Good god guys get a grip!!!!
07-22-2008, 12:02 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Payson, AZ USA
Posts: 1,181
Ok, first............. I know everyone is excited, and rightly so. After all, it has been a long wait, and there is still more wait to come.
However, please do not let your enthusiasm cloud your vision.
So many here are comparing this 2010 Camaro to the 2005 Mustang. Why??? I know you will say I am nuts, and that you are comparing it to the 2009 Mustang. But, 2009 Mustang = 2005 Mustang. They are the exact same car, and the 2009 is the last year for the current car.
You CANNOT say that the 2010 Camaro will blow away the 2010 Mustang, because you know nothing about it. Ford has not been showing it to the public for years............... and they have not released specs on it a year before production. You CANNOT say that the 2010 Camaro interior is lights years better than the 2010 Mustangs................ because you don't know that.
Please do not let your excitement cause you to make a bunch of general statements that will not stand up to the test of time. In other words, we will see.
I can tell you that the 2010 Mustang will be lighter than the current car, and will have more power. The interior will be all new. The current car does 0-60 in 4.9-5.1 seconds, so it is already not far off the mark. Less weight is your friend. We do not know what the suspension setup will be either.
That said, I can tell you what some Mustang people, and just automotive enthusiasts in general. Some like the way it looks, and some don't. My husband is a HUGE 1st gen Camaro fan, and he hates it. Most do not like the interior, as they think the ergonomics look terrible............. much in the same way that the ergonomics of 60's muscle/pony cars were terrible. They don't like the weight, but like the power. They don't like the fuel economy or the fact that the SS requires premium. They reserve judgement on quality of exterior or interior, until they can see the actual production cars. Most are very happy that GM is finally coming out with a new one, as it can only improve the cars it competes with. Most worry that the car will not have staying power, due to the current economic climate, and gas prices.
That about sums it up. Please do not slam me as a Ford/Mustang lover, or a Camaro hater. After all, we do have a 1968 Camaro............... and no Mustangs.
Finally, those with criticisms should always be allowed to voice their opinions. I would bet that the majority of them have owns far more Camaros in their lifetime, than the blind cheerleaders. Our critiques can only improve the car in the future, and can help to ensure there is a future for it.
However, please do not let your enthusiasm cloud your vision.
So many here are comparing this 2010 Camaro to the 2005 Mustang. Why??? I know you will say I am nuts, and that you are comparing it to the 2009 Mustang. But, 2009 Mustang = 2005 Mustang. They are the exact same car, and the 2009 is the last year for the current car.
You CANNOT say that the 2010 Camaro will blow away the 2010 Mustang, because you know nothing about it. Ford has not been showing it to the public for years............... and they have not released specs on it a year before production. You CANNOT say that the 2010 Camaro interior is lights years better than the 2010 Mustangs................ because you don't know that.
Please do not let your excitement cause you to make a bunch of general statements that will not stand up to the test of time. In other words, we will see.
I can tell you that the 2010 Mustang will be lighter than the current car, and will have more power. The interior will be all new. The current car does 0-60 in 4.9-5.1 seconds, so it is already not far off the mark. Less weight is your friend. We do not know what the suspension setup will be either.
That said, I can tell you what some Mustang people, and just automotive enthusiasts in general. Some like the way it looks, and some don't. My husband is a HUGE 1st gen Camaro fan, and he hates it. Most do not like the interior, as they think the ergonomics look terrible............. much in the same way that the ergonomics of 60's muscle/pony cars were terrible. They don't like the weight, but like the power. They don't like the fuel economy or the fact that the SS requires premium. They reserve judgement on quality of exterior or interior, until they can see the actual production cars. Most are very happy that GM is finally coming out with a new one, as it can only improve the cars it competes with. Most worry that the car will not have staying power, due to the current economic climate, and gas prices.
That about sums it up. Please do not slam me as a Ford/Mustang lover, or a Camaro hater. After all, we do have a 1968 Camaro............... and no Mustangs.
Finally, those with criticisms should always be allowed to voice their opinions. I would bet that the majority of them have owns far more Camaros in their lifetime, than the blind cheerleaders. Our critiques can only improve the car in the future, and can help to ensure there is a future for it.
