NEWS: Tall, Grande, Venti: GM releases extra large version of Camaro pic

Filed under: Spy Photos (http://www.autoblog.com/category/spyphotos/), Coupes (http://www.autoblog.com/category/coupes/), Chevrolet (http://www.autoblog.com/category/chevrolet/)
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/01/preproductioncamaro01lead.jpg (http://www.autoblog.com/photos/pre-production-camaro-high-res/572511/)
You might wonder how many times we are going to report on the same photograph. We first showed you the unwrapped Camaro after Lutz commanded it to go without camouflage (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/03/bob-lutz-declares-no-more-camo-on-the-camaros/), but the photo was no more than a thumbnail. We next brought you a slightly larger version along with photoshopped versions showing what the Camaro would look like in a variety of colors (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/04/blow-it-up-bigger-pic-of-2009-chevy-camaro-in-every-color/). Now in our (hopefully) final post on the photo, we bring you a high resolution version practically straight out of the camera. You can now inspect all of the pre-production details without squinting at your screen and speculate to your heart's desire.
[Source: GM]
Gallery: Pre Production Camaro High Res (http://www.autoblog.com/photos/pre-production-camaro-high-res/)
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/01/preproductioncamaro02_thumbnail.jpg (http://www.autoblog.com/photos/pre-production-camaro-high-res/572550/)http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/01/preproductioncamaro03_thumbnail.jpg (http://www.autoblog.com/photos/pre-production-camaro-high-res/572549/)http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/01/preproductioncamaro01_thumbnail.jpg (http://www.autoblog.com/photos/pre-production-camaro-high-res/572511/)


Permalink (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/10/tall-grande-venti-gm-releases-extra-large-version-of-camaro-p/) | Email this (http://www.autoblog.com/forward/1082961/) | Comments (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/10/tall-grande-venti-gm-releases-extra-large-version-of-camaro-p/#comments)


More... (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/01/10/tall-grande-venti-gm-releases-extra-large-version-of-camaro-p/)

So much for the "two-dashes" theory. :lol:

Never thought I'd say this (only because the concept is such a beautiful car) but I'm actually starting to like the slightly softer lines of the production car MORE than the concept :eek: Next year can't get here soon enough :D

...and I still think the wheels are 18's.

Never thought I'd say this (only because the concept is such a beautiful car) but I'm actually starting to like the slightly softer lines of the production car MORE than the concept :eek: Next year can't get here soon enough :D

...and I still think the wheels are 18's.

The lines are slightly softer, but because the pre-production car is also slightly larger, it looks more muscular. It hasn't lost the attitude that the concept had.

The lines are slightly softer, but because the pre-production car is also slightly larger, it looks more muscular. It hasn't lost the attitude that the concept had.

I agree 100%

So much for the "two-dashes" theory. :lol:

What did I miss?

I need to change my pants.

I just wish I could see it in Dk. Grey or Black....oh i wish.

These pictures just get better and better. Can't wait for more colors and angles! :)

The lines are slightly softer, but because the pre-production car is also slightly larger, it looks more muscular. It hasn't lost the attitude that the concept had.


I don't think the Camaro has any softer lines than the concept. I think the body in white of this pre-production car tones them down visually but the crisp hard lines are still there. Looking at this pic with the larger and higher resolution pics shows more of those lines than the blurry pics we've seen so far. Take notice of the door for instance there is a lot of crisp and cut body lines there. The hips are there too. There have been tweeks but overall this is right on with the concpet for all the hard body lines that we loved.

I think it looks "softer" because the dash to front axle length is shorter, the door to rear axle length is longer and it also has a longer deck.

It's the proportions.

Car looks great but I think they should have made the side view mirrors more rounded and smooth instead of what looks like to be "blocky"....

I think it looks "softer" because the dash to front axle length is shorter, the door to rear axle length is longer and it also has a longer deck.

It's the proportions.


Is this known info or just a guestimation? I don't remember any measurements being released on the Camaro production car.

IMO if you take the white car in the pic and put the same wheel/tire package as the concepts, lower it and put a killer show quality paint job on it they would about the same. (Save the rear bumper, mirrors and no spoiler)

Is this known info or just a guestimation? I don't remember any measurements being released on the Camaro production car.



A combo.

