Flint says slow down on Camaro, Challenger plans
To say the Chevrolet Camaro and Dodge Challenger (pictured) concepts caused a stir when unveiled at this year's North American International Auto Show in Detroit would be like saying Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt are ‘just’ another couple of pretty faces to the paparazzi (never mind the public). Comments continue to trickle in here on Autoblog, especially on the Camaro.
So why is Forbes’ Jerry Flint holding up a ‘Slow Down’ sign on bringing both cars to production? Enthusiastic fandom notwithstanding, he questions the practicality of production from the manufacturers’ side.
[Continue after the jump]
Flint points to the costs of building the vehicles, resources that DaimlerChrysler (Challenger) and, especially, General
Motors (Camaro) may need to devote more to vehicles that appeal to the average consumer. DaimlerChrysler has the
advantage here since the Challenger is based on the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Magnum/Charger frame. The company can cut or
increase production depending on demand. GM, on the other hand, would have to add the Camaro to its list of new RWD
vehicles currently in development.
Flint wonders, too, if the current market is large enough to make the investment profitable for either company. Enthusiasm does not necessarily translate to sales. (Remember the Pontiac GTO?) He guesstimates, for example, that GM would need to sell 60,000 Camaros yearly to make it viable. Ford sold 161,000 of its Mustang, arguably the most well-known muscle car, in 2005. Is that pie big enough for three vehicles?
Besides the problems inherent with larger engines, he discusses Toyota Motors and its strategy, as well. The automaker has no well-known muscle vehicle. Instead, it continues to increase the horsepower of its fleet, especially its Camry, the best-selling car in the U.S.
What do you think of Flint’s warning, hogwash or sound advice?
Flint wonders, too, if the current market is large enough to make the investment profitable for either company. Enthusiasm does not necessarily translate to sales. (Remember the Pontiac GTO?) He guesstimates, for example, that GM would need to sell 60,000 Camaros yearly to make it viable. Ford sold 161,000 of its Mustang, arguably the most well-known muscle car, in 2005. Is that pie big enough for three vehicles?
Besides the problems inherent with larger engines, he discusses Toyota Motors and its strategy, as well. The automaker has no well-known muscle vehicle. Instead, it continues to increase the horsepower of its fleet, especially its Camry, the best-selling car in the U.S.
What do you think of Flint’s warning, hogwash or sound advice?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Carlos 1:06PM (2/08/2006)
And if GM does build a pony car, only Pontiac should get it. Unless they kill off the brand.
Reply
D-Dog 1:08PM (2/08/2006)
That's hogwash, Sir!
Reply
Aki 1:11PM (2/08/2006)
Forbes' comparisons to Toyota and the failed Holden--er, Pontiac GTO aren't exactly relevant. GTO arguably failed because the styling was bland and the car was originally from Australia. Toyota wins for its reliability and fit & finish.
Chevy is entering new territory with the muscle-car Camaro, so it definitely is a gamble. But it's also a gamble that will potentially pay off. And with the Mustang selling well, it's not an unreasonable investment. Dodge on the other hand, may already have too many "muscle" cars with the Charger, Magnum, or 300 (if that can be called muscle).
Reply
Steve S 1:12PM (2/08/2006)
Let him but the boring Toyota. Real Americans want muscle!
Mustangs are nice but not everyone's cup of tea. The Camaro looks great, will attract new buyers and bring back some old ones, and can get 30mpg. What is not to like? As long as they price it like the Mustang it will do just fine.
The Challenger would require much less cost to produce based on it's platform and powerplant so it's an easy one for DCX. I think it will sell less than a new Camaro simply due to cost, but it will still sell.
Short version: Flint's a and Old Foggy.
Reply
Mike 1:26PM (2/08/2006)
Sound-Hogwash
Flint has a valid outlook, but I drive a 2005 GTO, So ya'll know my opinion. Let Toyota be the car for the masses, and GM can be the bully on the streets. *smirk*
Reply
Voz 1:35PM (2/08/2006)
Well there is a lot of us here that want a car to proud about and if i am offending anyone by saying this a camry is not a car to proud about . Toyota's cars are are blad and boring looking it's been done to death. And we want more muscle cars back not just the mustang. So flint you don't know caca popo about it. Just sit down and shut up.
Reply
jamie 1:38PM (2/08/2006)
Why build Camaro?
Why build Challenger?
Why build Mustang?
It sells.
It's profitable.
It brings young buyers into the showroom.
Duh.
Reply
Paul 1:50PM (2/08/2006)
The GTO is a terrible comparison, that enthusiasm faded the second it was released as a grand prix with an ls1 (plus relaunching the next year with a much better engine at the same price? come on who wouldnt have waited for the ls2?)
GM must do something soon to bring back in the young market which it appears to be failing to do with the colbalt ss...
I say produce it you bastards! the naysayers dont know anything.
Reply
Tag1 1:59PM (2/08/2006)
Flint's an idiot.
Reply
Freelancer 2:05PM (2/08/2006)
Flint is right on the money. We car enthusiasts do not make up enough of a market to warrant the production of either one of these.
Someone is gonna realize that and kill them both off.
