Vette Pro

I have not warmed up to the 5th gen car yet and I sell them for a living. My complaints are the car is over weight, has poor visibility, I do not care for the interior at all, the handling is so so to say the least, and the car did not improve its performance over the 4th gen car. For the large increase in price I expected better performance and handling from this car. The first thing it needs a suspension upgrade like the mustang track pack. I am a GM supporter from way back but I am disapointed in this car. What is printed in Motor Trend means nothing to me. They change their tune constantly to sell their rag. The Camaro is selling well but the lack of a product in this market catagory by GM is probably the biggest selling point the car has going for it. We will see if it can continue to be a big seller in its 2nd and 3rd year. I suppose that the convertible will keep the sales going for a while. But sooner or later the car will have to stand on its own merits. From my point of view it has a lot of corrections needed. I sell them but I would not buy one. I hope the 6th generation will turn out to be the one that I was hoping for because the 5th gen sure isn't.

besz28

very well put. I like the new camaro...not love it, they made it too heavy, interior plastic looks and feels like garbage. This car is 8 years newer than the last camaro in 2002 and performance wise is not much if any better. That can't be. Once the newness wears off the numbers and performance will be all that is left. And many people at the dealerships say the same thing it could have been so much more, close doesn't get it. Now with that said i think the new camaro is a beautiful automobile...but it could have been so much more.

third&fourthgen

Yea, if only they would have thrown about another ten grand at it, it could have been a a,,, well a corvette!

Z28CamaroPower!

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

Z28CamaroPower!

Anybody that posts "CamEro" on this site should be banned-for-life.

Silver2009

word!!!!!!!!

426HPSS

I particularly love comments like" the interior is garbage".
These types of innacuracies are not in keeping with driving the car and living with it daily. Sorry, but garbage comapred to what?? EVERYONE that looks inside my Inferno Orange Black SS...and I mean everyone.... with NO exceptions says wow !!
So to be blunt....
If you want an Audi V8 A5 loaded with a real expensive rich interior go buy one....
A few small items could be improved in Next Gen but garbage??
Sorry bud...you dont have a clue.

Z284ever

Maybe they're being polite. I talk to alot of 5th gen owners and tell them nice things - eventhough I think the interior is pretty ghastly. I don't want to be rude and hurt their feelings you know.

As long as you love it, that's all that really matters. But generally, I find most people have a negative impression on the Camaro's interior. Maybe that's why GM will revise it in '12.

teal98

The interior of my 4th gen has been criticized in many venues, but I like it just fine. My passengers complain about the hump, but it didn't bother me when I was a passenger, as long as I could move the seat back.

A VW Golf may have a better interior, according to many, but that's not what I want.

Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks!

HuJass

I was at a local cruise last night and was checking out a new Camaro.
I was peering in through the driver's window when I reaffirmed that I really like the interior of the car.
It has a retro look that goes well with the rest of the car. And it's unique.
I'm glad it doesn't look like all the rest of the cars out there.
I hope they don't change the interior too much.

arnie

I believe there is a lesson to be learned from the MT Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger head-to-head tests. Up front I will note that I have no idea how many that have posted in this thread frequent the engine tech section of this forum. Therefore, what I am about to explain may be Greek or of not concern to others in this thread.

In regards to the realistic MT test results, a relevant fact is the Mustang GT not only out accelerated the other two, but did so in 'chewed 'em up and spit 'em out' fashion. How so or how could that be? The other two have more horses. Yes, I know, the 'Stang is ~300# lighter, but still, it literally walked away from the other two. So what is making for the confounded and almost disbelieving realization?

Though it has less HP/torque it is the shape of the power/torque curve that wins that type of race. Understand, and though the wording in the MT article did not explain it and with the wording used was actually inaccurate and thus misleading, the 2011 5.0 is NOT a return of the 5.0 Ford had in their previous vehicles. This (very) high tech 5.0 is a DOHC, (as is their 2011 V-6 BTW) with variable cam timing. Actually its a bigger brother of Ford's 4.6. Not only can the OHC rev higher and more efficiently, it can tailor the cam timing to match the given RPM. Consider it today's high tech version of the old variable duration hydraulic lifters of decades past, but retains the variable duration objective. That is how they can achieve a very flat, pull hard to readline flat torque curve, and THAT is what is responsible for the superiority (with ballpark torque numbers of course) of the 5.0 compared to the other two valve, pushrod engines.

The lesson to be learned as noted at the top of this post? When choosing a cam to complement the rest of your engine package, pick one with not only superior torque/HP, but one that also has a superior (by superior I mean flat) torque curve. Use both criteria equally when choosing a cam and find a pleasing compromise. Ultimate HP may give bragging rights, but wouldn't you rather brag about 'chewing up' the other guy/vehicle in a race? I should note that am I in no way implying that you will be able to achieve a superior flat torque curve with ANY cam you choose that will rival the 5.0 as that will not be possible with our engines.

This 5.0 engine (as well as the V-6) begs to be turbocharged. A monster for 2013 anyone?

BTW, for those that are followers of the TV program Horsepower should be aware those guys do not get. When they do their dyno tests or test comparos on the program what do they reveal or hi-lite? The peak HP and peak torque! They appear to occasionally make other unrelated mistakes on that program as well. That program is in need of a qualified engine tech consultant.

For those that read through the entire post, thank-you for making this time consuming post worthwhile.

CamaroZ282008

Couldn't of said it better myself. The 5th Gen is a good car not a great car.

besz28

the more i read on the 2011 mustang the more i realize ford built an awesome car it is dynoing between 375-395 rwhp. i need to start modding my 2008 corvette.

guionM

I'm going to finally chime in here (I've been in "Lurker Mode" for some time on most of the threads here).

There seems to be 2 groups of 5th gen fans here. The first is represented by 426HPSS who is so emored with his Camaro that the thing could be dog crap in a box and he'd defend it. Then there's the other group who think the Camaro SS IS crap in a box because it's too heavy, too cheap, or too something else. I've had one quite a few times (as well as the new Mustang and Challenger (though I haven't driven a manual Challenger yet). Here's my take on all of this.


First off, it's completely obvious that the new Camaro is an "OLD General Motors developed car. I'm not passing judgement on the interior's design (that's subjective) but the materials and feel or the materials (especially the dash and doors) are simply and undeniably CHEAP. When I went to the Camaro introduction in Detroit, I remember afterwards writing on this very site (if the archives go that far back, you can look it up) that I hope GM uses good material quality in the interior because with that blank expanse of dash on the passenger side, if they don't, it's going to magnify how cheap the material is. Having something soft to touch on that side would change the view of the interior.

At last year's Los Angeles show, there was a concept called the Camaro "Black". It's interior was a revelation. The cheapness of the production Camaro was gone with far superior (and richer looking) guage graphics, there was stitching even on the dash seams and the interior was easily ahead of everything else. I voice my opinion both to the reps there on press day and here that GM should get that interior into regular Camaro ASAP. It's the same design, but the materials MADE the interior.


Second, the feel of the Camaro itself. From the seat of the pants, the new Camaro feels no quicker than my 4th gen. And IMO, it doesn't have the roadholding and it's brakes stop no quicker (though it does have better feel). In all fairness, I'm running 275 Nitto NT05s, ceramic brake pads, a K&N filter, and a mildly more agressive tune on my B4C, but to tell the truth, my B4C is far more of a blast to drive. So is a new Mustang GT. And unless you are driving very aggressively, the Challenger R/T feels no bigger (until you look in the rear view mirror and you see those huge rear seat headrests seemingly yards away). With that agressive "chopped" look of the Camaro, you do pay a price. You feel like you are sitting in a car where if a ray of daylight reaches most of the interior, it's cause for a celebration.

I did something in the new 5th gen that I never did in any car I recently drove outside of quick FWD vehicles, I understeered. You turn the wheel sharply going into a turn and then after a few moments.... the car finally turns. My old 5.0 Fox Mustangs never did that (though they tended to oversteer). The same moves in the new Mustang give immediate grip. Same story in the 4th gen Camaros. Same story in my '89 Thunderbird Supercoupe.


