Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Consequences of a new Pony Car war
The upcoming (we hope) war of pony cars could be pretty exciting, and should give us lots to talk about.
I'll start with a thought that I had about the Camaro, that I haven't seen anywhere else in automotive websites or blogs. Maybe being first to say it out loud means I'm missing something, like a few screws. But anyway, I'll start by making myself real popular:
The Chevy Camaro will kill Pontiac and is therefore a BAD IDEA.
I like the car, but it can't come into existence as the Camaro. It'll kill Pontiac!
GM's "sporty" brand should be built around a car like the Camaro. The brand's volume seller, its heart and soul, should be a pony car. I'll refer to it as the Firebird in this post, but I don't care what it's called.
That would give Pontiac meaning. But it would only be practical if GM had no other pony car for sale. The Camaro would probably kill the Firebird in sales just by virtue of being a Chevy, rendering the Firebird ineffective as a volume seller. Pontiac would have to base its sales on something more mundane, like a G5 or G6 - something you also buy at any other GM brand.
More importantly, the Camaro's existence would render Pontiac more pointless than ever. Between Chevy and Saturn, you can find everything that Pontiac has - and usually better. Chevy has a faster FWD sport compact, a faster V8 sedan, a faster V8 sports car, faster SUVs, and I bet the fastest version of the Camaro will be faster than the fastest Firebird.
Is this making any sense? Can Pontiac survive without being GM's pony car banner bearer? Can't Chevrolet survive just fine without the Camaro? It's nice to see GM get emotional about car development after decades, but I think they've lost sight of the big picture...
I'll start with a thought that I had about the Camaro, that I haven't seen anywhere else in automotive websites or blogs. Maybe being first to say it out loud means I'm missing something, like a few screws. But anyway, I'll start by making myself real popular:
The Chevy Camaro will kill Pontiac and is therefore a BAD IDEA.
I like the car, but it can't come into existence as the Camaro. It'll kill Pontiac!
GM's "sporty" brand should be built around a car like the Camaro. The brand's volume seller, its heart and soul, should be a pony car. I'll refer to it as the Firebird in this post, but I don't care what it's called.
That would give Pontiac meaning. But it would only be practical if GM had no other pony car for sale. The Camaro would probably kill the Firebird in sales just by virtue of being a Chevy, rendering the Firebird ineffective as a volume seller. Pontiac would have to base its sales on something more mundane, like a G5 or G6 - something you also buy at any other GM brand.
More importantly, the Camaro's existence would render Pontiac more pointless than ever. Between Chevy and Saturn, you can find everything that Pontiac has - and usually better. Chevy has a faster FWD sport compact, a faster V8 sedan, a faster V8 sports car, faster SUVs, and I bet the fastest version of the Camaro will be faster than the fastest Firebird.
Is this making any sense? Can Pontiac survive without being GM's pony car banner bearer? Can't Chevrolet survive just fine without the Camaro? It's nice to see GM get emotional about car development after decades, but I think they've lost sight of the big picture...
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Pontiac is already on life support, and probably needs to die. The brand has no value -- its nameplates are largely relegated to the rental car circuit, and you could sell the Solstice with any other badge and do just as well with it. (If anything, if the goal is to preserve at least a few GM badges, rather than start over again, it would have been preferable to have branded the Solstice as a Chevy than as a Pontiac.)
I see pros and cons to the Camaro. Overall, I'd put it in the plus category, but it does have some downsides attached:
Pros:
-Profits: If done properly (and that's an "if", to be sure), it will sell in large numbers and generate a profit. If GM needs anything right now, it's having a car that is profitable.
-Positive buzz: It might create some nice PR and glow for a GM brand that isn't a truck and isn't a limited production model. If the goal is to pull people into showrooms based upon a car they find appealing (Camaro) but that lure them into buying a car that might actually need (a 4-door sedan or minivan, for example), then that alone would be reason enough to do it.
Cons:
-Might hurt the brand: GM already has a reputation of being behind the times, and building a retro pony car may just reinforce that impression. Yes, it will appeal to Big 2.5 buyers, but if it turns off potential import buyers as being a redneck throwback, then the overall result might be negative. Some care will need to be taken in how the car is marketed and styled to manage this risk.
