View Poll Results: What concerns YOU more on the Camaro?
Voters: 179. You may not vote on this poll
What concerns you more? Cost or weight?
06-10-2008, 09:54 AM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 9,710
Cost, by a large margin.
As I plan to purchase a loaded supercharged Z/28, the cheaper it is the better, whereas 100-200 lbs either way doesn't concern me as much.
If the Camaro is priced competitively, I may even consider purchasing two, a red V6 convertible for the Mrs., and the aforementioned Z/28 (in hugger orange) for me.
As I plan to purchase a loaded supercharged Z/28, the cheaper it is the better, whereas 100-200 lbs either way doesn't concern me as much.
If the Camaro is priced competitively, I may even consider purchasing two, a red V6 convertible for the Mrs., and the aforementioned Z/28 (in hugger orange) for me.
06-10-2008, 10:03 AM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Cost, by a large margin.
As I plan to purchase a loaded supercharged Z/28, the cheaper it is the better, whereas 100-200 lbs either way doesn't concern me as much.
If the Camaro is priced competitively, I may even consider purchasing two, a red V6 convertible for the Mrs., and the aforementioned Z/28 (in hugger orange) for me.
As I plan to purchase a loaded supercharged Z/28, the cheaper it is the better, whereas 100-200 lbs either way doesn't concern me as much.
If the Camaro is priced competitively, I may even consider purchasing two, a red V6 convertible for the Mrs., and the aforementioned Z/28 (in hugger orange) for me.
But I really have little interest in a 4100 pound Z/28 and a V6 convertible which weighs nearly as much. Weight is the deal killer for me.
06-10-2008, 10:10 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,897
Cost and weight.
I've already determined I won't be buying one new (unless gas drops back to $2/gal
) The cost of ownership isn't justifiable to me anymore, so my fingers are crossed for a nice used on in a couple years. Cheaper price, insurance, and SC taxes (paid yearly based on vehicle's value) 
More weight = less mpg (in all engine config.) which = bad.
I've already determined I won't be buying one new (unless gas drops back to $2/gal
) The cost of ownership isn't justifiable to me anymore, so my fingers are crossed for a nice used on in a couple years. Cheaper price, insurance, and SC taxes (paid yearly based on vehicle's value) More weight = less mpg (in all engine config.) which = bad.
06-10-2008, 10:39 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 801
Cost, like was said above, by a large margin. the weight is an unfortunate issue that I can live with.
On a personal scale, I'm more concerned about cost because if I cannot get a V8 for under or at 30k, I'm gonna be a little disapointed. I said I would be more than happy driving a V6 model -- and I will be. But not being able to get that big-honkin V8 will be a bit of a let-down.
On a grand scale, price gets priority because if GM doesn't price the Camaro within reach of Mustang, it's not going to sell. Which is bad.
Your average consumer doesn't care about weight. He/she sees the inital cost, saftey, comfort + ammenities, and fuel economy compared to other vehicles in its class....
On a personal scale, I'm more concerned about cost because if I cannot get a V8 for under or at 30k, I'm gonna be a little disapointed. I said I would be more than happy driving a V6 model -- and I will be. But not being able to get that big-honkin V8 will be a bit of a let-down.
On a grand scale, price gets priority because if GM doesn't price the Camaro within reach of Mustang, it's not going to sell. Which is bad.
Your average consumer doesn't care about weight. He/she sees the inital cost, saftey, comfort + ammenities, and fuel economy compared to other vehicles in its class....
06-10-2008, 10:47 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
Posts: 5,308
Charlie, where's the option for BOTH???? 
For ME?? I want the car to come out as light as possible. Power is cheaper and easier to add than weight is to remove.
But I also KNOW (and I'm sure you do too) that the COST is the real deal killer for ~99% of the buying population. A few of us here can jump up and down screaming all day about how heavy the car is, but unfortunately, there is a direct relation between the weight of the car, and the weight of money in GM's pockets
.
I'll still place my vote under WEIGHT, because if/when the time comes, I'm rarely one to cringe at the price of the things I'm buying, as long as I'm satisfied with WHAT I'm buying
.
For ME?? I want the car to come out as light as possible. Power is cheaper and easier to add than weight is to remove.