Finally, while the new Camaro is an absolute steal in V6 form, the SS isn't so much so. Sure, the Mustang V6 will now simply stomp a V6 Camaro in just about every performance catagory, but the V6 Camaro is still the far better deal when you look at what you get for the price. Any moron can make a car quick, simply add horsepower. But to make a car a screaming value is what makes the superior car. In V6 form, the Camaro is still the planet's best automotive deal. In SS form, the new Camaro simply is not. For the exact same reasons that go against the Mustang V6. The Camaro SS is undeniably quick. So is the Mustang V6. But go beyond that and look at what you get for the money compared to competitors.

The V6 Camaro comes with not just a 300+ hp V6, but also IRS, hot styling, a great interior design, big wheels, and if you know which option to check, 157mph capability, all for the price of a mid range Mini Cooper. But spend that extra $10,000 to pay the cover charge for the SS, and what do you get? An engine and brakes. But then look at what else is available at 32 large. The Mustang GT is cheaper, quicker, has a better interior, and can run circles around the SS on a track. The Challenger R/T is roomier, has better interior materials (if not a better designed dash), arguably more comfortable seats, has a bigger usable trunk, is barely wider than a Camaro and only slightly taller than a Mustang, and argably gets as many looks (especially now that 5th gens aren't exactly rare sightings anymore). You are also well into G37 range and approaching the entry fees of BMWs, Acuras, and other near luxury lines where you get more for the money.


But all of this doesn't mean the 5th gen isn't without merits.

The exterior styling is still traffic stopping. Not quite as much as before, but it still is an undoubtedly fantastic looking car.

To those that still complain about the weight, my advice is this: "[i]Get Real[i]!!!!". Some of the very same people that complain about the weight is are the same ones who wanted mega horsepower, mega brakes, mega chassis, independent rear suspension, and a Camaro price. This is exactly what we got. If we want a lighter car, then be prepared to give up things, including performance. Going back to 1980s era brakes will save weight. Also a smaller cooling system for a lower horsepower (and heat producing) engine. Losing those massive 20", 275 tires in favor of, say, the Fox Mustang's 225/60s on 15s will lose quite a bit of weight. Get rid of the IRS and we won't need that rear subframe, and even that log of an axle will weigh a little less than the reinforced, double U-jointed half axles of the rear drive system itself.

Finally, every car doesn't have to top another car in every catagory.

The Challenger R/T is an excellent car for a lot of long distant driving and the occasional drag race (don't forget, it's still as quick as an LS1 4th gen), as well as carrying real passengers in the rear seat, and it has much of the same appeal as the Camaro (styling) as well as the vices (questionable dash design). The Mustang is the car to get if you actually plan to run the thing. It looks aggressive enough (save the somewhat goofy rear end), has better interior design and far better materials. You can easily see out the thing without jacking your seat up till your head is almost rubbing the ceiling. It has a trunk that you don't have to fold things up before putting it in.

But the Camaro is a very good all round car. It looks great & it rides great. It's a fantastic commuter car as well as a weekend getaway car. It's quick in both V6 and V8 forms. The top speed is excellent. You almost feel like you're ripping of GM buying a V6 at near base MSRP price, while the V8 is a no worse (as well as no better) deal than you'd get from the competitors.


Personally, I really like the Camaro. Although if I was buying at this very moment, among the V8 coupes I'd likely choose the R/T (I actually need the room and the trunk space since it'd be my sole car), the Camaro SS is merely a much better interior and eliminating that oversteer issue (ad also add it to the equasion, but I know a $2000 lower MSRP is out of the question) away from flipping my choice.

That's not a show on how flexable I am... it's a reflection on how good the Camaro is.

It's not flawless as some think, but it's not junk either.

In both cases, not by a long shot.

Z28Wilson

I wonder if that was a preview to the 2012 interior revisions.

Personally I would prefer a complete interior re-style to something more modern, though I know that styling is purely subjective and that probably isn't what's coming.