An observation re: Camaro

Something like this should be on my Blog, but I want to throw this out for feedback.

GM is basically morgaging their entire existance on the Volt, a car that I personally feel is a White Elephant (facinating to look at, but does no good whatsoever). Perhaps even worse. The Volt is a car that is in the background of every GM brass interview. Volt is the car GM is toting as the future of the company, and the press GM is pushing for the Volt is incredible considering it's still about 1 1/2 to 2 years away.

But despite all this, GM is going to lose money on every Volt they produce. One would expect that with the full bore PR GM is doing with the Volt, GM wants to sell a gazillion of them when they come out. Fact is, the more Volts GM sells, the more it loses. GM know this. Production of the Volt at least the 1st few years will be extremely limited (only 10,000 will be made the 1st year). With a pricetag that is expected to be well between $35,000 (if it gets government tax breaks) to $40,000 (if it doesn't), the idea of limiting production may become as meaningless as CAFE standards when gas is $5 per gallon.


But yet, you have the Camaro. A car that generates enthusiasm and excitement at every showing (the latest as the Daytona 500 pace car). It's a car that GM would never have approved if it came along just 1 year later. It's a project that sat in GM's system for a decade, then was rammed through with a speed almost unheard of at GM without Federal regulations chomping at their collective butts. It is the sole survivor of a car line that was supposed to make GM a legitamate full line car maker again, putting it's cookie cutter image in the trash heap once and for all.

It's obvious that as long as the loan market thaws out, Camaro is going to be a smash hit. With Mustangs selling now selling at a 4K a month clip and Challengers running 2600+ monthly, even with the current credit market, the 5th gen Camaro is most likely going to have the best production year since '99... and if credit improves by spring, with pent up demand for new cars, Camaro will be riding a crest of new car buying.

With an extensive option and factory personalization list (which will send a Camaro SS well into Corvette pricing territory), GM is set up to make serious bank on the Camaro. Chrysler is making quite a bit on Challenger's extensive option list.


It's ironic that the car that GM would not have made (and in most circles wishes it hadn't) is not only going to outsell their darling (the Volt) by whopping margins, but is going to clear a comparative massive amount of money on each Camaro made (even base V6 Camaros have a thin profit margin built in, let alone loaded 2SS).

The Volt may start making GM money late in the decade, but what is GM to do until then? Today, General Motors Corperation would have been shuttered for over a month if the government hadn't released money to keep them afloat just days before New Years. The Volt isn't going to make a profit before 2015... if ever.

The irony is that the Camaro stands to do more to save GM (by actually bringing money into the company instead of bleeding it out) than the Volt, despite it's standing next to the Volt.

but the cruze is more important than either of those two you mentioned.

The Cruze is undoubtedly vital to long-term survival, but I don't think it will do as much for Chevrolet image-wise nor be as profitable as Camaro will be. A successful Camaro can only be beneficial to Cruze - a younger buyer may come in to look at a Camaro and go for a Cruze instead if that's all they can afford. That's assuming that there's some kind of Cruze SS Turbocharged - which I think there will be.

honestly i don't see GM selling that many camaros vs the amount of cruzes that would be sold.

I think they are pushing the Volt not only to help it's sales when it comes out, but to also try to change GM's image, that they have what it takes to compete(even if it's not out yet) and to try to tell people that they are not all about trucks and gas hogs, that they do have innovation, design and technology.

I think they are pushing the Volt not only to help it's sales when it comes out, but to also try to change GM's image, that they have what it takes to compete(even if it's not out yet) and to try to tell people that they are not all about trucks and gas hogs, that they do have innovation, design and technology.
and if the go see one...find out they can't afford one ...and all they see on the lot is trucks and gas hogs then what?

honestly i don't see GM selling that many camaros vs the amount of cruzes that would be sold.

Nope, I don't either, but I would guess that the profit margin will be somewhat slim on Cruze whereas there will probably be some decent profit in a high-content Camaro.

i hate blogs.
but besides that, i think that the whole hybrid /electric car phase is goign ot be just that, a phase. just like it was in the 70's and the 80's and even early 90's. its going to pass and we'll get back to our regular life.

Nope, I don't either, but I would guess that the profit margin will be somewhat slim on Cruze whereas there will probably be some decent profit in a high-content Camaro.
i don't think the profit margin can compensate.

and if the go see one...find out they can't afford one ...and all they see on the lot is trucks and gas hogs then what?

Well, then they got some showroom traffic and if they can't afford that, then they walk right on over to the Cruze or another vehicle that they might be interested in and find out they actually offer vehicles that might actually fit them other than trucks and gas hogs.

i hate blogs.
but besides that, i think that the whole hybrid /electric car phase is goign ot be just that, a phase. just like it was in the 70's and the 80's and even early 90's. its going to pass and we'll get back to our regular life.

The one difference between then and now is that we now have the technology to develop adequate batteries for the job. There are so many good news in the battery engineering world nowadays that i feel we're on the electric track for good. Of course there are plenty of uses where batteries will be useless, but in time i think comsumer cars will all be electric. Even more so if anyone finds a way to bypass batteries altogether. The drag strip guys will love it because electric engines are beasts (check a dyno)

That being said, when that day comes i'll be really sad to see 4-troke engines die out. There is nothing electric that will ever replace the rumble of a sports engine, and nothing that will ever come close to the thrill of bringing an engine to its redline while drag-racing.

The value of the Volt lies in its ability to appeal to the tree huggers in Congress and thus, helped free up the cash for a loan.

Well, then they got some showroom traffic and if they can't afford that, then they walk right on over to the Cruze or another vehicle that they might be interested in and find out they actually offer vehicles that might actually fit them other than trucks and gas hogs.will the cruze be out by then? if not all they are going to see is outdated cobalts and impalas.

The one difference between then and now is that we now have the technology to develop adequate batteries for the job. There are so many good news in the battery engineering world nowadays that i feel we're on the electric track for good. Of course there are plenty of uses where batteries will be useless, but in time i think comsumer cars will all be electric. Even more so if anyone finds a way to bypass batteries altogether. The drag strip guys will love it because electric engines are beasts (check a dyno)

That being said, when that day comes i'll be really sad to see 4-troke engines die out. There is nothing electric that will ever replace the rumble of a sports engine, and nothing that will ever come close to the thrill of bringing an engine to its redline while drag-racing.

this is a phase. the only good battery driven car out there that i have seen thus far is the Tesla roadster. as far as the volt and those cars, yeah they seem cool. but their not very practical at all. no one understands what happens when the battery's break or wear down. its not as simple or cheap to replace a entire set of car batteries like its a flash light. its going to have a "warranty" for a certain amount of time. then what? the warranties up and your paying out the ass for a new battery that cost you close to 10grand after all the labor and materials cost. these cars are a joke right now. very impractical and uselss after they would break down. no longer will you be able to just go in your garage and work on your car if you have a problem. youll have to call the dealer(becasue local mechanics sure dont know jack about battery oppereated cars) just to diagnose the problem and then you have to pay them to fix it. whatever it may be. there are so many things that can go wrong and WILL go wrong with these cars. just think, we are just now getting to a point in vehicle manufacturing where we dont have alot of "kinks" to work out. and gas powered motors have been around for decades! battery driven cars are a joke. im sorry thats the way i feel and im not buying into the "electric/hybrid" era. it will pass.

i don't think the profit margin can compensate.

Nevermind, you're right. The Cruze is going to be Chevrolets image leader. High schoolers are going to be drawing it on their notebooks and daydreaming about the day that they, if they are incredibly lucky, might actually own a Cruze!

Just because it's the volume seller doesn't make it the image car. Cobalt was selling pretty well for a GM car up until recently, but do people asprire to own them, or buy them (as I did) because they are cheap, reliable transportation?

but the cruze is more important than either of those two you mentioned.

I am in no way debating that point. With Cruze replacing Cobalt, it's going to be at minimum, a 200K annual car versus Camaro's 40-75K.

The point was that the Camaro, a car that GM would have never made if it waited a year, is going to do more for the company (and by reaction, will define a new GM more) than the car that's getting all the press.

I think the Cruze will be a straight out success, but it's production was never in doubt and didn't have nearly the resistence of the Camaro program or all the push of the Volt's.

The value of the Volt lies in its ability to appeal to the tree huggers in Congress and thus, helped free up the cash for a loan.

There isn't enough actual treehuggers in congress to hold a decent card game, let alone gather the votes for a "green" agenda.

When the issue is jobs in their district, then that's when you have their full attention.

Just because it's the volume seller doesn't make it the image car. Cobalt was selling pretty well for a GM car up until recently, but do people asprire to own them, or buy them (as I did) because they are cheap, reliable transportation?

You're correct about not just the Cobalt, but any small volume car.

Image cars are not typically volume cars. Image cars are the cars that people want or aspire to. That simply doesn't happen with a Focus, Fusion, Malibu, or Cobalt. Mustang & Camaro are image cars. So is Viper & Corvette. Solstice and the XLR (soon to be replaced with the CTS coupe).

Image cars (halo cars, aspirational cars... all the same) draw traffic into showrooms, and help sell other brands. You may go into a showroom and buy a Malibu LTZ, but in your mind you bought a car that shares a history with Corvettes. A Fusion buyer might have a different view of Ford if they never had a Mustang in the showroom.

this is a phase. the only good battery driven car out there that i have seen thus far is the Tesla roadster. as far as the volt and those cars, yeah they seem cool. but their not very practical at all. no one understands what happens when the battery's break or wear down. its not as simple or cheap to replace a entire set of car batteries like its a flash light. its going to have a "warranty" for a certain amount of time. then what? the warranties up and your paying out the ass for a new battery that cost you close to 10grand after all the labor and materials cost. these cars are a joke right now. very impractical and uselss after they would break down. no longer will you be able to just go in your garage and work on your car if you have a problem. youll have to call the dealer(becasue local mechanics sure dont know jack about battery oppereated cars) just to diagnose the problem and then you have to pay them to fix it. whatever it may be. there are so many things that can go wrong and WILL go wrong with these cars. just think, we are just now getting to a point in vehicle manufacturing where we dont have alot of "kinks" to work out. and gas powered motors have been around for decades! battery driven cars are a joke. im sorry thats the way i feel and im not buying into the "electric/hybrid" era. it will pass.

The Tesla to the Volt isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison since the Tesla has just batteries and no internal combustion engine at all. The Volt, in essence, carries its own battery charger.

I'm sure GM has been performing extensive lifecycle testing on the Volt's powertrain and I'd guess it will be stone cold reliable.

The Prius technology was untested in the marketplace when it was introduced, but it's proved to be a very reliable car.

I'd guess the Volt will have at least a 100,000 mile Voltec powertrain warranty if not more.

Your points about service are certainly something to think about, though. Joe on the corner won't be fixing it!

The Tesla to the Volt isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison since the Tesla has just batteries and no internal combustion engine at all. The Volt, in essence, carries its own battery charger.

I'm sure GM has been performing extensive lifecycle testing on the Volt's powertrain and I'd guess it will be stone cold reliable.

The Prius technology was untested in the marketplace when it was introduced, but it's proved to be a very reliable car.

I'd guess the Volt will have at least a 100,000 mile Voltec powertrain warranty if not more.

Your points about service are certainly something to think about, though. Joe on the corner won't be fixing it!i know the tesla is not the same as the volt. yeah you get a 5yr 100k warranty. your good for 5 years. after that your on your own. the prius' have a 10 yr warranty i think. so your good for 10 yrs. as long as the warranty covers whatever issue it is that is wrong with your car. if it comes to replacing the batteries(around 7-10k) im sure they will be looking for something that you did to the car so they wont have to cover it under warranty. there will be so many restrictions on these car adn "little black box's" its going to be sick. they will look for any way to get out of paying for the new battery for you. yeah the people buying these cars are going to be paying around 35k for the car too. out the door close to 40k. when does your gas savings start? well not right away becasue your 40k in debt now. where as if you were to buy a car that gets 30+mpg on a regular gas motor, and you paid 15-20 k for it. your savings start way earlier than the volt or prius.

Nevermind, you're right. The Cruze is going to be Chevrolets image leader. High schoolers are going to be drawing it on their notebooks and daydreaming about the day that they, if they are incredibly lucky, might actually own a Cruze!

Just because it's the volume seller doesn't make it the image car. Cobalt was selling pretty well for a GM car up until recently, but do people asprire to own them, or buy them (as I did) because they are cheap, reliable transportation?i applaud the sarcasm.:) but highschool drawers don't make GM money either. right now GM needs profits and thats why the cruze is more important.

