[TheRealJA105]

Originally Posted by oldman

What really gets on my nerves is the Ford's pretend MSRP, IMO if you can't buy it for "MSRP" EVER... then that is not the price of the vehicle. PERIOD. One would think hey the GT500 base ain't that bad... and really it ain't that bad of a price, but in reality we know the you can have a ZL1, a truck and trailer too for the true out the door price of a base, and carbon stuff, heck you can make that a nice diesel truck. Sorry but Ford has treated me and others as second class citizens. Can't talk to you unless you are willing to get rapped. Well no thanks GM will take my money and give me a huge discount off MSRP and GM credit union finance is super good too...

So agree on the adms, but everyone just argues that you can only compare off msrp. My wallet doesn't compare off msrp tho!

Camaro for the win again without even posting its biggest strength of the laptimes.

If Blaq unblocks me he might find this quote interesting as it's 100% what I've been saying. "With a talented 'shoe in control, the Camaro is quickest to 60 mph, a feat it manages in 3.4 seconds. At 11.5 seconds in the quarter-mile, it's only a tenth off the much more powerful GT500 because one had traction and one did not."
Also they finally called out the garbage launch control on the Camaro and Redeye, and reconfirmed the GT500 has good LC minus the delay.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

So agree on the adms, but everyone just argues that you can only compare off msrp. My wallet doesn't compare off msrp tho!

Camaro for the win again without even posting its biggest strength of the laptimes.

If Blaq unblocks me he might find this quote interesting as it's 100% what I've been saying. "With a talented 'shoe in control, the Camaro is quickest to 60 mph, a feat it manages in 3.4 seconds. At 11.5 seconds in the quarter-mile, it's only a tenth off the much more powerful GT500 because one had traction and one did not."
Also they finally called out the garbage launch control on the Camaro and Redeye, and reconfirmed the GT500 has good LC minus the delay.

I stand on both sides of this argument, because I think there are two things we sorta talk about at the same time. When comparing what manufacturers offer, I think it is only fair to compare at MSRP since what happens after that no manufacturer can directly control. Even doing this looks real bad for the GT500, as we have seen you get little for that $18,000 difference.

When talking about what actually matter, not solely about what Ford and GM offer, but talking what I can actually buy one for, which one I WOULD BUY, then the only real number that matters is price paid.

Even on M6G, some Mustang guys are saying, IF the price were the same I would take the GT500 for sure. A nice way of saying they would pick the Camaro.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

So agree on the adms, but everyone just argues that you can only compare off msrp. My wallet doesn't compare off msrp tho!

Camaro for the win again without even posting its biggest strength of the laptimes.

If Blaq unblocks me he might find this quote interesting as it's 100% what I've been saying. "With a talented 'shoe in control, the Camaro is quickest to 60 mph, a feat it manages in 3.4 seconds. At 11.5 seconds in the quarter-mile, it's only a tenth off the much more powerful GT500 because one had traction and one did not."
Also they finally called out the garbage launch control on the Camaro and Redeye, and reconfirmed the GT500 has good LC minus the delay.

Where did that quote come from? The behind the scenes edmunds video?

I think you and I have been saying the gt500 LC seems pretty good, the camaro and hellcats sucks.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Where did that quote come from? The behind the scenes edmunds video?

I think you and I have been saying the gt500 LC seems pretty good, the camaro and hellcats sucks.

The quote came from here: https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...-car-showdown/

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by hotlap

The opening statement in the Track Preparation guide tells you everything you need to know about how your Camaro was designed and tested.

A sanctioned racing event would void the warranty but they straight out say it will handle it.
This car is so confident that its a joy to drive. The best that this level of money can buy.

Ford cuts corners and every car comes with some sort of excuse or *. GM isn't perfect but Chevy Performance gives 100%

I wonder if, when Pontiac went under, they gave those guys positions in performance sections within GM. Because Pontiac was always GM's performance Make. I mean, the other Makes had performance. But Pontiac's bread and butter seemed to be more towards performance than the others. Whatever the Camaros did, the Firebirds and Trans Ams seemed to do just a little better. I remember the 4th Gen Trans Ams always outran the Z28s and Z28 SS. And the Firehawk version was even faster. And the WS6 package. It would have been a shame to let all that talent go to waste. Maybe they ended up in performance development or something.

Disclaimer: It's just a hunch and a topic starter/enhancer shaffe...

[wnta1ss]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

So agree on the adms, but everyone just argues that you can only compare off msrp. My wallet doesn't compare off msrp tho!

Agree with you, the ones who argue that you can only compare off msrp are lying. When you know that real-world, a Camaro ZL1/1LE buyer could probably also buy a Camaro SS for daily driving (to save the ZLE for weekends) for what he'd actually pay to get a GT500 CFTP, then the honest price of the Ford has to be considered pretty obscene in comparison to the Chevy.

[whiteboyblues2001]

For the most part, MSRP is a good comparison metric becasue most cars are bought a bit under MSRP. And if you are a bit patient, you can wait for an incentive to pop up, etc. So comparing a few cars at MSRP makes sense.

But when ADMs can be as high as $20k, ADM's must be taken into consideration. A few grand incentive vs. a few grand ADM may not be a swaying factor if you are buying for passion or performance. But the high level and duration of ADMs on Shelby cars have to be in the mix for any honest comparison. If the ADMs were small and dissapeared within 6 months, then I wouldn't bother.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by wnta1ss

Agree with you, the ones who argue that you can only compare off msrp are lying. When you know that real-world, a Camaro ZL1/1LE buyer could probably also buy a Camaro SS for daily driving (to save the ZLE for weekends) for what he'd actually pay to get a GT500 CFTP, then the honest price of the Ford has to be considered pretty obscene in comparison to the Chevy.

Not all comparisons are made with the intent to purchase either car, so I am not sure what you mean by your claim I am lying in my post above. Can you explain further?

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

The quote came from here: https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...-car-showdown/

Nice, hadn't even seen that article yet. Any lap times from Willow Springs yet? I only saw the usual metrics, or did I miss something?

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I wonder if, when Pontiac went under, they gave those guys positions in performance sections within GM. Because Pontiac was always GM's performance Make. I mean, the other Makes had performance. But Pontiac's bread and butter seemed to be more towards performance than the others. Whatever the Camaros did, the Firebirds and Trans Ams seemed to do just a little better. I remember the 4th Gen Trans Ams always outran the Z28s and Z28 SS. And the Firehawk version was even faster. And the WS6 package. It would have been a shame to let all that talent go to waste. Maybe they ended up in performance development or something.

Disclaimer: It's just a hunch and a topic starter/enhancer shaffe...

bahahahaha I got a good chuckle out of that.

It would make sense that those guys got scooped up into other areas of GM.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Nice, hadn't even seen that article yet. Any lap times from Willow Springs yet? I only saw the usual metrics, or did I miss something?

I wouldn't be shocked if they fluff it out to three articles. I saw one article yesterday from C&D that was just talking about these 3 cars in the 1/4. then there was the test that had some road and some track talk. I wouldn't be shocked to see a third article

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Not all comparisons are made with the intent to purchase either car, so I am not sure what you mean by your claim I am lying in my post above. Can you explain further?

That is why I think in this setting of just debating about them and comparing them MSRP to MSRP is the best route. It eliminates outside variables. you paying cash, financing, lease, what's your sales tax rate, do you have to pay tax at time of purchase or not till you register it etc etc. All of that stuff can be different from buyer to buyer. MSRP is MSRP


Obviously if/when you are going to purchase then yes by all means you have to consider real world OTD costs.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by shaffe

That is why I think in this setting of just debating about them and comparing them MSRP to MSRP is the best route. It eliminates outside variables. you paying cash, financing, lease, what's your sales tax rate, do you have to pay tax at time of purchase or not till you register it etc etc. All of that stuff can be different from buyer to buyer. MSRP is MSRP


Obviously if/when you are going to purchase then yes by all means you have to consider real world OTD costs.

