

|
01-04-2008, 11:14 PM
|
#1
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 7,542
|
What if there were two different Camaro interiors?
In another thread, I saw this question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by notgetleft
What i don't get is, WHY go with a retro interior that is so polarizing in a car that HAS to be a homerun?
|
Which got me thinking. Even though we know the interior spy shots we've seen can't possibly be what we'll see when the car reaches production, it's still obvious that GM is pursuing the retro interior design to some extent. The console-mounted gauges are there, as are the weird rectangular speedo and tach gauge housings.
But then I thought about the GMT900 trucks. There are two very different interiors available in those trucks. One very modern, and one more traditional for a full-size truck.
Who's to say that GM isn't pursuing a similar approach with Camaro? Maybe the plan is to allow buyers to choose between a concept-style retro interior and a more modern design like the ones that so many others have mentioned (G8, Malibu, CTS).
I think that would definitely help the Camaro be the home run that it needs to be. Some people love the retro interior and think a modern interior would ruin the car's overall style statement, while at the same time others feel that a retro interior is unacceptable.
__________________
2002 NBM Camaro Z28 M6 - best ET 13.21, best MPH 108.9, best 60' 2.14 - 325hp/343tq - Lid, Corsa, SixSpeedsInc T56, Pro 5.0 w/ short stick, 17x9 wheels
1987 Buick Grand National - best ET 13.66, best MPH 101.5, best 60' 2.08 - 253hp/334tq - 93 chip, RJC, meth, Hooker catback, 160 t-stat, shift kit, no-hop bars
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 12:21 AM
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: West Chester PA
Posts: 13
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
Which got me thinking. Even though we know the interior spy shots we've seen can't possibly be what we'll see when the car reaches production, it's still obvious that GM is pursuing the retro interior design to some extent. The console-mounted gauges are there, as are the weird rectangular speedo and tach gauge housings.
|
I was thinking the exact same thing. I was looking at the high res. pics on Autoblog.com earlier and I swear I'm seeing a second fuel gauge. At least that's what it looks like to me. Take a look at the pic that was taken from the passenger seat vantage point. Now look at the tach. There is what looks like to be a second gauge there. Now why do you need two fuel gauges???
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 01:00 AM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: South Bend , IN
Posts: 4,876
|
In a high volume/high profit margin truck I can see the flexiblity to please all with a nice interior and then a traditional truck interior . In a car thats lucky its here at all , thats just not gonna happen .
The prototype probably does have an extra fuel guage . The 4 on the console I doubt even function .
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 09:29 AM
|
#4
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 7,542
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90 Z28SS
In a car thats lucky it's here at all, that's just not gonna happen.
|
Everything I've seen points to the Zeta platform (including Camaro) being intended to be a pretty high-volume seller. They're already going to have the line set up to accept multiple different cars with multiple different interiors, so I see no reason to rule this out for logistics reasons.
__________________
2002 NBM Camaro Z28 M6 - best ET 13.21, best MPH 108.9, best 60' 2.14 - 325hp/343tq - Lid, Corsa, SixSpeedsInc T56, Pro 5.0 w/ short stick, 17x9 wheels
1987 Buick Grand National - best ET 13.66, best MPH 101.5, best 60' 2.08 - 253hp/334tq - 93 chip, RJC, meth, Hooker catback, 160 t-stat, shift kit, no-hop bars
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 11:16 AM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Commerce, mi, USA
Posts: 2,377
|
I can relate how some might want a wide interior choice in the new Camaro. Sort of like how you could get a Berlinetta interior in the 1980's. But those days are long gone. It likely costs a lot more than it used to, to do such a thing in a modern car. This is one reason why power windows have become so much more common in cars. Its cheaper to equip every variant with them, then to design, test, and complicate builds with two sets of door panels, wire harnesses, controls, etc.
I want my new Camaro to be affordable. That's always been, and will no doubt continue to be, part of Camaro DNA. I'm sorry to say it - but I don't want to have to also 'help pay for' or 'subsidize' another variant of interior with my purchase. I like the heritage interior of the concept; and I hope the production car is similar but I will wait and see before making a lot of judgements and scenario-rustling.
__________________
2005 Grand Prix GXP, Blue-Green Crystal, Ebony leather (hers); 2006 Grand Prix GXP, Dark Cherry Metallic (mine); 1999 Firebird Trans Am, Bright Red; 1984 Camaro Z28, metallic blue, L69, MX0.
More Pix
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 11:40 AM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 4,241
|
I just had a similar idea...
this is from the Fbodyfather thread
Lets just say, hypotheticly GM got bad press over the interior. I would assume that there are or were at least 2 or 3 other designs in the running. How much longer would it take for GM to reverse gear, get one of the other designs ready for production, send it out to suppliers, and get it mocked up and ready?
__________________
2009 Malibu LT 2.4: My NEW Ride! Yeah...no Camaro...I know I know...
1987 Camaro Z28
1972 Camaro RS: It's easy being green
Mod @ GMInsidenews.com
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 01:09 PM
|
#7
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 7,542
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigDarknFast
I want my new Camaro to be affordable. That's always been, and will no doubt continue to be, part of Camaro DNA. I'm sorry to say it - but I don't want to have to also 'help pay for' or 'subsidize' another variant of interior with my purchase.
|
The thing you're missing is that Camaro will no longer be by itself on a unique platform (no, I didn't forget about Firebird... but the interior was the same  ). The Zeta platform is going to underpin at least three cars, and I'm thinking GM will expand it to include a couple more.
Those other cars will help subsidize Camaro -- not the other way around.
__________________
2002 NBM Camaro Z28 M6 - best ET 13.21, best MPH 108.9, best 60' 2.14 - 325hp/343tq - Lid, Corsa, SixSpeedsInc T56, Pro 5.0 w/ short stick, 17x9 wheels
1987 Buick Grand National - best ET 13.66, best MPH 101.5, best 60' 2.08 - 253hp/334tq - 93 chip, RJC, meth, Hooker catback, 160 t-stat, shift kit, no-hop bars
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 01:57 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Premium Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 8,077
|
Production would be too expensive. Other than leather or cloth seats, I don't see many drastic differences other than an "LT" or "SS" might have more chrome.
__________________
My Current Chevys:
1967 Camaro Coupe - 350HO/TKO-500 (Old Blue)
1967 Camaro RS - 327/PG (Goldie)
1995 Camaro Z28 - LT1/A4 (Norma Jean)
2002 Tahoe LS 2WD - LR4/A4 (The Big Red Truck)
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 02:04 PM
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 4,241
|
I can see possibly different types of seats. A RWD Chevy sedan could get a heavy sport seat and be shared with the Camaro.
Camaro should have more then just one style seat, unless that seat is very supportive where all it would take would maybe be some additonal padding for a top shelf Camaro. I would think it would be cheaper to have 1 really good seat then making 2 seats.
Or that if there were 2 seats, that 1 would come from another car on the line, while the Camaro designed seat was set up for everything above sport.
__________________
2009 Malibu LT 2.4: My NEW Ride! Yeah...no Camaro...I know I know...
1987 Camaro Z28
1972 Camaro RS: It's easy being green
Mod @ GMInsidenews.com
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 04:04 PM
|
#10
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 7,542
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jg95z28
Production would be too expensive.
|
Do you (and others who have made similar claims) have some sort of basis for this? Remember that Zeta is going to be a high-volume platform with lots of flexibility. Why wouldn't it be able to support two different Camaro interiors?
__________________
2002 NBM Camaro Z28 M6 - best ET 13.21, best MPH 108.9, best 60' 2.14 - 325hp/343tq - Lid, Corsa, SixSpeedsInc T56, Pro 5.0 w/ short stick, 17x9 wheels
1987 Buick Grand National - best ET 13.66, best MPH 101.5, best 60' 2.08 - 253hp/334tq - 93 chip, RJC, meth, Hooker catback, 160 t-stat, shift kit, no-hop bars
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 04:15 PM
|
#11
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,311
|
The camaro was ALREADY SUPPOSED to be sharing a platform with several other GM cars, which apparently, are now more than likely dead in the water? So now, there's an even smaller business case for the camaro and HOPEFULLY GM will still be able to keep it priced close to a mustang even without the other US variants to share costs with. *IF* all the G8 variants do come (el camino? and wagon) I still can't see all three pontiacs accounting for much more than 200-250K in sales, and I feel even that is optimistic. The impala is likely dead? Maybe a caddy? But again, probably not a car that will sell more than 100K/year. I REALLY think to keep costs down the Impala NEEDED to be part of zeta. There's your high volume car....
