Good god guys get a grip!!!!
07-22-2008, 09:17 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
The performance guys wanted a Camaro, and GM gave us a Chevelle.
Hey, if a Chevelle is what the market needs, then good on GM. They know that vastly better than I do. I understand the need to shift away from a "Performance ONLY" Camaro. I just didn't expect it to move that far... particularly on the mass end.
Maybe I should have, and am a bit stung by the idea. Apparently the market, as defined by the experts in that field, has moved away from what I thought a Camaro was supposed to be. That's fair... there's nothing that says my vision is the only right one.
Maybe GM has a way to make up for the added weight that we haven't seen yet, and the performance will be there.
I keep repeating that I want to keep an open mind here, and that I want the car to succeed. I really do.
07-22-2008, 09:19 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Oh...
So, in your world, my only choices are (nearly...) TWO TONS 'O' FUN, and a Miata.
If the intent is to turn the car into a Touring GT or personal luxury coupe, I can see why nearly 4000 lbs. looks like a reasonable compromise. The things necessary to get that type of ride comfort and feature set are admittedly heavy (6 spd automatics, IRS, heavy and stiff bodies, lots of optional content, etc...). Honestly, if that's the criteria, it certainly makes a lot of sense.
If that's the case though, let's not call it a Pony Car any more - because it's not.
NOTE: If somebody doesn't like the "pony car" description, then pick another that means the same thing... relatively SMALL, LIGHT WEIGHT, 2+2 car with a broad engine selection and great styling.
So, in your world, my only choices are (nearly...) TWO TONS 'O' FUN, and a Miata.
If the intent is to turn the car into a Touring GT or personal luxury coupe, I can see why nearly 4000 lbs. looks like a reasonable compromise. The things necessary to get that type of ride comfort and feature set are admittedly heavy (6 spd automatics, IRS, heavy and stiff bodies, lots of optional content, etc...). Honestly, if that's the criteria, it certainly makes a lot of sense.
If that's the case though, let's not call it a Pony Car any more - because it's not.
NOTE: If somebody doesn't like the "pony car" description, then pick another that means the same thing... relatively SMALL, LIGHT WEIGHT, 2+2 car with a broad engine selection and great styling.
Last edited by Z284ever; 07-22-2008 at 09:21 AM.
07-22-2008, 10:27 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
07-22-2008, 11:00 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 362
Camaro guys. Anyone who would buy the mustang over the Camaro because
of weight may be a car guy, but certainly not a Camaro car guy. I say to them, don't let the door hit you in the ***.
07-22-2008, 11:02 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 362
I really hope you find your CTS. Your comments are really getting old.
07-22-2008, 11:15 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: U.S.
Posts: 201
I'm wondering if the choices we had this time around were, first; same kinds of plastic interiors and not so good build quality with lighter weight, or second; higher quality interior and build quality being topnotch with more weight. Personally, I don't mind the weight that bad, although I really should wait and drive it first before I speak. But I do know I was hoping for a better quality this time around, and if the car is a bit heavier, that's cool. I'm not a racer, after all, just a regular driver. I think the mpg will be alright, as long as the driver keeps his foot out of it. 
07-22-2008, 11:33 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 439
07-22-2008, 11:39 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
I'm sure they are saying it's overweight, some may say the exterior is ugly, more (my bet) will say the interior is beyond bizzare....
I really don't feel the need to go over to those sites to see what I already know will be there.
I really don't feel the need to go over to those sites to see what I already know will be there.
07-22-2008, 11:58 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Shelton, WA
Posts: 954
07-22-2008, 11:59 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
That's a little over the top, even for you Charles.
07-22-2008, 12:01 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166