07-22-2008, 12:04 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 3,650
A lot of them really like the car.
www.winnipegheights.com (GM forum)
www.beyond.ca (automotive news)
www.winnipegheights.com (GM forum)
www.beyond.ca (automotive news)
07-22-2008, 12:08 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
07-22-2008, 12:47 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,463
The car is what it is. Just to get it meant Zeta and that meant a higher curb weight. Chevy has blended the Camaro and Chevelle/Monte Carlo in this car, probably not totally by choice. But it's full on content and I think that for sales it will help the car in the long run. For us racing enthusiasts our compromises have been a bit more focused.
The weight is higher than any of us wanted but it can be managed. It's probably never going to handle like the C6 and I don't think Vette owners will need to worry about Camaros taking them out at street lights. But lets not turn our nose up on the 6M LS3 I have no doubt the car will move and unless you have a Vette or GT500 watch out. It's not soo heavy that it won't run some serious numbers.
In my racing days at the strip we used a rule of thumb, 100lb's of weight loss or a 10hp increase is worth a tenth in the 1/4. So the LS3 certainly has enough power over the LS1 to pull this heavier car to a faster ET.
Look no further than MB and the AMG cars to show that even with curb weights well over 2 tons for the 2 seat SL can move if the power is there.
Carving corners may not be so easy. The weight is hard to hide there. This car will probably perform better at road courses than parking lots. The SS does carry some serious brakes.
Interior is not bad IMO. If you hate the style then that's is. But the look and the options, colors and materials do improve it. The seats look very nice and the LED piping and probable HUD help.
I can't think of any car available today or in the past that was 100% perfect to me. I had some complaints about the 4th gens Camaros and I bought 3 of them. Does this car have more positives than negatives and if so is it worth your heard earned money... For me I think it does.
The weight is higher than any of us wanted but it can be managed. It's probably never going to handle like the C6 and I don't think Vette owners will need to worry about Camaros taking them out at street lights. But lets not turn our nose up on the 6M LS3 I have no doubt the car will move and unless you have a Vette or GT500 watch out. It's not soo heavy that it won't run some serious numbers.
In my racing days at the strip we used a rule of thumb, 100lb's of weight loss or a 10hp increase is worth a tenth in the 1/4. So the LS3 certainly has enough power over the LS1 to pull this heavier car to a faster ET.
Look no further than MB and the AMG cars to show that even with curb weights well over 2 tons for the 2 seat SL can move if the power is there.
Carving corners may not be so easy. The weight is hard to hide there. This car will probably perform better at road courses than parking lots. The SS does carry some serious brakes.
Interior is not bad IMO. If you hate the style then that's is. But the look and the options, colors and materials do improve it. The seats look very nice and the LED piping and probable HUD help.
I can't think of any car available today or in the past that was 100% perfect to me. I had some complaints about the 4th gens Camaros and I bought 3 of them. Does this car have more positives than negatives and if so is it worth your heard earned money... For me I think it does.
07-22-2008, 01:06 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Jeff, I want you to read this post very carefully, so you can see where I'm coming from.
First some minor houskeeping, I'm not over the top, because this Camaro IS the coupe version of the cancelled Zeta Impala - that's a fact. So there's that.
The bigger and much more important picture is this though. Although lots of people on fan sites are drooling over this Camaro, the sad truth is that not all of them will buy one. And those that actually do - won't all buy new. I think we can agree on that so far. Beyond that, I believe that this car's mass and MPG numbers will serve to give it a sale hit when it actually comes time to sign on the dotted line, for many "non-enthusiast consumers". We can argue about that, but that's my belief.
So why do I care? Because I'm taking the big picture, 10,000ft view here on the Camaro brand. Shortly, serious discussions will start on a 6th gen. If/when the 5th gen falls short on it's sales numbers, I don't want that to crucify to 6th gen. I don't want some GM dweeb in a suit to go into a meeting and say:" See, we gave the enthusiasts EXACTLY what they wanted, and this product's sales performance fell short. I say let's kill any further discussion about Camaro or it's future".
