior version of the car. Blindspot monitoring is an absolute necessity in that car. But it only comes as an extra-cost option on the “2” (e.g., 2SS) models. If you want a V8 and the ability to know what’s happening in your blind spot, be prepared to spend near-Corvette level money. Meanwhile, I can actually see out of my Mustang by turning my head.

    Price is the other big factor in why the Mustang will crush the Camaro in sales. My GT Premium cost $7K less than the cheapest SS the dealer could find. That’s for a basic Camaro with cloth seats. Money matters to buyers of these cars. If someone wants to spend close to $50K, they have many other options to look at that don’t look like cartoons come to life.

    • 0 avatar
      bswanny

      Im not a Ford guy by any means but after test driving both and pricing them out, the Mustang is superior. I agree with all your points.

    • 0 avatar
      suspekt

      I’m 100% in the GM > Ford camp…

      But

      I totally agree with you.

      IF I was in the market for these 2 cars, I’d pick the Mustang….

      Having said that,
      I just bought an 18,000 mile C5 Corvette Fixed Roof Coupe and I couldn’t be happier…. the C5 is just a solid solid sports car… proper sports car

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Just like the old days (of the 80s and 90s) reviewers love the Camaro and buyers love the Mustang. Nothing new to see here.

    • 0 avatar
      TrailerTrash

      That s because reviewers don’t have to live with the car.

      Buyers do..
      I was thinking about these two cars. I guess if they cut out a larger trunk opening in and perhaps cut a circle in the C pillar, I might think about the Camaro. But if not, I would have to drive around with the top always down…not a real bad thing.

      The Mustang just seems soooo big for no back seat.

      • 0 avatar
        raph

        “The Mustang just seems soooo big for no back seat.”

        Blame it on the “fastback” styling, the svelte roofline adds inches.

        IMO a pretty good trade off for not having to cruise around in a 4 series clone (People love to ask why the Mustang doesn’t have tidier packaging like the BMW but if it did it would share all the same basic proportions and just be a blue oval copy called Mustang).

  • avatar
    Corollaman

    It still suffers from the hunkered down syndrome so many drivers dislike, plus it’s more expensive.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I think the motor vehicle market can be read like the real estate market.

    Subtle trends indicate a change in the direction of that market. The US vehicle market will start to decline.

    Mustang production will be different than the Camaro, due to the global market Ford is selling the Mustang in. Even Australia should sell a significant number of Mustangs.

    GM should of had a right hand drive Camaro as well as a “global” turbo four. Well, the US manufacturers want to be very “US centric” and this is what happens. The Camaro, like the Mustang are relatively small vehicles, that will appeal to export markets and can be priced reasonably. The build quality is important as “foreign” vehicles tend to better put together better.

    EXPORT!

    But to do this some real changes need to occur in how the US auto industry is regulated and protected. Countries will not want to trade when too many controls and barriers are in the way.

  • avatar

    The Mustang is represented as a lower priced “pony car”. The Camaro is represented as a “toy for big boys” that will pay a premium.

    The new Mustang looks good, perhaps even better than a Camaro, but if you are a Chevrolet fanboy its a Camaro, not a Mustang and vice versa.

    Can’t afford a Corvette, need a bit more space, then a Camaro might just do.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      If you can afford a Camaro with a V8 and leather, you can stretch for a ‘Vette. It’s not a poor man’s performance car anymore. The only reason to buy the Camaro over the Corvette is that you prefer its looks, or need two useless back seats.

      • 0 avatar
        rudiger

        ^This. There are four reasons the Mustang outsells the Camaro:

        1. Price.
        2. Mustang easier to live with, i.e., outward vision.
        3. Lack of advertising.
        4. Price.

        For the price of a loaded V8 Camaro, with careful option choices, it wouldn’t be difficult to get a nice, base Corvette (which still has lots of standard equipment).

        Similarly, I’ve never quite been able to grasp why so many people will pay a huge premium for a Shelby over the price of a regular Mustang GT.

        • 0 avatar
          raph

          Mainly its the name, ergo the reason you have a litany of pissed off Cobra fan boys that absolutely hate the Shelby name since it carries more clout and command a better price.

          However to its credit it works out well for the dealers, Ford’s real customers.

