poSSum

How likely is it that the 5th gen will come to market 79.6" wide? I see that combined with long doors as a potential Achilles heel in the "secretary" demographic.

dream '94 Z28

Not only that, my freind indicated that it wouldn't fit on his trailer at that width.

Someone on this board (don't know if I can reveal the name) told me that there was some....'discussion', between John Heinricy and the stylists concerning width. From the discussion I was left with the impression that if the car is that wide it could be detrimental to it's handling. The only think I could think of is that if the car's too wide, if wouldn't be quick to respond to inputs (I'm not an engineer, that was my impression based on what I was told).

Aaron91RS

Won't fit on my trailer either.
If GM listens I think it will get shrunk once they have a 'lite' platform for it.

StreamlineZ28

from what i can tell on the video of the unveiling the doors look really long, and that is a huge complaint about the Camaro. no add almost another 6 inches in width, your gonna be parking at the other end of the grocery store paking lot with the pickups. car needs shorter doors.

Hey i know give to 2 suicide doors like the Extended cab pickups

TOO Z MAXX

I think the car is way to wide. It should be 10 inches narrower. That would make it the skinniest fbod to date. This will also help in the weight department. Look what they did with the Vette. The C6 is smaller than the C5, not by much but every bit helps.

Z284ever

Yup, the car is W__I___D__E. We'll see what happens.

RhinoSS

I agree that the width and the doors don't make it very friendly to parking spaces, although I feel that by decreasing the width, and shortening the doors, it's going to completely kill the look of the car.

With all things considered, I guess I would rather see a less dramatic car than no car at all.

Chris 96 WS6

I think 10" narrower would make the car look goofy. 4th gen width will be adequate as long and length doesn't increase any more. 186" is the top end of OK for a lot of folks here.

I personally didn't think the doors were that long. They might look longer in the photos in proportion to the whole car but remember its a good 8-10 inches shorter than the 4th gen.

96_Camaro_B4C

I don't think it would be quite that wide in production. That would be wide even for a big family sedan that needed the space! A 300C is 74.1" wide, for reference. I think that is about the width of a 4th gen too. The Challenger concept is 78.6" wide, or an inch less than the Camaro (Challenger is also 4" TALLER than the Camaro).

I'd say the Camaro could definitely be made narrower by a few inches. Concept cars are often pretty dramatically proportioned. I personally wouldn't mind seeing a bit more height in the greenhouse or a slightly lower beltline, but I don't want the overall height climbing. Like the second pic below:From this thread. I'm not talking about the rear hatch vs. trunk issue or the wraparound rear glass or the T-tops being discussed in that thread, just the slight increase in front door greenhouse height (in the bottom pic vs. the original car in the top pic) that fits the car a little better, imo. One of the things that bugs me about the LX cars is how the windows are like gun slits compared to the height of the door panels.

It is less of an issue on this Camaro because the car is so sleek and the door panels are not flat slabs (like the LX cars) but rather have creases and character lines. Still, I think the slightly (like an inch or so) taller side window in the bottom pic here makes the tie to the '69 Camaro just a bit stronger without losing the sleekness of the current concept.

Whew!

91Z28350

Without having seen the car, I cannot say for sure how I feel about it, but based on the appearance of the pictures, I hope they leave the body AS IS! The interior I am sure will change, but I am loving the lines of the exterior .

muckz

You know what I love? No huge front overhangs! I love that the wheels have been moved forward, ala Mustang/BMW 3 series.

And I'm sure it will be narrower when it hits production, it is very difficult picturing such a wide "pony" car.

jg95z28

Camaros have always been wide... that's why its "The Hugger". While 79 inches is wide, it shouldn't be much less than that. 75 inches at a minimum. Anything less than 70 inches, just isn't a Camaro.