Guess what? Motortrend favors the Camaro again

[Grintch]

Well they do admit that it was not the dream matchup with the PP2, because Ford could not supply one at the time of the test. They said they will do the comparison again "soon" when the PP2 becomes available to the media.

You really can't blame MT. They were told 6 months before the PP2 will be available for magazine tests, so they went with what they had. It was either that, or no comparison at all, since Chevy supplied a 1SS 1LE.

Right, and to the original MT favoritism complaint. The Camaro has won every comparison test verses the Mustang I have seen since the 6th generation was released. Across multiple magazines, tests, and test vehicle specs.

Let's hope the PP2 will be a better answer to the 1LE than it looks to be on paper.

Sponsored

 

[Hack]

show me one performance based test the mustang bested the gen6. there isn't one. again in talking performance cause these are performance cars. talking comfort or sales and sayong the mustang wins it all based on its easier to live with and sells more would be like someone In the ufc getting knocked out in the first round but still given the win cause he's better looking. I'm talking out of the box performance

Your metaphor doesn't work at all, because performance isn't the only gage of what people like in a vehicle.

A better metaphor would be this: The Chevy UFC fighter punches harder, but the Ford UFC fighter keeps winning. And you keep saying it doesn't matter that the Ford UFC fighter is winning, because being a UFC fighter is all about punching harder.

 

[tyler2k]

Your metaphor doesn't work at all, because performance isn't the only gage of what people like in a vehicle.

A better metaphor would be this: The Chevy UFC fighter punches harder, but the Ford UFC fighter keeps winning. And you keep saying it doesn't matter that the Ford UFC fighter is winning, because being a UFC fighter is all about punching harder.

I'd say your medaphor doesn't work since the mustang had yet to win against s gen6 other then sales. so how is the mustang the fighter that keeps winning, a better comparison would be the camaro is the ufc fighter that delivers in the ring while the mustang is the ufc fighter is better at branding himself and selling his name

 

[Arthonon]

so what about the edmunds test, similar car in price, the mustang had a tire upgrade as the a10 and the camaro still edged it out, everyone was blaming tires and saying its not fair cause the ss come with magniride, you don't think that's an excuse. so if the pp2 beats the 1le and i say if the 1le had cup2s its win you wouldn't call that an excuse cause i would. bottom line if you want comfort that you can do spirited backroad driving the mustang 100%is the car, if you want best performance for dollar the camaro is your car

I don't see anyone really disagreeing with the bolded statement, so I don't know what you're arguing. I think using the examples of tires, magneride, etc., make sense because it does show why one car would perform better under a given set of circumstances, and they're pointing out that the cars weren't equally equipped and that's why the Mustang did what it did in comparison to the Camaro. It's not an excuse, it's an explanation. And sure, if they tested a base 1SS against a PP2, and the 1SS lost, I'd say that is because it wasn't comparably equipped.

I think it would make sense to compare what you can get for the same money, and state that clearly as your point of reference, and if one car is better equipped for the same price, it gives you your answer based on that criteria.

But as has been pointed out again and again and again, all-out track performance is not the only thing people look for in a car, so if they're close in performance, but the Mustang has other features people prefer, it makes sense to buy that car.

At this point, I'd say that unless you are going to strip out the A/C, passenger seat, radio, etc., in your Camaro, then you largely agree with the overall sentiment that it's OK to trade performance for conveniences. Just because what you're willing to trade doesn't match up with someone else's doesn't make either right or wrong. And really, if someone REALLY focused on track performance, neither the Mustang or Camaro would remain stock, and once you get into that level of modification, I'm not sure we even know which has the greater potential.

 

[Jdenkevitz]

I'd say your medaphor doesn't work since the mustang had yet to win against s gen6 other then sales. so how is the mustang the fighter that keeps winning, a better comparison would be the camaro is the ufc fighter that delivers in the ring while the mustang is the ufc fighter is better at branding himself and selling his name

No this is a terrible analogy.

The Mustang is "winning" in the ultimate metric. Sales. Its a reflection of how well the product meets consumer demand. Performance is a factor in this segment, but the metric you are so fervently focusing on, is only one part of what drives the vast majority of sales.

Maybe one tenth of one percent of pony car sales are bought by consumers with a focus on track performance.

People just don't care about such a small difference.

Consumers DO care however about looks, about ergonomics, about comfort, about features, about driving experience (visibility), and about practicality as a daily driver (trunk and storage space). All things which the Mustang does very well for the segment. Why are these factors so important? Because those are the ones that impact the drivers experience every time they drive the car.

Not some adolescent fantasy inspired by watching too many fast and furious movies.

 

[Hack]

I'd say your medaphor doesn't work since the mustang had yet to win against s gen6 other then sales. so how is the mustang the fighter that keeps winning, a better comparison would be the camaro is the ufc fighter that delivers in the ring while the mustang is the ufc fighter is better at branding himself and selling his name

Not at all. The Camaro MAGAZINE results are the branding and naming. Camaro is slightly better at some things that very few people use the car for, so it gets some magazine wins.

The Mustang gets the sales wins which are the true wins because overall it's the better car.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The Mustang is "winning" in the ultimate metric. Sales. Its a reflection of how well the product meets consumer demand. Performance is a factor in this segment, but the metric you are so fervently focusing on, is only one part of what drives the vast majority of sales.

Maybe one tenth of one percent of pony car sales are bought by consumers with a focus on track performance.

The problem with trying to call anything an 'ultimate metric' for anybody but the car mfr comes when whatever it takes to meet typical consumer demand does not line up with a specific individual's priorities. For some, that might be dragstrip credibility or gee-whiz feature content, but here in a H2H track comparison it's corner-carving abilities/qualities.

