Cool

 

I don't think people are trying to destroy it, just stating the fact that in 2009, mediocre won't be good enough to sell in volume to this more educated consumer base. We don't want a "dead duck"...and don't expect a reskinned C6/Z06 either.
The internet is bringing everyones' expectations higher. It's so easy for the masses to compare every aspect of a new vehicle with every other, in a short period of time. And an endless stream of reviews as well.
The first impression of a new Camaro had better make an IMPACT!..

(I've got a 9-bolt too, see sig..:'86 T/A 5.0L 9-Bolt/3.27(selling soon)

 

I'm not ready to throw the white flag up yet, Chris.

My CTS weighs 3,6xx lbs. It is a large-ish, 5 passenger, 4 door sedan which is built like a brick sh!thouse. It has power everything, xenon's, sunroof, 18" wheels and heavy duty chassis components.

If you're telling me that I need to accept that my little 5th gen Z/28 coupe needs to weigh more than that - I say unacceptable. JMHO.

 

No, but I'm telling you whatever it weighs the ship has sailed. It may come in at 3600, it may come in at 3800, but the time for ranting and raving trying to get somebody at GM to listen and change course is loooonnnnnggg gone.

 

I have read alot of everyone's comments sence this forum was added to the list. I am excited to see the car hit the lots. For me, what I expect in the new camaro is for it to be on par with other car makers in fit and finish. Gm has been doing better about using better plastics wich the 4th gen was lacking. I expect it to be very close to the concept (beeing realistic though). I expect it to be afordable to the masses. I expect it to trounce the mustang in all aspects of performance. I don't think that is asking too much.

I will have to put off buying one for a year or so after the launch. Due to just leasing a new car. If the new camaro dosen't live up to those expectations that I listed above. I will be getting a Subaru Sti. I consider my self camaro loyal but when it comes down to it I am for the best buy for the money. I think that GM knows that is the real bottom line. just my .02 cents

 

Late to the party, but...

If it weighs more than 3400 lb. (and we all know it will), I'm not buying one:P

Lighter-weight cars are just more fun at the track (road course), and any daily-driver car I own will also be a backup track car for me.

The argument that light weight costs more is not valid. Light weight can cost LESS. But not if you have to "add it on" after the fact, that's HUGELY expensive for any meaningful weight reduction. I don't think anybody's suggested that.

It just kinda sucks that it's going to be a 2-door Cadillac. There wouldn't be a Camaro legend if the original had been such.

A pity no manufacturer sees fit to produce a family of smaller, lighter-weight rwd cars. Ah well...

 

They have. They are called Miata, Solstice, Saturn Sky, etc.

What you low-weight-at-all-costs guys want is a little roadster, not a Camaro....at least that is my perspective. Or at least let me put it this way...the Camaro that would make you weight freaks happy probably wouldn't make anybody else happy, especially the millions of non-enthusiasts this car will have to appeal to in order to survive.

 

None of those cars you mention have roofs, or back seats. Not only that, but all those cars you mentioned are slow, and even their high performance versions coming out are only going to be quick, not fast. I would love a lightweight, relatively powerful 2 door, without having to spend big bucks to get one. I guess that is what the used car market is for.

 

Write your local congressman.

 

Because I am sure he would write back to me about this.

 

At least one; me!

 

AMEN to that. 100% agree.

 

If that's what I wanted, that's what I'd buy. I want a closed coupe or hatch, 2+2 preferably (even if the +2 is only suitable for oompa loompas or rheesus monkeys). And some power would be nice.

Also, I don't want low-weight-at-all-costs, I just don't want the next Camaro to be a 2-door Caddy!

I think a near-2-ton Camaro will appeal to the general public a lot less than a 3200 lb. Camaro would. Particularly if gas prices continue to rise.

Anyway, my ideal Camaro formula is just that, ideal for ME. Just expressing MY desires in a new car, not necessarily what I think will sell.

But still, 3200 lb., 320+ hp V8 2+2 coupe/hatchback, how would that be inconsistent with "Camaro"?

 

I hope I'm wrong, but it sure sounds like a lot of folks on this message board and in the F-body community in general WANT this car to fail. When have Camaros ever been fly weights? The later 2nd gens certainly weren't. The big block 1st gens weren't exactly light. Do you want a 5th gen that weighs in like one of the lighter 3rd gens? Better get ready for some of those 3rd gen amenities then, like hand crank windows, no power door locks, and forget XM and Onstar. And a 500hp model? Why? So it can win some meaningless magazine showdown with the Cobra (or not, depending on gotta have factor)? Give us a LSX that's not impossible to turn wrenches on and the aftermarket can make it as fast as you want...till your money runs out.

 

You are wrong.

Later second gens were also big, and they were steel. But yes, they were heavy.

Probably why I never would have bought a big block 1st gen.

The 3rd gen didn't exactly start out on a light platform either. Dan's point is that the car could be inexpensive to make light if it wasn't based off of a Caddy platform, and he is probably right. GM likely saw that Ford could make a successful Mustang off of a Lincoln LS platform, and they followed the example.

500hp would not be necessary if the Camaro was lighter than it's competition. Even so, who is to say that GM couldn't build a lightweight NA 6.2L 500hp engine in the next few years that was still easy to wrench on? There is still much speculation on these boards about the exact details of future GM powertrains.