If oil prices remain high, one key here will be to include a 6-cylinder model that is neither just a base model nor a horrendous compromise to own and drive. In a world of $4 fuel, my bet is that you won't have much demand for V-8's, which means the demand will skew to smaller motors. I have my doubts that GM would be very capable at creating a six that is sufficiently smooth, modern, economical and reliable to fit the bill.
With that said, I do wonder how concerned Pony car buyers are with fuel economy - regardless of gas prices. I also have to think there are many "wanna bes" that buy the 6 cyls and still drive 'em like they stole 'em - but they just bought the 6 cyls in order to save some money up front.
I would like to see research as to whether the Pony cars would benefit by utilizing the cylinder deactivation technology to where they could run on 4 cylinders when strain is not being applied to the engine. One option for GM could be to offer a smaller V8 with this technology as the base engine, and then offer a higher performance V8 for the enthusiast. If GM is considering throwing Camaros into fleet service (rentals) on a large scale, then I guess they would have to include a 6 cyl in the lineup.
The Mustang is successful because they sell a ton of v6 models, probably in the order of 3 to 1 or more over a GT. It has been that way since 1964, women have always loved Mustangs and have bought tons of the entry level model.
The fact is, while many will want to see nothing but HiPo v8 models, there are not enough buyers to plunk down $30k plus on a muscle car.
If Dodge brings the Challenger to market it will also make things tougher in the market place. The Mustang has a foot hold and with it's attractive price along with a convertible.
While I miss the "pony" car wars and I miss reading and seeing head to head comparisons, I just don't know if the market can support 2-3 muscle cars in relatively large numbers.
regarding the supposed pony-car war, i wonder if it will occur if recent fuel prices continue in USA.
one feature i would probably like in my 6-speed GTO is cylinder-shutdown since i use the car for mucho highway cruising where the engine is loafing. i hear the next-gen camaro will have cylinder-shutdown for the V8 models... and there's a good chance i'd trade my GTO for a next-gen camaro, unless i decide to go for a diesel. i doubt we'll be seeing any diesel pony cars
But to the immediate point, in terms of size and weight, pony car status is usually relative to what else is out there. For instance, Mustang specs have shifted up and down as the rest of the automotive market has. Look at 1965 and a 1973 together, and the difference is astounding.
The current Mustang seems quite large compared to my 2002, just as my 2002 seems quite large compared with a Fox body. But when you compare them each to the size of the average family sedans in the market at the time, they're all relatively about the same in proportions.
If I'm not mistaken, the split is about 50-50, with many of the retail six-cylinders going to women, and the majority of the retail V8's being sold to men.
To clarify my previous point, the six-cylinder variants of these cars have tended to be crude afterthoughts with coarse, anemic motors and less appealing styling, definitely screaming out "Base Model"! I would suggest that the 6-cylinder models be attractive and appealing in their own right, so that getting one isn't such an obvious compromise. Just as a BMW 325 doesn't seem to be such a horrendous compromise as compared to the 330 -- each car is desirable in its own right -- I wouldn't continue to build a second-rate 6-cylinder pony car just to make the 8-cylinder version look better.
The V8 needs to be available to maintain the image, while understanding most of the buyers won't actually buy one if the fuel costs too much. The V8 helps to maintain the allure of the nameplate, even for those who buy the less powerful version.
Could be worse...remember back in the late 80's-early 90's when the engine choices for the Fox body Mustang were either a 2.3L 4 cylinder, or the 5.0V8?
But on the "screaming 2.3 liters of Mustang fury" topic
I think it says a lot about the non-performance qualities that a good pony car should have that there is interest in even those versions...GM and Chrysler take note: it's not all about 0-60 times.
Actually, it's some of their fans that need to take note of that fact. You'd think that the ONLY things that matter were engine displacement, hp ratings, and 1/4 mile numbers. It's like they want to drive a spec book instead of a car....