Something like this should be on my Blog, but I want to throw this out for feedback.

GM is basically morgaging their entire existance on the Volt, a car that I personally feel is a White Elephant (facinating to look at, but does no good whatsoever). Perhaps even worse. The Volt is a car that is in the background of every GM brass interview. Volt is the car GM is toting as the future of the company, and the press GM is pushing for the Volt is incredible considering it's still about 1 1/2 to 2 years away.

But despite all this, GM is going to lose money on every Volt they produce. One would expect that with the full bore PR GM is doing with the Volt, GM wants to sell a gazillion of them when they come out. Fact is, the more Volts GM sells, the more it loses. GM know this. Production of the Volt at least the 1st few years will be extremely limited (only 10,000 will be made the 1st year). With a pricetag that is expected to be well between $35,000 (if it gets government tax breaks) to $40,000 (if it doesn't), the idea of limiting production may become as meaningless as CAFE standards when gas is $5 per gallon.


But yet, you have the Camaro. A car that generates enthusiasm and excitement at every showing (the latest as the Daytona 500 pace car). It's a car that GM would never have approved if it came along just 1 year later. It's a project that sat in GM's system for a decade, then was rammed through with a speed almost unheard of at GM without Federal regulations chomping at their collective butts. It is the sole survivor of a car line that was supposed to make GM a legitamate full line car maker again, putting it's cookie cutter image in the trash heap once and for all.

It's obvious that as long as the loan market thaws out, Camaro is going to be a smash hit. With Mustangs selling now selling at a 4K a month clip and Challengers running 2600+ monthly, even with the current credit market, the 5th gen Camaro is most likely going to have the best production year since '99... and if credit improves by spring, with pent up demand for new cars, Camaro will be riding a crest of new car buying.

With an extensive option and factory personalization list (which will send a Camaro SS well into Corvette pricing territory), GM is set up to make serious bank on the Camaro. Chrysler is making quite a bit on Challenger's extensive option list.


It's ironic that the car that GM would not have made (and in most circles wishes it hadn't) is not only going to outsell their darling (the Volt) by whopping margins, but is going to clear a comparative massive amount of money on each Camaro made (even base V6 Camaros have a thin profit margin built in, let alone loaded 2SS).

The Volt may start making GM money late in the decade, but what is GM to do until then? Today, General Motors Corperation would have been shuttered for over a month if the government hadn't released money to keep them afloat just days before New Years. The Volt isn't going to make a profit before 2015... if ever.

The irony is that the Camaro stands to do more to save GM (by actually bringing money into the company instead of bleeding it out) than the Volt, despite it's standing next to the Volt.

I agree with you 100%! The Volt will not make a profit and I for one am not and will never be interested in ANY kind of electric car. The thing that really gets me is that we have tons of oil, to be precise, we have the worlds largest oil reserve, 3 times what the whole entire middle east has! If we started utilizing this oil now, we would have oil LONG after all of us here are gone, our children our gone, and their children our gone! It is absolutely absurd that the government is essentially forcing GM to biuld electric cars, hydrids and the like, and then in turn they are being crammed down our throats, the consumers! Just think how far the gasoline engine has come in the past 10 years or so. You could not even imagine the type of performance along with the incredible fuel economy they get years ago, and it will only keep getting better. The government should stay out of what GM does and basically every other company that makes products and services in this country, because everytime it gets involved it only hurts the products/services and the consumer is the one that ultimately in the end suffers. Sorry for being so political, don't like mixing politics with a passion such as cars on a site like this, but unfortunately the reason that the Volt even exists today is the sole responsibility of the liberals and their environmentalist buddies, a.k.a. your friendly tree huggers!

i applaud the sarcasm.:) but highschool drawers don't make GM money either. right now GM needs profits and thats why the cruze is more important.

I won't have a Camaro this coming year, but I can guarantee there will be some in high school parking lots across the country. Not only are some parents who buy their kids brand new cars, but teens are a huge influence on their parents purchases as well.

I'll be curious to see what the profit breakdown is on Cruze. My understanding is it was a loss on Cavalier and not much better on Cobalt. I've heard the Cobalt referred to as "profitable" but no exact figures.

Sharing Cruze with so many markets will probably help, but per car profit will still be lower than Camaro.

I'm not saying in any way, shape or form that the Cruze is not important, but I think if Camaro sells well, it can definitely add to the bottom line and could be a positive for Chevrolet/GM public image.

i applaud the sarcasm.:) but highschool drawers don't make GM money either. right now GM needs profits and thats why the cruze is more important.

And let's not forget why the Cruze is being built, it is solely for the purpose of fuel efficiency to help meet that ridiculous 2020 CAFE B.S.

i know the tesla is not the same as the volt. yeah you get a 5yr 100k warranty. your good for 5 years. after that your on your own. the prius' have a 10 yr warranty i think. so your good for 10 yrs. as long as the warranty covers whatever issue it is that is wrong with your car. if it comes to replacing the batteries(around 7-10k) im sure they will be looking for something that you did to the car so they wont have to cover it under warranty. there will be so many restrictions on these car adn "little black box's" its going to be sick. they will look for any way to get out of paying for the new battery for you. yeah the people buying these cars are going to be paying around 35k for the car too. out the door close to 40k. when does your gas savings start? well not right away becasue your 40k in debt now. where as if you were to buy a car that gets 30+mpg on a regular gas motor, and you paid 15-20 k for it. your savings start way earlier than the volt or prius.

GMs current Hybrid Component warranty on their current hybrids is 8 years/100,000 miles, which is the same as the Prius and other Toyota hybrids. So, I'd assume Volt will get the same treatment.

From what I've read, averaging things out, Prius pays off in about 4 years. Volt is an unknown right now and will probably vary considerably depending on how the owner uses one.

I agree totally that buying a Volt won't really be about cost savings. I think people who buy them will look at it as investing in new technologies.

I won't have a Camaro this coming year, but I can guarantee there will be some in high school parking lots across the country. Not only are some parents who buy their kids brand new cars, but teens are a huge influence on their parents purchases as well.

I'll be curious to see what the profit breakdown is on Cruze. My understanding is it was a loss on Cavalier and not much better on Cobalt. I've heard the Cobalt referred to as "profitable" but no exact figures.

Sharing Cruze with so many markets will probably help, but per car profit will still be lower than Camaro.

I'm not saying in any way, shape or form that the Cruze is not important, but I think if Camaro sells well, it can definitely add to the bottom line and could be a positive for Chevrolet/GM public image.it maybe per car less but i'm sure it will sell more than 2:1.

i know the tesla is not the same as the volt. yeah you get a 5yr 100k warranty. your good for 5 years. after that your on your own. Actually, the last we heard, GM was talking about a separate lease/warranty on the battery packs. You could purchase the car, then lease the battery packs. After 5 years (tbd), you'd replace the battery pack and then enter into a new lease/warranty on the replacement.

...GM is basically morgaging their entire existance on the Volt, a car that I personally feel is a White Elephant (facinating to look at, but does no good whatsoever). Perhaps even worse. The Volt is a car that is in the background of every GM brass interview. Volt is the car GM is toting as the future of the company, and the press GM is pushing for the Volt is incredible considering it's still about 1 1/2 to 2 years away.

But despite all this, GM is going to lose money on every Volt they produce. One would expect that with the full bore PR GM is doing with the Volt, GM wants to sell a gazillion of them when they come out...

...The irony is that the Camaro stands to do more to save GM (by actually bringing money into the company instead of bleeding it out) than the Volt, despite it's standing next to the Volt.

Everyone is missing the politics angle. There are two critical deadlines in the coming weeks, February 17 and March 31. If GM cannot convince Washington they are on the right track, they’ll have to pay back the loan and won’t get any future funding. In other words, GM will be dead.

Therefore they are playing it smart. Pushing cars like the Volt, Cruze and Beat as the future of GM, while they downplay cars like the Camaro and delaying a car like the CTS Coupe. Once the Camaros hit the showroom floors and start selling like crazy, then GM will feel relaxed to tell Washington, “look, the American buyer wants Camaro” and it will be easier to sell a 400+hp musclecar to the Feds when the American consumers are gobbling them up. Then they can highlight the Camaro while maintaining the line that cars like Volt, Cruze and Beat are the future of GM, however the Camaro will help pave the way to get there.

Everyone is missing the politics angle. There are two critical deadlines in the coming weeks, February 17 and March 31. If GM cannot convince Washington they are on the right track, they’ll have to pay back the loan and won’t get any future funding. In other words, GM will be dead.

Therefore they are playing it smart. Pushing cars like the Volt, Cruze and Beat as the future of GM, while they downplay cars like the Camaro and delaying a car like the CTS Coupe. Once the Camaros hit the showroom floors and start selling like crazy, then GM will feel relaxed to tell Washington, “look, the American buyer wants Camaro” and it will be easier to sell a 400+hp musclecar to the Feds when the American consumers are gobbling them up. Then they can highlight the Camaro while maintaining the line that cars like Volt, Cruze and Beat are the future of GM, however the Camaro will help pave the way to get there.

DING!

Kind of like our presidents choice in cars. When no one was looking, he had a Hemi powered 300C. When that became a political liability, he bought a hybrid. You buy what you want when left to your own devices, but when everyone's looking, you get what you're expected to get. So GM may have to play the green card for now, but if the public clearly shows that it wants muscle, they will oblige.

Besides, who in their right mind would spend 40 grand on a midsized car when you could buy a much more practical Malibu for 15-20k less? That buys a lot of gas, even at $5/gal.

GM is borrowing money, they have to prove that they are taking steps to improve.
So for now the Volt is a dog and pony show.
It's a great car, but the battery technology just isn't there yet at an affordable price.
If gas prices go up again, and they will, the Volt is more of a deal.
I really think we should have the Volt though for 3 reasons:
1. It keeps GM and other companies working on the technology.
2. The more Volts that are sold, the better the corporate average fuel economy rating is for CAFE, thus keeping the V8 Camaro around longer.
3. The more Volts and economy cars that are sold, the more gas will be around for our Camaros in the future.

GMs current Hybrid Component warranty on their current hybrids is 8 years/100,000 miles, which is the same as the Prius and other Toyota hybrids. So, I'd assume Volt will get the same treatment.

From what I've read, averaging things out, Prius pays off in about 4 years. Volt is an unknown right now and will probably vary considerably depending on how the owner uses one.

I agree totally that buying a Volt won't really be about cost savings. I think people who buy them will look at it as investing in new technologies.

theres no way that the car pays its self off in 4 years. maybe you get the loan payed off in 4 years but when do you actually start to get to the "good investment" part of the c ar. you spent all the 40k paying it off, now when do you start to make your money back on the gas savings?
compare this car to a new silverado which gets the best gas mileage of all the trucks. how much willa base truck cost? 20grand,now with all the discount. maybe thats a little high for a base with incentives. but still its 20 grand cheaper than the volt. now with this truck you have so much more capability than with the volt becasue of the towing/hauling aspect. seating 3-6 people depending if its ext. cab or not. compared to the volts 5 seats and very small trunk. where as the silverado has a very large bed. now with gas savings you are saving right away because you dont have as much $ into the silverado as you do the volt. and granted the volt gets 40miles with 0 gas, the silverado is getting 18-20mpg. and the silverado cost your home electric bill 0 dollars to "charge" at night. by the time the volt catches up to the silverado in"getting its moneys worth", the volt is going to need those batteries replaced. no way is there a 4 year payoff in the volt. you may pay the loan off in 4 years but you will not get your investment out of it in gas in 4 years.

Everyone is missing the politics angle. There are two critical deadlines in the coming weeks, February 17 and March 31. If GM cannot convince Washington they are on the right track, they’ll have to pay back the loan and won’t get any future funding. In other words, GM will be dead.

Therefore they are playing it smart. Pushing cars like the Volt, Cruze and Beat as the future of GM, while they downplay cars like the Camaro and delaying a car like the CTS Coupe. Once the Camaros hit the showroom floors and start selling like crazy, then GM will feel relaxed to tell Washington, “look, the American buyer wants Camaro” and it will be easier to sell a 400+hp musclecar to the Feds when the American consumers are gobbling them up. Then they can highlight the Camaro while maintaining the line that cars like Volt, Cruze and Beat are the future of GM, however the Camaro will help pave the way to get there.
thats just pathetic that the cars now have to be ok'd by the govt. great life we have here now. no more can they just make a car, they have to watch their back because of that stupid bail out.