          I’d also say performance but I’m sure GM probably has used the GT350 as a bench mark for its 1LE package and the GT350R for the upcoming ZL1 the former coming in thousands less and the latter offering greater performance for a similar price (even if its only for a lap or two before the blown LT4 reigns in the fun in an attempt to keep aluminum slag out of the oil pan).

  • avatar
    runs_on_h8raide

    The Camaro has a coffin-like outward side vision. It was horrendous in the last gen, and its still horrendous. Quite frankly, they needed to get away from the retro styling, but they didn’t. It looks cartoonish now. I’ll give Ford great credit…at least their retro look is a lot more modern and graceful vs. GM, and way more palatable.

    In a year or two when the senior citizens that have been buying up the GT350s and GT350Rs, have moved onto Depends and Toyota Camrys, you’ll be able to scoop these cars up with low miles and depreciated way down from the MSRP…let alone the obscene market adjusted values I’ve been seeing on these things.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      I had to drive a Camaro this week. I don’t know how any purchase desire survives the test drive. I’d ask my friend who bought his wife a new SS today, but it would be gauche. OTOH, so is driving a Camaro.

    • 0 avatar
      nrd515

      No, they need to do retro RIGHT. The present car, and the last one look like some sort of LSD induced take on a 1st gen Camaro. Enough with the first gen “look”, go 2nd gen or even 3rd, and make it have some sort of usable trunk! And I can’t believe I’m saying this, make the greenhouse bigger! I say I can’t believe I’m saying that because I have complained about too big greenhouses for a long long time, but the Camaro finally went too far. And it’s too expensive. I can get a decently loaded Scatpack Challenger for a lot less than I can get a Camaro of the same level for. And the Challenger is comfortable!

  • avatar
    Krivka

    I don’t think the Camaro is a bad looking car. Neither is the Mustang. Both are attractive vehicles that are pretty fun to drive. Now, the Camaro is a BETTER car mechanically in my opinion, and the platform is slightly better on the road but who really cares? I have had conversations with GM people, and you can read similar statements from GM executives that claim “current Caramo owners didn’t wan’t to deviate from the previous iteration”. My reply was simple. Did you design this car to sell only to current Camaro owners? What about trying to win over a few Boxster owners or others who may find the car an attractive alternative to the pillbox called a Camaro? It is a difficult car to love to say the least. Great chassis and drivetrains, but if you can’t see out of it what is the use? The Mustang is a better vehicle all around, and GM better make the Camaro more like a Jaguar F type if they want to keep he car relevant.

  • avatar
    bswanny

    Price is what is killing the Camaro and the ability to not see out of it. Two things buyers notice right away when shopping cars

  • avatar
    skor

    The 1965 Mustang sold 560,000 units. How times have changed.

  • avatar

    To me, the BIG news in this story isn’t that the Mustang outsold the Camaro, but that the Challenger outsold the Camaro. That tells you all you need to know about the public reception to the Camaro “redesign”.

  • avatar

    Per previous comments, GM seems to be over-engineering their cars lately for the market segments they are in. Cadillacs and Camaros were not bought in the past because they were the most expensive, top tier performers. While I applaud the engineering prowess involved, the reality is that they are designing cars that are ultimately not appealing to the general public’s perception of what the particular brand/model should be.

    • 0 avatar
      Shawnski

      Good point, GM divisions (Detroit) were always successful because of the perceived value. The Mustang does well because it has styling, contemporary tech features, is FTD while being easy to live with and affordable. No it’s not built like a BMW, but it’s never going to be because no one is going to buy a Ford Mustang GT for an equivalent BMW money.

      That’s not to say that the Camaro is built like a BMW either, but perhaps GM overreached AND missed IMO on styling and packaging.

  • avatar
    alexndr333

    GM played it too safe by merely ‘refining’ the last generation Camaro with the ATS platform. It seems to me that, as the company attempts to remake itself internally, GM remains too slow and too cautious in attacking its many markets. Given the benefits of amortizing the ATS / Camaro platform, I would recommend that GM swing for the fences with a larger green-house Camaro in 2-door and 4-door guises, while the ATS is made with higher-zoot materials and all-wheel drive.