I needs to be known AND VERBALIZED, that yes WE KNOW, that this car is compromised. And we want GM to know that we know. That if this car fails, don't blame the Camaro brand or the "ponycar concept". Blame it on the fact that this particular product hits off center on the ponycar formula.
First some minor houskeeping, I'm not over the top, because this Camaro IS the coupe version of the cancelled Zeta Impala - that's a fact. So there's that.
The bigger and much more important picture is this though. Although lots of people on fan sites are drooling over this Camaro, the sad truth is that not all of them will buy one. And those that actually do - won't all buy new. I think we can agree on that so far. Beyond that, I believe that this car's mass and MPG numbers will serve to give it a sale hit when it actually comes time to sign on the dotted line, for many "non-enthusiast consumers". We can argue about that, but that's my belief.
So why do I care? Because I'm taking the big picture, 10,000ft view here on the Camaro brand. Shortly, serious discussions will start on a 6th gen. If/when the 5th gen falls short on it's sales numbers, I don't want that to crucify to 6th gen. I don't want some GM dweeb in a suit to go into a meeting and say:" See, we gave the enthusiasts EXACTLY what they wanted, and this product's sales performance fell short. I say let's kill any further discussion about Camaro or it's future".
I needs to be known AND VERBALIZED, that yes WE KNOW, that this car is compromised. And we want GM to know that we know. That if this car fails, don't blame the Camaro brand or the "ponycar concept". Blame it on the fact that this particular product hits off center on the ponycar formula.
07-22-2008, 01:17 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
I'll give you everything else you said, because part of me agrees with you. However while this Camaro was designed as a Zeta coupe, and while Impala was to be a long wheelbase Zeta sedan, basic platform architecture is about all they shared. While I personally would have rather seen Camaro on a stretched Kappa platform, they just couldn't make it work.
Calling this Camaro the Zeta Impala coupe is simply just wrong. (More for emotional reasons than technical ones.)
07-22-2008, 01:22 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 362
HOT!!
) and sustains sales by continuing to look HOT and tweaking it as the years past. We here on this site are a very, very small part of the buying segment. 99% of most drivers don't even go on car forums regularly. The avg.joe says "That car is HOT", I'm getting one. Plain and simple. Now with the high
fuel prices hurting every aspect of our economy, that is not a good thing as well.
If you don't believe that a cars sells on looks, take a gander at the last generation GTO. Great car, but styling
killed sales.
Last edited by 8Banger; 07-22-2008 at 01:24 PM.
07-22-2008, 01:29 PM
#38
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
07-22-2008, 01:49 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
All I read is this car is big and will be slow. Just another GTO!!!! May as well go geta Mustang??? Here is why I wont. The mustang interior looks like a bunch of plastic trash thrown together. The Camaro looks refined, sweet gauges HUD 18-20" wheels. The car is full of options. Then the power train 420HP will be plenty to own a GT and stomp the 4400LB challenger. Imagine adding Intake, exhaust, and a tune im sure this will net close to 500HP. Also mid 20MPG with the 6speed???What does the GT get??? What does the challenger get???(I think I made my point here.
)Then take a look at the car. it looks pissed just sitting there. Most of the lines from the concept are there. the 20" wheels that everyone said would not make production are there.
And to end, I would rather have my sweet sound system, with a car full of airbags, then a 400 HP 4th gen that the only up side will go faster around a corner. Again this is only how I see it...And I will be willing to bet it does a thousand times better than the GTO did.
Rant Off
p.s. sorry if i seem all over the place but it was a long day at work
* The Challenger isn't 4400 pounds. The SRT8 is 4100 pounds.
* The Camaro SS loses to the Challenger SRT8 according to GM's info and Road and Track magazine:
0-60 mph: 4.9 Camaro, 4.7 Challenger.
1/4 mile: 13.3@108 Camaro, 13 flat at 110 Challenger.
* The Camaro will certainly get worse fuel economy than the current Mustang GT. The G8 with cylinder shutdown and 362 horsepower gets 15 & 24 mpg. The LS3 Camaro won't have that. Mustang GT gets 15 and 23. Camaro won't top that.
Where you're right:
* Saying it will own a current Mustang GT. Ford plans a horsepower upgrade for the GT by the time the Camaro comes out.
