Post by
MinisterofDOOM »
https://forums.nicoclub.com/ministerofdoom-u16506.html
Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:21 am
The Camaro has always been better looking than the Mustang as far as I am concerned. There are only a few Mustangs that I didn't find dreadfully ugly, in fact. Anything from 1971 until 2004 has been vomitously ugly--not to mention gutless with poor handling and a bad ride. I don't think GM will have much trouble keeping on top of that. Besides, a vast majority of people actually consider the 2005 Mustang (one of the best looking, I think) to be incredibly ugly. Read letter submissions to car mags and Ford message boards. Most people hate it.
The GTO is a pontiac, and its a GTO. There is a reason it looks like it does. Same reason the original looked "mundane" in its day. The Pontiac Tempest was no special car. The Pontiac GTO was just a fast Tempest. Aside from that, who cares if it looks "mundane." Its far from ugly, and it'll whip the pants of most any other car in its price rance. Not only does it produce 400 hp but its also a good all around car. Can't beat that, even if it looked like a Mustang II. Anyone who whines about the current GTO doesn't understand the original. Go do some research. There's a lot in common between them. And even that ugly mundane pontiac will destroy the Mustang in nearly every way possible. Car and Driver just did a comparison of the Mustang and GTO. THe ONLY departments Mustang was ahead in were 70 mph cruising speed and gas milage. I don't think that matters much in sports cars, do you? Oh, and it's cheaper. CHEAP being the key word. The Mustang did win the comparison, but looking at the scores, I still can't figure out how. The GTO's collumn is nearly all red "best in test" numbers. The Mustang's is nearly all black.
I feel sorry for anyone who buys a Mustang because it "looks better" than the Camaro if the Camaro ends up making more power, handling better, and driving better. That's their own loss. I'm fairly sure the Camaro will do all of those.
Think about it. You're GM. You see this popular new sports car, but you notice people griping about a couple of things particularly. What do you do? You make a car in the same class that has everything the popular car does, without the issues. If they don't they're fools.
We're going to be back to the old Mustang versus Camaro rivalry, and if it were the sixties still, I'd say they both win. But the Mustang has proven itself to be an underpowered, poorly built, cheap econo-car with an optional V8 for the last 32 years. The Camaro is a sports car with packages from gutless to Corvette-class. The Mustang is most definitely in trouble.
Wow...that degraded into a Mustang-bashing post. Ooops.
My basic point is that I think that it won't be hard for GM to top the Mustang with the new Camaro, at least initially, since they have a very good example of what does and does not work: the Mustang itself. With IRS and more than 320 hp, the Mustang may suffer for a while. It'll always come back to the same back-and forth and the same overall stalemate (my personal opinion is that the Camaro has always been better--but it's little more than that).
------------------------------
As for the Mitsu thing, I hope O'Neill can save them and put them back in the shape they were in during the early-mid 90's. That's when Mitsu were at their best. The only good eclipse, the 3/S, the closest thing to a Maxima anyone has ever made (Diamante). That'd definitely earn my respect.
Modified by MinisterofDOOM at 5:56 AM 12/13/2004