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

V8 Camaro to be more expensive?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 03:23 PM
  #31  
TallicA32's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 140
From: Long Island, NY
Just remember what Scott said: within $xxx (either 500 or 1000) of a similar Mustang...
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 04:23 PM
  #32  
boomer78's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 253
I remember reading THAT quote a LONG time ago....
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 04:33 PM
  #33  
DAKMOR's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,406
From: Philaduhphia
Why not just put 2 rear ratios in? If designed right it might last warranty length and give performance when needed and economy when warranted.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 04:41 PM
  #34  
Good Ph.D's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,597
From: Mack and Bewick
Originally Posted by boomer78
I remember reading THAT quote a LONG time ago....
Right, back before CAFE, back when Camaro still had line mates, back when Mustang was getting a reworking right before Camaro came out, back when Dodge thought Challenger could exist on only V8 sales...

I think the last part might be the worst omen, the Challenger required less work than the Camaro, already had 2 1/2 succesful line mates, and was and will still command a premium over Camaro, but they're already gunning for the V6 market...
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 06:18 PM
  #35  
JasonD's Avatar
Admin Emeritus
 
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Originally Posted by guionM
anyone saying the price of the volume V8 Camaro is going to be near Corvette territory is completely off their rocker.
This is true. Not to mention, the plant will be a flex plant, so other cars and trucks will be built there as well.

You simply are NOT going to get another $22K V8 Camaro. Most all Z28s, even in 2002, stickered in excess of $25K.
My 2002 Camaro SS (loaded with t-tops, leather, 6-speed, etc.) was over $32k. Hardly seems like it was going on 6 years ago.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 06:31 PM
  #36  
ForYourMalice's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 204
From: Filthydelphia, PA
I was expecting to pay about $32K for a nicely equipped/almost loaded V8. And it better have at least 400 HP, not this L76 BS. If the price of a loaded "base" V8 comes out to be around $38-40K, I hope the car tanks and once again becomes history. That would be nothing short of offensive and a complete punch in the face to what the Camaro stands for.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 06:33 PM
  #37  
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
Originally Posted by Silverado C-10
If GM puts a high geared rear end in the car, then yeah, it's probably possible... but it's also a camaro. It's hard to find that balance where the car will have competitive 0-60 times, etc. and still have good fuel economy. I'm sure the camaro could easily be geared for 30mpg highway, but it will be a complete dog and uncompetitive (the same could probably even be said for the *boring* passenger cars, but no one wants to give up the performance numbers and look slow or "weak" when compared to competitors). On the other end of the spectrum, GM could say screw fuel mileage and drop a low rear in the car and have *lower* 0-60 and 1/4 miles times.
I didn't really speak to city mileage because the highway mileage should be occuring mainly in 4th-6th which you wouldn't even get to in the 1/4mi let alone at 60mph.

Originally Posted by Z284ever
You mean as aero as the MUCH lighter Corvette, which gets 16/26?
As close as possible. I realize the Camaro is going to be a good bit heavier, but I don't think that is quite as large a factor for highway mileage as aero and gearing. The final through 6th is pretty tall on the Vette, but I couldn't say if you could go taller...
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 07:24 PM
  #38  
Noth'nLikeaSmBlock's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 69
From: Philly Burbs, PA
Originally Posted by jrp4uc
And with the more limited production and increased premium on the V8, the Camaro is becoming more of a Challenger competitor than Mustang competitor. Perhaps it will be higher volume than Challenger, but this seems like a natural concession given the circumstances.
Seriously, we know that GM has planned this entire camaro business case on selling a sizeable number of the vehicles! I don't see how they could even operate the plant if the Camaro is limited like the Challenger.
Yes, based on the latest media reports some of the RWD vehicles are now being put on hold or postponed including the impala which everyone anticipated coming off the same flex line. It does seem that GM could build the small Caddy off of the same line. Also, a report I read last weekend says that GM could build FWD vehicles off of the same assembly line??

