Corvettes and Mustangs

**Mark B.** · January 26, 2005, 06:00 PM

Re: price killed the Camaro

Joe,

I'm glad you started this thread as if allows me to think about why after 30 years I switched camps and became a Bowtie owner. It's really not about the car, but more about the people who own the cars. I remember reading somewhere that "the bag boys in the grocery stores own the Mustangs, but the Manager owns the Corvette". To some extent that is very true. Having owned a Springtime Yellow 65 6-cylinder, 3-speed Mustang as my first car, I was indoctrinated into a fraternity of car lovers that held tight until about 2 years ago when I began to realize that I was one of the oldest guys at the car shows with my 91 stock Mustang GT sporting only 7,100 miles. I could no longer speak the language of the younger generation whose cars surrounded mine with twin turbochargers and tubbed out rear wheel wells. I was antique, allowing my car to remain untouched as a garage queen. No one seemed to care that it was an all original 13-year-old car, except for the young guy in Pennsylvania who bought it. Fast-forward to today, and I am in the midst of older, smarter car guys who appreciate the originality of the Corvette and what it stood for when it was created. I'm glad I made the change, and I'm not looking back. There will always be a soft spot in me that loves the Mustang, but I'm going to make every effort to make my Corvettes the best cars I have ever owned.

**Mark B.** · January 26, 2005, 06:00 PM

Re: price killed the Camaro

Joe,

I'm glad you started this thread as if allows me to think about why after 30 years I switched camps and became a Bowtie owner. It's really not about the car, but more about the people who own the cars. I remember reading somewhere that "the bag boys in the grocery stores own the Mustangs, but the Manager owns the Corvette". To some extent that is very true. Having owned a Springtime Yellow 65 6-cylinder, 3-speed Mustang as my first car, I was indoctrinated into a fraternity of car lovers that held tight until about 2 years ago when I began to realize that I was one of the oldest guys at the car shows with my 91 stock Mustang GT sporting only 7,100 miles. I could no longer speak the language of the younger generation whose cars surrounded mine with twin turbochargers and tubbed out rear wheel wells. I was antique, allowing my car to remain untouched as a garage queen. No one seemed to care that it was an all original 13-year-old car, except for the young guy in Pennsylvania who bought it. Fast-forward to today, and I am in the midst of older, smarter car guys who appreciate the originality of the Corvette and what it stood for when it was created. I'm glad I made the change, and I'm not looking back. There will always be a soft spot in me that loves the Mustang, but I'm going to make every effort to make my Corvettes the best cars I have ever owned.

**Mike McKown** · January 26, 2005, 09:11 PM

**Mike McKown** · January 26, 2005, 09:11 PM

**Mike Cobine** · January 27, 2005, 12:17 AM

Can't see the pictures

Is this that C5 that looks like a stretched '53?

**Mike Cobine** · January 27, 2005, 12:17 AM

Can't see the pictures

Is this that C5 that looks like a stretched '53?

**Mike Cobine** · January 27, 2005, 12:46 AM

Where to even jump in?

This is a great conversation. I think all of this is valid, too bad Chevy doesn't read it.

1. Generational ties - True, most cannot see the ties from one generation to the next, let alone from C5 to C2 or any other big jump. But they are there. They are just very subtle. The first C4s I saw I immediately thought of the tail on the '68. Different, but some sameness. The side coves and vents on the C5 I don't see so much as C1 but '63/'64. Of course, I remember people used to cut those open to make them functional. And lots of other little things. The hood bulges in different years. The sweep of the front fenders.

2. Price - price is a big deal. There are a lot more bag boys than managers. This is where Mustang has the edge, because almost anyone could afford a Mustang. And you could buy a 6 cyl Mustang that with a bit of ordering could look like the bad ones for very little. If you want the bad looking Camaro, you paid the price.

3. Every hot rodder's garage - When it came to playing with cars, I think the latest Camaro blew it. Corvette blows it in many ways. While in the '50s and '60s there were the fully finished packages of every go-fast option you could have, there was also the very basic platform for you to perform your own magic. While the race packages in the late '60s were big block, the small block racers could take one, and attach all they needed to ake it jsut about as fast. And you could do it in any single car garage.