The angle of the photo also makes the rear look longer than the front, however there have been some adjustments over the concept.

A combo.

Sharing is caring... :)

IMO if you take the white car in the pic and put the same wheel/tire package as the concepts, lower it and put a killer show quality paint job on it they would about the same. (Save the rear bumper, mirrors and no spoiler)

and the gas filler, where did it end up ?

Is this known info or just a guestimation? I don't remember any measurements being released on the Camaro production car.

IMO if you take the white car in the pic and put the same wheel/tire package as the concepts, lower it and put a killer show quality paint job on it they would about the same. (Save the rear bumper, mirrors and no spoiler)

From what I can tell the proportions have changed slightly as Z284ever has said. I think this picture shows the diffences in proportion the best.
http://publish.shaw.ca/j0n0/images/camrocomparo.jpg

That extra bump on the rear bumper and tacked-on reverse lights really piss me off.

Totally f*cks the whole look of the back end.

Think I like the pre-pro better.

and the gas filler, where did it end up ?


Well it's not on the right side or rear from what we've been shown so that only leaves the passenger side.

Well it's not on the right side or rear from what we've been shown so that only leaves the passenger side.

I hope not...

Car looks great but I think they should have made the side view mirrors more rounded and smooth instead of what looks like to be "blocky"....

That's funny. I had the exact opposite reaction. The fuzzy pic we had before appeared to have more smooth, rounded mirrors and I didn't think it matched the Camaro at all.

Now these hi-res pics show that the mirror are in deed more angular, and I think it's a perfect fit.

The Camaro IS 'blocky', it's not smooth and rounded. Rounded mirrors would be completely out of place on the 5th Gen. IMO anyway.

Think I like the pre-pro better.

I'm 100% positive I like it better than the concept.

The rear of the pre-production actually looks more evil than the concept. I didn't think that was possible.

Now if they just keep those after-burner style taillights it'll be perfect.

I hope not...
+1.

I hope not...

It could be in the trunk in a makeshift fuel cell at this point too.

Is that a sunroof that I see mounted on that pre-production Camaro?

Is that a sunroof that I see mounted on that pre-production Camaro?yes.

Think I like the pre-pro better.

+1. As much as I loved the concept, I like the pre-pro better. At least from that view.

Sure, the reverse lights aren't the best, but I like everything else they did (very, very subtle as the changes were).

Damn wait is killing me.....

I think it looks "softer" because the dash to front axle length is shorter, the door to rear axle length is longer and it also has a longer deck.

It's the proportions.

All of those changes would seem to be in favor of more room in the rear seat and the trunk.

What I think that has been throwing me off is the smaller wheels (and wheel wells) on the mule. The larger wheels on the concept kicks it up a notch. I know the explanation that we won't see such large wheels is the cost issue, but doesn't the Charger and 300 have fairly large wheels?

The other things I wish were different is the door handles (I'd prefer something more flush with the door) and low trunk lid. At least I think it's a low trunk lid, because I can't think of any other reason for that line.

Oh, and the backup lights look like they were added as an afterthought. I hope the production version is placed better, but I don't have any suggestions on how to place them.

I agree, the placement of the backups doesn't seem too creative. I don't know if it has to do with fed regulations, but maybe they can put them inside the tailamps, a-la 1970's camaros?

The wheels on the Challenger are 20inch. The mules and the prototype are also supposed to be 20 inch - maybe it's the gap between wheel and arch or just the size of the arches themselves that make the wheels look smaller?

In any case, it'll be easy enough to swap them out with bigger 21/22 inchers to fill the gap!

Why couldn't they integrate the backup lights into the visible groove between the painted bumper and the blacked-out diffuser panel that incorporates the exhaust outlets? I'm pretty sure that the groove I am referring to separating the bumper cover and the diffuser on the concept car is mesh. It would be much cleaner looking than the solution used on the pre-production car and not unprecedented either since the backup lights on the C6 are mounted down low by the exhaust tips.

Why couldn't they integrate the backup lights into the visible groove between the painted bumper and the blacked-out diffuser panel that incorporates the exhaust outlets? I'm pretty sure that the groove I am referring to separating the bumper cover and the diffuser on the concept car is mesh. It would be much cleaner looking than the solution used on the pre-production car and not unprecedented either since the backup lights on the C6 are mounted down low by the exhaust tips.

