2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

I drove a 2010 SS today!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-16-2009, 02:04 PM
  #46  
Registered User
 
2010_5thgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: ohio
Posts: 4,482
Originally Posted by Rob V
Interesting that it doesn't have the orange door panels or dash panels. I know I had the option of orange leather when I ordered mine, and that was a prerequisite of the accent package. Makes me wonder if the door panels and dash panel are extra...?
no, its supposed to come with the orange interior. i wonder why this one didnt have the orange accent panels though.
2010_5thgen is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 02:30 PM
  #47  
Registered User
 
Eric77TA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 1,958
It looks to me like there aren't any interior trim panels installed. Don't the base cars even have the metallic looking door panels? I wonder if the orange seats were ready but they didn't have enough trim panels or something and since it's a pilot car they just left 'em off for now.
Eric77TA is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 02:46 PM
  #48  
Registered User
 
Tkc23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 90
i was snooping around on camaro 5 and found this picture from the same car



Now if im not mistaken the 2 SS is fully mech adjustable seats.

My theory is that they intended this to be a 1 SS then just decided to stick on a gauge pack and the orange leather...

More to back it up... Look at the armrest on the door for both of these pictures... on the first (the 1SS) there is no orange stitching but then on the 2nd picture (2SS) at Barrett Jackson there is orange stitching... Then the reason is on the first pic (1SS) sides of the center armrest are more grainy and low quality plastic while on the B.J. camaro (2SS) it is more of a high quality and smooth and shiny enough to reflect my flash finish to it.
Name:  NewCamaroSSShoot005.jpg
Views: 40
Size:  61.2 KB
BarretJacksonsat271.jpg?t=1234817932

i hope that is enough to prove it is a 1SS!

Last edited by Tkc23; 02-16-2009 at 03:49 PM.
Tkc23 is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 03:39 PM
  #49  
Registered User
 
99SilverSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,463
Originally Posted by Patman
Overall I would have to say I was disappointed that the car didn't have that major rush of acceleration I was expecting, but very impressed overall with the entire car and especially with it's quality feel. The seats were very comfortable for sure, I just found the more upright position a bit different than what I've been used to.

It's also entirely possible that this car could be quicker in the quarter than the LS1 f-body, but just doesn't feel as fast since the LS3 is such a smooth engine and also doesn't have that peaky nature of the LS1 (which tends to feel sluggish down low but then kicks in hard at 3500rpm or so and hits you with a rush of power)
I remember that was the same thing we said in late 1997 when the LS1 made it's way into the F-body. Everyone said it didn't feel fast especially down low where the torque peak of the LT1 was. We all thought that our LT1's with "only 20hp" less would run close. But the beauty of the alloy LS1 was it's smooth power delivery and as they say the rest is history.

Sure there is an extra 400-500 lbs of car to haul but the LS3 is plenty powerful enough to make up for it. I think time will judge this car well in terms of it's drag prowness.
99SilverSS is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 03:47 PM
  #50  
Registered User
 
cmg06s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 172
Wow I've been hating on this car because of the interior, but that 2ss looks awesome with the colored leather... I guess I should wait till I actually sit in one to make my decision
cmg06s is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 03:52 PM
  #51  
Registered User
 
bombebomb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,856
That head rest is bleh, IMO hehe.
bombebomb is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 04:21 PM
  #52  
Registered User
 
97z28/m6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: oshawa,ontario,canada
Posts: 3,597
Originally Posted by cmg06s
Wow I've been hating on this car because of the interior, but that 2ss looks awesome with the colored leather... I guess I should wait till I actually sit in one to make my decision
i sat in one today and it is indeed comfortable (way better then the mustang!) but the interior is still a let down. IMO the design is horrible and the plastics used are not the best.


out of all 3 (camaro, mustang, challenger) the challenger wins hands down. too bad they are too big and heavy. nevermind you need to step up to SRT-8 specs. camaros will make a good used buy when the price drops to match the low end interior.

Last edited by 97z28/m6; 02-16-2009 at 04:23 PM.
97z28/m6 is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 04:30 PM
  #53  
Registered User
 
HuJass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: CNY
Posts: 2,224
Yeah, it looks like it has 1SS door panels and dash inserts.
I wonder what gives.

That's the way I would actually want mine (light gray interior w/light gray fabric door & dash inserts). I don't like the shiny, hard plastic inserts.

Last edited by HuJass; 02-16-2009 at 04:32 PM.
HuJass is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 04:45 PM
  #54  
Registered User
 
Brez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 204
If that is a SS IMO its just too bland for a SS car.

I am no fan of non functioning hood scoops, useless badging and wings but that car looks really bland and generally boring. I love the design of the new Camaro but cant they spice it up a bit for the SS?
Brez is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 08:27 PM
  #55  
b4z
Registered User
 
b4z's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: chas., s.c. U.S.A.
Posts: 61
If the car has a VIN with 210 at the end it is a sellable car.
Will probably be used by an executive to drive around for 3-6months or so, but that car will be on a dealer's lot for sale within 6-9months.

The all new 2003 Cadillac CTS came out January 2, 2002. I have personally seen CTSs on the dealers lots as executive cars built in November 2001.
b4z is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 10:05 PM
  #56  
Registered User
 
FiefSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago Burbs
Posts: 873
Originally Posted by Brez
If that is a SS IMO its just too bland for a SS car.

I am no fan of non functioning hood scoops, useless badging and wings but that car looks really bland and generally boring. I love the design of the new Camaro but cant they spice it up a bit for the SS?
What is bland for it? There are alot of difference between this car you are seeing and a V6 car...
FiefSS is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 10:37 PM
  #57  
Registered User
 
King Moose SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 1,071
God, you guys remeber all the good times..... My most memorable camaro moment was when I picked "muscle car" magazine and on the front page it said. "GM to kill the Camaro"

I almost cryied
King Moose SS is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 11:20 PM
  #58  
Registered User
 
Logansneo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 141
I can't state with any certainty exactly what the SS Camaro will do on the test track but the following articles are vehicles that in my opinion serve as good examples of where I believe we should expect the SS to perform.

Lexus IS-F

Aston Martin V8 Vantage

2010 Jaguar XKR
Logansneo is offline  
Old 02-16-2009, 11:24 PM
  #59  
Registered User
 
Logansneo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 141
Originally Posted by Patman
I did get the chance to go full throttle a couple of times, it feels about the same as a stock LS1 f-body unfortunately. I figured they would be quicker, but it feels like about a 13.3 at 105 to me. It's got 426hp, but weighs probably 3800 lbs so that obviously hurts performance.
I forgot to ask but did you have a chance to engage the Launch Control feature on your test drive? And the weight is supposed to be 3860 lbs, roughly 40-50 lbs. heavier than the comparison cars I listed in my post above, with considerably more torque as well though (and yes, the Aston is 200 lbs lighter, but in the same ballpark in my opinion).

Last edited by Logansneo; 02-16-2009 at 11:29 PM.
Logansneo is offline  
Old 02-17-2009, 03:42 AM
  #60  
Registered User
 
IZ28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
Originally Posted by FiefSS
What is bland for it? There are alot of difference between this car you are seeing and a V6 car...
Nope. Exterior is front bumper, emblems, and mailslot. Interior is gauges and SS on seats. I agree with the blandness. They both look too similar. (V6 has the better front bumper also)
IZ28 is offline  


Quick Reply: I drove a 2010 SS today!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:53 AM.