First Baldwin-Motion Camaro delivered to owner
The first Baldwin-Motion big-block 1969 Camaro to roll off the line has been delivered to its owner, David Flynn, who owns a Chevy dealership in Ohio. The #01 Camaro was a red Phase III model like the one above and cost Flynn $250,000. For that kind of money one gets a 700-horsepower, 565-cubic inch Motion big block with a five-speed, a Motion independent rear suspension, eight-piston front and three-piston rear disc brakes, rack-and-pinion steering and much more in the way of luxury accoutrements.
Only 12 Baldwin-Motion Camaros are planned to be built and two more are already under construction. Additional donor cars are being sought out to fill the rest of the muscle car's revival run.
[Source: Sports Car Market]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Paul 8:50AM (6/28/2006)
For a quater mil? Yeah... I'd do it.
Reply
HardwareGuy 9:17AM (6/28/2006)
So you can get a 1969 Camaro with independent rear supension, but a 2006 Mustang still doesn't have it?
Reply
Peter L. 9:31AM (6/28/2006)
Baldwin-Motion Camaro = $250,000
2006 Ford Mustang GT = $30,000
The price might have a reason why one car has an IRS and the other one doesnt?
Reply
Paul 10:00AM (6/28/2006)
Ummm no... tons and tons of cars have an independent rear, and many of them are priced comparatively or lower than the Mustang. For example the new camaro will have an IRS or perhaps something already on the road like the charger
IRS is neither rare nor expensive. The mustang just has a design flaw (well two, the lack of the IRS and the fact that it isnt a Camaro... j/k)
Reply
epilonious 10:15AM (6/28/2006)
From what I understand... Ford had put IRS on the Mustang but the enthusiast community was upset and preferred the live-axle because it was a "part of the mustang handling experience".
Besides, IRS' are a lot more expensive to configure and strengthen for drag racing or other serious power delivery over a comparable live-axle.
Reply
Jeff the Baptist 10:34AM (6/28/2006)
Ford since the Thunderbird and Mustang share a platform, Ford does have an IRS they could use. I've heard that a lot of enthusiasts wanted solid axle and Ford agreed. Maybe we'll see the IRS in the Cobra. Or maybe not.
Also IRS gets trickier the more power and torque you put through it. Most of the IRS RWD cars out there either cost significantly more or aren't putting the same power to ground as a V8 'stang.
Reply
LK 10:37AM (6/28/2006)
Yup, "tons and tons" of rear-wheel-drive cars out there that are $25K, have 300hp, and have IRS. If there are so many of them out there, could you list, say, 5 or 10 of them for us?
Oh, that's right - you can't, because they don't exist.
(I've actually seen new Mustang GTs selling for less than $24K including destination fees, but I used $25K just to be fair.)
Reply
gbh 10:44AM (6/28/2006)
Honestly, if you drive a new Mustang at 95% on a road course, you'll probably never know it's a live axle car. It really handles pretty darn well for a pony car.
As far as my inside Ford friends told me, it was just about catering to the lowest common denominator (i.e., the shallow end of the racing gene-pool, dragging).
Let's face it, most pony cars are not ever going to see duty on a road course. Also, the average pony buyer likes to imagine that backward tech is "tougher". (Which is occasionally true.)
Building a tough IRS would actually cost a few dollars more. Rather than engineer it and offer it as an option, the low road prevailed as it almost always does in DET. But as sales start flagging, IRS might appear as an option someday.
Reply
markwalt 10:49AM (6/28/2006)
Ford never originally put an IRS in the Mustang. It's been live axle since day one. Probably for cost reasons, to help keep the price below 30K.
As a former Ford salesman, the lack of IRS was something I had to overcome in selling them. If the "enthusiasts" demanded a live axle, I never met one.
Reply
Paul 10:49AM (6/28/2006)
Well it depends on the set-up, i personally think that not having IRS standard with a delete option for it was a mistake. Because although we in the culture like to pretend that it is a drag car, very few people are really using it for that. Put IRS on standard so that it sells better to the general public, put it as a delete option so that those that dont want it dont have to take it.
Reply
guyincognito 11:01AM (6/28/2006)
The IRS was in fact in the baseline assumptions for the 2005 Mustang. It was intended to share a platform with the Lincoln LS, Thunderbird, Jag S-type but packaging and cost issues led to a new, live axle platform.