I agree with you... they should try to hide those within the lower part of the bumber. Where the tail pipes are.... they would look better and give the back of a car a cleaner look.

Heritage?

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/12/web/240000-240999/240075_4_full.jpg

What I think that has been throwing me off is the smaller wheels (and wheel wells) on the mule. The larger wheels on the concept kicks it up a notch. I know the explanation that we won't see such large wheels is the cost issue, but doesn't the Charger and 300 have fairly large wheels?

The picture we've seen is a V6 car with 18" wheels. From what I've heard, it's likely that 19" wheels will be available. I suppose 20" is possible too, but I haven't heard anything to that effect. I doubt we'll see 21 or 22-inch wheels on the Camaro from the factory, but there's always the aftermarket! :D

I'd say the rear facia, which is leaning a few degrees towards the car now is a result of a real, legal bumper underneath.

And, Fbodfather already said those back-up lights aren't gonna make it, due to the space being used by wide license plates in other countries.
And, I like the angular side mirrors, they really flow well with the angular body lines.

It's still really hard to read dimensions since those 2 photo's are very different angles, and colors, and the outdoor light is much softer...and those fender flares can cause a little optical shinkage on the concept photo b/c of the angle.

I hope we don't have to walk around to the other side of the car to put gas in it
tho...

Still hoping for a GOOD ducktail spoiler option photo.;)

And, Fbodfather already said those back-up lights aren't gonna make it, due to the space being used by wide license plates in other countries.
And, I like the angular side mirrors, they really flow well with the angular body lines.




I don't think so, I think he said they can't be put closer (adjacent to) the license plate area because of that reason? The ones on the car shown are the final design.

I don't think so, I think he said they can't be put closer (adjacent to) the license plate area because of that reason? The ones on the car shown are the final design.
+1. That's what I remember reading.:D

Originally Posted by Fbodfather:
The Camaro will be exported to several countries. The back-up lights cannot be adjacent to the license plate -- as many license plates are substantially longer than U.S. Plates
Hmmm, I guess he'll have to clarify?...
If that's the case, I'd rather see them in the roll pan...somewhere.

Hmmm, I guess he'll have to clarify?...
If that's the case, I'd rather see them in the roll pan...somewhere.

I believe several people made comments about why not put the lights here:

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x210/Dragoneye22/rear.jpg

;) But I agree, if they could have implemented them into the black thingy (diffuser??) that would be slick. But I have no problem where they are now, the fact that they are so small is awesome to me.:D

and the gas filler, where did it end up ?Maybe they did the "heritage" thing and stuck it behind the tail light? :D

Maybe they did the "heritage" thing and stuck it behind the tail light? :D

you mean behind the license plate?

you mean behind the license plate?

No, tail light...

http://shopper.purrfectdomains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/chevy-gas-cap.jpg

:D

No, tail light...

http://shopper.purrfectdomains.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/chevy-gas-cap.jpg

:D

but that's not a camaro

the heritage thing would be to put it behind the license plate like the 1st gen camaros

but that's not a camaro...Ah yes, but it goes well with using 57 Chevy headlamp bezels for the dash guages, no? ;)

From what I can tell the proportions have changed slightly as Z284ever has said. I think this picture shows the diffences in proportion the best.
http://publish.shaw.ca/j0n0/images/camrocomparo.jpg

I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.

I think it is the rear wheel wells, they seem to be a little bit smaller. It'll probably look great with a larger size wheel.

The more I look at the comparison photo, the more excited I become! Something tells me no one is going to posting on the board when the photo of the production top dog is shown. We'll all be down at the dealership trying to be first in line to buy it.

I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.

Also the space between the end of the doors and the rear wheel wells. It would appear that the trunk is a bit longer as well (more rear overhang) as the rear glass doesn't come as close to the end of the trunk on the pre-production car.

In fact, the entire pre-production car's greenhouse would appear to be shifted forward slightly. And if those really are 20" wheels, they look awfully small in comparison to the rest of the car.

Also the space between the end of the doors and the rear wheel wells. It would appear that the trunk is a bit longer as well (more rear overhang) as the rear glass doesn't come as close to the end of the trunk on the pre-production car.