Actually, the last we heard, GM was talking about a separate lease/warranty on the battery packs. You could purchase the car, then lease the battery packs. After 5 years (tbd), you'd replace the battery pack and then enter into a new lease/warranty on the replacement.

for the low price of...............? so you can lease a car, but you can lease the battery? so if you dont pay your lease payment, their going to reposes your batteries?! haha. ahhh this just gets better and better.

this is a phase. the only good battery driven car out there that i have seen thus far is the Tesla roadster. as far as the volt and those cars, yeah they seem cool. but their not very practical at all. no one understands what happens when the battery's break or wear down. its not as simple or cheap to replace a entire set of car batteries like its a flash light. its going to have a "warranty" for a certain amount of time. then what? the warranties up and your paying out the ass for a new battery that cost you close to 10grand after all the labor and materials cost. these cars are a joke right now. very impractical and uselss after they would break down. no longer will you be able to just go in your garage and work on your car if you have a problem. youll have to call the dealer(becasue local mechanics sure dont know jack about battery oppereated cars) just to diagnose the problem and then you have to pay them to fix it. whatever it may be. there are so many things that can go wrong and WILL go wrong with these cars. just think, we are just now getting to a point in vehicle manufacturing where we dont have alot of "kinks" to work out. and gas powered motors have been around for decades! battery driven cars are a joke. im sorry thats the way i feel and im not buying into the "electric/hybrid" era. it will pass.

Believe it or not, IC engines get replaced when they get old and tired too; it's not like batteries will be more 'disposable' to owners of battery cars than engiens are to owners of IC cars. GM isn't working on making a large Duracell or Energizer here!

IMO, electric cars are DEFINITELY coming, and they'll be here to stay until the next big thing comes (I'm thinking we'll just figure out how to teleport and won't need cars at all :p ). By todays standards, gas engines were a joke when they first came out too.

theres no way that the car pays its self off in 4 years. maybe you get the loan payed off in 4 years but when do you actually start to get to the "good investment" part of the c ar. you spent all the 40k paying it off, now when do you start to make your money back on the gas savings?
compare this car to a new silverado which gets the best gas mileage of all the trucks. how much willa base truck cost? 20grand,now with all the discount. maybe thats a little high for a base with incentives. but still its 20 grand cheaper than the volt. now with this truck you have so much more capability than with the volt becasue of the towing/hauling aspect. seating 3-6 people depending if its ext. cab or not. compared to the volts 5 seats and very small trunk. where as the silverado has a very large bed. now with gas savings you are saving right away because you dont have as much $ into the silverado as you do the volt. and granted the volt gets 40miles with 0 gas, the silverado is getting 18-20mpg. and the silverado cost your home electric bill 0 dollars to "charge" at night. by the time the volt catches up to the silverado in"getting its moneys worth", the volt is going to need those batteries replaced. no way is there a 4 year payoff in the volt. you may pay the loan off in 4 years but you will not get your investment out of it in gas in 4 years.

I did not say that I thought the Volt would pay off in 4 years. I was only referring to the Prius in that case. Here is what I said:

From what I've read, averaging things out, Prius pays off in about 4 years. Volt is an unknown right now and will probably vary considerably depending on how the owner uses one.

I agree totally that buying a Volt won't really be about cost savings. I think people who buy them will look at it as investing in new technologies.


Until we find out exactly how much the sticker price on the Volt is and how much it costs to charge one, there is simply no way to figure out when and if you will save money with the Volt. I would, however, wager it will likely be before the battery pack is worn out if gas returns to $4.00 a gallon. If it stays at $2.00? Maybe not.

^ I'm with Eric

Most people aren't going to buy the Volt to save money. They're going to buy it because they like the idea of the car, like to be green, and like how it looks. Not everything comes down to dollars and cents when you buy a car. If it did, we'd all be driving Aveos and base model pickups.

I for one would love to have a Volt. I think they look good, and it would be cool to drive on electric power. For the money I'd buy something more performance oriented, but I'd guess >80% of the public don't hold that kind of performance as paramount as we do; and that's who's going to buy them :)

but the cruze is more important than either of those two you mentioned.

The Cruze will give GM a decent smaller car like every other manufacturer already has. There won't be Cobalts to laugh at anymore....but that's about it. I'm sure it will be a great car, but as an image leader for GM? I don't think so.

I agree with you 100%! The Volt will not make a profit and I for one am not and will never be interested in ANY kind of electric car. The thing that really gets me is that we have tons of oil, to be precise, we have the worlds largest oil reserve, 3 times what the whole entire middle east has! If we started utilizing this oil now, we would have oil LONG after all of us here are gone, our children our gone, and their children our gone!

Thanks for the agreement, but I do have to interject that the US does not have the world's largest reserves of oil. The US is ranked about 3rd. I can tell where you got this info (talk radio... I've heard some of those ridiculous claims myself), but please... always do your own research.

Do you know the biggest suppliers of oil to the US is Canada, Mexico, Liberia, and Venzuela... not a group of Arab countries?

The issue with oil is that there is no 3 countries alone (let alone a single country) that can supply us with all the oil we need. We use so much oil that it threatens our national security. Also, the more oil we buy from outside the country, the more money we send outside the country which creates a trade deficit (more money going out than coming in). The thing we MUST do is drop oil consumption to the point where we can function with just the oil available to us from friendly countries, as well as balence out our trade.


It is absolutely absurd that the government is essentially forcing GM to biuld electric cars, hydrids and the like, and then in turn they are being crammed down our throats, the consumers! Just think how far the gasoline engine has come in the past 10 years or so. You could not even imagine the type of performance along with the incredible fuel economy they get years ago, and it will only keep getting better. The government should stay out of what GM does and basically every other company that makes products and services in this country, because everytime it gets involved it only hurts the products/services and the consumer is the one that ultimately in the end suffers.

GM got themselves in this position. The idea that the government forced GM into this position simply doesn't hold water. General Motors is the planet's biggest car company. It has resources available that would blow your mind. However, Toyota not only jumped ahead in production, but while GM has a $60 billion debt, Toyota has a $100 billion cash warchest. Ford, a much smaller company managed to go without federal help, and might just be able to avoid it all together. Chrysler is a flyspeck next to GM.. yet last June, Chrysler had more cash than GM.

Anyone going to someone else for money needs to be prepared for conditions attached. It happens with banks, it happens with loans to friends (you wouldn't lend an alcholoic deadbeat friend money for more drinks), and it should be the case with loans from governments.

Sorry for being so political, don't like mixing politics with a passion such as cars on a site like this, but unfortunately the reason that the Volt even exists today is the sole responsibility of the liberals and their environmentalist buddies, a.k.a. your friendly tree huggers!

Again, your passion simply is not supported by the facts. No one was holding a gun to the head of GM to produce the Volt any more than anyone was holding a gun to the heads of Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Chrysler, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Kia, Hyundai, BMW, or any other car maker that makes & sells vehicles here in the United States.

GM... and GM ALONE... decided to win brownie points like Toyota did by producing the Volt. Do a Google or Yahoo search, and you will find out that Bob Lutz pushed the thing almost singlehandedly.

The idea behind the Volt is great: Create a rolling sellable advertisement that would be great for GM's image, just like Toyota did with the Prius. Even Honda just got into the act this year.

But the difference between both Honda and Toyota is that they have litterally BILLIONS in the bank, and are constantly earning profits. They can afford to produce a money loser that will give them great press with enviroimentalists and greenies. In Toyota's case, it hides the terrible mileage of some of their trucks and V6 cars next to US brands.

But GM is hemmoraging money like a guy with a severed limb. The absolute last thing GM needs is something that will make them bleed even more.... especially when they need a transfusion from a source of last resort because no one else will give them anything because they see it as a hopeless proposition.


I feel the Volt is the last thing GM needs. But GM has painted themselves in a corner on this because they themselves have heavily hyped it.

While Ford & Chrysler are busy throwing every resource they have to survive, GM is throwing every resource it has into the Volt.

Again, I appriciate the passion, I myself am also not interested in any electric cars yet (they simply are not cost efficient, and I drive long distances). But we do have to decrease (greatly) the oil we consume. There's plenty of cost effective options available today (diesel, downsizing, even a fuel tax) that still lets the marketplace work.

Believe it or not, IC engines get replaced when they get old and tired too; it's not like batteries will be more 'disposable' to owners of battery cars than engiens are to owners of IC cars. GM isn't working on making a large Duracell or Energizer here!

IMO, electric cars are DEFINITELY coming, and they'll be here to stay until the next big thing comes (I'm thinking we'll just figure out how to teleport and won't need cars at all :p ). By todays standards, gas engines were a joke when they first came out too.

this is the same thing they said years ago when they were bringing out electric cars. then they cancelled them. and im not mechanical genius, but i have better odds of rebuilding a combustion engine compared to, me having build or rebuild an electric motor. its a phase.

^ I'm with Eric

Most people aren't going to buy the Volt to save money. They're going to buy it because they like the idea of the car, like to be green, and like how it looks. Not everything comes down to dollars and cents when you buy a car. If it did, we'd all be driving Aveos and base model pickups.

I for one would love to have a Volt. I think they look good, and it would be cool to drive on electric power. For the money I'd buy something more performance oriented, but I'd guess >80% of the public don't hold that kind of performance as paramount as we do; and that's who's going to buy them :)it does come down to things being about money. yeah yeah about the environment and all that bs tree hugger crap. people buy hybrid and electric cars to save on gas. people go nuts when gas is expensive and then they cut down their driving. so people arent goign to buy these cars just becasue its the baddest car on the road. or the new cool thing. ok maybe people in Hollywood will. but in real world, a 40k hybrid(and lutz was quoted saying around 35 for the volt) is rediculous.

thats just pathetic that the cars now have to be ok'd by the govt. great life we have here now. no more can they just make a car, they have to watch their back because of that stupid bail out.

Would you rather Washington let the auto industry fail and then we'd have to buy all of our cars from overseas? I guarrantee you that a future without GM, Ford and Chrysler is not what any of us want.

In a world without Detroit the rest of the auto industry is going to be fairly conservative with their products so that they don't end up out of business themselves. If you like cookie-cutter design and economy cars, that may not be an issue. But if you like individualistic styling and freedom of choice, your options would be fairly limited in that scenario, and probably out of the price range for most consumers.

it does come down to things being about money. yeah yeah about the environment and all that bs tree hugger crap. people buy hybrid and electric cars to save on gas. people go nuts when gas is expensive and then they cut down their driving.

People do not buy hybrid and electric cars to save (money) on gas. Typically it costs more to own, operate and maintain a hybrid or electric car in today's world. They purchase them because they believe it helps the environment. Whether or not that they actually help the environment is open to debate; however, if saving money were the only issue, they'd buy something else.

people act like filling bankruptcy is a new thing. chrysler has done it 3 times and their still around.
yes i know it wouldnt be good if gm were to go under but its impossible for them to. maybe not impossible, but there will not be a time,in our life time, where there is no GM.

actually some of those cars you speak of being made over sees, more of them are probably made here than our american cars are. theres alot of toyota made here. and theres alot of gm made in canada and mexico. believe me im all about buying american, but where do you cross the line when calling a car "american made" or an "american car" when its not even made here?

Would you rather Washington let the auto industry fail and then we'd have to buy all of our cars from overseas? I guarrantee you that a future without GM, Ford and Chrysler is not what any of us want.

In a world without Detroit the rest of the auto industry is going to be fairly conservative with their products so that they don't end up out of business themselves. If you like cookie-cutter design and economy cars, that may not be an issue. But if you like individualistic styling and freedom of choice, your options would be fairly limited in that scenario, and probably out of the price range for most consumers.



People do not buy hybrid and electric cars to save (money) on gas. Typically it costs more to own, operate and maintain a hybrid or electric car in today's world. They purchase them because they believe it helps the environment. Whether or not that they actually help the environment is open to debate; however, if saving money were the only issue, they'd buy something else.i have to agree to disagree with you. the reason people buy hybrids is for an alternative fuel solution or to cut down fuel consumption. thats the reason they exist. is doesnt matter if a car has ZERO emissions or the worste in the world, there will still be some dumb ass complaining about it.

the reason people buy hybrids is for an alternative fuel solution or to cut down fuel consumption. I agree with you 100%. I simply mistook what you were saying. You said "save gas", which I took to mean "save money" not "cut down on fuel consumption and minimize my carbon footprint on society". :D

It's ironic that the car that GM would not have made (and in most circles wishes it hadn't) is not only going to outsell their darling (the Volt) by whopping margins, but is going to clear a comparative massive amount of money on each Camaro made (even base V6 Camaros have a thin profit margin built in, let alone loaded 2SS).

The only irony I see is that you act like this is a surprise. What I find ironic is cars like camaro which are profitable will eventually have the V8s regulated out of them to the point where I wont want one anymore. Not to mention what damage may be done to the Truck line which we all know is the lion share of GM income. I believe loans will be tied to hippy cars like the Volt which at best will give GM bragging rights for being first to market with such a car and show they didnt "kill the electric car"

If there is a lesson to be learned it is that the EV1 shouldnt have been over promissed to the point its massive failure seemed like a conspiricy. Hind sight is 2020 but...

It's ironic that the car that GM would not have made (and in most circles wishes it hadn't) is not only going to outsell their darling (the Volt) by whopping margins, but is going to clear a comparative massive amount of money on each Camaro made (even base V6 Camaros have a thin profit margin built in, let alone loaded 2SS).

The only irony I see is that you act like this is a surprise. What I find ironic is cars like camaro which are profitable will eventually have the V8s regulated out of them to the point where I wont want one anymore. Not to mention what damage may be done to the Truck line which we all know is the lion share of GM income. I believe loans will be tied to hippy cars like the Volt which at best will give GM bragging rights for being first to market with such a car and show they didnt "kill the electric car"

If there is a lesson to be learned it is that the EV1 shouldnt have been over promissed to the point its massive failure seemed like a conspiricy. Hind sight is 2020 but...

and before you make ANOTHER insulting assumtion that I dont do my own reasearch, choose not to agree with the news channels you agree with and therefore get my news from news channels you refer to as not real news.

here is the letter from John Sarbanes DEMOCRATIC Member of Congress when I sent the petition.


November 25, 2008







Dear :



Thank you for contacting me about possible government loans or assistance to the U.S. auto manufacturing industry. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.



First and foremost, I believe that any investment of taxpayer dollars in such an enterprise must be contingent upon strict accountability on the part of the auto industry to ensure that their future business models and balance sheets are in working order. On November 19, 2008, the House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing entitled "Stabilizing the Financial Condition of the American Automobile Industry". As a result of the testimony presented by the CEOs of these companies, and as a condition of any future assistance that would be offered by the government, the auto companies have been asked to present a detailed and realistic plan for the future success of their industry to the Congress and the Administration by December 2nd.



While I will withhold judgment until I see the specifics of any plan, I do believe that the development of new battery technology and the production of the next generation of fuel efficient vehicles here in the United States, if done correctly, could save countless American jobs. It could also help us achieve several U.S. policy goals as they pertain to our national security, environment, and economic strength. Just as growth in information technology was the force behind economic prosperity in the 1990's, the development of green technology and green jobs will spur tremendous growth and offer long-term relief to the American economy.



Again, I appreciate hearing from you. I will be sure to keep your views in mind as Congress continues to consider possible measures related to the U.S. automakers. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other issues of concern to you in the future.




Sincerely, John Sarbanes Member of Congress

I believe loans will be tied to hippy cars like the Volt which at best will give GM bragging rights for being first to market with such a car and show they didnt "kill the electric car"

I have to agree with your post. Guy, you said in an earlier post that "there aren't enough treehuggers in Congress to hold a decent card game", which I would vehemently disagree with. The push to create these "green" jobs is coming from all areas of government. Michigan's do-little governor claimed in her recent State of the State that green technology is the future here. Our new President has said several times that the gov't needs to replace their vehicles with hybrid alternatives. In fact, isn't there an earmark to do just that in the "stimulus" bill they just passed?

If you haven't noticed the not-so-gentle push from all levels of gov't regarding hybrids and renewable energy technology, you've practically been in a coma.

This thread may be getting way off topic, so to bring it back around I will say that if nothing else the Volt will be valuable to GM to keep the federal assistance rolling in. It will also put them to a point where (God forbid) if cars like Camaro are either legislated off the map or done so by natural forces (such as the price of oil) they will have the experience needed to make the transition to hyper-milage vehicles.

people act like filling bankruptcy is a new thing. chrysler has done it 3 times and their still around.
yes i know it wouldnt be good if gm were to go under but its impossible for them to. maybe not impossible, but there will not be a time,in our life time, where there is no GM.

Chrysler has never... and I repeat NEVER has filed for bankruptcy.

Please look things up before you place wrong claims to prove a wrong point.

Also, GM can very easily crash and go under.

1. GM's debt far outstrips it's assets. That's why they need government loans... no one will lend them money.

2. GM has lost massive amounts of money over many, many years. It took nearly a decade for Studebaker to go under. Packard took about half that. AMC's popularity during the mid 70s energy crisis was followed by a steady decline till Chrysler bought what was left from Renault, and phased it out via the Eagle division.

In the latter, a number of years of losses, failure to respond to a changing market until it was too late and money was unavailable, selloffs, and merger (actual & attempts) are all the common thread with these companies and GM.

Ever since January 1st, GM owes it entire continued existence to the United States Federal Government... who can recall taxpayer investment on March 31st which will instantly end the General Motors Corperation as we know it.

So yes... not only can GM go under in our lifetime, it can easily go under before this summer.

i have to agree to disagree with you. the reason people buy hybrids is for an alternative fuel solution or to cut down fuel consumption. thats the reason they exist. is doesnt matter if a car has ZERO emissions or the worste in the world, there will still be some dumb ass complaining about it.

Actually living in a city and region chock full of Hybrid buyers, I can clearly tell you there are 2 types.

1. The Ford Escape group. These are people who, as you say, buy a vehicle to cut down fuel consumption and often want to genuinely help the enviroment. Ford Escape is the symbol I use, but it includes Chevrolet's Malibu and any other cars and trucks that hybrids are simply versions of regular vehicles, and simply blend in with traffic unless you get a close look at the fender or rear hatch badge.

2. The Toyota Prius group. These are the ones who want to show the world they are protecting the enviroment, who you simply can't explain to them how their car isn't cost effective. These guys aren't instrested in fuel economy, and to them it the EV1 was killed by GM and the oil companies in a conspiracy. These guys completely ignore vehicles that look like everything else... they absolutely have to stand out.

well arent you just a big ball of negativity?

Chrysler has never... and I repeat NEVER has filed for bankruptcy.

Please look things up before you place wrong claims to prove a wrong point.

Also, GM can very easily crash and go under.

1. GM's debt far outstrips it's assets. That's why they need government loans... no one will lend them money.

2. GM has lost massive amounts of money over many, many years. It took nearly a decade for Studebaker to go under. Packard took about half that. AMC's popularity during the mid 70s energy crisis was followed by a steady decline till Chrysler bought what was left from Renault, and phased it out via the Eagle division.

In the latter, a number of years of losses, failure to respond to a changing market until it was too late and money was unavailable, selloffs, and merger (actual & attempts) are all the common thread with these companies and GM.

Ever since January 1st, GM owes it entire continued existence to the United States Federal Government... who can recall taxpayer investment on March 31st which will instantly end the General Motors Corperation as we know it.

So yes... not only can GM go under in our lifetime, it can easily go under before this summer.



Actually living in a city and region chock full of Hybrid buyers, I can clearly tell you there are 2 types.

1. The Ford Escape group. These are people who, as you say, buy a vehicle to cut down fuel consumption and often want to genuinely help the enviroment. Ford Escape is the symbol I use, but it includes Chevrolet's Malibu and any other cars and trucks that hybrids are simply versions of regular vehicles, and simply blend in with traffic unless you get a close look at the fender or rear hatch badge.

2. The Toyota Prius group. These are the ones who want to show the world they are protecting the enviroment, who you simply can't explain to them how their car isn't cost effective. These guys aren't instrested in fuel economy, and to them it the EV1 was killed by GM and the oil companies in a conspiracy. These guys completely ignore vehicles that look like everything else... they absolutely have to stand out.

those guys with the prius' are the reason i bought a Hummer.

ok sorry i had my information worng on the chrysler bankruptcy. but they did ask for bail outs before. and have been VERY VERY VERY close to bankruptcy.:yes:

The only irony I see is that you act like this is a surprise. What I find ironic is cars like camaro which are profitable will eventually have the V8s regulated out of them to the point where I wont want one anymore. Not to mention what damage may be done to the Truck line which we all know is the lion share of GM income. I believe loans will be tied to hippy cars like the Volt which at best will give GM bragging rights for being first to market with such a car and show they didnt "kill the electric car"

If there is a lesson to be learned it is that the EV1 shouldnt have been over promissed to the point its massive failure seemed like a conspiricy. Hind sight is 2020 but...

and before you make ANOTHER insulting assumtion that I dont do my own reasearch, choose not to agree with the news channels you agree with and therefore get my news from news channels you refer to as not real news.

here is the letter from John Sarbanes DEMOCRATIC Member of Congress when I sent the petition.

1. Be honest...you didn't do your own research in this instance. ;)

2. This is not an issue of disagreement. You stated that the US has more oil than the middle east. That (to be honest) is something that anyone who took a few minutes to look it up would know better.

3. You posted a bogus assertion as fact. Sorry if calling you out on that is insulting, but again... research before posting something that sounds incredible on a public site saves public insult when proof is readily available. Don't simply listen to something you hear on the radio and repeat it on a website full of people who will easily pull up real information (or in some instances, have done research on it before).



That haven been said, going to the rest of your post, I feel it's missing quite a few facts.

1. The MARKRTPLACE has abandoned the truck line, not regulations as you put it. IMHO, GM wins my personal award for "The most idiotic, put-my-b*lls-in-a-doorjam-and-dare-someone-to-slam-the-door-shut-on-them, shortsighted business model". Fuel prices jump around over the slightest thing. Fuel shortages can happen quickly. What does GM do? Pour all their resources and money into trucks while essentially abandoning cars. Truck sales suddenly drop in the spring of 2005. What does GM do? Stop work on everything else, and pour it all into trucks, then start cutting and eliminating car programs, and go back to dragging their feet...er...business as usual.

2. The MARKETPLACE is what turned away from V8 engines. Save Mustangs and Corvettes, sales of V8 powered cars have been in steady decline for well over a decade. The drop of V8 sales in recent years is best shown in retail sales of the Dodge Charger. The Hemi V8 once took over half of the Charger's sales. Today, V6 Chargers far outnumber V8s in retail... and have for some time (as gas climbed towards $5 per gallon).

3. There's no such thing as Hippies anymore, and Hippies never bought new cars. The buyers of cars like the Volt and Prius tend to be people who have money in the bank.


I will give you that GM may be trying to make up for the bad press they got for almost forcibly taking EV1s (which were leased, not sold to customers) and crushing all of them. Again, if GM had money in the bank, or at least was staying afloat, the Volt would be a very good idea because it would generate alot of great press.

But for a company that had serious problems getting a loan even when credit was easy, and now has bondholders (far more than the government) holding their survival at the brink, moving the Cruze up, getting a Camaro & CTS coupe to build up showroom traffic, and accelerating the introduction of the new Impala the way Ford did with the Taurus would do far more to improve the health of GM than the resources they are funneling to the Volt.

those guys with the prius' are the reason i bought a Hummer.

ok sorry i had my information worng on the chrysler bankruptcy. but they did ask for bail outs before. and have been VERY VERY VERY close to bankruptcy.:yes:

Chrysler came close in 1979. They were in trouble again right around 1990. The '79 bailout was to pay creditors, and Chrysler had 7 years to pay it back. They did it within 3.

Big difference between being close and actually going into bankruptcy. Crossing that line pretty much ends the prospect of customers. It's not like buying a $200 or even $400 ticket from a bankrupt airline. It's a big difference in risking a few hundred dollars betting a company will stay in business a few days or a few weeks, versus putting up $30,000+ betting a bankrupt company will stay around for 5-6 years when there are plenty of other car makers whose have no bankruptcy issues.

1. Be honest...you didn't do your own research in this instance. ;)

2. This is not an issue of disagreement. You stated that the US has more oil than the middle east. That (to be honest) is something that anyone who took a few minutes to look it up would know better..

Thats cute. Theres only one problem with this part. I DIDNT claim the US had more oil than the Mid east NOR did I mention it in this thread. In another thread a long time ago I mentioned it was worth drilling for but I purposely was trying to avoid that arguement here.


3. You posted a bogus assertion as fact. Sorry if calling you out on that is insulting, but again... research before posting something that sounds incredible on a public site saves public insult when proof is readily available. Don't simply listen to something you hear on the radio and repeat it on a website full of people who will easily pull up real information (or in some instances, have done research on it before). .

Boy are you arrogant...

1.) I am almost afraid to ask what "bogus" assertion youre refering to because I dont know if you are confusing someone elses post with something I actually posted.

2.) What I posted was NOT from radio. Yes they do mention it but what I posted which YOU quoted was DEMOCRATIC Contgresssmans reply to my email. Part of my reasearch was the email you quoted. Did you read what you quoted?.

3.) I am under the assumption based on what several here have said that the rest of the Zeta cars that were supposed to be come over now wont because they wont meet CAFE standards. Scott mentioned that CAFE standards will eventually effect cars like camaro. Again that email also shows to me Congressmen are interested in tieing the loans to the green technology. Doesnt matter whether you agree. Its not a news source. That was HIS email in my post that you quoted.

Here it is again EMAIL from John Sarbanes Democratic Member of Congress from Maryland. Not to single Congressman Sarbanes out. And I want to be fair. This is a email responce to my petition for the AUTO LOAN. I dont think he is unique but he is a DEMOCRATIC member of congress who obvious knows his motivation for voting and this was his email reply to ME. NOT a radio show. http://sarbanes.house.gov/


November 25, 2008







Dear :



Thank you for contacting me about possible government loans or assistance to the U.S. auto manufacturing industry. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.



First and foremost, I believe that any investment of taxpayer dollars in such an enterprise must be contingent upon strict accountability on the part of the auto industry to ensure that their future business models and balance sheets are in working order. On November 19, 2008, the House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing entitled "Stabilizing the Financial Condition of the American Automobile Industry". As a result of the testimony presented by the CEOs of these companies, and as a condition of any future assistance that would be offered by the government, the auto companies have been asked to present a detailed and realistic plan for the future success of their industry to the Congress and the Administration by December 2nd.



While I will withhold judgment until I see the specifics of any plan, I do believe that the development of new battery technology and the production of the next generation of fuel efficient vehicles here in the United States, if done correctly, could save countless American jobs. It could also help us achieve several U.S. policy goals as they pertain to our national security, environment, and economic strength. Just as growth in information technology was the force behind economic prosperity in the 1990's, the development of green technology and green jobs will spur tremendous growth and offer long-term relief to the American economy.



Again, I appreciate hearing from you. I will be sure to keep your views in mind as Congress continues to consider possible measures related to the U.S. automakers. Please do not hesitate to contact me about other issues of concern to you in the future.




Sincerely, John Sarbanes Member of Congress

http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5775760&postcount=1.....oh - by the way -- CAFE will play a role in future years of the Camaro -- but right now, we're safe.......

http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5778446&postcount=23

http://www.camaroz28.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5778446&postcount=24

There are other sources but to me those are far and away the most credible.

Edited to readd the email as a source. Again not single Congressman Sarbanes who knows his motivation for voting for something out or to put Scott on the spot.

Sorry I didnt finish this earlier but I was at work and really couldnt believe what I was reading. Anyway, the last part was mostly about you lecturing that I should do more reasearch to back up a points I didnt make in what Im quessing was something posted by someone else. The rest of this is what appears to be a responce to my actual post, you either didnt understand what I said, or you simply ignored to make your own point about the free market. Consequently I will address the rest of the points I didnt make which you feel I should do more reasearch on.


1. The MARKRTPLACE has abandoned the truck line, not regulations as you put it. IMHO, GM wins my personal award for "The most idiotic, put-my-b*lls-in-a-doorjam-and-dare-someone-to-slam-the-door-shut-on-them, shortsighted business model". Fuel prices jump around over the slightest thing. Fuel shortages can happen quickly. What does GM do? Pour all their resources and money into trucks while essentially abandoning cars. Truck sales suddenly drop in the spring of 2005. What does GM do? Stop work on everything else, and pour it all into trucks, then start cutting and eliminating car programs, and go back to dragging their feet...er...business as usual.

2. The MARKETPLACE is what turned away from V8 engines. Save Mustangs and Corvettes, sales of V8 powered cars have been in steady decline for well over a decade. The drop of V8 sales in recent years is best shown in retail sales of the Dodge Charger. The Hemi V8 once took over half of the Charger's sales. Today, V6 Chargers far outnumber V8s in retail... and have for some time (as gas climbed towards $5 per gallon).

3. There's no such thing as Hippies anymore, and Hippies never bought new cars. The buyers of cars like the Volt and Prius tend to be people who have money in the bank.

1 and 2 are the same. 3 is rediculous and getting off topic. I never said anything about abandoning the truck line or V8 powered cars. My father bought new a 2500 series Silverado, and new heavy duty Chevy work van.(cant remember if its the 2500 or 3500) My uncle bought new a Ford F350 Crew Cab Dually. All 3 are used for their business and are likely hopefully be replaced with similar capable vehicles. Camaros V6 numbers always (unless Im missing a freak year) outnumbered the V8. Im surprised Chargers V8 sales were ever over half. I actually wonder if there is something else to that because I didnt think that was the norm. Its irrelevant anyway. If the Market is abandoning the V8 powered vehicles it doesnt need Overregulation helping them fail or making them too expensive. Such as the Gas Guzzler tax. Its already the reason as I understand it from a Lutz interview Deisel cars arent worth pursuing or wont be eventually because as what is needed is added to meet regulation you loose any advantage you were looking for to begin with. Also I think it was Motor trend a while back that mentioned Chrysler was the only of the big 3 that had diesels that would meet regulation. The reason the article gave was Chrysler got the technology from Deimler Benz. I think it was either the ram or the Jeep line. (again a while back)


I will give you that GM may be trying to make up for the bad press they got for almost forcibly taking EV1s (which were leased, not sold to customers) and crushing all of them. Again, if GM had money in the bank, or at least was staying afloat, the Volt would be a very good idea because it would generate alot of great press.

But for a company that had serious problems getting a loan even when credit was easy, and now has bondholders (far more than the government) holding their survival at the brink, moving the Cruze up, getting a Camaro & CTS coupe to build up showroom traffic, and accelerating the introduction of the new Impala the way Ford did with the Taurus would do far more to improve the health of GM than the resources they are funneling to the Volt.


Yeah Volt will be good for great press being first to market and hopefully killing the EV1 bad image I think. But also I hope it will give GM a leg up in experience and refining that technology. I also agree GM put all its eggs in the SUV market. Hind sight is 20/20, however I thought this mid to late 90s when the current colbalt would have been ideal. IMO a CTS coupe would be really nice, but unless Im missing something Cruze would be my pick if you could only sell one car or truck from the whole of GM even not being crazy about the front.

Camaros V6 numbers always (unless Im missing a freak year) outnumbered the V8.

67 - 58,761 6cyl 162,145 8cyl
68 - 50,937 6cyl 184,178 8cyl
69 - 36,500 6cyl 206,500 8cyl
70 - 12,615 6cyl 112,286 8cyl
71 - 11,177 6cyl 103,466 8cyl
72 - 4,821 6cyl 63,830 8cyl
73 - 3,614 6cyl 93,138 8cyl
74 - 22,210 6cyl 128,798 8cyl
75 - 29,749 6cyl 116,021 8cyl
76 - 38,047 6cyl 144,912 8cyl
77 - 31,389 6cyl 187,464 8cyl
78 - 36,982 6cyl 235,649 8cyl
79 - 22,041 6cyl 260,541 8cyl
80 - 51,104 6cyl 100,901 8cyl
81 - 58% 8cyl
82 - 51.7% 8cyl
83 - 58.4% 8cyl
84 - 57.4% 8cyl
86 - 77,478 6cyl 114,741 8cyl
87 - 56.1% 8cyl
88 - 55.5% 8cyl
89 - 61.5% 8cyl
90 - 66% 8cyl
91 - 68.5% 8cyl
92 - 65.9% 8cyl

67 - 58,761 6cyl 162,145 8cyl
68 - 50,937 6cyl 184,178 8cyl
69 - 36,500 6cyl 206,500 8cyl
70 - 12,615 6cyl 112,286 8cyl
71 - 11,177 6cyl 103,466 8cyl
72 - 4,821 6cyl 63,830 8cyl
73 - 3,614 6cyl 93,138 8cyl
74 - 22,210 6cyl 128,798 8cyl
75 - 29,749 6cyl 116,021 8cyl
76 - 38,047 6cyl 144,912 8cyl
77 - 31,389 6cyl 187,464 8cyl
78 - 36,982 6cyl 235,649 8cyl
79 - 22,041 6cyl 260,541 8cyl
80 - 51,104 6cyl 100,901 8cyl
81 - 58% 8cyl
82 - 51.7% 8cyl
83 - 58.4% 8cyl
84 - 57.4% 8cyl
86 - 77,478 6cyl 114,741 8cyl
87 - 56.1% 8cyl
88 - 55.5% 8cyl
89 - 61.5% 8cyl
90 - 66% 8cyl
91 - 68.5% 8cyl
92 - 65.9% 8cyl

Nice work! :D This discussion came up before and I provided data from the Camaro White Book... not until the 4th gens did 6-cylinders ever out number V8s.

Nice work! :D This discussion came up before and I provided data from the Camaro White Book... not until the 4th gens did 6-cylinders ever out number V8s.

Very interesting. I guess that's due to the fact that with the 4th Gen. you had to get a Z28 to get a V8?

Very interesting. I guess that's due to the fact that with the Th Gen. you had to get a Z28 to get a V8?Possibly, but I think was just that GM made a conscious decision to go that route.

67 - 58,761 6cyl 162,145 8cyl
68 - 50,937 6cyl 184,178 8cyl
69 - 36,500 6cyl 206,500 8cyl
70 - 12,615 6cyl 112,286 8cyl
71 - 11,177 6cyl 103,466 8cyl
72 - 4,821 6cyl 63,830 8cyl
73 - 3,614 6cyl 93,138 8cyl
74 - 22,210 6cyl 128,798 8cyl
75 - 29,749 6cyl 116,021 8cyl
76 - 38,047 6cyl 144,912 8cyl
77 - 31,389 6cyl 187,464 8cyl
78 - 36,982 6cyl 235,649 8cyl
79 - 22,041 6cyl 260,541 8cyl
80 - 51,104 6cyl 100,901 8cyl
81 - 58% 8cyl
82 - 51.7% 8cyl
83 - 58.4% 8cyl
84 - 57.4% 8cyl
86 - 77,478 6cyl 114,741 8cyl
87 - 56.1% 8cyl
88 - 55.5% 8cyl
89 - 61.5% 8cyl
90 - 66% 8cyl
91 - 68.5% 8cyl
92 - 65.9% 8cyl

I stand corrected on that one :D You could have just gave the year it reversed.

Nice work! :D This discussion came up before and I provided data from the Camaro White Book... not until the 4th gens did 6-cylinders ever out number V8s.

Yeah, I should have got my white book

Very interesting. I guess that's due to the fact that with the 4th Gen. you had to get a Z28 to get a V8?

Well I had always assumed sports car insurance was a factor for V6s outselling the V8s.. at least relatively recently. Then again I was way off on the numbers and years... Did sports car insurance rates change maybe? I dont see anything in the whitebook under 94 that references a reason. The 200hp V6 wasnt an option until 95

Well I had always assumed sports car insurance was a factor for V6s outselling the V8s.. at least relatively recently. Then again I was way off on the numbers and years... Did sports car insurance rates change maybe? I dont see anything in the white book under 94 that references a reason. The 200hp V6 wasn't an option until 95That's an old wives tale that has been disproved before. Insurance rates have more to do with the number of reported incidents for each trim line than the size of the motor. Case in point, when I went to insure my then 16-year old stepson on a 1995 Mustang, the V6 was twice as expensive to insure than the V8. Yep, its true... $1300/yr for a GT, and $2600 for the V6. They didn't even increase it that much 6 months later when we sold the 95 GT and bought him a supercharged 96 GT. :D

That's an old wives tale that has been disproved before. Insurance rates have more to do with the number of reported incidents for each trim line than the size of the motor. Case in point, when I went to insure my then 16-year old stepson on a 1995 Mustang, the V6 was twice as expensive to insure than the V8. Yep, its true... $1300/yr for a GT, and $2600 for the V6. They didn't even increase it that much 6 months later when we sold the 95 GT and bought him a supercharged 96 GT. :D


weird.

That's an old wives tale that has been disproved before. Insurance rates have more to do with the number of reported incidents for each trim line than the size of the motor.

