After having gone through 5 GM cars that all had interior rattles and shakes - I too would be heavily in favor of spending more money on better plastics.

 

The plastics are all the same from all the manufacturers. ABS with soft-touch paint, PP, etc...

It isn't the materials, it's the fit.

And there's a solution:

It's called "Dimensional Management".

PLAN for it, FOR ONCE, and GM can pull off a world-class interior for the same amount of money (or LESS) than they pay now.

Don't plan for it, and you get the C6's interior. Sorta nice materials, sorta nice visuals... awful fit and finish.

 

I deffinatly would. Its expected now, especialy if the Camaro's price reaches 30k+.
And I doubt you will ever be able to get Sirius, since GM kinda owns XM Radio. And we all know XM> Sirius anyway.
Pacer said it best, the quality of parts is there, its the matter of design and drawing attention AWAY from the cheap stuff, and leave the good stuff out to touch. Sporty seats are a must, no soft, saggy buckets.
GM could share a lot with the cars around it. Seats from a Corvette or a Solstice, or even the G6/Malibu SS seats that are bolsterd right. GM coud do a lot and save money just looking around the parts bins, and they wont have to cut quality for it either.

 

Yea I know GM owns XM (I never said we'd get it, just that I'd prefer it).

Yes I want seats that will last. Mine have surprisingly held really well compared to others I have seen.

Back to the sat. nav. -- I honestly don't think it's expected, expecially in a muscle car that is going to be priced to sell. I'm not saying that it WONT be an option, but I'm not saying it SHOULD be either. I've just never seen the point in nay. systems - and yes, I have used them. I don't know, for a car that a lot of people won't drive year round, or even all week (just weekends, etc.) - it really isn't necessary. How many people road-trip in a Camaro, and most people shouldn't need it on a daily - even monthly basis. There are plenty of other ways to get directions, anyway. e.g. gas stations, mapquest, google SMS, etc.

 

I don't know why you think that...unless you have XM or work for them or something. IMO, XM will die out before Sirius does.

Sirius is more expensive - I believe close to $13 a month, while XM is $8-9 (I think). Though I'm not a fan, Sirius now has Stern (even though now they want to regulate what he says) - and a lot of people have been signing up for Sirius for that reason alone. Sirius I had always had the impression destroys XM in the world of sports. All I've ever heard of XM having is NASCAR and hockey. Sirius has all the college sports, which I could not live without. Just over all, Sirius is known for better programming - even though a lot of people like the XMs better.

There is obviously no question that every car will be built XM ready since yes, GM owns XM. Also, the overwhelming amount of deacks available are XM ready as well.

Personally, I wish it was Sirius instead - however Pioneer and Alpine decks are XM ready, which ar emore popular decks. I think newer Pioneers now are supporting both, but it's costly - and who would have both at the same time...

I think it would be best if one bought out the other and made the price $10-12/mo.

 

Yeah my 98 stupid seatbelt thing that keeps the buckle from dropping to the floor broke too. You have to dige around between the seat and the rocker to find that buckle...

 

Sorry for another post, didn't want some information to get lost and wanted to seperate ideas from supporting fact. After my last comments I decided I'd better do some research so there is some validity to what I'm saying (and to make sure I didn't make any of it up). Here is the first link that comes up when you google "sirius or xm" -- from a site we all know too

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=103686

 

I like the blue bow tie the best

 

I too want the Camaro to have a "quality" interior.

But here's the problem - interior quality is VERY subjective. An example: Many critics find the interiors in Mercedes to be crappy - they criticised the 97-02 E-Class for being too boring on the inside, and the 00-06 S-Class for looking too cheap on the inside. Wheras I love both of those interiors.

Some hold Audi, and their lower priced cousin VW out to be the best at interiors - but others say they look cheap and crappy.

I think my BMW has one of the best interiors, with it's center stack canted toward the driver, and orange lighting everywhere. But others say it's a disorganized ergonimic nightmare of a buttonfest.