In fact, the entire pre-production car's greenhouse would appear to be shifted forward slightly. And if those really are 20" wheels, they look awfully small in comparison to the rest of the car.

I think the wheels are 18"s. I don't think the greenhouse is moved on the car but the door is a bit shorter and starts a bit further forward.

I think the jury will be out until production specs are listed and we can see the numbers to show what our eyes are picking up or not.

No, you guys got it all wrong. The filler cap isn't on either side or behind the plate or a taillamp - nope, the new Camaro doesn't need a filler cap. It's got a reactor under the hood - no need for gas so no filler cap - see, that was simple. :D

No, you guys got it all wrong. The filler cap isn't on either side or behind the plate or a taillamp - nope, the new Camaro doesn't need a filler cap. It's got a reactor under the hood - no need for gas so no filler cap - see, that was simple. :D
Don't you mean "Mr. Fusion"? :D

It appears the roof detailing has been lost. I realize there is a sunroof option apparently, but I was hoping these lines (similar to the C6 Vette) would make it to production. I imagine it's not cost effective for them to appear on non-sunroof cars.

It appears the roof detailing has been lost. I realize there is a sunroof option apparently, but I was hoping these lines (similar to the C6 Vette) would make it to production. I imagine it's not cost effective for them to appear on non-sunroof cars.

This is the same car as the rear shot with the sunroof.....non-sunroof cars should still have the "reverse mowhawk".

I believe several people made comments about why not put the lights here:

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x210/Dragoneye22/rear.jpg
European license plates are wider than US plates. If they put them there, they'd have to make a whole different bumper for other countries.

the heritage thing would be to put it behind the license plate like the 1st gen camaros

My Grand National has the gas cap behind the license plate, and I have to tell you, that would be a deal breaker for me on a new Camaro. It's seriously that annoying.

I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg

Very nice super excited now!

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg

Thanks for the comparo. The changes are small but worthwhile. The pics reaffirm that the pre-prod car is a better looker than the concept... in my humble opinion, of course.

The back of the concept looks slab sided compared to the pre-prod. Great improvement there!

I reckon the wheels are either 19" or 20", remembering the concept sported 21" fronts and 22" rears.

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg


Nice job.

I reckon the wheels are either 19" or 20", remembering the concept sported 21" fronts and 22" rears.

I'll bet you a premium membership that they're 18". :)

I think the concept is the "sexier" car. The longer hood, shorter deck, and six extra inches of width gave it better proportions.

That said, I think the proportions of the production car will make it much more livable, and that the sacrifice in sexiness is minimal and only noticeable when the car is right next to the concept.

I'd like to comment on some of the differences noted in TrickStang's image:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg
1. I disagree that the fender in front of the front wheel has more chunk. In fact, comparing them side by side, it appears to have considerably less chunk. :)

2. We've known since day 1 about the larger mirrors.

3. I think the sharpness of the body line near the bottom of the door will be more pronounced in better light and with metallic paint.

4. We have it on good authority that cars without a sunroof will retain the roof channel.

5. The thick window molding will be much less visible on darker-colored cars. Ditto for the B-pillar.

6. I think the characteristic I miss most from the concept is the body line that intersects with the wheel well. However, moving that body line up (along with increasing the gap between the wheel well and the shoulder line) is going to put a lot more room in the rear seat and trunk, and IMO that's going to be worth it.

7. One thing you missed is that there is more door below the body line on the bottom of the door. The body below the door has also gotten a bit thinner compared to the concept.

8. Finally, one more difference: you'll be able to buy one like the white one for a reasonable price, whereas the silver one is off limits. :D

It could be in the trunk in a makeshift fuel cell at this point too.

Good point graham, I didn't think about that. I just hope it's final location is on the driver's side. It wouldn't kill a deal for me or anything but I think more people prefer to have it on the driver’s side.

I'll bet you a premium membership that they're 18". :)

I think the concept is the "sexier" car. The longer hood, shorter deck, and six extra inches of width gave it better proportions.

That said, I think the proportions of the production car will make it much more livable, and that the sacrifice in sexiness is minimal and only noticeable when the car is right next to the concept.

I'd like to comment on some of the differences noted in TrickStang's image:


1. I disagree that the fender in front of the front wheel has more chunk. In fact, comparing them side by side, it appears to have considerably less chunk. :)
7. One thing you missed is that there is more door below the body line on the bottom of the door. The body below the door has also gotten a bit thinner compared to the concept.

