Camaro outsells Mustang

[Joe]

Oh college boy... you youngn's make this too easy..

Line rate does not equal productivity.... here's one for ya.. How many operators are required to build a Mustang vs a Camaro? ... Don't know? Neither do I frankly...
Does it matter?... Hell yeah.

I ask this.. Is it better to build a big building, tool it, and only use it for one shift a day... or build a smaller building, buy less tooling, and build cars for 2 shifts, you could argue that somebody build a building 2x too big.

The right answer is to generate a comparison of manufacturing cost per vehicle.... there are companies/firms set up just to guess that.. I'm glad I don't have that job, seems pretty dry.. I have one where I can type useless counter-arguments on a local web forum on my BlackBerry.

Even when you make your brain hurt thinking about it... Camaros out sold Mustangs.. period... I think it just means that in 2009 more people wanted Camaro's than Mustangs. Above and beyond that... it's all a mystery...

I thought this thread would be like throwing a cheeseburger into a Weight Watchers meeting.. I know I was right about that.

:gr_jest:

 

[cjmatt]

Camaros out sold Mustangs.. period... I think it just means that in 2009 more people bought 2010 Camaro's than 2010 Mustangs. Above and beyond that... it's all a mystery...

I edited your post a tad, because "wants" do not equal sales. But I will give you the fact that for 2010 MY, Camaro wins. Camnt wait to see this years outcome

 

[WhiteHawk]

well than you must have read lots of my posts to get dumb enough prior to not understand that when 2 companies are building pretty much the same amount of vehicles, Camaro is selling approx 10% more YTD, yet the Mustang can build that amount of vehicles on 1 shift when the Camaro needs 2 shifts to do it.

Here is some math to hopefully smarten you up a tad...these are made up numbers by the way since I do not know the Camaro production schedule.

Mustang

100k vehicles per year/47 production weeks = 2128 mustang per week
2128 per week/5 production days = 425 vehicles per day
425 per day/1 shift = 425 mustangs per shift

Camaro
110k vehicles per year/47 production weeks = 2340 camaro per week
2340 per week/5 production days = 468 vehicles per day
468 per day/2 shifts = 234 camaros per shift

Now please tell me how it is not a good thing when the Ford plant can build 425 mustangs in one shift, yet it takes the camaro team an extra 8 hours to only make 43 more

I am getting dumber by the second just responding to this. Not only are you still clueless, your math is STILL wrong. Last year, for the year when the sales data was taken, Mustang built on TWO shifts, and Camaro was on ONE. On top of that, Camaro built for 8 months. So, based on your meaningless math (I will explain why it is meaningless relative to your point in a moment), Camaro built 468 per shift last year. While Mustang did it on two for 212.5 per shift.

The thing you are completely missing like a blind man at a 3d movie wearing the funny goggles is that there is a HUGE fixed cost involved with an assembly plant! The more you produce from it, the more efficient it is. Your fixed costs are amortized over a larger number of vehicles. So the contribution margin for each vehicle gets bigger.

Now here is why your math doesn't mean a thing so pay attention. If it costs 1 million dollars to run a plant and one vehicle comes out of it, you have one million dollars in fixed cost on that vehicle. But if that plant makes a million vehicles, it only adds one dollar per vehicle. So next year when the Camaro plant runs on two shifts, the fixed cost to produce them becomes half as much as they were when they were running on one shift. And the fixed costs on the Mustang doubles because they are only running on one. Make sense?

-Geoff

 

[cjmatt]

I am getting dumber by the second just responding to this. Not only are you still clueless, your math is STILL wrong. Last year, for the year when the sales data was taken, Mustang built on TWO shifts, and Camaro was on ONE. On top of that, Camaro built for 8 months. So, based on your meaningless math (I will explain why it is meaningless relative to your point in a moment), Camaro built 468 per shift last year. While Mustang did it on two for 212.5 per shift.

The thing you are completely missing like a blind man at a 3d movie wearing the funny goggles is that there is a HUGE fixed cost involved with an assembly plant! The more you produce from it, the more efficient it is. Your fixed costs are amortized over a larger number of vehicles. So the contribution margin for each vehicle gets bigger.