Exactly my thinking.

Some like to compare competing cars without the intent of buying, only to compare what two competing manufacturers offer to the market in a given segment. In this sort of comparison, it is accurate to say that to compete with the $74K ZLE, Ford charges you $94K.

If I want to go buy either of these cars, the comparison is completely different as MSRP is just a '...Suggested Retail Price" and we all know a ZLE can be had for less than MSRP and a CFTP for all intents and purposes will cost you more than MSRP.

MSRP is irrelevant in the real world outside of being a starting point for negotiations. If you pay more you're a sucker, and if you pay less you did well in negotiating a good price.

I don't know, maybe I am crazy, but I see no lies.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by shaffe

That is why I think in this setting of just debating about them and comparing them MSRP to MSRP is the best route. It eliminates outside variables. you paying cash, financing, lease, what's your sales tax rate, do you have to pay tax at time of purchase or not till you register it etc etc. All of that stuff can be different from buyer to buyer. MSRP is MSRP

BUT, all of those things wil be EXACTLY THE SAME for any given buyer. It's not like an individual would pay one tax rate for car A and a different tax rate for car B. Each person would have ONE and only ONE value for all those values you quoted above.

So for any given individual, those are pretty fixed costs (or fixed rates in the case of taxes).

AND, NONE of those factors were ever included in the discussion. It's not like anyong is saying John paid this and Fred paid that, when John and Fred live in different states, and John only paid more because his tax rate was higher...

AND AND, not only that, if you have a fix tax rate of 5% or something, you will pay EVEN MORE for a more expensive car that includes ADMs. It's not like you pay taxes on the MSRP, you pay taxes on the SALES PRICE. 5% on $20k ADM is another $1000 on top! And, if you get the car under MSRP, you pay even less in taxes too. So, it is completely unrealistic to NOT include ADMs when they are so high.

Sure, ADMs of a few grand or ADMs that dissapear in a few months can be ignored, but anything over $5k must be brought into the equation, especially if they last long. Otherwise you are nowhere near the real price that folks will actually pay.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Exactly my thinking.

Some like to compare competing cars without the intent of buying, only to compare what two competing manufacturers offer to the market in a given segment. In this sort of comparison, it is accurate to say that to compete with the $74K ZLE, Ford charges you $94K.

If I want to go buy either of these cars, the comparison is completely different as MSRP is just a '...Suggested Retail Price" and we all know a ZLE can be had for less than MSRP and a CFTP for all intents and purposes will cost you more than MSRP.

MSRP is irrelevant in the real world outside of being a starting point for negotiations. If you pay more you're a sucker, and if you pay less you did well in negotiating a good price.

I don't know, maybe I am crazy, but I see no lies.

Nope not crazy lol

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by shaffe

bahahahaha I got a good chuckle out of that.

It would make sense that those guys got scooped up into other areas of GM.



I wouldn't be shocked if they fluff it out to three articles. I saw one article yesterday from C&D that was just talking about these 3 cars in the 1/4. then there was the test that had some road and some track talk. I wouldn't be shocked to see a third article



That is why I think in this setting of just debating about them and comparing them MSRP to MSRP is the best route. It eliminates outside variables. you paying cash, financing, lease, what's your sales tax rate, do you have to pay tax at time of purchase or not till you register it etc etc. All of that stuff can be different from buyer to buyer. MSRP is MSRP


Obviously if/when you are going to purchase then yes by all means you have to consider real world OTD costs.

Yea you're probably right on them milking the comparo for everything its worth, really seems to be hot and popular with all the reviewers that have done it.

I think msrp to msrp should be listed for sure in the stats, as it will remian constant even when adm's fizzle out, but the actual street value prices at the time of the review should be mentioned and noted in the written parts of the reviews. Also financing, paying cash, taxes and what not wouldn't really have any impact on one car being way more expensive in real world prices.