While I can't speak from experience with owning a Camaro, I would hope issues you presented are not repeated with the 5th gen. Especially because I plan on the Camaro being the first brand new car I ever buy . If I'm spending nearly $40k on a Z28, or any vehicle for that matter, there should not be problems like the ones you stated. Granted, vehicles always have problems, but efforts should be made to minimize all of them and eliminate the stupid ones e.g. the door motors breaking. The goal of GM is to bring their quality up to compete with imports who are stealing their market segment.

I've been driving a used 96 Blazer for the past 8 years and for the most part, it has been a good GM vehicle. I plan on buying a used GTO this summer to get me through these days of waiting for the Camaro.

This is GM's shining moment for the everyday American who wants an affordable pony car. I want GM to succeed. But, if they don't get the Camaro right and I get burned after waiting all of this time, it will be difficult to convince me to buy another GM vehicle. I hope they get it right.

 

It's a painfully simple answer. GM decided to kill the fcar around the 95/96 timeframe.

Once that decision was made, minimal money was allocated for anything new for the rest of it's life cycle. So we never saw persistent issues like the factory installed pinion seal leak and lousy power window motors addressed.

We never saw things like the C4 ABS system or humongous 1st gen airbags updated.

In fact, production was initially scheduled to terminate sooner than 2002. A strong case could be made that SLPs "intervention" in 96 with the SSs and WS6s breathed enough new life into them to extend the 4th gen's life until 2002.

So... I think it's really comparing apples to oranges comparing the 4th gen to the 5th gen. The 5th gen isn't hamstrung from a design and engineering budget perspective like the 4th gens were.

 

True this is a completely different animal, but a bad taste in your mouth is still a bad taste.

In any case I certainly think that rant was full grown, nothing "mini" about it.

 

from th firewall back the 4th gen was virtually the same as a third gen. all the flaws carried over. i own a 91 camaro, but it has virtually been rebuilt entirely by me, because it needed it! i also drive a new chevy work truck, and i think they piece fleet vehicles together from spare parts!! it seems like it is falling apart, and only has 15000 miles on it. i like my camaro now, and the only reason i would sell it would be to get a new 5th gen car. looking at the new gm cars, i think they have made an infinite improvement, but you can tell on their fleet vehicles they pinch pennies big time.

 

Drum brakes might be the answer

My '70 and '71 Cutlasses will never have warped rotors!

 

Well I'm glad to say I got 3 great Camaro's by the issues I've seen here. Sure the cars had some minor flaws. My 02 had the piston slap, and a whining rear end. Rear end was fiked under warranty and GM gave me a warranty extension on the engine and drivetrain. I didn;t like the slap sound when cold, in Michigan that was about 6 months a year. But the thing ran great, 12.8's in the 1/4 and threw down 286hp on the dyno with 1k on the clock. I didn't pay a lot for it $23k new so I could deal with a few little issues IMO. My 99 had no problems and although I over revved the LS1 in a 3-2 powershift after the pushrods were replaced it ran great again. All of them had the dreaded warped rotors. I mean sure none of them were quiet and none of them had the tight gaps or felt solid over the railroad tracks but I didn't expect that. If I bought a Maybach or Roll Royce then yea I'd be annoyed.

 

I think Scott was refering to the LS1, not the LT1. Corvette ended up with the F-body, and they moved to make a detuned LS1 for the Camaro. Scott and company (very ingeniously I'd say) put forth the position that it would cost GM nothing to simply bolt the engine in the Camaro yet it would cost GM a decent penny to design an engine that would produce less power, so what would be the logic?

As far as the extra power needing to be valadated, it's extremely doubtful that the crappy power windows, warping brakes, and the general inability of the car to hold up to hard use would be influenced by the extra 20-30 horsepower the car ended up with. GM had automatics in trucks that were inside the same casing that handled everything thrown at them without a problem. The 6 speed manual in the Corvette apparently has a clutch that's almost flawless. GM has made bullitproof rear ends before.

Ditto on the codes!
Ditto on the brake rotors.

The current B4C is has started a faint pulsating, so I'm guessing that's what it is. I recocgnize it. That's how my '97's brakes started when they ended up warped as well.

In all fairness, my Fox mustangs were very prone to this as well. But to farther damn the Camaro's brakes, none of my SCs had warped rotors. If you saw how husky those things are (especially compared to regular 'Birds) you'd think it would nearly take an act of God to warp them.