Now here is why your math doesn't mean a thing so pay attention. If it costs 1 million dollars to run a plant and one vehicle comes out of it, you have one million dollars in fixed cost on that vehicle. But if that plant makes a million vehicles, it only adds one dollar per vehicle. So next year when the Camaro plant runs on two shifts, the fixed cost to produce them becomes half as much as they were when they were running on one shift. And the fixed costs on the Mustang doubles because they are only running on one. Make sense?

-Geoff

I am well aware of the fixed cost of running a plant, and I am also well aware that it also costs alot more to run machines twice as long...aka 16 hours vs. 8.

an idled plant costs nowhere near the same FIXED cost as one running. Considering the union employees are going to all be put to work elsewhere at other plants gets rid of a huge cost.

Vehicle assembly is about 25% the cost of manufacturing a vehicle (Not sales price). Of that, Fixed manufacturing overhead is usually about 30%, so about 10%. These are off the cuff numbers and im not even taking fixed union labor into account as theyre all going to be redeployed anyway. So figure 5% cost hit since we are losing half the total production time from before (1 shift vs. 2)

 

[WhiteHawk]

So figure 5% cost hit since we are losing half the total production time from before (1 shift vs. 2)

Like I said, more expensive. I am glad you are finally getting it.

-Geoff

 

[cjmatt]

Like I said, more expensive. I am glad you are finally getting it.

-Geoff

Yes, from a fixed cost perspective. Although its kind of a mute point considering Ford made 70k Mustangs, on 8.5 months of production. Ford was down for launch also...vs. the Camaros 84k in 8 months...Sure, GM sold more, but id be willing to bet that a large majority of mustang owners were holding out for 2011's considering the fact that everyone I know who wanted a 2010 has held out for an '11

 

[Mr Mach 1]

I hope 2010 & 2011 is good for the Mustang & Camaro.
It's good to have competition. Hell I hope even the Challanger sells good also...

 

[Boomer!]

Not sure if anyone said this yet (to lazy to read) but when was the last time GM had a factory delivered 400 horse 5.0. Oh, that's right ?

I see more Craparo's sitting on lots than driving. Maybe the just made more ?

 

[Joe]

Not sure if anyone said this yet (to lazy to read) but when was the last time GM had a factory delivered 400 horse 5.0. Oh, that's right ?

I see more Craparo's sitting on lots than driving. Maybe the just made more ?

When was the last time Ford delivered 400 HP out of a 5.0l? Oh yeah, next year. Was that your best line? :lol:
Has zero to do with the thread anyway, this thread has become quite a joke, nothing but brand bashing.

 

[Roadrage]

I'm not a Mustang lover. Claiming top sales when your product had to be discontinued for several years because it was stagnant isn't anything. When the Camaro lasts as long as the Mustang without interrupting service, then it can have a service record to tout. Till then good for the Camaro for being in production. It's an ugly car with one of the worst designed interiors ever, but that only matters to me.

The car wasnt put out of production because it wasnt selling enough. Sales werent great but the car was still making a profit. The union contract in Canada combined with the new crash standards coming were what made GM decide to off the line.

Ok, now the Ford lovers can get back to bashing the Camaro

 

[Boomer!]

Sorry I suck at this game. I am going back underneath my rock ! LOL

When was the last time Ford delivered 400 HP out of a 5.0l? Oh yeah, next year. Was that your best line? :lol:
Has zero to do with the thread anyway, this thread has become quite a joke, nothing but brand bashing.

 

[cjmatt]

When was the last time Ford delivered 400 HP out of a 5.0l? Oh yeah, next year. Was that your best line? :lol:
Has zero to do with the thread anyway, this thread has become quite a joke, nothing but brand bashing.

What are you talking about? Theyre making 5.0s right now...ive got a scrapped block sitting under my desk that I use as a footrest lol

 

[Scooter70]

What are you talking about? Theyre making 5.0s right now...ive got a scrapped block sitting under my desk that I use as a footrest lol

But it wasn't delivered to a customer. There's lots of badass stuff around here that nobody outside of these walls ever gets to see.

 

[cjmatt]

But it wasn't delivered to a customer. There's lots of badass stuff around here that nobody outside of these walls ever gets to see.

The 5.0 is already in production. Launched over a month ago. They just havent put them in cars yet. My bosses 5.0 Stang is being built Monday. were goin down at lunch to watch it

 

[Shadow X]

if i had the money i would have all 3

 

[Joe]

What are you talking about? Theyre making 5.0s right now...ive got a scrapped block sitting under my desk that I use as a footrest lol

:lol: