Yeah, I guess. But I don't think that would be the case anyway.

I consider the GT500 powertrain to be a compromised package. Sure, it puts out respectable power - but at what cost in weight, mass, complexity and expense? And in the end the 400 hp Z51 C6 still makes it it's biotch.

 

not to mention the 20k dealer markup

 

A very limited production top of the line model with whatever engine is going into the Corvette SS (supercharged 6.2L w/ 600+ hp.) would make a good ZL1. You wouldn't be stepping on the Corvette's toes perfromance-wise with the difference in weight, size, materials, etc. I could see a business case here as long as it was kept to a very limited number of cars. Sure they're not going to make any money on the car itself but the interest generated by a car like that would definately draw in more potential buyers.

 

But, I want the top Camaro to make it it's biotch.

 

My preference would be for GM to keep the number of option packages between specific models to a minimum and let the dealer/customer do the supplemental options. Simplicity is good, it is good for profitability, it is good for marketing, and it leaves minimal confusion.

For example let your base V6, performance V6, and Z28 come standard with package A (standard) with a medium range of frills and then have package B (RS) as your all option upgrade. If there are only selected features from the RS package that you want to add to package 1, then the dealer can add it upon request or you could do it yourself.

Then the uber camaro (ZL1 or maybe something new) we are all hoping for, later on, could come in two forms 1) PERFORMANCE - stripped down delete option (dragstrip or road track, whichever is decided upon, maybe have a setup for each) and 2) LUXURY PERFORMANCE - it’s own unique high-end option package, package C, e.g. SS that is better than your RS package

And as a disclaimer, I personally don’t mind either way if the Z28 and SS nomenclature is switched around from what I presented. I only ask that before you rip me a new one, that you understand the argument for the options and leveling is the point I am trying to get across and not the name of the package or name of the level.

In review, in my opinion, I would advocate the following, tiers and packages:

Starting Year 1
Base V6 – Package A (Standard) or Package B (RS)
Performance V6 – Package A (Standard) or Package B (RS)
Z28 – Package A (Standard) or Package B (RS)

Starting Year 3 or 4
Uber Camaro (ZL-1 or a new name) – Delete Option Package (Stripper) or Package C (SS)

 

Good reasoning. I'm dreading the flame posts, but I think you have something here.

 

I agree. I made a similar comment on another thread. I was optioning out the Corvette a few days ago and one thing I really didn't like was that you have your choice of 3 option packages, but if you only want one option in the package, you are SOL becasue you have to get the entire package. For example, if I were to get a Vette I would want the base 1LT package, but I also want the HUD which is only available in the 3LT package at a cost of $5000 over the 1LT.

If I am going to special order a car, I should be able to get it exactly how I want.

 

I had been considering people's comments from various threads over the past few days and decided to put it here, because I was too lazy to go find the other threads. It is good to know that my opinion on a consensus strategy is close to what others envisioned. Although, I'm sure it won't be able to address everyone's preferences.

I have to say that I have learned a lot about the history of Camaro and the character of its enthusiasts over the past year from this site. (I signed up long after I had been reading the threads.)

 

What makes you think that GM is going to be able to produce more LS7s for the Camaro. It can barely produce enough for the Z06. I highly doubt that GM will steal any thunder from the Z06 by putting the LS7 in any other vehicle. On top of that I doubt that the LS7 will be around in 2009 anyway. Keep in mind that this car will die if it strays much above $500 more than the equivalent mustangs price. It will have to be sold at a comparable price to the mustang. Sure in the first year or so when all the Camaro faithful buy theirs the car will sell. But it has to make it on its own after the initial rush. I do not want to see this car die again. The 2 door sport coup market is not as large as all that have been posting here think it is. Rational thought needs to return here. The long list of options will make it more expensive to produce. Beleive me GM knows how they will market this car to the public and they have tons of bean counters working this as we speak.

 

They build them in option groups because it is easier to build and it makes the car less expensive to build. The long list of options complicates production and esculates cost. The C5 Corvette from 1997 -2000 could be ordered hundred different ways. In 2001 GM went to the 3 option groups to make the car less expensive and easier to produce. FYI for ya... HUD is highly over rated anyway. I'd rather have a good tach that does not lag behind engine speed in stead. The Camaro is not going to be a Corvette clone. Is has its own identity.

PS The 3LT option group is $4945 on the MSRP side. If I were specing out a new Vette it would be a 2LT (the base 1LT seats suck!!) with the Z51 Performance Handling Package and nothing else. All the rest of that fluff is dead weight.

 

There is a video floating around on the internet where a GM representative said they are keeping the Z06 supply low intentionally. That does not necessarily preclude making more (it won't be LS7 at that time the Camaro comes out) engines for the Camaro.

The Camaro won't be stealing any thunder from the Corvette with the same engine. The weight and performance won't even be close.

 

Option #5