1. I didnt mean the chunk was in the front end, but more as the car seems slightly stretched upwards. this kept the greenhouse very similar to the concept. they could have added the extra room by making the greenhouse larger but they chose the other rout. neither one better than the other, just an observation

7. I saw that too, but wasnt sure that was something really worth pointing out. But I guess i should have.

European license plates are wider than US plates. If they put them there, they'd have to make a whole different bumper for other countries.....

then where do european corvette drivers have their license plates??????

I did 3 tours in Germany while I was in the Army. The Germans had a special size plate to fit the American cars.

I did 3 tours in Germany while I was in the Army. The Germans had a special size plate to fit the American cars.

so then why do they use the excuse of european license plates for the new camaro?

Who knows?

I rotated out from 2ACR back to the States in 1990 and retired in 1995. But I would think that things would still be the same as far as the special size plates..

I just looked at a Police car club site in Germany and they are still running the US shaped German Plates on there American Police cars. Also there are cars from the Netherlands, same thing.

http://www.pcooa-ev.de/ The site is in German and English just click on the American Flag for English.

Here is another Police Car Cub in England. Again they have special plates to fit the American Police Cars. http://www.911evac.co.uk/index.html

So I can't see a good reason for where the reverse lights are located. Unless it's from down under.

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg

I think many of those changes have to do with meeting 5 star safety ratings. But you did an excellent job of pointing them out. I could imagine this is part of what GM is doing right now in their design studios. You could just see in some large room like a college lecture hall they have these two pictures projected on to a wall larger than life, and they disect each difference between the concept and pre-production car with another real life model they have in front of them.

Man, looking at all this neat stuff makes me want to go back to college all over again and go into engineering.

If there is one thing to say for sure, there is no shortage of tallented engineers at GM. It just seems it took Bob Lutz to bring out the best in them (unless this Camaro is being designed by a whole new, young group of folks my age - 30).

[QUOTE=JakeRobb;5105468]I think the concept is the "sexier" car. The longer hood, shorter deck, and six extra inches of width gave it better proportions.


So, who said the car is 6" narrower than the concept?! That is the first I've heard of that big a difference in the width of the car. I thought the production car was only going to be about an inch narrower.

European license plates are wider than US plates. If they put them there, they'd have to make a whole different bumper for other countries.
I know that...I think I posted that for somebody who asked why the lights couldn't be "where?". I like to speak in pictures.;):D

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg

That's so great you took the time to do that. :bow: Awesome.
If I may...can I point out a few things myself?:D I read earlier that some of what I'm about to say has been said, but :shrug: ;)

From back to front:

1: The trunk access. (you didn't point this one out), I believe it looks like the piece in between the taillights now moves WITH the trunk lid, in an additional effort to enlarge the access hole.

2:the "added bulk". I think that may be an effect of the angle more than not.(i.e. the Prototype shot is tipped a little, where the concept is flat on the ground)

3:"Wider gap"....ehhh, I'm not sold on that, but it does kinda look that way.

4:"Wheelwell stays below bodyline". I think this, again, may be one of those angle things.

5: "extra roof molding" and "loss of body line". It seems to me, that some prototypes have sunroofs (which would be the reason for the "loss of bodylines"), and some do not. (instead they have the hood groove) I believe to allow that flexibility for a sunroof, the roof has become a separate piece from the body - which explains the body moldings. Just pointing it for anybody afraid we've lost the inverted mohawk.

6: I'm still not seeing where there's more chunk in the front fender...

Again, thanks for putting that together, TrickStang, :D:D

here ya go, jus helpin you out.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b259/bluelightning302/camrocomparocopy.jpg

First of all great work. I think we differ on our view of the same picture in a few areas. I think many of you are over analyzing the picture but not actually seing the car itself. The big change in the picture you've used of the concept to compare to is the angle and lighting.

First we agree that the mirrors are differnet. So is the rear bumper in both size and shape, back up lights etc. B pillar also thicker. Moldings are part of production cars plain and simple you'll be glad when it rains that they are there. Trunk now has a lover reach in height and I think that's an improvement. All in all we knew of may of this and expected the rest.

Where we differ and I think it has more to do with lighting and angle but still appears differnt but I doubt it is.

A pillar IMO is the same width. Lighting and angle show the concept as more svelt but the pre-pro pic actually shows light from behind so the inside of the pillar is now seen.

I don't see any more chunk in the front.

Roof details are gone but I think the concensus is that it's due to the very obvious sunroof and other spy pics of of cars w/o sunroofs do have the C6 like roof detail. Thanks Mr. Peters.

Wider area between top of wheelwell and quarter panel deck is most likely also the same as the concept and wheelwell vs body door line. I think it may look this way but only because of the angle of the pre-pro Camaro vs concept. I doubt that it actually is.

Lower valance difference but only in shape not height. I think if the concept had the same design as the pre-pro it would look the same. Personally I like the production version better.

Is the front shorter from the door or the rear longer from back of door or is the wheelbase shorter or the door length?? Not much we can do about it now.

I'll bet you a premium membership that they're 18". :)


Yeah I read someone else say 18s as well but my calculation involved subtracting 2" from the overall wheel diameter of each wheel. I could well be wrong but 18" really look tiny on the VE. 19" look better. 20" look better again.

Anyway, for comparison, these HSV wheels are 19"... so you may be right? Hard to tell.

http://www.hsv.com.au/galleries/hsv/Eseries_clubsportr820/clubsportr8202.jpg

Why couldn't they integrate the backup lights into the visible groove between the painted bumper and the blacked-out diffuser panel that incorporates the exhaust outlets? I'm pretty sure that the groove I am referring to separating the bumper cover and the diffuser on the concept car is mesh. It would be much cleaner looking than the solution used on the pre-production car and not unprecedented either since the backup lights on the C6 are mounted down low by the exhaust tips.

I agree with you... they should try to hide those within the lower part of the bumber. Where the tail pipes are.... they would look better and give the back of a car a cleaner look.

Agreed X3. The backup lights, down on the rear diffuser, looks great on the Vette. While we're at it, I'm glad they put the aggressive rear diffuser on the pre-pro - looks mean! me likey!

So, who said the car is 6" narrower than the concept?! That is the first I've heard of that big a difference in the width of the car. I thought the production car was only going to be about an inch narrower.

The concept is 78" wide. AFAIK, the preproduction car is 72" wide. I believe that it is "one inch narrower" compared to a 4th gen, not the concept. Can anyone confirm this? I could be mistaken.

B pillar also thicker.

Thicker? The concept didn't have a pillar there at all. :)

The concept is 78" wide. AFAIK, the preproduction car is 72" wide. I believe that it is "one inch narrower" compared to a 4th gen, not the concept. Can anyone confirm this? I could be mistaken.


:eek: Yeah, I'd like to hear this too??? How is the concept 6" wider than the production car???

:eek: Yeah, I'd like to hear this too??? How is the concept 6" wider than the production car???

Our very own CamaroZ28.com gives the width of the concept (http://www.camaroz28.com/camaroconcept/
) at 79.6" (wider than I thought).

For reference, a Hummer H2 is 81.2" wide.

fbody.org lists the width of a 4th gen (http://www.f-body.org/tech/tech.htm#FourthGen) at 74.1", which is 5.5" less than the concept.

The 2010 Super Camaro FAQ (http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/showthread.php?t=467587) says that Scott said the production version wouldn't be as wide as the concept.

I can't find anything that actually references the width of the concept, but I remember seeing it recently.

I'm well aware Scott said it would be narrower, but I thought it would be an inch narrower than concept. If the car is, indeed that narrow... I think it's awesome... I can't tell the difference in the concept/pre prod. cars...

Hmmmm, I looked up Mustangs.... overall width 74".... based on this pic... looks like you may be onto something...

http://images.leftlanenews.com/content/november2007/chevy-camaro-6.jpg

Heres a chop I havent seen on here. it really help define the edges. its amazing how much the white "dumbs" it down. you can easily see the edges are still there in all there glory.
http://one8thmile.com/sitebuilder/images/PreProductionwheels22Camaro01Adarkgrey5go-600x450.jpg

http://www.mobilitysite.com/blogimages/0602_mjd_chevy_camaro_04_900-thumb.jpg

Now THOSE rims look like 20's! I like the 18's better. The bodylines look great in that 'chop.