The actuarial approach to car insurance is relatively new; in the 1970s, the bigger engine always meant the bigger insurance premium, regardless of what the statistics say.

Prior to the ready availability of computers and data mining software, it was far too difficult to do it any other way.

a Z28 will get a 25% "high performance" surcharge over a base camaro here.

a Z28 will get a 25% "high performance" surcharge over a base camaro here.The same is true here. It all depends on the make and model.

67 - 58,761 6cyl 162,145 8cyl
68 - 50,937 6cyl 184,178 8cyl
69 - 36,500 6cyl 206,500 8cyl
70 - 12,615 6cyl 112,286 8cyl
71 - 11,177 6cyl 103,466 8cyl
72 - 4,821 6cyl 63,830 8cyl
73 - 3,614 6cyl 93,138 8cyl
74 - 22,210 6cyl 128,798 8cyl
75 - 29,749 6cyl 116,021 8cyl
76 - 38,047 6cyl 144,912 8cyl
77 - 31,389 6cyl 187,464 8cyl
78 - 36,982 6cyl 235,649 8cyl
79 - 22,041 6cyl 260,541 8cyl
80 - 51,104 6cyl 100,901 8cyl
81 - 58% 8cyl
82 - 51.7% 8cyl
83 - 58.4% 8cyl
84 - 57.4% 8cyl
86 - 77,478 6cyl 114,741 8cyl
87 - 56.1% 8cyl
88 - 55.5% 8cyl
89 - 61.5% 8cyl
90 - 66% 8cyl
91 - 68.5% 8cyl
92 - 65.9% 8cyl

Its amazing what happens when you offer 4-5 different V8 engines at once. Up untill the 4th gen, there were always optional V8 engines. Hell, in 92, you had a choice of 3 V8's.

Had I had access to such numbers, I would have made my case for an L76 powerd Camaro even better. I can honestly say that an L76 option for the 2LT would have been awesome and given GM a killer vehicle and something to close the power gap from V6 to V8, not to mention put out a vehicle closer to the RT/GT.
If only the other Zeta cars were given the green light, this would have made a very cheap and easy move, IMO.

. I can honestly say that an L76 option for the 2LT would have been awesome and given GM a killer vehicle and something to close the power gap from V6 to V8, not to mention put out a vehicle closer to the RT/GT.
.

This was something that was considered or at least discussed, Al. The concern was the cannibalization of SS sales.

Well, based on the above info, having more V8 options means more options and more sales.
I think that having that V8 would stop anyone that says either
1) SS makes too much power
2) SS is too expensive
3) I want a V8 but without all the additional stuff
4) Anyone crosshopping the GT/RT.

Agreed. The SS is more car than wifey wants, therefore, I am stuck w/ her getting a V6. I know it's a great V6, but a major player in Fcars for me is the V8 sound. An L76, or heck, even an LS1 level engine, would have been an absolute deal sealer for us, wouldn't have canibalized any SS sales, and it would have made GM MORE money!

In 1992, it cost us $358 dollars to upgrade our RS from a V6 to V8. Today, that number is $6300 from a 1LT to a 1SS, or $6800 from a 2LT to a 2SS, that's about an 1800% increase in cost from the 1992. I know you get the brakes too, but frankly, we don't need em. A 360ish hp L76 V8 option on the 2LT would have had me dancing in the streets. Oh well.

Yep, and I honestly think that if there were more then one Zeta car at Oshawa, that the L76 would play a massive roll in the existance of such cars like the Impala and play such a large part in cars like the G8.
Camaro 2LT with 6.0 AFM with 6spd auto only, getting 26mpg with 2LT's brakes, starts at 27k, 2LT/RS is 29,995.
Seriously...it would sell like gangbusters.

Yep, and I honestly think that if there were more then one Zeta car at Oshawa, that the L76 would play a massive roll in the existance of such cars like the Impala and play such a large part in cars like the G8.
Camaro 2LT with 6.0 AFM with 6spd auto only, getting 26mpg with 2LT's brakes, starts at 27k, 2LT/RS is 29,995.
Seriously...it would sell like gangbusters.

I like the idea as it would be a nice competitor to the Mustang GT. It would be just enough car for most of the V8 buyers who find the Mustang GT auto to be a nice sporty car to enjoy.

I just wonder if deep in the meeting rooms that the decision was made to cut options like this because GM is really worried about CAFE. It would only stand to reason if it was a large factor in what almost killed Zeta that it would cut multiple V8 options for the any survivor. I think for them they'd rather have the automatic Mustang GT type buyer in the V6 Camaro.

I like the idea as it would be a nice competitor to the Mustang GT. It would be just enough car for most of the V8 buyers who find the Mustang GT auto to be a nice sporty car to enjoy.

I just wonder if deep in the meeting rooms that the decision was made to cut options like this because GM is really worried about CAFE. It would only stand to reason if it was a large factor in what almost killed Zeta that it would cut multiple V8 options for the any survivor. I think for them they'd rather have the automatic Mustang GT type buyer in the V6 Camaro.

I can understand, but I would figure that its cheaper to build an engine like the L76, combined with the more common suspension and brake system, that the profit margin would be higher on a L76 car vs the 3.6 or even the SS car, percentage wise anyway.

The LS/LT with 304hp is gunna be a fun car, no doubt. But some people just want a V8, and they dont want a V6.
If GM had more money, Zeta moved foward, and we had a full size cars, this would be a great way to increase market share in the coupe market for what seems to be a small price.
Only problem it would be ONLY automatic.

You folks are aware that GM and the other car manufaturers who have received assistance need to report to the taxpayers < government > about what actions are being taken to turn business around. Fuel economy and emission are somthing else being considered as well.

Who here would like to sell financing an intermediate V-8 program for a Sports car to Congress?:death: Do you think you might possibly get a request to kill the higher horsepower offering in the process?;) Think V-8's are popular politics on Capital Hill?

You folks are aware that GM and the other car manufaturers who have received assistance need to report to the taxpayers < government > about what actions are being taken to turn business around. Fuel economy and emission are somthing else being considered as well.

Who here would like to sell financing an intermediate V-8 program for a Sports car to Congress?:death: Do you think you might possibly get a request to kill the higher horsepower offering in the process?;) Think V-8's are popular politics on Capital Hill?

I don't know, but I'm sure Obama liked his Chrysler 300 w/ the HEMI engine that he bought a few years ago...

And as far as selling V8s to congress, If the plan was a moneymaker, and could generate IMMEDIATE bottom line relief, I would think congress would be in favor of it, rather than asking GM to kill popular cars that people want to buy and force them to make money losing eco cars that nobody wants.

You folks are aware that GM and the other car manufaturers who have received assistance need to report to the taxpayers < government > about what actions are being taken to turn business around. Fuel economy and emission are somthing else being considered as well.

Who here would like to sell financing an intermediate V-8 program for a Sports car to Congress?:death: Do you think you might possibly get a request to kill the higher horsepower offering in the process?;) Think V-8's are popular politics on Capital Hill?

I bet I could pull off a better sales job then the three of them did.
Congress wants to see repaying of the loan, not that its repayed with "green" money.

But my plan would be before the whole economic disaster. Even still, a higher profit margin from a L76 car would be good for Camaro, and it captures people now that they dotn have 35-40k to spend on an SS, but stillw ant a V8 car. They could continue to capture people looking for an affordable V8 Camaro.

I don't know, but I'm sure Obama liked his Chrysler 300 w/ the HEMI engine that he bought a few years ago...

And as far as selling V8s to congress, If the plan was a moneymaker, and could generate IMMEDIATE bottom line relief, I would think congress would be in favor of it, rather than asking GM to kill popular cars that people want to buy and force them to make money losing eco cars that nobody wants.

I'm looking for a pic of the President in either his personal V-8 or smoking a cigarette. Both of which I'm certain he does, but not a regular photo op offered up.

I salute your optimism regarding Congress being "for" whatever products turn a profit. It will certainly become apparent soon.

I think we all know how little politics or sacred cows played into the money delegated to save jobs this weekend.

We can all be confident it was all well thought out and crafted to be the best use of the money being considered.

Even still, a higher profit margin from a L76 car would be good for Camaro, and it captures people now that they dotn have 35-40k to spend on an SS, but stillw ant a V8 car. They could continue to capture people looking for an affordable V8 Camaro.

How is an L76 a higher profit car? One can buy an SS for $31K.

I spend a lot of time with Camaro intenders. I'll grant it's not all intenders that are out there, but I will tell you that no mention is made about how great a lower HP V-8 would be. Believe me, I listen closely.

There's a lot of positive reaction over a 304HP V-6. Many that find the V-6 appealing say "That's all you need".

Many relish the L99 or LS3 numbers.

Any requests for different offerings have been requests for BIGGER HP numbers, not smaller.

I have heard no requests for a lesser V-8, ever.

Requests for a larger performance model called a Z/28? Well... it's a regular question..

I'm not selling your idea short. I just offer it's not a subject which car show attendees have ever brought up to me.

I hear LS7, LS9, LSA.... No mentions or requests for an L76.

There is certainly more discussion over interior lighting on the net than the lack of a Lower HP V-8.

.

Requests for a larger performance model called a Z/28? Well... it's a regular question..




While we're on the subject....

Many of us, (including me), having lobbied hard ----FOR YEARS --- on this one. And we won. Unfortunately, the predicament we find ourselves in now, pretty much precludes such a car from this gen.

My hope is that all that effort doesn't ultimately turn to vapor. That enough of the good people at GM, who saw eye to eye with us on this, still remain after all is said and done. And at some future time, we can get our Z/28.

How is an L76 a higher profit car? One can buy an SS for $31K.

I spend a lot of time with Camaro intenders. I'll grant it's not all intenders that are out there, but I will tell you that no mention is made about how great a lower HP V-8 would be. Believe me, I listen closely.

There's a lot of positive reaction over a 304HP V-6. Many that find the V-6 appealing say "That's all you need".

Many relish the L99 or LS3 numbers.

Any requests for different offerings have been requests for BIGGER HP numbers, not smaller.

I have heard no requests for a lesser V-8, ever.

Requests for a larger performance model called a Z/28? Well... it's a regular question..

I'm not selling your idea short. I just offer it's not a subject which car show attendees have ever brought up to me.

I hear LS7, LS9, LSA.... No mentions or requests for an L76.

There is certainly more discussion over interior lighting on the net than the lack of a Lower HP V-8.

One has to wonder whether car show attendees represent the average buyer, I think the answer is no. I would think most car show attendees are enthusiasts just like the participants on these boards. I would also guess that many "future buyers" will ask about options and packages that they will never buy, they want to know if the big engine is available when the reality is they will buy the V6. When I went to buy my first Camaro in '67 I wanted to know what all of the high performance options were "in case" I decided to get them, the reality is I bought the 2 barrel 327. What people talk and ask questions about is often very different then the reality when they have to put their money on the line. Would I be interested in an additional smaller V8 on the new Camaro? Probably not unless it was a special package like the DZ302 was back in the first gen.
Clyde

They should stop the Volt, and make it the cadillac Converge, Nobody is gonna buy a chevy for $40k, but a Cadillac for $40k is more like it.

How is an L76 a higher profit car? One can buy an SS for $31K.

I spend a lot of time with Camaro intenders. I'll grant it's not all intenders that are out there, but I will tell you that no mention is made about how great a lower HP V-8 would be. Believe me, I listen closely.

There's a lot of positive reaction over a 304HP V-6. Many that find the V-6 appealing say "That's all you need".

Many relish the L99 or LS3 numbers.

Any requests for different offerings have been requests for BIGGER HP numbers, not smaller.

I have heard no requests for a lesser V-8, ever.

Requests for a larger performance model called a Z/28? Well... it's a regular question..

I'm not selling your idea short. I just offer it's not a subject which car show attendees have ever brought up to me.

I hear LS7, LS9, LSA.... No mentions or requests for an L76.

There is certainly more discussion over interior lighting on the net than the lack of a Lower HP V-8.i remember many talks on here about lesser V8's.

How is an L76 a higher profit car? One can buy an SS for $31K.



I have heard no requests for a lesser V-8, ever.