When you're a corner-carver at heart, that 0.1% becomes 100% or close to it. You already know that the other 99.9% aren't going to understand (and maybe never will).

People just don't care about such a small difference.

Even when the differences really are small, they go to a difference in intent by the mfr . . . how seriously are they taking the people who want cornering performance and composure? By way of example, Dodge sure takes the drag racing and traditional muscle car segment pretty seriously without making everything else in the Charger & Challenger lineups seem like escapees from the local dragstrip as well.

Consumers DO care however about looks, about ergonomics, about comfort, about features, about driving experience (visibility), and about practicality as a daily driver (trunk and storage space). All things which the Mustang does very well for the segment. Why are these factors so important? Because those are the ones that impact the drivers experience every time they drive the car.

Sure. But not all drivers give the same weighting to each of those priorities. I know I don't, and apparently neither does tyler. Not the same weightings relative to each other and certainly not relative to the corner-carving side of performance driving.

I understand (more or less) where tyler is coming from, and why he made the decision that he did.

Not some adolescent fantasy inspired by watching too many fast and furious movies.

Anybody for whom that might be true, I'd disown if they even tried to call themselves corner-carvers. Track driving and reckless hooning have little in common with one another. I sure as hell wouldn't want to share track time with the kind of fan who thinks the F&F brand of hooning = race car driving.


Norm

 

[Grintch]

Not at all. The Camaro MAGAZINE results are the branding and naming. Camaro is slightly better at some things that very few people use the car for, so it gets some magazine wins.

The Mustang gets the sales wins which are the true wins because overall it's the better car.

And a Camry smokes them both in sales, so the Camry must be the better car, right?

The Mustang used to have a substantial price advantage, which I think drove a lot of it's popularity. Something they seem to have "fixed" for 2018.

 

[millhouse]

I was reading today that Coupe sales in the USA were about 2.2%, with 97.8% non coupe.

I'm not sure why GM and Ford really bother making these cars. The Mustang at least has a heritage name that's known worldwide but GM Camaro, what's that all about? I've never seen one.

That the Mach 1 is due to be an electric SUV says it all. The Coupe Camaro will go first then the Coupe Mustang. I give them 10 years.

Ford makes on average 8.6% profit per vehicle sold.

http://www.dw.com/en/big-carmakers-big-profits/a-19480709

If we take into account trucks and SUVs typically have a higher profit margin, let's round down to a 5% margin on the mustang.

If the average mustang sells for $28k, that is a profit of $1333 per vehicle. Multiply that by 100,000 vehicles and your're at $133 million and change profit. While that is quite small compared to the $9 billion or so profit Ford has every year, it all adds up. It's enough to justify paying the workers and engineers and countless supplier jobs that support it to buy mustangs as well as other higher profit vehicles.

 

[Regs]

That's wrong in many ways. Performance vehicles have a much higher profit margin and are growing in demand even with strong government regulations. They would not be investing a hybrid mustang for 2020 if there was no margins or opportunity for growth. Though no percentages were explicitly given, the 2017 Ford guidance for investors mentions performance vehicles as a "profit pillar" that they plan to fortify.

There is also the intangibles that are not included on the income statement like innovation achievements, testing beds for engineers, and the halo effect from the performance crown.

 

[drabon74]

My 15 has headers, Lund e85 tune, mpss/ forged wheels, bc coilovers. How would it fare against the 18 pp1? It started life as a base suspension non pp, only after throwing a lot of parts at it did I get it to handle properly. Now she hooks like mad in the corners.

 

[Ohthatguy]

Ford fixing that 6cm tire width difference would close a lot of the gaps here.

 

[TomcatDriver]

Ford makes on average 8.6% profit per vehicle sold.

http://www.dw.com/en/big-carmakers-big-profits/a-19480709

If we take into account trucks and SUVs typically have a higher profit margin, let's round down to a 5% margin on the mustang.

If the average mustang sells for $28k, that is a profit of $1333 per vehicle. Multiply that by 100,000 vehicles and your're at $133 million and change profit. While that is quite small compared to the $9 billion or so profit Ford has every year, it all adds up. It's enough to justify paying the workers and engineers and countless supplier jobs that support it to buy mustangs as well as other higher profit vehicles.

I would be interested to see how they do that math. I suspect they are also amortizing NRE and fixed costs across the production cycle. I would expect that actual per unit profit to be much higher counting marginal expenses only.

 

[millhouse]

That's wrong in many ways. Performance vehicles have a much higher profit margin and are growing in demand even with strong government regulations. They would not be investing a hybrid mustang for 2020 if there was no margins or opportunity for growth. Though no percentages were explicitly given, the 2017 Ford guidance for investors mentions performance vehicles as a "profit pillar" that they plan to fortify.

There is also the intangibles that are not included on the income statement like innovation achievements, testing beds for engineers, and the halo effect from the performance crown.

“There has been no greater profit machine in the history of industry than the Ford F-Series.”

"Not long ago we found that Ford makes nearly $13,000 in profit on every F-Series pickup that it sells."

https://carbuzz.com/news/most-profitable-cars-of-all-time-the-ford-f-150

 

[bootlegger]

so what about the edmunds test, similar car in price, the mustang had a tire upgrade as the a10 and the camaro still edged it out, everyone was blaming tires and saying its not fair cause the ss come with magniride, you don't think that's an excuse. so if the pp2 beats the 1le and i say if the 1le had cup2s its win you wouldn't call that an excuse cause i would. bottom line if you want comfort that you can do spirited backroad driving the mustang 100%is the car, if you want best performance for dollar the camaro is your car

The Edmunds comparison was a non PP1 car on Pirellis and what looked like the black package wheels. The reason it was similar price, was due to the premium and 401A. Once again, not even close to an even comparison with the 1SS as far as performance goes. Track people aren't cross shopping with luxury items.

Sponsored