GM killed the F-body for a reason and that reason was it wasn't making any money. If you wanna blame someone blame women. They were 60% of the buying public on F-body's and ran for the SUV market cuz it makes them feel safer on the road. Until the female buyer wants to return to a 2 door pony car it's not gonna sell.
Pontiac (GM) did the Holden import cuz it could do it without great expense (DCX could do this with the Challenger). That line is dead in OZ so therefore the GTO is dead here.
Ford just happened to be in the right place at the right time again. Eventually the retro phase will pass and the mustang sales will slump, again.
Reply
steven.stlaurent@usmc.mil 2:10PM (2/08/2006)
Who is Jerry Flnt? Bahhahahaaaaaa
No one cares...
Reply
Edward 2:11PM (2/08/2006)
There's an obvious link between the Camaro concept and it's past, whereas the GTO was just a badge stuck on the offspring of a BMW and Honda Accord... ;~)
Reply
SS3 2:18PM (2/08/2006)
Sometimes the decision to build one car or another defies rational examination. The Edsel was one of the most thoroughly studied, focused tested, and planned products ever and it bombed. The original Mustang was built on the gut feeling of one executive (Iaccoa) who knew it was "right".
If there ever was a "just right" product for GM it's the Camaro. Brand equity, youthful appeal AND baby-boomer appeal, it just works. The RWD platform can be used for other products (Firebird, GTO, Monte Carlo, Caprice, et al) to achieve the necessary economies of scale. Get on with it GM, I am waiting.
Reply
Ryan H 2:18PM (2/08/2006)
For goodness sake build em, especially the Challenger. Show people that what they drive can have performance and style. In my circle of automotive friends here at school, a couple already have the 05 Mustang GT, several are willing to sell their Camaros for a new one if it gets produced, and I'm looking to drop the cash on a Challenger. For so long it seemed like no one cared about style in the auto industry. We are begining to finally see a change. I'm tired of egg-shaped cars that all look alike (ahem Toyota Camry, Corolla, Avalon, Honda Civic, Accord) Bring back the muscle and help my generation get some clue about distinguishing cars.
Reply
Michael Karesh 2:45PM (2/08/2006)
If they can be profitable at 60,000, then they should do it. If they need twice that, it's not going to work out. 90,000? Maybe. The segment here is 300,000 at best, and probably closer to 225,000.
Reply
Dm 2:49PM (2/08/2006)
The time is ripe to build the muscle cars now before gas gets to out of control. Remember, that is what killed the muscle car era of the 70's. I have been on the boards for the Challenger and there is quite a buzz. If any of the cars make it to market, it will be the Dodge. As for the Camaro, I think that is just a pipe dream.
It would take GM to long and at to great of an expense to bring it to market. By then, we will all be riding in our muscle cars with no need to switch.
Dodge, there is a market, you can build these without to much expense, but don't wait to long. If you do, people are going to be lining up for the Mustang 500's (cobra) and will forget all about Dodge's plan. If they were smart, they would at least annouce their intent soon!
As for the GTO, I am a current Pontiac owner and when I first heard the news it was coming back, I really wanted to like it. But the bland styling, hard to access rear seat, no trunk space was all to much to overlook.
Now the Challenger, heck I would take one of these over a Z06 any day!
Reply
Jim 2:51PM (2/08/2006)
Flint sounds like a former "Bean Counter", (the same people that got Detroit in trouble in the first place) turned so called journalist. Not worth listening to.
Reply
MikeW 3:00PM (2/08/2006)
You get 30mpg in a camaro if you drive 60mph.
These people running the auto assemblers do not understand, DO NOT RAISE THE TOP, raise the bottom.
How about a 6 speed manual with the 2.4 in the cobalt, or 6 speed automatic.
Reply
PJ 3:15PM (2/08/2006)
Flint's right, of course, that GM needs to be building competitive mass-market cars, not just great "halo" cars. Even if the Camaro sells well, it's not going to equal half the sales volume of the Impala--coupes, as a segment, have never sold as many units as sedans or trucks.
But Flint's missing an important point when he compares GM to Toyota. Even if Chevy started building world-class Malibus and Impalas today, I don't think many Camry/Accord owners would even think to visit a Chevy showroom and check them out. Chevy needs a highly visible, desirable car like the Camaro to establish its brand's personality and get back onto mainstream buyers' radar screens.
Besides, if you build a car that gives your company personality--a muscular, "all-American" one, in this case--then you don't need to build better Toyotas than Toyota does. We're seeing this with DCX's Magnum, 300, and Charger. None of them is as practical or user-friendly as a Camry, but because they have a distinctive look, feel, and American "character," they're finding lots of buyers regardless.
Oh, and GM, here's another good reason to build the Camaro: I WANT ONE.
Reply
Gardiner Westbound 3:29PM (2/08/2006)
GM will come to the party very late, as usual. Niche automobiles have a short shelf life, and their market is limited. Recent examples include the New Beetle, PT Cruiser, Thunderbird and the Ford GT. By the time the Camaro gets to market the Mustang and possibly the Challenger will have eaten GM's lunch.
Reply