Corvette's current basic package if all out, where to you begin at changes. Granted you probably don't need to, but many live for being able to. Same on Camaro. A '69 Camaro was a perfect vehicle for modifying. A '99 Camaro was, well, crowded.

4. The Look - Take one '69 Camaro, a set of low profile wide rear tires, and it said "Come on, I'm ready". Even an early '70s Camaro did that. The '80s were not quite that easy to get The Look. By the '90s, the car looked like someone's fat momma wallowing down the grocery aisle from behind. Granted it was aerodynamic and was fast on the track, but then John Belushi and Drew Carey were both much more agile than first glance, but would you let your daughter date them if they weren't rich and famous?

Mustang though has maintained that "cute car for your daughter/Saturday night street fighter for the guy" look just about the entire run. The Mustang is as much a pony car today as in 1964. Camaro was losing that all the time, and with the last gen, really had lost anything left of '60s muscle car/pony car look.

The Corvette didn't maintain that '69 Camaro street fighter look, but it did manage to keep that McLaren/Can Am look in the C5.

And the C6, which I thought was ruined with the exposed headlights, I find I like more than I thought I would. There is a look of smallness to it somehow. But I think that is all illusion.

**Mike Cobine** · January 27, 2005, 12:46 AM

Where to even jump in?

This is a great conversation. I think all of this is valid, too bad Chevy doesn't read it.

1. Generational ties - True, most cannot see the ties from one generation to the next, let alone from C5 to C2 or any other big jump. But they are there. They are just very subtle. The first C4s I saw I immediately thought of the tail on the '68. Different, but some sameness. The side coves and vents on the C5 I don't see so much as C1 but '63/'64. Of course, I remember people used to cut those open to make them functional. And lots of other little things. The hood bulges in different years. The sweep of the front fenders.

2. Price - price is a big deal. There are a lot more bag boys than managers. This is where Mustang has the edge, because almost anyone could afford a Mustang. And you could buy a 6 cyl Mustang that with a bit of ordering could look like the bad ones for very little. If you want the bad looking Camaro, you paid the price.

3. Every hot rodder's garage - When it came to playing with cars, I think the latest Camaro blew it. Corvette blows it in many ways. While in the '50s and '60s there were the fully finished packages of every go-fast option you could have, there was also the very basic platform for you to perform your own magic. While the race packages in the late '60s were big block, the small block racers could take one, and attach all they needed to ake it jsut about as fast. And you could do it in any single car garage.

Corvette's current basic package if all out, where to you begin at changes. Granted you probably don't need to, but many live for being able to. Same on Camaro. A '69 Camaro was a perfect vehicle for modifying. A '99 Camaro was, well, crowded.

4. The Look - Take one '69 Camaro, a set of low profile wide rear tires, and it said "Come on, I'm ready". Even an early '70s Camaro did that. The '80s were not quite that easy to get The Look. By the '90s, the car looked like someone's fat momma wallowing down the grocery aisle from behind. Granted it was aerodynamic and was fast on the track, but then John Belushi and Drew Carey were both much more agile than first glance, but would you let your daughter date them if they weren't rich and famous?

Mustang though has maintained that "cute car for your daughter/Saturday night street fighter for the guy" look just about the entire run. The Mustang is as much a pony car today as in 1964. Camaro was losing that all the time, and with the last gen, really had lost anything left of '60s muscle car/pony car look.

The Corvette didn't maintain that '69 Camaro street fighter look, but it did manage to keep that McLaren/Can Am look in the C5.

And the C6, which I thought was ruined with the exposed headlights, I find I like more than I thought I would. There is a look of smallness to it somehow. But I think that is all illusion.

**Michael H.** · January 27, 2005, 12:50 AM

Re: Can't see the pictures

Yes, the one that looks like a 21st century version of a 53. Try the pic again. Having problems with the host. I tried it a minute ago and it worked.

**Michael H.** · January 27, 2005, 12:50 AM

Re: Can't see the pictures

Yes, the one that looks like a 21st century version of a 53. Try the pic again. Having problems with the host. I tried it a minute ago and it worked.