[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by EE7

I'm confused as to how you think it looks like a four door sedan. It is leaner and way more streamlined than the outgoing 5th gen and smaller in every dimension. The only one of these cars that has anything that remotely resembles a sedan is the fusion-esque nose on the Mustang.

Really, the nose? I tend to focus on design lines rather than "family" traits.

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by SUMMIT WHITE SS

See, I never really liked the 5th gen, and I owned one. It just looked too much like a 11/10 scale '69 Camaro to me, and not in a good way. (no offense to current 5th gen owners LOL.) The changes on the 6th gen are IMO just right, the same basic, classic '69 Camaro shape, yet made smaller, and more aggressive looking. To the point where they will have my business again.

The new Mustang is nice, I won't deny that. But I have two main issues with it. One, the front looks just like my daily driver (a new Ford Fusion), which I obviously think is a good looking car, and I get brand identity, but it's just too close. Two, the fit and finish on the new Mustangs is terrible, and it's very, very common. The hood to fender alinement is bad, and really can't be fixed without lots of work, the rear windows are commonly installed out of whack, and is a royal pain to fix, the bumpers side tabs are too weak and can crease the bumpers, etc, etc. It's all over the forums, and no better for the '16s. I have personally looked at over a dozen close up, and the fit and finish is very disappointing. The fit and finish on my '11 GT is spot on...not sure what happened.

Funny I liked the C5 Camaro, specifically because it was the least retro of the three; sure it was inspired by the '69 Camaro but in my mind it was the most original and cleanly rendered of the three. Plus when it was amongst traffic it stood out with almost a concept car quality.

And I agree with you on fit and finish issues with the Mustang. It's a shame that the plant can't meet the tolerances the design requires. Ford needs to address this asap. And you got luck on your '11, as my 12 came from the factory with fender bolts not torqued down.

[KMPrenger]

In person, the new Mustang looks low and wide, and has a nice profile, but in pictures this trait wasn't as pronounced.

Everyone that has seen the 6th gen in person is saying they have liked it better in person as well (well...maybe saying "everyone" is a stretch lol, but in general). So for that reason I look forward to seeing it in the flesh.

[Fenderaddict2]

OK, for those I've offended. I never said the C6 Camaro was ugly.

It's (to me) just over designed, a trait far too many cars share today. It's like when my designers come to me all excited about how how many hours they've put into a design, and I tell them to go back and put in less.

The new Corvette shares the same problem. GM is so excited that all the aero is functionally that they've highlighted it in contrasting colour. Less is more...if much of that was rendered in the same colour as the car, it would be far more attractive.

Back to the new Camaro, I personally don't think it will age as well as the C5, which was a fresh take on history rendered brilliantly by Lee.

Look at how the brilliant '82 Camaro was ruined by the 93 and later models. Which designs look timeless designs today, and which look very much from the era?

Hey, if you like it, great. Some like blondes, some like brunettes, and some like redheads. Differing opinions make the world an interesting place.

[90503]

The Camaro IMO is now a whole new, different, and better pony car.

I have an '11 and you bet I liked the retro styling cues, the 69ish vibe, etc....But that ship has sailed. It was long gone with the re-fresh, but a lot of us were in denial and hoping for more retro-nods, even 2ndGen cues for this 6thGen...but it was not to be.

And that is a good thing. Looking at my '11 vs. the '16 and it just doesn't look 5 years old, more like 15-20years old. The 6thGen is closer to the Corvettes now than it is to any of it's previous generations. I think it's great. The Camaro seems like it has broken away from the 1stGen (which IMO put it on the map and made the Camaro comeback a success). All I'm saying is the retro thing is played out and had it's day in the sun. Time for new technology, styling, marketing, power plants, etc., etc., to carry the Camaro into the future.

[mt3130]

I know some will think this flies in the face of what I said a few posts above, but I think the Mustang is a very good looking car in person.

I test drove one, and was very underwhelmed with the power at lower rpm. It seemed like I really had to get the motor revved up to get some power out of it. I always thought people drove Mustangs like this because they were obnoxious, but it turns out that's how you have to drive it if you want to have any fun.

That left me deciding between the Camaro and Challenger. The Challenger is a blast to drive, and I actually like the space that it offers, but the reliability of FCA scares the hell out of me. People are having issues with rust, radiators, ticking engines, fit and trim, timing chains, electronics, and on and on.

My original budget was $40k, so I will likely hold out until the end of model year for deals to get as close to that number as possible for a 2SS with MRC, NPP, and A8.

[RagingHawk]

Originally Posted by mt3130

I know some will think this flies in the face of what I said a few posts above, but I think the Mustang is a very good looking car in person.

I test drove one, and was very underwhelmed with the power at lower rpm. It seemed like I really had to get the motor revved up to get some power out of it. I always thought people drove Mustangs like this because they were obnoxious, but it turns out that's how you have to drive it if you want to have any fun.

That left me deciding between the Camaro and Challenger. The Challenger is a blast to drive, and I actually like the space that it offers, but the reliability of FCA scares the hell out of me. People are having issues with rust, radiators, ticking engines, fit and trim, timing chains, electronics, and on and on.

My original budget was $40k, so I will likely hold out until the end of model year for deals to get as close to that number as possible for a 2SS with MRC, NPP, and A8.

