Quote:
Originally Posted by why?
That is interesting info. Sounds like you have a cool job, you just seem to travel a ton.
The only thing I would disagree on is point 5. I think the show cars proved they were on a secret agenda somewhere, and while yes it could take years for them to change that agenda, it has been years, and if they had planned on introducing new models at the mid cycle refresh that is plenty of time to change things. I don't think they ever expected to introduce all the models up front, but I do expect they would introduce the 86 and give it some indeterminate amount of time and see what happened before they planned on introducing sub models. I understand we could be talking about 5 years or more here, and I understand it is more than simple sales figures that would go into that decision. It is also too early to say they ruled them out. I also think that when the president of a company says to do something people below him will jump through all sorts of hurdles to do it, since that is what happened with the 86 to begin with.
Of course they know what they are doing more than we do, I hope no one would be dumb enough to argue against that.
I could argue against point 4 as well. While bottom of the line muscle cars are not super performance cars, neither is the 86. Pretty sure every current base muscle car is more powerful than our car. To simply call them hairdresser cars is the same as every imbecile everywhere that says the 86 is under powered. For every person that could afford to buy a brand new top of the line muscle car, I am sure there were a few that just didn't think it was worth it for whatever reason.
That I agree with completely. The majority of most cars, even sports cars, go to "Joe/Jill Average" and not car enthusiast.
|
I do have a very cool job and yes I travel a pile. Never to cool places though it is always somewhere like Detroit or Butfeck Illinois.
The thing for the big changes is that they pretty much said outright from the very beginning that they would never be doing a high HP version. I don't think (opinion alert) that it was ever in the plan or that it ever will be. It seems to us here that there are loads of people screaming for them but the real numbers are probably way below a profit point.
I wasn't very clear when I spoke of the muscle cars. I was not meaning to imply that they were low powered or poor performers just that they are not the big name versions of legend. They are the bread and butter of the industry for those that want the name, style, history, etc of the cars but don't care about the performance. I was not comparing them to the 86 in function but just illustrating the point that if the only versions that existed were the performance ones than even the Mustang would be a low production car. Be sort of like if the twins were just upgraded Corollas then they would have that huge volume base model for the average person and the short run performance version for those that wanted it. Since 86 does not have this high volume version it stands alone as a low production car.