So the cars are axed and the assembly line is put to use building what people really wanted to buy, not just admire... :P
I know Ford misjudged the demand for the GT and had to scramble to make more available, but I can't believe the mix is 50-50. At least not around here, I see 2-3 v6 models to every GT at a minimum.
In any case, I'd say that the six-cylinders need to be turned into bona fide versions, rather than obvious compromises, if they are to achieve high sales numbers and reach a wider audience. Remember that in a broad sense, a sporty coupe could be able to reach a fairly wide audience, and should provide at least indirect competition to a whole host of cars, i.e. Civic Coupe, GTI, Solara, etc.
(Yes, I know that these are front-drivers, not American, not direct cousins to the Camaro, etc. but there are buyers who don't necessarily see distinctions between them that are so strong that it would bar them from considering the others, assuming that they meet similar needs. If a Camaro proved to be nicely styled, well built, reliable and otherwise appealing, it should be able to pull sales from several competing nameplates, and not just from Mustang and Challenger buyers.)
And that will be key for the Camaro to survive. A solid handling base model with a respectable powertrain would be a big plus. A 3.9 or better yet 3.6 base model with auto and manual trans would be a very competent car that may win some sales from other areas.
The problem is most people who are looking at something like a Civic Si or VW GTI probably wouldn't be caught dead at a Chevy dealership.
That is probably true in many cases (although I am confident that sentiments don't run as deeply among typical buyers as they would among us on the Inside Line!) But yes, conquest is important, and no automaker can increase its market share without taking buyers from someone else, so this must be part of the plan. That's why the cars have to be that good -- it take more work to win over converts than it does to sell to your loyal fan base. Unfortunately for GM, its fan base just isn't large enough to help it go the distance.
And GM, unfortunately, has a history of overestimating demand for specialty models. Has GM even unloaded all of those Chevy SSRs yet?
When the pony car wars first started, Japanese companies attempted the make their own (notably the Celica was born for this reason) to compete. However, it just didn't work (probably because of the lack of big engines), and the Asian entries went either 1) down the sport-coupe path to what they are today: relatively small engined, FWD cars or 2) down the sports-car path (the high-end ones).
But these days, "Asian V8" is no longer a contradiction.
So does anyone think we'll be seeing a RWD Toyota "Kirin" (based say on the Camry platform) with a V8 engine option that'll give the big three a run for their money? :confuse:
You could argue that the Mazda RX-8 is a Pony car
although it isn't based on a sedan platform. :P
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Depends on what counts as a "pony car". Stuff like the nonturbo Supras, 300ZXs, and SC300s of the '90s were the Japanese equivalent of V6 Camaros and Mustangs, and the G35 has no problem hanging with V8 Mustangs (and there is the oft-rumored RWD Tiburon waiting in the wings).
Now, if a "pony car" has to have a crunky high-displacement, low output V6 or V8 in a massively-decontented live-axle rattletrap, then no. The V8 is a luxury/high-dollar engine in the rest of the world (even Australia; buying a V8 Holden is like buying a Corvette here) and they are designed for luxury/high-dollar cars. Jamming big cubes into a crapmobile is a uniquely American innovation.
keep three competing Pony cars in the market place.
My bet is that history will repeat itself and rising gas prices, insurance costs and other factors will reduce the demand so that the GM and Chrysler entries will be withdrawn and the Mustang alone will survive.
I freely admit to bias on that last point, I owned a Mustang 5-liter convertible for 12 years.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
The big difference between those cars and pony cars is price. Pony cars have to offer decent performance at a bargain price...those cars offer good peformance, but not at pony car prices.
But I take your point about V8s in the rest of the world...it's very true that they're in large part a North American specialty.
But could that be solved by my fictional Toyota Kirin having a V8 option here in the U.S., but sold in the rest of the world with a 6 cyl as the big engine (the "Kirin ActiveSport"). Kinda like how the Ford Capri was Europe's Mustang, but with a V6 instead of a V8.
An attendant question seems to be: is RWD really making a comeback, or is it just a U.S.-centric nostalgia thing?
"My bet is that history will repeat itself and rising gas prices, insurance costs and other factors will reduce the demand so that the GM and Chrysler entries will be withdrawn and the Mustang alone will survive."
I've wondered for a few years now if we're about to see a "Mustang III" appear in the not-too-distant future...little, somewhat fuel efficient, and destined to be popular at the time, but hated years later.
I would encourage those that are interested to research this one some more because Toyota is hard at work on a "pony car" of it's own to compete with the Mustang and Camaro.
As far as the Camaro is concerned it's not a matter of if they're going to build it it's a matter of when. That car, whether you like it or not, is what GM and Chevy need right now to stay afloat. Granted it's not everything they need but it's a portion, a hefty one at that, of what GM needs to keep going right now. Watch and you will read thousands of references to the new world order Camaro as the savior of GM or the one that brought GM back. That is if it can help save GM in the real world. That makes it sort of a suspense story, then, eh?
As far as it's design goes I think Chevy has come up with a winner with the Camaro, if one were just looking at the new body design. If I were in the market for a Stang or Camaro-type rig, though, I would go for another rig that we don't yet know will be built...the new world order Dodge Challenger. Now that car blows away the new Charger, IMO, and Dodge designers has given it a retro look that incorporates sleek modern lines yet retains the muscular bombardment that was the Challenger of old. I think Dodge will score large with the new Challenger and, yes, I think Dodge will build it.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
So what you're saying is that if GM can manage to get just one mass-produced, mid-end car perfect, that might be what it takes to restore confidence in the company and its abilities? Hmmm...interesting idea, and a "bold move" (with apologies to Ford...) to be sure. I'd love it if GM actually pulls it off.
Maybe even the original Fairlady Z (240Z) :confuse:
Though it wasn't advertised as a "Pony" in the American sense, the Z used the basic body formula of long hood-short deck, light weight, decent power/weight ratio. And it had a decent suspension.
But back on topic.
I don't think the Camaro is going to come. With GM's financials, SEC probe, the UAW and Delphi situation, the on again/off again of the platform and Lutz's comments on break even point (one article quoted 100K, another 130 - 150K) are there really that many shoppers out there? As stated before, many talked about the gen-4 F-body, but many bought them. And with a high break even point, that they couldn't meet with the last model, are they going to meet it with the new one?
I really don't see it happening. It would be nice, but I don't know. As long as they don't rebadge some Daewoo or something... :surprise:
I just think GM needs a sporty rig to produce that is successful on a massive scale. One that they could mass-produce, get it right from the start and sell truckloads of. No, it won't be enough to lift them out of the dumpster entirely but it's a good start.
The Pontiac Solstice is a GM car that is selling well that is sporty, new and different. From what I read they can barely keep up with demand on this car, but Pontiac isn't building them at a very fast pace, so take that one however you want.
I think the Camaro will come but Chevy is going to need to improve their small car offerings and they still need a valid body design department to compete with Camry and Accord, IMO. What lame midsize offerings from GM. The Malibu and Impala are weak vehicles.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Maybe even the original Fairlady Z (240Z)
Though it wasn't advertised as a "Pony" in the American sense, the Z used the basic body formula of long hood-short deck, light weight, decent power/weight ratio. And it had a decent suspension.
RX-7s and 240Zs are sports cars which are quite a bit different than pony cars, they're smaller, lighter and generally only have two seats. The original Mustang concept car (ca. 1962) was a tiny two-seater with a mid-engine.
link
When Ford chose to build a larger, heavier Mustang the reaction from the sports car set was disappointment if not outrage. It wasn't til the introduction of the GT-350 that the sports car crowd fully accepted the Mustang.
The short deck/long hood look was a deliberate imitation of the portions of the front engined roadsters of the era.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
American sports cars have traditionally had big engines, Japanese ones have emphasized handling, and Europe had two philosophies: lightweight roadsters (most of which have died) and luxury sports cars.
I guess Toyota or Nissan could make an American-style pony or muscle car now that they've settled in here so well, but I don't think many people would buy one. Almost all the allure of the Mustang and Camaro is in their history - if they had been invented in 2005 I don't think they'd be nearly as popular as they are.
