Why did Camaro and Trans Ams sales slip, compared to the Mustang?

I agree with you that the Camaros and T/A's are more powerful than Mustangs. I am a little disappointed with GM for stopping production in 2002. But, the good news is that Chevrolet has a new F-Body in the pipeline. Have you seen the new Camaros? I am not exactly sure, but I believe that they are going to start being manufactured in late 2008. I am considering buying one...although I am fond of the older Camaros too. I believe that the new Camaro is going to have a 400HP aluminum engine...one similar to the LS1 and LS2 engines. Actually, I don't know if the 'newer' ones are called LS2, but I think so. Sorry that I don't have all my facts correct. I love the Camaros. I also love the Trans Ams, too. I don't think that the fact that sales were supposedly poor has anything to do with the fact that the Camaros and T/A's are more powerful. I think that there are multiple reasons for the fall of production numbers and sales. A few years ago, SUV's starting getting extremely trendy. Personally, I hate SUV's. But since SUV's were some sort of "status symbol", folks started wanting to buy those vehicles left and right. It almost seems like a contradiction, because I was under the impression that people wanted better fuel economy...but as you probably know, SUV's are gas hogs. I drive a V6 Firebird. It doesn't get good gas mileage- maybe 17 mpg city, and 20 mpg highway. Actually, though, the V8 models get better gas mileage, and have about 100 or more horsepower! Strange. I want a V8 Camaro or Firebird when I get my next vehicle. I don't mind if the gas mileage is not all that great. Having the good performance is worth that sacrifice. GM made a grave mistake...well, okay...maybe it wasn't all THAT serious of an error...but I think it was wrong to pull the plug (even if only temporarily) on the Camaros and Firebirds back in 2002. If a GM fan wanted a fast car, he was left with few options. I personally can't afford a Corvette. They did manufacture a few Australian Super cars...the Pontiac GTO was resurrected for a few years...I think it was from like 2004 to 2006. But, again, those were and are expensive, too. I think that the economy played a part in GM's decisions. Gas prices, the economy, inflation, the automobile marketplace, the SUV craze, and so forth. I think that they exaggerated when they claimed that Camaro sales were down. I am looking forward to the new Camaros. They look pretty cool! They sort of have a slightly retro look/stance, kind of similar to the first Gen Camaros. And with a 400 horsepower small block, they will also be beasts on the street, as well. Good question, by the way.

One of the reasons is the price of the Camaros were a little bit more than the Stangs. It was also more expensive for GM to make the Camaros than it was for Ford to produce the Stangs. With low sales,GM could not afford to keep on making them.

THERE JUNK THATS WHY

didnt really...they were still making 125,000 yr when killed...F ing bean counters

gas prices

Ugly styling and higher prices.Also GM did nothing to promote them . They could make more money selling trucks that were cheaper to build and the stupid public was stupid enough to pay more money for.Now like back in the seventies with high gas prices and nothing but gas guzzling trucks in there inventory it biting them if the a s s.

inagaddadavida pegged it. I do recall that the reason the cost was so high had to do with the benefit packages the workers were receiving in Canada, and they stopped making it until said contract expired. Also, to Rooster, the newer LS engine that is in the Cadillac CTSV, Corvette Coupes, and the GTOs is the LS2, but the newest engine is the LS3, which is slated for the 2009 Vette, I believe. No official word has been given as to the powerplant for the new Camaros, which are no longer F-bodies. Since the whole design has changed, the Camaro is now being built on the Zeta platform, if memory serves me, thus the F-body monicor is no longer accurate. That is all. Carry on.

because the mustang seats more comfortably, but u want a fun car get camaro, i have an 85....cant be beatn by mustang in looks....Ever

People weren't buying them, they costed too much to produce, their quality and reliability was terrible, they were ugly, they rode and handled like a truck, they had poorly thought out interiors, the list goes on and on. Yes they were faster than the mustangs, but the mustang were far superior as a daily driver. And most people buying these cars bought them to drive them every day. Now moving onto the new Camaro, it won't be produced until 2009 at the earliest. There is already stiff competition from the Mustang, which will get an update in 2009. The Challenger will also be released in 2008 or 2009. The Challenger will come with a more powerful engine (425hp vs 400hp), and probably be available at a lower price due to being cheaper to build (based on existing cars). The Camaro had better be extremely good, otherwise it won't make it to 2011. Although you can always count on the GM faithful to keep buying the inferior products that they produce.