  • avatar
    MRF 95 T-Bird

    Mustang vs Camaro sales over the past 50 years.

    http://blog.caranddriver.com/warning-graphic-content-50-years-of-camaro-vs-mustang-sales-numbers-in-living-color/

    Most years the Mustang outsold the Camaro even during the Mustang II era, which even as a former 1970 Mustang owner a vehicle I have oddly grown to appreciate over the years.

    Peak mullet head era 82-86 the Camaro outsold the Mustang.

  • avatar
    ...m...

    …the new camaros are old men’s cars: big, clunky, expensive, antiquated-looking caricatures of their teenaged years, so as the old men die and the younger folks laugh them off, new camaro sales fade with their demographic…

    …the new mustangs, by contrast, made a concientious effort to shed that stigma (even by bringing a dash of fox-body!) and thus the new cars *appear* lighter, crisper, more modern, open, and airy: eagerly looking toward a bright future, rather than reminiscing of a dim past…

    …funny enough, GM might could follow a similar playbook by bringing a taste of F-body styling back to the new camaro…

    • 0 avatar
      319583076

      Truth. When I test drove a 6.4 Hemi Challenger MT last year, the salesman told me he special-ordered that car for a certain customer. He then spent most of our time together collecting build sheets from the door panels and trunk because in his words, “Most guys that buy these like to frame the build sheets.”

      These cars are squarely aimed at boomer collectors fighting the reality of their mortality. If you want one for whatever reason, I’d buy soon because they won’t be available in their present incarnations much longer. Of course, the used market will be flooded with examples that haven’t been driven, but have been obsessively detailed replete with framed build sheets. So maybe it’s better to wait?

      • 0 avatar
        ...m...

        …the same demographic cycle will repeat with generation X and the fox/f-inspired cars, but i’m not sure whether there will remain a retro “pony” car market after that: generations Y and Z grew up without a legitimate cheap, accessible, contemporaneous pony car at the heart of their coming-of-age experiences…

        …the truth about pony cars is that the old fox/f-bodies were the last generation to serve their native market niche; the generations since have been more of retro muscle cars marketed as trophy acquisitions for older drivers…i guess if they become cheap enough and ubiquitious enough on the used market, the retro cars might still flood high school parking lots, but i think that the newer modern styling conceits stand a better chance of being cool than the previous-generation retro cartoons…

  • avatar
    LBJs Love Child

    Might I suggest one very possible reason (or at least a strongly contributing factor) in the 6th Gen Camaro’s lackluster sales? One that is directly related to the 5th Gen’s sales success?

    The 5th Gen Camaro met a pent-up market demand for Camaros following the six-year absence from the market place. Success!

    The 6th Gen met a saturated/satiated market, with many Camaro faithful upside down on their 60/72-month loans, and no really compelling need to trade-up for a car that looks similar and costs a lot more. Stumble.

  • avatar
    Wodehouse

    The Alpha platform curse. CTS, ATS, and, Camaro. High acclaim from the journalists, critics, and, fist-bumping, hotshoes, but, a near zero to the actual car buying public. It generates great numbers and spirited driving feel, but, it doesn’t work well for everyday human existence: passenger room, visibility, cargo space.

    Who is in charge of Camaro Marketing? Does Camaro marketing exist outside of enthusiast rags?

    Styling and design are wrong. Just wrong, as in 2013 Malibu wrong. Not ugly or bad, just wrong. Inside and out. Why is the Camaro’s touch screen aimed at my navel? Was the gauge package a last minute design? Is it all new? The automotive enthusiast press notice, but, does the buying public?

    It’s a new coupe in market gone crossover mad.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Funny you mention the gauge package. One more overstimulating feature of the chaotic Camaro interior. The car I test drove had 3, I say again, three speedometers!

      The digital circular electronic gauge, the digital numerical electronic gauge, and the HUD. It’s absolutely ridiculous. Less is more, GM.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @FreedMike – Yup. The original “Big Lie’. Firearms aren’t all that effective at...
  • 28-Cars-Later: “Anyone who wants Land Rover posh, near-S-Class tech, and a third row for Jeep money, but...
  • 28-Cars-Later: “Maybe it’s because your political opinions are 90% maga BS” Dude, we don’t know you...
  • Scoutdude: If it is just a remote, for many you don’t need anything other than the remote. For example on my...
  • slavuta: “Check the number of police per capita. Or the overall police budgets. Police forces/services in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber