Point out the similarities? Okay, I'll give that a shot. In no particular order:

1. Wheel design.
2. Wheel placement (wheels have moved closer to the corners of the car with each gen, with the exception of the third gen front wheels)
3. Back half of the profile (including roof, glass, and spoiler/lip) this has been largely unchanged for all five generations, with the hatchback coming and then going)
4. The death of the lip spoiler.

I'll try to come up with more later.

 

Or maybe because classic muscle is just cool. Why assume?

Unless you're Rick Wagoner or Bob Lutz or someone else at GM who actually made that decision, you shouldn't be making statements like that.

The people that DESIGNED the car don't think it's retro. How's that for evidence?

 

1. Are you serious? Wheel design? That has nothing to do with the design of the car!!

2. The wheel placement is considerably further out than any prior generation. The 4th gen had just as much overhang as the 2nd and 3rd's.

3. The 4th gen was a hatchback with a huge rear window, and had no rear quarter windows. The 5th gen has what appears to be a trunk, with a significantly less sloping rear glass, and DOES have rear quarter windows. The B pillars are not even close to resembling one another.

5. Lip spoiler? That has nothing to do with it's design. That is an accessory, or part of a body kit. Those are add-ons...and who's to say the 5th gen won't have one, or one available? It lends itself to one, just like the 1st gen.


You are really, really reaching on this one.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree. If I were a car designer and wanted my car to look a bit retro, I would have gone with something more like Torque Thrusts. I feel that wheels have a lot of influence on the overall character of a car, and the wheels (and the Concept as a whole) do not evoke 1969 in my mind at all.

But they rounded the corners of the 4th gen, making the wheels seem much closer to the front. Remember, we're talking about what the car looks like.

I said profile. Think of the silhouette of the car from the side. In the section I described, the 4th gen and the Concept look quite similar, aside from a change in the glass angle.

Ignoring the fact that you can't count , they are part of the look of the car.

I have an opinion, and you asked me to defend it. I had five minutes. Give me more time to build a defense.

Or, just acknowledge that the car's actual designers agree with me and go on your merry way.

 

You are trying to make this into a war of opinions. GM doesn't want it to be called 'retro', even though it clearly is, because they don't want to be considered as Johnny come lately. Oh gee, the mustang did it, let's do it too...but let's try to convince people that we aren't copying them or Dodge. So, we'll build a modern interpretation of a '69 Camaro, but say it isn't retro. WTF? So, GM doesn't like that term. Too bad, it isn't their decision to make. It's the publics. Anyone in their right, and unbiased mind will compare this car to a 1st gen, and rightly so, since that is exactly what it looks like. It is retro.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!!!

I'm out!

 

I agree with this statement, but I still don't think retro when I see the car.

I think the reason is that it is a modern interpretation (your words) of the 1st gen.

Let me put it this way. I think it is far less retro than the '05+ Mustang and the Challenger concept. It's nowhere near as retro as the HHR or the Thunderbird.

If it were the only car doing a design throwback to the 50's and 60's, yeah, I might call it retro. But as I said in my original argument, you have to compare it against the norm. I think that the Concept is less retro than the norm, and I am therefore comfortable claiming that it is "not retro".

 

I really could care less if the design of the car meets somebody's definition of the word "retro". Half of the people will say it is, half won't. I'm just glad that it looks awesome and that I will be able to buy one again. I wouldn't mind hearing that "retro" exhaust note every morning on the way to work.

 

Let me preface this by saying I have not, and will not read this thread... So feel free not to read this.

However this very much needs to be an, "Agree to disagree" sort of situation.

As stated above the cars shape is what a Camaro and any muscle car should be, long hood, small green house, short rear deck. Every gen has had that.

Neither the quarter window or that side vent make it a carbon copy of first gen. Second, every vehicle that has history enough to do so almost always mix and matches designs from various generations, that in it self does not make it retro.

Im not going to say that you absolutely cannot call it retro if you feel the need to, but compared to Mustang, or worse yet Challenger which are pure copies its the best of both worlds. Its identifiable with the best generations but is still very "new".

 

I can't believe no one pointed these out, i guess to be expected on a 4th gen site.

- Aside from the overhang, the concept and third gen front fenders are damn near identical. The flare and the door crease especially.

-Another interesting feature in that area is the angle of the recessed grille's outer lip at the fender merge. The 69 is straight up and down there, the concept has an angle just like the third gen headlight pocket.

- on the same note, the profile of the front of the 69 on the bottom is kinda like this
|
.\___
The thirdgen front end and concept front end are more like
. /
|___

- The DEEPLY recessed headlights, while not square, evoke the headlight pockets of the thirdgen and LT1 cars with their large flat surface under the headlight. Unless you've owned a thirdgen maybe you can't relate, but the first thing i thought when i saw the front was, wow, glad you don;t have to push the fascia out of the way to get to a screw to change your sealed beam anymore. The first gen, while recessed, doesn't look as 'shielded' as the concept and pocket headlight cars to me.

- Also note that not only does the 69 not have front wheel flares, it also does not have rear wheel flares. The concept flares match the thirdgen flares IMO.

 

Lots of third gen in there. Which I suppose still supports the retro arguement, if they threw out 4th gen.


Hell, 4th gens are ugly, and I drive one. If you want a Corvette get one.

 

The Challenger concept is a modern interpretation of the original Challenger. It is also very retro. People here are trying to pick their words carefully enough that they don't accidently identify the 5th gen with direct retro terminology, and it is getting kind of ridiculous in my opinion.

 

I can't believe this thread! LOL! Wow! Everyone is splitting hairs. The Camaro is retro, end of story. Why are so many in denial about it?

 

LOL. I think its a cool looking car that is obviously a Camaro - no doubting it for anything else. From my perspective, this line fits the car best: "a modern interpretation of the 1st gen".


Whether or not that makes it "retro" is open for debate. But boy....some of ya'll are REALLY ate up on how this little detail is just like that little detail from this year - thus its a (insert gen here) retro design!

 

I agree with you on this. I agree that definitions are open to interpretation, as is this car. I do also strongly agree that this car is very modern.

I think it conveys a blurry line of retro vs modern and does such a damn good job of it, that it will ultimately be left up to the buyer of the car to feel about it how they will. If a guy like me wants retro, I feel that I get that in this car. If my buddy wants a car that's very modern, I'm sure he would feel that he gets that out of this car as well. That's part of what makes it so appealing I think.

Personally, my passion is for the 1st gens...maybe that's why I'm so adamant because I'd like nothing more than a modern '69, and I feel that I'm getting that in this car. But, I also am glad that I'm getting something so modern at the same time. Regardless, this 'Modern Interpretation of a '69' is certainly going to end up in my garage!!

 

A long nose and a short rear deck has always meant Camaro. So has nimble handling and rwd V8 preformance. While there is heritage styling in the concept, there has been heritage styling with every generation of Camaro. As I've said in the past, there are 1st gen styling cues in the 4th gen... you just have to know where to look.

The new Camaro is far less "retro" than the current Mustang or the new Challenger. It has more C6 in it than 69 Camaro. Anyone that insists it is 100% retro is either short-sighted or blind.

In short... it aint retro. Go see it person. See it in person side-by-side with a 69 Camaro. If after doing so, you can still say "its retro" with a straight face, I'll give you the name of a good shrink.