Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Saleen makes new value-oriented Racecraft brand official
Officially Official: 2009 BMW 7 Series
Officially Official: 2009 Ford Focus RS
I want my FPV: Super sedans hit the desert in new TV spot
Happy Independence Day from Autoblog
Track Test: 2008 Roush 427R Trak Pak Mustang
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Porsche Cayman S
First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mazda MX-5 Miata Retractable Hard Top
In The Autoblog Garage: BMW 128i Convertible
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this thread(Page 1 of 1)
Travis @ Apr 24th 2008 2:50PM
The F-bodies weren't much competition to the Mustangs either.... at least sales-wise, anyway. There's definitely a reason why the Mustang has kept going, while the rest of the competition just faded away.
For some reason, I just can't get excited over this car. Muscle cars are (were) supposed to be attainable, and 40, 50k+ just sort of loses it for me. Anything from the $22-27k range seems affordable, and there's a ton of performance vehicles in that range. $25k for a 300hp mustang that's reasonably lightweight is one thing, $40k+ for bigger, heavier, and just more powerful really doesn't do it for me anymore. My uncle bought a Mustang right out of HS. Another member of my family bought a Camaro as a graduation from college present to herself.
It's almost as if the new crop of "muscle cars" are not targeting the same age bracket, they're targeting THE SAME PEOPLE. If you had a Camaro back in 1973 when you just graduated HS, now you're 53, have money to spare, and want to relive the glory by buying a $40k muscle car.
Any "affordable, powerful car" today is going to be a hot-hatch, or *maybe* a mustang if the budget is stretched a bit. For $24k, a Mazdaspeed3 in a 6sp is going to DESTROY the Challenger SE (in everything except maybe 0-60).
Dunno, just think that they're aiming for the wrong demographic with these cars...