Know the difference between a pony, sports, sporty, muscle car. My mention of the Fairlady and RX-7 was that if considering an RX-8, my take is that an -7 and the Fairlady iterations were closer to the "formula". Now a Skyliner, hmmm, that's a sticky one.
And as you know, many times the lines get blurred, especially between the pony and muscle cars - a little pet-peeve of mine.
There wasn't too much of a market for the mid-engined two-seater - remember why the T-bird went to four seats? Iacocca, Fry and the other guys really hit the nail on the head with the Mustang - very, very good market research and execution. It still cracks me up when people don't realize it was a Falcon, a gussied up one, but still a Falcon.
It's easy to fit cars under those designations...the tricky part is locating the cars that occupy points on the lines between any two points.
On the Mustang's rear seat issue, love the reason why they added them...market research of college-aged kids indicated that they wanted bucket seats in the front for a sporty feel while driving, but a rear bench to facilitate, er, other activities while parked.
Okay, so I feel really stupid for asking this, but what exactly is the difference?
Muscle car is usually a large displacement engine pushing a heavy mass, or a small block high powered in a smaller car. Original I believe was the Super 88 Olds mobile, which for its time weighed a little less, yet had more HP. They won many a race of NASCAR days-gone-bye. Ah, the days of real stock cars. The real NASCAR.
-Loren
P.S. radio and other un-nessarary items are optional on a muscle car :P
I would have loved to have been old enough to enjoy the heyday of the Trans-Am series...sigh.
The old TransAm was everything NASCAR should be and isn't. If you haven't seen Mark Donohue pounding Bridgemampton in the rain or Parnelli Jones dicing with Dan Gurney at Mont Tremblant or Lime Rock you have missed some great racing.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I was a little kid at the time, and had a father who was more interested in European sportscars than American pony cars. Though on the plus side, I have some great pics of me in his Jaguar 120 coupe.
I catch the current iteration of Trans-Am (I like Boris Said) when I can, but it's hard to get too excited about cars that can change from a Mustang to a Jaguar simply by switching the body shell...
Now this is a pony car, well sort of. More like a Italian Stallion. :P
Rocky
Rocky
Twin-screw is the only way to go on a low-revving large-displacement engine, and it also needs some bigger pipes. 2.5" just isn't enough for a forced-induction 4.6L. The money blown on the hood could have gone for a nice flywheel.
Rocky
Agree on the pointlessness of swaping the hood though. But 'cause I'm old school, I dig the hood pins...not ridiculous at all as they claim...
Looking forward to the testing...
Also, for my nephew whom is taking the Driving test in a few days, what exactly is the "Auxiliary Equipment" on a car?
BTW, they're called scissors doors.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
... anyone else have an opinion
I guess that's what they mean by consequences....
Instead of doing the smart thing and shutting down those factories overseas, thereby moving that money here, they would rather stop paying people here. What does that do? It takes the money made by those workers that could be funneled back into our economy and makes it evaporate.
So ....when sales drop because the public has no expendable income, the snake ends up eating its tail.
In desperation, the BIG THREE are trying to revive the golden era of the automobile. Unfortunately, Dodge royally missed the mark with the Charger. Four doors and a grill reminiscent of the 50s 300? Are you kidding? The Charger was a two-seater, with distinct bodylines and characteristics. Missed the point completely. Ford got it right with the most recent incarnation of the Mustang, but missed the bus when they dropped the Bronco. The Explorer had so many transmission troubles (bad case on the AOD and A4LD) that the moniker got a bad rap before they could salvage the sales. Chevrolet can't seem to KEEP a model. They're renamed the same platform so many times I'm afraid all of their vehicles have schizophrenia. A front-wheel-drive Monte Carlo and Malibu? Have you completely lost touch with what the history of these cars are and what memories they recall to your brand-loyal customers?
This is my point. When you're bleeding from an amputation, you don't get a tiny band-aid. You stop doing the easy thing and fix whats wrong the right way.
Pony car wars ain't it.