* The cheap plastic interior. That will also be upgraded next year, so we'll see how it compares.
* From what I've seen of the new Mustang, I feel Camaro looks better.
07-22-2008, 02:56 PM
#40
ALMIGHTY MEMBER
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Detroit, MI USA
Posts: 2,301
Wrong. That statement is about as accurate as "The Colorado is really a Silverado because it's a pickup truck and it has a big honkin' Gold Bowtie on it"
I will, in the next day or two (when and if I ever get caught up...) post my thoughts on the weight issue.
07-22-2008, 03:08 PM
#41
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
OK -- stop there.
Wrong. That statement is about as accurate as "The Colorado is really a Silverado because it's a pickup truck and it has a big honkin' Gold Bowtie on it"
I will, in the next day or two (when and if I ever get caught up...) post my thoughts on the weight issue.
Wrong. That statement is about as accurate as "The Colorado is really a Silverado because it's a pickup truck and it has a big honkin' Gold Bowtie on it"
I will, in the next day or two (when and if I ever get caught up...) post my thoughts on the weight issue.
Anyways, looking forward to reading your thoughts on that Scott...
07-22-2008, 03:14 PM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Mack and Bewick
Posts: 1,600
As for the weight, it's not changing at this point. Cars, performance cars or otherwise, are heavier than they were ten years ago. Of course you could take some consolation in that the trend is probably about to start swinging the other way.
07-22-2008, 03:15 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Shelton, WA
Posts: 954
OK -- stop there.
Wrong. That statement is about as accurate as "The Colorado is really a Silverado because it's a pickup truck and it has a big honkin' Gold Bowtie on it"
I will, in the next day or two (when and if I ever get caught up...) post my thoughts on the weight issue.
Wrong. That statement is about as accurate as "The Colorado is really a Silverado because it's a pickup truck and it has a big honkin' Gold Bowtie on it"
I will, in the next day or two (when and if I ever get caught up...) post my thoughts on the weight issue.
hmmmmm........
well.........
I'm not sure which has been debated more:
1. -- Weight
2. -- SS versus Z28 --whoops-- Z/28....(Sorry!)
See -- here's the problem.
One -- we have to be able to sell the car in volume -- so that we make at least a few dollars on it.
Now -- to sell it in volume, we have to look at the wants and needs of who's gonna buy the car.
There are those who want to be able to order the car without a radio and with crank windows. I'd guess that number to be quite small.......weight savings? Negligible -- cost to do so? Stupid money.
There are those who want to be able to insure the car. That means 5 star crash ratings -- and that also means a host of airbags -- and airbags mean extra weight. --
There are those who constantly complain about brakes and rear axles.......brakes and heavier axles cost weight -- and money.
There are those who want a quiet ride -- meaning more insulation and isolation mechanisms........
There are those who want a substantial feel to the sheet metal. (you don't want hood flutter at 70-80mph..........)
There are those who want to be able to carry an occasional two people in the back seat now and then.......
There are those who want enough driver and front passenger room to accomodate someone 6' 8'' or above........
There are those who want comfortable seats for long distance comfort......
There are those who want great tactile feel to instruments and controls.......
There are those who feel a 'live axle' is too primitive for a car of this caliber in the new century.......
The list goes on and on.
The team must wade thru all of these wants and needs and make decisions.
Dispite what some say, there was not a real choice in which architectures to use -- yes, many have been looked at -- but this particular Zeta -- and it's different than G8 Zeta -- serves a great purpose.
Yes, it's OK to question. I just can't understand why a few people have written off the car even before they've driven it.
It comes back to practicality and affordability.
....and -- if you ignore any of the above -- you compromise on how many people the car will appeal to......
-- the sad reality for a few of you is that a 3,300 pound Camaro isn't in their wants or needs. If it were doable at a reasonable price point, don't you think we'd do it? REALLY????? Just because someone wants a 3,300 pound Camaro doesn't mean they're wrong -- and unfortunately they may never like this Camaro. (I tend to think they're going to be pleasantly surprised...)
I do believe that the new Camaro --(and I'm not alone here -- ) will surprise and delight. Further, the car feels much lighter than it is.
OK to question -- but how 'bout we calm down -- and drive the car first?
And to the point of people having to answer to the Board of Directors -- Boy Howdy.......everyone does today........and that's what I mean about 'having a stake' in the process. Some of us do - some of us don't. Those who do know the cost of getting it wrong.
well.........
I'm not sure which has been debated more:
1. -- Weight
2. -- SS versus Z28 --whoops-- Z/28....(Sorry!)
See -- here's the problem.
One -- we have to be able to sell the car in volume -- so that we make at least a few dollars on it.
Now -- to sell it in volume, we have to look at the wants and needs of who's gonna buy the car.
There are those who want to be able to order the car without a radio and with crank windows. I'd guess that number to be quite small.......weight savings? Negligible -- cost to do so? Stupid money.
There are those who want to be able to insure the car. That means 5 star crash ratings -- and that also means a host of airbags -- and airbags mean extra weight. --
There are those who constantly complain about brakes and rear axles.......brakes and heavier axles cost weight -- and money.
There are those who want a quiet ride -- meaning more insulation and isolation mechanisms........
There are those who want a substantial feel to the sheet metal. (you don't want hood flutter at 70-80mph..........)
There are those who want to be able to carry an occasional two people in the back seat now and then.......
There are those who want enough driver and front passenger room to accomodate someone 6' 8'' or above........
There are those who want comfortable seats for long distance comfort......
There are those who want great tactile feel to instruments and controls.......
There are those who feel a 'live axle' is too primitive for a car of this caliber in the new century.......
The list goes on and on.
The team must wade thru all of these wants and needs and make decisions.
Dispite what some say, there was not a real choice in which architectures to use -- yes, many have been looked at -- but this particular Zeta -- and it's different than G8 Zeta -- serves a great purpose.
Yes, it's OK to question. I just can't understand why a few people have written off the car even before they've driven it.
It comes back to practicality and affordability.
....and -- if you ignore any of the above -- you compromise on how many people the car will appeal to......
-- the sad reality for a few of you is that a 3,300 pound Camaro isn't in their wants or needs. If it were doable at a reasonable price point, don't you think we'd do it? REALLY????? Just because someone wants a 3,300 pound Camaro doesn't mean they're wrong -- and unfortunately they may never like this Camaro. (I tend to think they're going to be pleasantly surprised...)
I do believe that the new Camaro --(and I'm not alone here -- ) will surprise and delight. Further, the car feels much lighter than it is.
OK to question -- but how 'bout we calm down -- and drive the car first?
And to the point of people having to answer to the Board of Directors -- Boy Howdy.......everyone does today........and that's what I mean about 'having a stake' in the process. Some of us do - some of us don't. Those who do know the cost of getting it wrong.
07-22-2008, 03:18 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 163
If it does my response is all car makers need to get the idea out of their head that the next generation of any car needs to be fatter then the previous and remember how in the early 90's we made cars lighter then the 80's and 70's and get back to that trend.
For an example that everyone can visualize I would say take a 3rdgen, replace it with the modern plastic panels instead of metal, the modern aluminum engine and you saved a few hundred pounds. Now add your dome light airbags and chilled glove box back in and you still have the about same weight you started with.
Again I use that for an example because we can easily relate to it. (I know someone will jump in and miss the point and say something off the wall about well it looks to dated, totally missing the point.)
For an example that everyone can visualize I would say take a 3rdgen, replace it with the modern plastic panels instead of metal, the modern aluminum engine and you saved a few hundred pounds. Now add your dome light airbags and chilled glove box back in and you still have the about same weight you started with.
Again I use that for an example because we can easily relate to it. (I know someone will jump in and miss the point and say something off the wall about well it looks to dated, totally missing the point.)
Last edited by Aaron91RS; 07-22-2008 at 03:23 PM.
07-22-2008, 03:24 PM
#45
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
Someone hasn't looked at the back seat.
Come on, Guy, comparing magazine times to manufacturer times? You know better. GM's official times for the LS1 SS were something like 13.8 at 105.
Come on, Guy, comparing magazine times to manufacturer times? You know better. GM's official times for the LS1 SS were something like 13.8 at 105.