Reply
TheChaz 11:35AM (6/28/2006)
"Put IRS on standard so that it sells better to the general public..."
Sells better to the general public? Honestly, I think that if you mention IRS to the general public, they think taxes, not unsprung weight. Most enthusiasts (myself included) would rather see independent suspension on a car, all else held equal, but Ford made the decision on a cost basis. If putting IRS on the Mustang would actually have made it sell better to the general public (enough to offset the cost of the more expensive system) you can rest assured they would have done.
Reply
C 12:00PM (6/28/2006)
The problem is that the previous gen Mustang (including the 390HP Cobra) HAD an IRS, and then it disappeared on the new model to save cost.
It's 2006-- I'm not buying a car with a live axle, but it was a wise move on Ford's part because the people buying the Stang don't care.
Reply
ricers suck 1:03PM (6/28/2006)
I agree that the shelby stang should have gotten IRS..but apparently the improvement in handling wouldn't have justified the added weight (and cost)
the live rear axle is the only suspension that can be built cheaply enough for a 17000 dollar car and that will still be able to handle 300 hp in a 25k car.
I think Ford should have offered a handling package for 5k or so that included irs.
Reply
KT 1:36PM (6/28/2006)
I thought this was a blog about the Motion Camaro?
I was a Good Guys show this weekend and every freaking car has those same "turbo thrust" style wheels. If I were paying 250K for the car it would have to have one of a kind wheels on it. Other than that and the L-82 hood (prefer the DZ hood) this is a smoking good looking car.
Reply
That One Person 5:33PM (6/28/2006)
#13 C...Only the last gen. Cobra came with IRS. The V-6 and GT models came with a solid axle...
But the Mustang is a good handling car.
Reply
PJ 5:39PM (6/28/2006)
Sorry to continue the OT...
But Ford's "we kept it live-axle for the fans" excuse seemed pretty thin. The live axle is a cost-cutting measure. But, as gbh said, it's a really well-located live axle. The Mustang still understeers too much and wiggles around some in bumpy turns, but it handles well enough for 99.9% of the people who actually buy the things. IMHO, tuning the steering for better feel would reap more subjective benefits than installing an IRS. Those who are picky about limit handling would likely spend their $25-$30K on a 350Z or RX-8 instead.
As for this Camaro, I personally don't get it. Impressive? Sure. But I doubt the owners are ever going to use the 700 HP or IRS to any benefit... at $250K, they're more likely to be trailer queens. And if I'm just looking at a '69 Camaro on a trailer, I'd rather see something that's period-correct and historically significant.
Reply
C 5:52PM (6/28/2006)
Alright, back to the Camaro: does anyone else think those rims are just too big for this car? (same problem as Foose, etc.)
#15 I agree about the style of the rims... but hey be careful what you wish for, you could end up with these http://seriouswheels.com/top-1969-Baldwin-Motion-540-Camaro-SuperCoupe.htm
I didn't realize only the Cobra had the IRS...now I'm double disappointed! Ford went to all that trouble for one special model then didn't bring it back on the even more powerful new one? Every review I read said it really set it apart from previous Stangs and F-Bodies.
Reply
Tim 6:29PM (6/28/2006)
I agree completely with PJ (#17). Whats the point of having a camaro worth so much that you will never drive it at risk of decreasing its percieved value? You can get much more pleasure from a decent camaro with a smaller v-8 than you would superficially 'impressing' people with your quarter million monster.
The mustang was created in the 60's to appease the general public with an affordable car that could be customized to one's needs. The new one continues that. If the mustang doesn't fit your needs w/ the live axle, don't buy it or whine about it. There are plenty other cars.
Reply
KT 6:29PM (6/28/2006)
I had a 99 Cobra with the IRS and 300hp. You could not eliminate the wheel hop even with the aftermarket yokes. Ford improved the later gen IRS (390hp Cobras)but it was still a problem and most ppl who wanted to drag race opt'd to replace it with a SRA. There's no way they could put an IRS in the new Shelby (that could handle the HP/TRQ) and keep the cost of the vehicle in the low $40's. Whats a Z06 cost nowadays?
The Mustang FR500 has won multiple Grand Am Cup races (those are road racing tracks) with the SRA against cars with IRS. They are selling more race ready cars than they expected.
Reply