We know the v8 will be a premium over the six, but WE ALL KNOW the Camaro would cease to be a CAMARO if there was no mainstream v8!

I'm going to have to "KEEP THE FAITH" on this one.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 07:32 PM
  #39  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by ForYourMalice
I was expecting to pay about $32K for a nicely equipped/almost loaded V8. And it better have at least 400 HP, not this L76 BS.
So whats the matter with the L76 for the run of the mill Camaro and an LS3 as an optional powerplant (if that were the case)? Nothing wrong with a mid to low 13 second car.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 08:00 PM
  #40  
yellow_99_gt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 393
From: Houston Tx
Originally Posted by bossco
So whats the matter with the L76 for the run of the mill Camaro and an LS3 as an optional powerplant (if that were the case)? Nothing wrong with a mid to low 13 second car.
With an IRS and a curb weight around 3700-3800lbs I don't see it hitting low 13's with an L76. That's what the later 4th gens ran with close to the same power (mine made 308rwhp stock in 01) and 3-400lbs less weight with no torque management bs.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 08:17 PM
  #41  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
I've heard 3700 lbs, but I guess I've figured it'd be closer to 3600 lbs. Well high to mid 13's for a base V8 still isn't bad if GM were to offer a two tier V8 program along with some sort of super SE along the way.

That'd actually make for a cool Mustang/Camaro heads up low buck racing class in both drag and road.

I could see it, limit the mods to factory wheel sizes and basic chassis bolt-ons, put a roll-bar in, strap on a brain bucket and go racing in cars that had about the same hp/TQ to weight ratio.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 08:29 PM
  #42  
yellow_99_gt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 393
From: Houston Tx
Now that would be cool.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 08:51 PM
  #43  
Dwarf Killer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 321
The huge strategic mistake here is that GM went with a large car platform instead of a smaller one. The writing was on the wall for large cars and SUVs three years ago. I can't understand why GM didn't heed the warning. Now they're stuck with a large platform that is basically a white elephant. To make it feasable they will have to build high-end large cars like Cadillac and Buick because they sure won't sell many large Impalas to anyone but police and taxi companies.

It is not the just the gas price this time, it's these damn lefties trumpeting the hysterical global warming agenda. Unless we speak up, I see three years of V8 Camaros before they end production. What a stinking mess.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 10:29 PM
  #44  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by Dwarf Killer
The huge strategic mistake here is that GM went with a large car platform instead of a smaller one. The writing was on the wall for large cars and SUVs three years ago. I can't understand why GM didn't heed the warning. Now they're stuck with a large platform that is basically a white elephant.
It puts Camaro in abit of a predicament.

For one reason or another, after much deliberation, Camaro ended up on Zeta. In the end, the selling point was, that it was an already developed architecture, and Camaro could spread it's costs with several other lines, in a modern assembly plant. Makes sense. Of course, it's possible that now, Camaro will be the only Zeta going down that modern, refurbished, flex line. So, there's that.

The other thing, is Zeta itself. Every Zeta program has struggled with weight. Generally, Zeta is not very CAFE friendly because of that. As long as the status quo remained with CAFE, the wizards at GM Powertrain would have had no trouble keeping hundreds of thousands of Zetas within compliance. But it's a whole new world now. A world where mass is the enemy, like never before. And there's a pretty good chance that Camaro will exceed it's weight target - maybe by alot. And that puts a big fat target on it's back.

My hope is that Camaro makes a HUGE splash when it's released. Every bit as big as Mustang's. GM management needs to see and believe that Camaro is an important integral of the global Chevrolet line up. They NEED to believe this, because I think that this Camaro's days are numbered. And if they don't believe it, really believe it, we won't get the next Camaro.

Last edited by Z284ever; Feb 5, 2008 at 10:56 PM.
Old Feb 5, 2008 | 11:13 PM
  #45  
JB22's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by Silverado C-10
That's my line of thought, but so many seem to think it's going to be the LS3. Honestly, I don't care, whichever is cheaper.
Can someone shed some light as to the actual difference in cost between the L76 and LS3 ??



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM.