Ummmm........ok.

 

Good comments. I was watching the vid and noticed how it said legends never die. I was thinking, well maybe the Camaro DID die, but it was buried in the Pet Semetary, you know, where critters come back, but PISSED AS HELL and ready to kill anything that moves!

 

Then don't buy it.



Did he see the car in person?

My feelings exactly. This car does make the 4th gen look like a dog.


No sure if you heard the reactions, the private conversations, or some of the press folks away from the display, but judging by the things I overheard about the design, your're right. GM does have a winner on their hands.

 

Sitting in rich guys collections gaining value... the Z8 is a very coveted vehicle and was never meant for high production.

As to the original question..... Retro rocks....and it WILL sell if GM gets off its boring FWD V6 dead-@ss and builds this thing.

 

Whats that...a bastardized Vette? No thanks. (Apologies to the artist but there is far less imagination in that than then what people are complaining about the retro concept)

 

You're joking right. Retro by definition means lack of imagination.

 

I'm confused why so many people are so dissappointed with the new design. All of the concept pics over the past couple years were retro in one way or another, and most had pretty good reactions. It seemed like that was all that was out there - was ideas for a retro design. Look at the Challenger and Mustang - Mustang sales were huge, in part because it looked the way it did; retro (I'm surprised it isn't even more retro since Mustang had such great success). The new Camaro IMO is nowhere near as retro as some are making it out to be. Yes, there is 1st gen in it, but that doesn't necessarily mean the car is retro. I believe that people looking for some retro will enjoy this car, and those looking for something new will find what they are looking for as well. I think it's best to let the car grow on you and see how you like it then. I hated the initial model for the most part, but the more I looked at it the more I liked it. Then other pictures came out, and finally the shots from Detroit - and I can feel myself driving it already. The changes from the initial clay mock up to the concept were for the better, and GM will be listening to our comments about the latest concept, and improve upon it. Either way though, it will clearly keep some retro - and why not? We're bringing a legend back, not creating a new one (I also personally don't like the idea of a new car and calling it Camaro that might have absolutely no hints of a previous Camaro). Let's get GM to build the car first, took long enough to get this far and there's no reason to take steps backwards now, and maybe opinions will change - maybe not.

 

I agree - but in the way that the new Camaro concept is retro, it may have taken more imagination to try to include hints of a previous era in a still modern design. Retro, by the lack of imagination definition, is the Challenger's interior.

--Also, IMO that blue w/e it is above is just plain aweful. There really is no other way to put it.

 

The Camaro and the Mustang posted side by side... I actually prefer the GT (sorry), at least from those two shots (probably the best shot you can get of the Stang is from that angle). Anyway, I think the Camaro is a little too much Robocop meets 68 Camaro. I have not seen it in person however, and would consider buying one if they give it a non-ridiculous interior, and the mechanicals/performance and everyday usability are solid.

 

Well of all things, I believe that in the final design (should there be one) the interior would be the first to change. I do like the concept's interior though, but it will definitely have to change.

 

I think the biggest problem here is the defenition of retro:

RETRO RET.RO
adjective
imitative of a style, fashion, or design from the recent past.

Key word in this defenition "IMITATIVE" no imagination no foreward movement, just lets just take some $hit we've already done and put it in a nice bubble gum type setup and watch the Masses praise it! what made the 1968-9 Camaro's so cool is that they were original, Guess what guys It'll NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN once it's done everything else is just a Cheap knock-off! Why in this country do we now praise these old cars, in their day they were great but that's over no matter how many viagra-induced hardon's you get for seeing it that's over and done with, it's like imagination and originality died with the end of 1969. That's just my $.02

 

Well said, I agree. I wanted to see something new, something that looked more like an Aston Martin or the 2007 Jaguar XK (but that's just my opinion). You know, something that actually looked enough like the 4th gens that they could share the same garage without looking funny together.

 

That's like 1995-Retro That would have been cool 10 year ago, but not today.

.
.
..
.
.
..
.

 

I hope those who dont like it will check it out in person.

That rear window is at a 3rd 4th gen angle giving the back kinda a testorosa look if you look down at the flat deck lid.

 

Many people here you are confusing "art" with scientific progress (they are not the same).

I would argue that the exterior of a car would be more correctly classified as "ART" then it would be considered a pure funtion of "technology". Sometimes in history technology has a direct affect on art and many times it does not. Often art and technology have their own path and evolve and change at their own own speed according to the tastes and needs of the culture that created them.

One could easily argue that automotive designers over the last few decades became so consumed with technology that they let it dictate 'artistic' design, and in the process they lost touch with the (non-technological) needs and passions of their customers.

It could also be said that many designers had their designs dictated to them by the 'un-holy trinity' of (1) windtunnel tests, (2) fuel efficiency requirements, and (3)focus groups and the end result were vehicles that became nothing more then souless appliances drifting aimlessly in the sea of automotive 'sameness'.

No surprise that many cars created in the 70's, 80's, and 90's don't get refererred to as 'beautiful' by most but instead people talk about HP and performance #'s (or lack of) because we as a culture were more focused on technolgy during that period of time.

Hopefully in the 21 century we can put art and beauty back into our cars.
________