But I also KNOW (and I'm sure you do too) that the COST is the real deal killer for ~99% of the buying population. A few of us here can jump up and down screaming all day about how heavy the car is, but unfortunately, there is a direct relation between the weight of the car, and the weight of money in GM's pockets
.I'll still place my vote under WEIGHT, because if/when the time comes, I'm rarely one to cringe at the price of the things I'm buying, as long as I'm satisfied with WHAT I'm buying
.
06-10-2008, 10:48 AM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,897
06-10-2008, 11:15 AM
#8
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Nashville, TN area
Posts: 11,157
Good poll, Charlie.
Folks...we ALL want to say that "both" is the answer, but if you have to pick one OR the other, which would you pick?
Not an easy one, I know. I had to think about it a bit.
Folks...we ALL want to say that "both" is the answer, but if you have to pick one OR the other, which would you pick?
Not an easy one, I know. I had to think about it a bit.
06-10-2008, 11:27 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NM
Posts: 199
06-10-2008, 12:10 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
I picked weight. Especially since I no longer plan on buying one new (if at all, depending on things LIKE weight, interior, etc.).
It's a tough poll, I have no illusions of a $20,000 LS3 equipped model just like I have no illusions of a 3300 pound Camaro. I just hope there is a "happy medium" somewhere.
It's a tough poll, I have no illusions of a $20,000 LS3 equipped model just like I have no illusions of a 3300 pound Camaro. I just hope there is a "happy medium" somewhere.
06-10-2008, 12:16 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Philly Burbs, PA
Posts: 69
Cost, like was said above, by a large margin. the weight is an unfortunate issue that I can live with.
On a personal scale, I'm more concerned about cost because if I cannot get a V8 for under or at 30k, I'm gonna be a little disapointed. I said I would be more than happy driving a V6 model -- and I will be. But not being able to get that big-honkin V8 will be a bit of a let-down.
On a grand scale, price gets priority because if GM doesn't price the Camaro within reach of Mustang, it's not going to sell. Which is bad.
Your average consumer doesn't care about weight. He/she sees the inital cost, saftey, comfort + ammenities, and fuel economy compared to other vehicles in its class....
On a personal scale, I'm more concerned about cost because if I cannot get a V8 for under or at 30k, I'm gonna be a little disapointed. I said I would be more than happy driving a V6 model -- and I will be. But not being able to get that big-honkin V8 will be a bit of a let-down.
On a grand scale, price gets priority because if GM doesn't price the Camaro within reach of Mustang, it's not going to sell. Which is bad.
Your average consumer doesn't care about weight. He/she sees the inital cost, saftey, comfort + ammenities, and fuel economy compared to other vehicles in its class....
HOWEVER.... I have complete confidence based on the Fbodfather & other comments that the base v8 (SS) will be priced in the same ballpark as its Mustang GT counterpart.
06-10-2008, 01:16 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 208
Any number of ways(and ranging costs) depending on what I wanted out of the car and how its laid out. Currently I don't have one in front of me to engineer anything or give specifics.
Generically if you wanted nothing more than a strip/road course car and cared nothing for asthetics/ride comfort you can gut the entire interior panels/extra seats/electronics/sound deadning/carpet/airbags/dash, replace the drivers seat with a suspension racing seat, tear out the egr/ac/engine covers. Drop the rear trunk pan and install a fuel cell, replace the heavier panels with carbonfiber/fiberglass, replace glass with lexan, etc..
Again this is extreme and generic due to lack of details but I think you get my point that its easier to come up with weight saving ideas and spend as YOU see fit rather than raise the cost of the vehicle for something that the masses would rather save the money on.
It all depends on how much comfort/amenities your willing to give up and how much your willing to spend.
Generically if you wanted nothing more than a strip/road course car and cared nothing for asthetics/ride comfort you can gut the entire interior panels/extra seats/electronics/sound deadning/carpet/airbags/dash, replace the drivers seat with a suspension racing seat, tear out the egr/ac/engine covers. Drop the rear trunk pan and install a fuel cell, replace the heavier panels with carbonfiber/fiberglass, replace glass with lexan, etc..
Again this is extreme and generic due to lack of details but I think you get my point that its easier to come up with weight saving ideas and spend as YOU see fit rather than raise the cost of the vehicle for something that the masses would rather save the money on.
It all depends on how much comfort/amenities your willing to give up and how much your willing to spend.