How does the mustang ride? Ive driven a charger R/T the suspension absorbs bumps really well. It was really comfortable diriving on Michigan roads. You didn't get much feedback though, it's like the frame is floating on the road, that's how you feel. The Camaro on other hand is very stiff, you feel everything and I wish we had better roads most of the time I have to slow down to avoid bad bumps. Part of my frame cracked , they are two small cracks but nevertheless. Is the mustang that stiff too?

[mt3130]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

How does the mustang ride? Ive driven a charger R/T the suspension absorbs bumps really well. It was really comfortable diriving on Michigan roads. You didn't get much feedback though, it's like the frame is floating on the road, that's how you feel. The Camaro on other hand is very stiff, you feel everything and I wish we had better roads most of the time I have to slow down to avoid bad bumps. Part of my frame cracked , they are two small cracks but nevertheless. Is the mustang that stiff too?

The one I drove did not have the performance pack, and I thought that comments about the car being a cruiser were accurate. The suspension on the GT was not as firm as the stock suspension on my Kia Optima lol (I have the SX, so it has the firmer "sport" suspension, but it's still funny to me).

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2

I'm dying to drive the 6th gen Camaro. It certainly sounds like a benchmark car to reset my driving expectations against. I remember my first drive in a 3rd Gen IROC Camaro, that car was a revelation and the first time an American car made since the 60's exceeded my expectations. Plus compared to anything else sold at the time, it looked like a supercar. Shame the car did not evolve over its production run, but that was typical of North American cars at the time; build a great car then let it whither on the vine. That car might be why I'm disappointed in the new car actually, I guess I want the car to visually match the advances they've made in dynamics.

Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2

Never said it needed to look different, just evolve. The new Mustang looks lower, sleeker wider, whereas to my eyes (and as a potential buyer, that's all that matters), the new Camaro looks busy, and almost has an appearance of a 4 door sedan rendered as a coupe. I keep reading it's an evolution of the previous car but to me it looks the opposite. The previous car was clean, uncluttered, down to business looking. The only superfluous design element was the "gills" behind the doors. Take away the great colour options and it's not as sexy. It's like an overdone case of plastic surgery. Generally the Camaro has been a better looking car than the compatible Mustang. Just not this time. That's why, perhaps instead of trying to steel elements from the C5, maybe they would have been better off just reimagining the Camaro completely for the new platform. Frankly I'm not sure what disappointed me more, the weight gain of the Mustang or the looks of the Camaro. In either case, as they both sit right now, neither GM or Ford will be getting my money. I look forward to the refreshes.

Maybe I was confused by your statement I bolded thinking that you wanted the Camaro to look completely different from the 5th gen. I said and so did GM the new Camaro evolved from the 5th gen. Thats what I also said about the Mustang, it evolved from earlier styling and from other Ford models. It's just the Camaro took on attributes from the 5th gen but also from the C7 Corvette and the Mustang took on attributes from the earler Mustangs but also took on some Fusion attributes.

[Fenderaddict2]

I always hated the retro tag. In some cases it was an attempt from designers to reset the lineage and provide for future continuum much like Porsche or Aston enjoy. Well except for the Challenger, that's pure retro ;-)

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by 90503

The Camaro IMO is now a whole new, different, and better pony car.

I have an '11 and you bet I liked the retro styling cues, the 69ish vibe, etc....But that ship has sailed. It was long gone with the re-fresh, but a lot of us were in denial and hoping for more retro-nods, even 2ndGen cues for this 6thGen...but it was not to be.

And that is a good thing. Looking at my '11 vs. the '16 and it just doesn't look 5 years old, more like 15-20years old. The 6thGen is closer to the Corvettes now than it is to any of it's previous generations. I think it's great. The Camaro seems like it has broken away from the 1stGen (which IMO put it on the map and made the Camaro comeback a success). All I'm saying is the retro thing is played out and had it's day in the sun. Time for new technology, styling, marketing, power plants, etc., etc., to carry the Camaro into the future.

I always hated the retro tag. In some cases it was an attempt from designers to reset the lineage and provide for future continuum much like Porsche or Aston enjoy. Well except for the Challenger, that's pure retro ;-)

[RagingHawk]

Originally Posted by mt3130

The one I drove did not have the performance pack, and I thought that comments about the car being a cruiser were accurate. The suspension on the GT was not as firm as the stock suspension on my Kia Optima lol (I have the SX, so it has the firmer "sport" suspension, but it's still funny to me).

That's interesting, lol, guess that would make it a better touring car. Which is a good thing if you live in Michigan.

[doc7000]

I finally got to see and sit in the 2016 Camaro today.....

For me the interior was a huge leap forward, it had a ton more space up front for the driver and passenger. Compared to the 5th generation it is a cathedral, yes it has a low roof line however to a degree that should be expected in this class of vehicle. It uses more soft touch materials where you are likely to interact with the car, in other ares of the interior it has hard plastics (was a 2SS model). Forward visibility has certainly been improved to a great deal, I didn't check rearward visibility (personal reasons it doesn't matter to me).

I think interior wise they pretty much hit it right out of the park, I think it has the interior that this car should have (at least in 2SS trim). The car also looks much cleaner in person then it does in many photos where it can look a bit busy.

Really though you can't go wrong between buying a 2016 Mustang or a 2016 Camaro.

[Rockhead]

Adam Carrola was as funny as a box Kleenex .