The GMT900's can afford 2 different interiors. The profit margin on a truck is very high (I've read it's 6-8K) and the profit margin on GM (and other) cars is fairly small (just 1-3K in some cases.) The GMT-900's also share a platform that sells WELL over a million vehicles per year and at the high profit margin whereas the camaro (once the dust settles the first year) will probably settle in around 75-100K/year (hopefully more, but with more and more sporty coupes coming to market, who knows.)
I guess my point is, I don't see a second interior as an option.
__________________
1999 Chevrolet S-10: 2.2L 5spd RCSB
2000 Silverado Z71: 5.3L/4l60/3.73
1967 Chevrolet C-10: 350/700R4/3.73
Chevrolet: Putting you first...Keeps us first
~1969 sales slogan
Last edited by Silverado C-10; 01-05-2008 at 04:34 PM.
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 07:49 PM
|
#12
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: South Bend , IN
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
Do you (and others who have made similar claims) have some sort of basis for this? Remember that Zeta is going to be a high-volume platform with lots of flexibility. Why wouldn't it be able to support two different Camaro interiors?
|
Interiors are a VERY costly part of the car design . you start mixing up different configurations which require specific wiring and trim ect ect ect , and the cost EXPLODES . That is why today , most options are bundled together and their arent any where near the individual option or color selection there used to be . Even over the last few years with alot OEM's , ALOT of tan or red interiors are simply just accented with red or tan seats and other various removeable panels like knee bolsters and door panel inserts ...so the main parts of the interior like the carpet , plastic and dash can remain ebony , graphite or black ....Much cheaper way to offer color options as opposed to have 3 or 4 different colors of the entire interior .
Even at 100K a year , the profit margin will not be there on a car like there is in a truck .
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 09:18 PM
|
#13
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 5,824
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
Remember that Zeta is going to be a high-volume platform with lots of flexibility. Why wouldn't it be able to support two different Camaro interiors?
|
The Chevy Zeta sedan is dead right now according to public releases. So much for a lot of North American volume. Camaro is a specialized Zeta of sorts. Even at 100,000/year, there just isn't enough there to justify spending on 2 radically different interiors for Camaro.
What's done is done. Let's just hope for the best.
__________________
2001 SS, Rally Red , M6....Pro 5.0, !CAGS, SLP SFCs, Direct Flo lid, SLP SS Grill, custom tuning. 310 RWHP, 330 RWTQ bone stock @ 12,000 miles.
2001 S10 Extended Cab 2WD
|
|
|
01-05-2008, 11:26 PM
|
#14
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 7,542
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
Let's just hope for the best.
|
That's what I'm doing.
__________________
2002 NBM Camaro Z28 M6 - best ET 13.21, best MPH 108.9, best 60' 2.14 - 325hp/343tq - Lid, Corsa, SixSpeedsInc T56, Pro 5.0 w/ short stick, 17x9 wheels
1987 Buick Grand National - best ET 13.66, best MPH 101.5, best 60' 2.08 - 253hp/334tq - 93 chip, RJC, meth, Hooker catback, 160 t-stat, shift kit, no-hop bars
|
|
|
01-08-2008, 02:01 PM
|
#15
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 272
|
The volume of the vehicle cannot justify the added complexity and added complexity costs of such an interior. With one interior the development costs are spread across every vehicle as it the piece costs. Adding another interior would double those costs and be almost a 4x increase in costs that would be passed on to the customer. Instead of cutting one sum into half, you are doubling the costs, and are not able to spread it against as many vehicles.
__________________
<-- Chris M
In the stable:
White 89 TA:
Gone but not forgotten:
2000 Camaro SS M6; 1986 C4 Corvette; 2004 Quicksilver/Red GTO A4
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 AM.
|