I'd like to say something about these 2 quotes. I don't know that you can fairly compare a 2LT w/ an L76 w/ a no option 1SS. The difference in equipment is pretty great. As GM has forced us to go all or nothing w/ things like leather, ambient lighting, console gauges, ipod/bluetooth compatibility, ect, I think it's only fair to compare what we're talking about w/ a 2SS, which adds up to a significantly higher cost for the consumer. To address your question, a 2LT w/ an L76 would be a higher profit car in our case because we (wifey anyway) will not be considering a SS, so GM won't be making that money. And on the truly alarming side, she's not happy w/ the lack of real interior colors (carpets, headliners, ect) as black interiors in Texas aren't a good mix. Couple that w/ the fact that she's not thrilled about being stuck w/ a V6, no matter how good it is, and for the first time yesterday, mentioned not getting one because of the compromises she would have to make and it not being worth the premium price (to her) to get a V8 w/ the options she wants and an interior color that she not just doesn't care for, but truely dislikes.

As to the second statement, I don't know what to say. There were A LOT of 305 TBI cars sold in the 80's and early 90's, in fact, I think it was the most popular engine choice during those times. It was only when GM decided to go all or nothing w/ the 4th gens that you saw this move of everyone to the high end car, which I'm sure was GM's intent. However, since GM hasn't offered a mid-V8 in almost 20 years, I'm not suprised that todays auto show enthusiasts (and I agree that a disproportionate number of them are probably performance enthusiasts, which is not a bad thing, I'm one!) would want the biggest most powerful engines. But that doesn't mean that theres not a segment that would go for a 350ish hp V8 JUST to get that SOUND, and a bit more torque than the V6 can provide. Especially if they could do it for the same price as they can w/ a G8, where you can go from a 3.6 A5 to a 6.0 A6 for $3500. That same move in a Camaro is $6500. Too much IMO if you're just looking for a torquey, good sounding engine at a competitive price (i.e. $2x,xxx) to the Mustang and you don't need/want 400+ hp and Brembo brakes.

I'd like to say something about these 2 quotes. I don't know that you can fairly compare a 2LT w/ an L76 w/ a no option 1SS. The difference in equipment is pretty great. As GM has forced us to go all or nothing w/ things like leather, ambient lighting, console gauges, ipod/bluetooth compatibility, ect, I think it's only fair to compare what we're talking about w/ a 2SS, which adds up to a significantly higher cost for the consumer. To address your question, a 2LT w/ an L76 would be a higher profit car in our case because we (wifey anyway) will not be considering a SS, so GM won't be making that money. And on the truly alarming side, she's not happy w/ the lack of real interior colors (carpets, headliners, ect) as black interiors in Texas aren't a good mix. Couple that w/ the fact that she's not thrilled about being stuck w/ a V6, no matter how good it is, and for the first time yesterday, mentioned not getting one because of the compromises she would have to make and it not being worth the premium price (to her) to get a V8 w/ the options she wants and an interior color that she not just doesn't care for, but truely dislikes.

I like GM's all or nothing features. Cause if you go to like other car companies there base MSRP is super low. But you have absolutly nothing in the car. The other companies say there cars are really cheaper, but when you add the features GM has standard, there either the same price or higher priced.

I'd like to say something about these 2 quotes. I don't know that you can fairly compare a 2LT w/ an L76 w/ a no option 1SS. The difference in equipment is pretty great. As GM has forced us to go all or nothing w/ things like leather, ambient lighting, console gauges, ipod/bluetooth compatibility, ect, I think it's only fair to compare what we're talking about w/ a 2SS, which adds up to a significantly higher cost for the consumer. To address your question, a 2LT w/ an L76 would be a higher profit car in our case because we (wifey anyway) will not be considering a SS, so GM won't be making that money. And on the truly alarming side, she's not happy w/ the lack of real interior colors (carpets, headliners, ect) as black interiors in Texas aren't a good mix. Couple that w/ the fact that she's not thrilled about being stuck w/ a V6, no matter how good it is, and for the first time yesterday, mentioned not getting one because of the compromises she would have to make and it not being worth the premium price (to her) to get a V8 w/ the options she wants and an interior color that she not just doesn't care for, but truely dislikes.

As to the second statement, I don't know what to say. There were A LOT of 305 TBI cars sold in the 80's and early 90's, in fact, I think it was the most popular engine choice during those times. It was only when GM decided to go all or nothing w/ the 4th gens that you saw this move of everyone to the high end car, which I'm sure was GM's intent. However, since GM hasn't offered a mid-V8 in almost 20 years, I'm not suprised that todays auto show enthusiasts (and I agree that a disproportionate number of them are probably performance enthusiasts, which is not a bad thing, I'm one!) would want the biggest most powerful engines. But that doesn't mean that theres not a segment that would go for a 350ish hp V8 JUST to get that SOUND, and a bit more torque than the V6 can provide. Especially if they could do it for the same price as they can w/ a G8, where you can go from a 3.6 A5 to a 6.0 A6 for $3500. That same move in a Camaro is $6500. Too much IMO if you're just looking for a torquey, good sounding engine at a competitive price (i.e. $2x,xxx) to the Mustang and you don't need/want 400+ hp and Brembo brakes.


Agreed, the base V8 would be a better sell the powers to be now then ever before. You can appeal to the V8 people while not have them price themselves out of the price range.
Is the V6 great? It sure is! I love it in the CTS. Its very smooth, it pulls that 4k+ sedan around with plenty of power. Hell, on a recent Acadia rental, my brother and mom were impressed of its power. My brother thought it was a V8 because it seemed to haul all thier snowboarding stuff very well and it pulled him back into the seat.
But the problem is image, and image is something that GM never can understand. Its along the same line of no navigation in anything but a Caddy. Its the same as the lack of a OHC V6 for decades. Its along the same line as GM's loss of interest in compact and midsized cars all together.
GM doesnt understand till its too late sometimes. I should actually say its GM-North America. Europe seems to get it. The Aussies seem to get it. But here in America, we some how we cannot understand our own people. GM NA used too, but for the last 30 years its been a guessing game.

We had many discussions about a mid-level V8 and how it would benefit the Camaro.....higher ups simply did not want to hear it. GM has incredible wisedom supposedly. :think: I honestly think that F*rd would be smart to keep the 4.6 available as an option for those that want a V8 but don't need 400HP. A similar option for the SS would have been smart for the Camaro.

I like GM's all or nothing features. Cause if you go to like other car companies there base MSRP is super low. But you have absolutly nothing in the car. The other companies say there cars are really cheaper, but when you add the features GM has standard, there either the same price or higher priced.

It's not as much about the price as it is about the ability, or lack thereof, to option the car the way I want it. Why is it impossible to have a V8 Camaro w/ cloth seats that plays mp3's? On the 1LT, you can get the "connectivity package" or whatever they call it and get the jack in the console, but it's unavailable on the 1SS. So they're making me pay $6300 for an engine and transmission upgrade that costs $3500 in a G8 (granted Im getting the brakes, but dont really want or need them), and then on top of that, I have to pay another $3xxx to get a 2SS so I can play my ipod, but then get stuck w/ leather seats that I don't want along w/ a host of other things. So I'm paying $10,000 for a V8 and mp3 capability, the rest of the stuff I don't want. It just bugs me, if thats the way they feel they have to do it, fine, but it just bothers me that as the generations of Camaros have gone along, we're getting less and less flexibility w/ the orderering, to the point now that it's impossible to even get the car we want, and I don't like making TOO many compromises in a car that now costs upwards of 40 grand.

One has to wonder whether car show attendees represent the average buyer, I think the answer is no. I would think most car show attendees are enthusiasts just like the participants on these boards. I would also guess that many "future buyers" will ask about options and packages that they will never buy, they want to know if the big engine is available when the reality is they will buy the V6. When I went to buy my first Camaro in '67 I wanted to know what all of the high performance options were "in case" I decided to get them, the reality is I bought the 2 barrel 327. What people talk and ask questions about is often very different then the reality when they have to put their money on the line. Would I be interested in an additional smaller V8 on the new Camaro? Probably not unless it was a special package like the DZ302 was back in the first gen.
Clyde

I don't know that your assessment that car show buyers are mostly enthusiasts is valid. There certainly are enthusiasts at car shows.

There are folks just out for an inexpensive day out and a large part of that group are retirees that go to the shows on weekdays on special admission perks.

A percentage of attendees are specifically looking at a new vehicle purchase, some toting some form of consumer buying guide and a pad for taking copius notes.

There are folks who didn't think they wanted a new car when they came and leave having to have a particular car now!

I have had folks ask, while looking at the Camaro, what kind of car is this? These folks might well be enthusiasts, but from another country or planet if that's the case.

I'm more inclined to think there is a wider range of mindset at shows than you suspect. The gamut runs from hardcore enthusiast that drove several hours to see one particular car to folks just wanting to get out of the house.

I don't know that your assessment that car show buyers are mostly enthusiasts is valid. There certainly are enthusiasts at car shows.

There are folks just out for an inexpensive day out and a large part of that group are retirees that go to the shows on weekdays on special admission perks.

A percentage of attendees are specifically looking at a new vehicle purchase, some toting some form of consumer buying guide and a pad for taking copius notes.

There are folks who didn't think they wanted a new car when they came and leave having to have a particular car now!

I have had folks ask, while looking at the Camaro, what kind of car is this? These folks might well be enthusiasts, but from another country or planet if that's the case.

I'm more inclined to think there is a wider range of mindset at shows than you suspect. The gamut runs from hardcore enthusiast that drove several hours to see one particular car to folks just wanting to get out of the house.

Yesterday was the first time I had a chance to see how the 'general autoshow populace' reacted to the production Camaro. I'd say the crowd was thicker around the Camaros, that any other GM product on the floor.

Yesterday was the first time I had a chance to see how the 'general autoshow populace' reacted to the production Camaro. I'd say the crowd was thicker around the Camaros, that any other GM product on the floor.


I wouldn't doubt that the Camaro had more around it than ANY product on the show floor, regardless of manufacturer. That has been my experience this season.

Regarding engine choices, I will qualify that my opinion is just that, my opinion. Based on my gut feeling, I don't think a midlle V-8 option for Camaro would garner sufficient penetration to justify the validation and calibration costs.

Anecdotally, my impression from folks I have spent time talking with seems to reveal that 304 HP is creating raised eyebrows and pleased reactions. The L99 and LS3 numbers seem to be just as appealing. The performance fanatics want an LS9, LS7, or LSA.

If there is truly a market for a V-8 for the sake of it' merely being a V-8 rather than an actual issue ofpower level... it hasn't revealed as true a ground swell issue. I'm sure that if it becomes apparent to be so, it will be addressed, but strictly on it's merits as a business case.

I'm a lover of vehicles which are manual trans equipped. I had an '03 Silverado which was among the last to be offered that way. When the manual tranny was dropped as an option I researched the reasons. The last year it was offered less than 200 were purchased. Was there a market for the manual? Sure. 200 buyers. There's no business there. Cost to offer the option dwarfed the viability.

It's not as much about the price as it is about the ability, or lack thereof, to option the car the way I want it. Why is it impossible to have a V8 Camaro w/ cloth seats that plays mp3's? On the 1LT, you can get the "connectivity package" or whatever they call it and get the jack in the console, but it's unavailable on the 1SS. So they're making me pay $6300 for an engine and transmission upgrade that costs $3500 in a G8 (granted Im getting the brakes, but dont really want or need them), and then on top of that, I have to pay another $3xxx to get a 2SS so I can play my ipod, but then get stuck w/ leather seats that I don't want along w/ a host of other things. So I'm paying $10,000 for a V8 and mp3 capability, the rest of the stuff I don't want. It just bugs me, if thats the way they feel they have to do it, fine, but it just bothers me that as the generations of Camaros have gone along, we're getting less and less flexibility w/ the orderering, to the point now that it's impossible to even get the car we want, and I don't like making TOO many compromises in a car that now costs upwards of 40 grand.

Your making it too hard on yourself.

Don't forget back in the day we used to the base model, and add all the customizations are self. Now days the cars are 100x more complicated, so I see your point. But..... I do like the all or nothing packages, sometimes though if you have a good dealer. They can hook you up.

For example this Art Moran Chevy dealership, the one I always go to. He is open to anything. I wanted a base Chevy Trailblazer, and he was able to get me the sun and sound package, safety package, and towing package all for free.