 

Think you're a couple of years off. More like after the 98's were on the streets (ie: after the 1998 UAW strike against GM) that GM decided to pull the plug and cut down the number of factories.

Even so, GM spent 250 mil on new noses, additional money on improved, less rattling dashboards, different brakes and rearends. I don't think it would have been a big issue to pull the window motors out of a Caprice or Cadillac and dumped the cheap junk that was in the F-body. Corvette ran Camaro the final number of years. Doubt it would have been a big issue fitting the gear & pinion set from the Vette.

If Ford can create an entire police package for the Mustang and make money on it, it would have been far easier for GM to make the same type of durability changes, since the V8 Camaros would be selling in far greater numbers at higher margins than the SSP Mustangs ever did.

 

I received that same recall notice last week. I believe my catalytic convertors will not fail any time soon though...seeing as they are sitting in my shed.

 

No wonder they almost went under.

 

I know it was mentioned earlier and what this thread started with but I've known several poeple with used Crown Vic's from the police force and they are not much better than the Camaro at least by what I hear and see. Several have dropped the trans and even the rear end. The brakes and window motors work fine but its the bigger ticket items that keep the car from driving. I think its fair to say the police force is hard on the cars and unless they are a proven and perfected package the flaws will come out. I'm sure the Caprice/Impala had flaws when they were in service but from what I've heard they were the best cop cars yet. So maybe the Crown Vic and the Camaro just arn't as good...

 

9C1 Caprices powered by the LT1 (prior to that, it wasn't really that popular) were extremely popular with the Highway Patrol out here, especially coming out at almost the exact same time Ford killed off the SSP Mustangs.

Unlike the B4Cs, the 9C1s had various unique parts over a standard LT1 Caprice, from heavier guage frame to upgraded brakes & transmission. GM actually took the time and invested a few dollars to make sure the cars could take the punishment. There were some cops I was friends with who prefered the later years Crown Vic's ride & felt it had a better quality interior. But almost to a person, they all felt the Caprice handled better (CVs tended to get a little squarrelly in violent manuvers with a half tank of gas) and was the all round better car.


Early 4.6 CVs had coolant system failures and plastic manifolds that cracked. The occasional transmission failure wasn't unheard of. But the failure rate with the B4C Camaro's automatic transmission is either across the board or high enough to be a very serious issue with the guys running CHP's transport, at least the NorCal section.

I haven't heard these guys slam a car this bad since the 1980s Dodge Diplomat Police Cruiser. Unlike the Mustang, I don't personally know any officers who drive B4Cs, and I imagine although they probally like the performance, I don't think it's too much fun dropping into & climbing out of the driver's seat multiple times a shift with bulky body armor and a fully equpted gunbelt. But it's safe to say (at least with the CHP) the guys in transport who have budgets, and are responsible for maintence & keeping the cars going, and run their own vehicle sales lots really dislike the car as a whole. When deciding which new cruisers to buy, the state takes input from them very seriously. Perhaps moreso than input from the officers in the field.

Unlike the Crown Vics, Mustangs, Tahoes & Suburbans, and last edition Rams which are refurbished by the CHP and sold to the general public, most all Camaros being turned in are in bad enough condition that they simply send it straight to private auction. Something usually reserved for the worst condition city police cruisers.

 

Nope. I'm dead on with this. It was in '95 or '96.

 

Hey Guy. Are the late 3rd gen B4C's as bad as the 4th Gens. Just curious.

 

Obviously power window motors are a problem....but that is NOT just on the Camaros. The fact that the '97 went through 3 clutches - can that really be blamed ENITIRELY on anything without including abuse by CHP/whoever before you picked it up? Same with the trannys (especially being autos) you had replaced....were all these cars you are talking about purchased as used B4C models? Finally....the rear end, I guess that could fall into the category of abuse/rough conditions as well - but that is definitely something that could be improved upon either way so I agree there. Have you ever had an optispark go? (just curious)

As far as Ford being more durable and less engine noise - that is kinda surprising and disappointing to hear. I have a friend with an early '90s stang that has been through a clutch and 2 trannys in about a year with not nearly as much abuse as a daily driven patrol car...I guess it all just depends on who you talk to and what experiences they have had.

I guess, I just feel that if all these were used B4Cs that these issues were almost to be expected given how they are driven. I'm sorry if I missed the main point and if these weren't cop cars...I'll have to reread again when I get back later.

I'm not trying to "defend" the car as you said not to do and I do agree without a doubt that improvements can (and will) be made. I just feel like some of these experiences are to be expected if all yours are B4Cs...