And Lexus sure seems to have nice interiors, but they look a little boring sometimes.

My 99 Z28 was a big step up in interior quality from my 95 - the older dash looked more fisher price than fisher body, and the older console lid was a lot easier to break and harder to use. The only real complaints I can think of are the left most air vent doesn't have a full range of motion, There were a lot of rattles (fixed most of them myself), the power window and lock switches don't have a satisfying click when you push them, and well that's about it. Oh, all my passengers hate the hump in the floor and the lack of legroom (seems to be less legroom on the passenger side than there is on the driver's side). But you knew that.

Since it's so hard to please everyone, I don't know exactly what the interior ought to look like - But whatever it ends up looking like, I think they would be best served to go a little crazy with rattle prevention, i.e. felt tape between every seam, and get the panel fits tight and even (like they appear to have done on all the most recent interiors - Caddy DTS, Buick Lucerne, Chevy Tahoe).

 

A man of reason that I can agree with 100%!!!!!!

Not too sure about the constant ragging on GM for their interiors. I don't see what the big deal is. Personally, I thought the interior on my 01 SS was pretty slick. The word "cheap" never came to mind.

A lot of the mainstream auto mags remarked how much GM improved the "quality" of the interior from the C5 to C6 Corvettes.
........I sure didn't see it. In fact, comparing the interior of my Dad's 04 (C5) to a 05 (C6) at the dealer, the only difference I noticed was that the abundance of silver on the C6 looked out of place & tacky.


The only complaint I've had with "recent" GM interiors has to do with the quality of the leather. I had extremely noticeable wear marks on the driver's side bolster of my 95 Z28 with less than 20,000 miles. It wore completely through to the foam at 2 places by only 30,000 miles (had to replace bolster when I sold it).
In fact, when I got my 01 SS, it was a plus to me that it had cloth seats, not leather. When we bought my wife's trailblazer, leather was an option we had no desire to have.

 

Heh, the same thing has happened to my car on the drivers side seat belt.


I don't know what kind of leather they used on the 95s, but I have a 2000 with leather and with almost 50,000 miles the seats still have no cracks or wrinkles in them. The car is a daily driver, and the seats have gotten wet before a few times. Apparently GM got it right with the leather on the later 4th gens, as far as longevity goes.

 

the major problem with me and plastic is not that it is not durable, or looks cheap (although i dislike that as well), but rather that after a year, it creaks, cracks, and makes horrid noises. Anyone whos had an fbody can relate.

 

That's a REALLY BAD assumption. If people aren't buying camaros to drive daily, year round, then it will be gone again in short order and never come back. People don't buy V6 camaros as weekend toys, and the V6 cars prop up the entire line. Even most V8 cars will be used as daily drivers, not many people spend money on a car just so it can sit in their garage 330 days of the year.

As for the rest of your 'argument', it holds no water. People don't need cell phones and ipods either, yet try to find someone who doesn't have at least one if not both on their person at all times

What i'm getting at is, gadgets are IN. I can't think of a single person i work with who has bought a new car in the last few years with available NAV and didn't get the NAV. I know people that have swapped in aftermarket NAVs just to be cool, one guy in particular has never left northern VA in his life and knows DC like the back of his hand, yet he still bought an aftermarket NAV unit just to keep up with the joneses

NAV will help sell cars, as would bluetooth and an ipod hookup. NAV is probably a pretty profitable option too since it WILL already have a satelite antenna for onstar (and XM) built in to the car anyway (recall that GM wants to make onstar standard equipment)

 

Yeah it would be a daily driver for me. The interior looks bigger and trunk too. I "road tripped" in my 98 all the time. Im not sure about Navigation option, but if GM looses sight of this car not being a viable daily driver again this car is dead in the water.

 

Well, it was a bad assumption because I didn't take states like VA and Cali into account. In the Chicago-area I live in, you will rarely see any Camaro in the winter - even V6. Either way, I can't see myself using it much, and don't see where it fits into the Camaro market. I just hope that without the added option, everything still looks "right".