It's not as much about the price as it is about the ability, or lack thereof, to option the car the way I want it. Why is it impossible to have a V8 Camaro w/ cloth seats that plays mp3's? On the 1LT, you can get the "connectivity package" or whatever they call it and get the jack in the console, but it's unavailable on the 1SS. So they're making me pay $6300 for an engine and transmission upgrade that costs $3500 in a G8 (granted Im getting the brakes, but dont really want or need them), and then on top of that, I have to pay another $3xxx to get a 2SS so I can play my ipod, but then get stuck w/ leather seats that I don't want along w/ a host of other things. So I'm paying $10,000 for a V8 and mp3 capability, the rest of the stuff I don't want. It just bugs me, if thats the way they feel they have to do it, fine, but it just bothers me that as the generations of Camaros have gone along, we're getting less and less flexibility w/ the orderering, to the point now that it's impossible to even get the car we want, and I don't like making TOO many compromises in a car that now costs upwards of 40 grand.you know they make these things for ipods that you can plug into ANY car and it will play through the sterio? if thats what you want just order the car how you want it minus the ss2 package and buy this 50 dollar part and plug it in to the camaro. that would save you alot of head ache and probably a heart attack.

Well, based on the above info, having more V8 options means more options and more sales.
I think that having that V8 would stop anyone that says either
1) SS makes too much power
2) SS is too expensive
3) I want a V8 but without all the additional stuff
4) Anyone crosshopping the GT/RT.

Agreed. The SS is more car than wifey wants, therefore, I am stuck w/ her getting a V6. I know it's a great V6, but a major player in Fcars for me is the V8 sound. An L76, or heck, even an LS1 level engine, would have been an absolute deal sealer for us, wouldn't have canibalized any SS sales, and it would have made GM MORE money!

In 1992, it cost us $358 dollars to upgrade our RS from a V6 to V8. Today, that number is $6300 from a 1LT to a 1SS, or $6800 from a 2LT to a 2SS, that's about an 1800% increase in cost from the 1992. I know you get the brakes too, but frankly, we don't need em. A 360ish hp L76 V8 option on the 2LT would have had me dancing in the streets. Oh well.

What I've quoted in bold just doesn't quite seem like a valid argument to me. How is 365 hp going to differ from 425 hp if you have traction control and some form of common sense when it comes to driving? Safe bet would be that if you couldn't handle a car with traction control and 425 hp then you aren't going to be able to handle any V8 or a 300 hp V6 for that matter.

Now the rest I can understand to a point, but I still don't quite see the necessity for the L76. Why would you want a car that would barely be faster than the V6 yet get the gas mileage of the V8?

Agreed, I think only an un-informed consumer would see the L76 as a legitimate option. If the base V6 was equal to what Dodge and Ford offers then yes the L76 begins to make sense. But we don't have that problem, GM gave the Camaro a sophisticated stud V6. Compare the engine lineups to the Challenger and Mustang. The Camaro offers better performance and gas milage at equal or lower pricing. One main reason Dodge has the mid V8 R/T is because the gas mialge on the SRT8 sucks worse than my old 1987 L98 IROC.

I like the idea of having more flexibility in the options, but none of the competitors can offer the same as the Camaro for the price, even after all the goodies are added in.

It's not as much about the price as it is about the ability, or lack thereof, to option the car the way I want it. Why is it impossible to have a V8 Camaro w/ cloth seats that plays mp3's? On the 1LT, you can get the "connectivity package" or whatever they call it and get the jack in the console, but it's unavailable on the 1SS. So they're making me pay $6300 for an engine and transmission upgrade that costs $3500 in a G8 (granted Im getting the brakes, but dont really want or need them), and then on top of that, I have to pay another $3xxx to get a 2SS so I can play my ipod, but then get stuck w/ leather seats that I don't want along w/ a host of other things. So I'm paying $10,000 for a V8 and mp3 capability, the rest of the stuff I don't want. It just bugs me, if thats the way they feel they have to do it, fine, but it just bothers me that as the generations of Camaros have gone along, we're getting less and less flexibility w/ the orderering, to the point now that it's impossible to even get the car we want, and I don't like making TOO many compromises in a car that now costs upwards of 40 grand.


I'm not sure you're looking at the connectivity options correctly (that or I'm not). The 1SS has MP3 capability and an auxilary input jack in the center console as standard if I understand it correctly (all models do). The USB port connectivity package (I take it that the radio controls can actually control the iPod w/ that USB port and I presume charge the thing too) is what isn't available on the 1SS. So the 1SS can play MP3s via the aux input jack and just missed out on the more advanced input option...

These two lines are standard per the spec sheet http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro/pdf/2010+Camaro+Order.pdf:
- "Audio system: AM/FM stereo with CD-ROM, MP3 playback, music navigator and Graphic Information Display, includes outside temperature display"
- "Center console: floor with armrest and auxiliary input jack"

These two lines are standard per the spec sheet http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro/pdf/2010+Camaro+Order.pdf:
- "Audio system: AM/FM stereo with CD-ROM, MP3 playback, music navigator and Graphic Information Display, includes outside temperature display"
- "Center console: floor with armrest and auxiliary input jack"

Right you are! Everyone has said that the usb jack was the ipod interface, and it is standard on the 2LT and 2SS, and optional on 1LT. So I guess that is addressed.

As to all the comments about the L76, in our case, the only reason I throw it out is because it is seemingly the only lesser V8 that would be feasable for the Camaro. As to why you would want it over a V6....torque and sound. If you don't agree w/ that, that's ok, but thats the reason. Who here would pick the DI V6 over an LS1 in the same car?

I'm done, defending an opinion based on personal preference is a no-win scenario.

I'd like to say something about these 2 quotes. I don't know that you can fairly compare a 2LT w/ an L76 w/ a no option 1SS. The difference in equipment is pretty great. As GM has forced us to go all or nothing w/ things like leather, ambient lighting, console gauges, ipod/bluetooth compatibility, ect, I think it's only fair to compare what we're talking about w/ a 2SS, which adds up to a significantly higher cost for the consumer. To address your question, a 2LT w/ an L76 would be a higher profit car in our case because we (wifey anyway) will not be considering a SS, so GM won't be making that money. And on the truly alarming side, she's not happy w/ the lack of real interior colors (carpets, headliners, ect) as black interiors in Texas aren't a good mix. Couple that w/ the fact that she's not thrilled about being stuck w/ a V6, no matter how good it is, and for the first time yesterday, mentioned not getting one because of the compromises she would have to make and it not being worth the premium price (to her) to get a V8 w/ the options she wants and an interior color that she not just doesn't care for, but truely dislikes.

As to the second statement, I don't know what to say. There were A LOT of 305 TBI cars sold in the 80's and early 90's, in fact, I think it was the most popular engine choice during those times. It was only when GM decided to go all or nothing w/ the 4th gens that you saw this move of everyone to the high end car, which I'm sure was GM's intent. However, since GM hasn't offered a mid-V8 in almost 20 years, I'm not suprised that todays auto show enthusiasts (and I agree that a disproportionate number of them are probably performance enthusiasts, which is not a bad thing, I'm one!) would want the biggest most powerful engines. But that doesn't mean that theres not a segment that would go for a 350ish hp V8 JUST to get that SOUND, and a bit more torque than the V6 can provide. Especially if they could do it for the same price as they can w/ a G8, where you can go from a 3.6 A5 to a 6.0 A6 for $3500. That same move in a Camaro is $6500. Too much IMO if you're just looking for a torquey, good sounding engine at a competitive price (i.e. $2x,xxx) to the Mustang and you don't need/want 400+ hp and Brembo brakes.

After reading your post repeatedly and after a hard look for what you actually seek, combined with hard consideration of the obstacles you describe, I hope I "get" the "picture".

It has been a "old home week" experience.

Part of what I used to do was read and respond to letters. I can tell you that reading a plea demands careful weighing on every word and phrase.

Thanks for the opportunity to resharpen my abilities.


Women have a tremendous control over the spending decisions made by a married couple. I am no stranger to the essential truth that a wife is the real decision maker in large expenditures. < Personally I am totally good with this factual reality. I would rather make money than worry about money.>

I think I understand that your wife has some absolute musts regarding a purchase of a Camaro.

Her "musts" and your "musts" include a parameter that slams into a reality.

If I read correctly, Price and must haves are conflicted.

I am a fairly skilled negotiator.

Give me the non-negotiable points for both sides. Give me the actual goals each side can see value in acheiving through an ownership experience.

What do you and your wife really see eye to eye on regarding what life should be like and definately include?

Let's try to get two folks into their dream car....;)

Give me the non-negotiable points for both sides. Give me the actual goals each side can see value in acheiving through an ownership experience.

What do you and your wife really see eye to eye on regarding what life should be like and definately include?



PM'd you

What I've quoted in bold just doesn't quite seem like a valid argument to me. How is 365 hp going to differ from 425 hp if you have traction control and some form of common sense when it comes to driving? Safe bet would be that if you couldn't handle a car with traction control and 425 hp then you aren't going to be able to handle any V8 or a 300 hp V6 for that matter.

Now the rest I can understand to a point, but I still don't quite see the necessity for the L76. Why would you want a car that would barely be faster than the V6 yet get the gas mileage of the V8?

Its 60hp, not a real huge difference, but it sounds different. People see the 3, people see the 4, and the rest of the numbers are caught up in the mess. Its why 29.99 sounds cheaper then 30.00. Its not a matter of real saftey, but what people perceived. 400 and 426hp sounds very powerful, very strong, but 365hp sounds a little easier to handle, mentaly.

Agreed, I think only an un-informed consumer would see the L76 as a legitimate option. If the base V6 was equal to what Dodge and Ford offers then yes the L76 begins to make sense. But we don't have that problem, GM gave the Camaro a sophisticated stud V6. Compare the engine lineups to the Challenger and Mustang. The Camaro offers better performance and gas milage at equal or lower pricing. One main reason Dodge has the mid V8 R/T is because the gas mialge on the SRT8 sucks worse than my old 1987 L98 IROC.

I like the idea of having more flexibility in the options, but none of the competitors can offer the same as the Camaro for the price, even after all the goodies are added in.

Work in the automotive field and you will come across thousands of uninformed consumers. If you work in ANY retail field, you will find milions of uninformed consumers.
Yes, Camaro has a high po V6, but that will become common place in a matter of 2 years, if they're any automakers left.


Right you are! Everyone has said that the usb jack was the ipod interface, and it is standard on the 2LT and 2SS, and optional on 1LT. So I guess that is addressed.

As to all the comments about the L76, in our case, the only reason I throw it out is because it is seemingly the only lesser V8 that would be feasable for the Camaro. As to why you would want it over a V6....torque and sound. If you don't agree w/ that, that's ok, but thats the reason. Who here would pick the DI V6 over an LS1 in the same car?

I'm done, defending an opinion based on personal preference is a no-win scenario.



I will tie it into this.

Some people want a V8. For years, the Mustang GT ate the Camaro Z28's lunch, but why?
You can tie it into a hundred reasons but we can disect it like this. The Mustang was at no point a better performance car by any stretch compared to the Camaro. There is even the report of Ford engineers showing off thier new SN95 car in front of press, and they brought in a Z28 to test. The Z28 blew the doors off the SN95.
But why did the Mustang continue to outsell the Camaro? It was perceived to be more friendly and comfortable.

An L76 now would be a stupid idea, not worth the money to spend to cert. it in the car.
BUT if there was a larger fleet of Zeta cars, the L76 would have most likely been the V8 option for cars like the Park Ave and Impala. If that was the case, the cost of putting it into a Camaro would probably be very easy.
Thats all im saying. I dont think that now is a good time due to the fact that the rest of Zeta is dead.

I got an idea...... Replace the V-6 with the impala SS's LS4 V-8. It makes about the same hp and about the same gas mileage, just ones a V-8 with a active fuel management. and ones a V-6 with direct injection

I got an idea...... Replace the V-6 with the impala SS's LS4 V-8. It makes about the same hp and about the same gas mileage, just ones a V-8 with a active fuel management. and ones a V-6 with direct injectionbut you also would need a V6. a non DI 3.6 would work tho.

I got an idea...... Replace the V-6 with the impala SS's LS4 V-8. It makes about the same hp and about the same gas mileage, just ones a V-8 with a active fuel management. and ones a V-6 with direct injection

LS4 is set up as a FWD engine, been a while since I looked at it, but I think even the intake manifold and accessories are set up on what would be the "back" of the engine. It gets out of its own way though.

LS4 is set up as a FWD engine, been a while since I looked at it, but I think even the intake manifold and accessories are set up on what would be the "back" of the engine. It gets out of its own way though.

Shoot, I completly forgot about that. What is GM going to do with the LS4 then? Cause the impala is due for a make over, and the Grand Prix GXP was dropped. It's really a engine that was ahead of its time when it came out.

Not sure. It's a nice little engine, sounds good, better than my LS3 (for the time being). The Buick Lacrosse Super uses it too, not sure if the new one still will or not.