Good post.

In addition, GM management is under a fair amount of pressure from wallstreet investors to show a "turnaround". Since it takes years and years to actually get a product on the market, GM may feel that it's worth showing their hand a little to inspire confidence. As their financial position improves, they will be more likely to keep things secret.

And I don't think that UAW flyer was a "leak" nor even necessarily accurate.

 

IGOR is also a C&G member.

 

Exterior design is important, and the designs of future products are guarded like the chastity of one's daughter. However, concept cars that are displayed traditionally point to the direction many automakers design departments are thinking. In recent years, these "concept" cars have been closer to upcoming production models for 2 reasons: One, it's hyper expensive to make them, so why not make them close to what's actually being produced; and Two, it gives early feedback on a design.

Bob Lutz has essentially abandoned "Focus Groups", and is using Auto Shows as a way to guage public acceptance to design ideas, even going so far as showing 3 ideas and letting the public pick one for production (the Chevy mini-cars at last year's New York Show).

Also, showing the design of a new car is perfectly fine as long as you're bringing the car out within a specific period of time. You point out that Ford changed the direction of the Mustang after GM unveiled the Camaro concept. However, that Mustang isn't going to beat the Camaro to market, it's coming the year or so after. So GM still has the advantage.




But there's more to new models than just showing how they will look. There's almost countless other things about a new car that needs to be 100% held from the public till late in the game or introduction. On this site, horsepower and performance is obvious. But closeups of interior design and quality is one. How GM gets by design problems is another (it's easier to make a one off than to adopt something to look great mass produced).

Then there's those things that simply aren't known till just before production. Suppose after heavy last minute testing it's found that the brake rotors warp prematurely? That's going to mean a last minute change to thicker, heavier rotors which will change the weight of the car.


Overall, design is the easiest to display in advance. Another competitor can't copy it, and it takes a few years to develop a new design that will have the same impact.

The only danger in showing a design early is public impact. I think the Camaro was shown a little on the early side. But while it can be seen as GM caving in to enthuiasts, GM also needed a media shot in the arm and something to symbolize it's revival, so Camaro was shown much earlier than is traditionally done.

As far as the details go, that's something we'll have to wait for.

I feel ya.

 

Keeping it affordable is key. It can't be priced too close to the vette, or most people would just buy the vette. (Keeping in mind i'm not talking about the unavoidable dealer markup for the first 6 months or so)

 

Bump! Its nearly April and still no word. This is stupid. Since 2006 you have been boosting this car, and wont tell the buying public anything? The GXP released all its information and will be avalible at nearly the same time. Whats your major malfunction?

 

I don't understand all this 'information in drips and drabs' either. If it takes GM 2 years to come up with a functioning headlight design, why would GM think that Toyota and Chrysler could come out with it sooner? Time to release the final pictures of the complete package. Nobody does this!

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm more than ready to see the production car but it's just not gonna happen yet. Go back and re-read the posts from this thread, as the same things still apply today. There are still things that aren't finalized (i.e. - headlights). The complete package isn't even ready. If it was, I'm sure GM would release the info and the car would be arriving on dealer lots. Patience. I know it sounds cliched, but good things come to those who wait.

 

Well then that tells me that GM does not have their act together when it comes to taking a car from concept to reality. Simple as that!

 

Pony cars have to hit their price points.
Someone mentioned that they would be paying $40K for their Camaro.
I doubt that that there will be many versions that hit $40K.
A LS7 version would probably be over $40K but most others won't including a convertible.
Ford and Chevy need volume for these cars to work. That is why they are in the low 20s and go up from there.
People were shocked when the GTO came in at $33K, but they forgot that 35th anniversary versions of the Camaro SS were over that amount.
I fully expect the LS3 version of the Camaro to be just below $30K.
Chevy will not make the mistake of overpricing these cars.
The dealers will make the mistake, but Chevy won't.

 

Hylton,

Looks to me like this car has the normal 4 year development cycle. Instead of it being done behind closed doors it has been completley transparent, with a fiberglass concept shown to the world at Detroit and ALL the development being done AFTER that.

 

dead on correct, but your timing is off. the engineering work did not really ramp up until 1Q2006 when the Michigan RWD team relocated to Austraila to form one centralized RWD engineering group at Holden.

We are a matter of months away from finding out all the juicy details. It's been a long wait, but we're so close. Hang in there.

 

They have to improve that 4 year development cycle. Also, how much of this got a head start from the Holden platform?

 

The car is still just short of a year until production. By giving any details now, competitors can still make quick changes to their lineups to be competitive and/or similar to the Camaro when they debut in the fall. The poker game is STILL in session, and it's not time to lay out all the cards yet.

In much the same way that a human's eyes and face are often the most descript, telling, and persuasive pieces of a human body, completing the headlight design on the Camaro is literally like taking the Mask off Zorro. Doing so would create a "face to recognize" and therefore judge, become familiar with. In fact, many automotive designers ENGINEER vehicles to trigger facial recognition--they design the curves, symmetry, and shapes to mimic human features that are easily recognized--and are attractive--to most people.

So, the Camaro still has it's "poker face" on, with its ugly dark shades (headlamps) until the bet is called. Undoubtedly, it could be bluffing and have a bunch of crap--Or, it could lay down a royal flush...

I'm always a fan of giving people time to do things right. We don't want a rushed release with a zillion problems and hasty design decisions, and GM doesn't want the car to fall on def ears because everyone has known the production details since day 1.

Patience, my pretty...patience...

 

I disagree. When Ford first came out with the GT concept and Chrysler first came out with the Viper concept, how much of the car had changed form concept to production model?

If Scott has indicated that little will be changed from the concept model to production in terms of rear end treatment and head lights then the competition has already seen everything and hence no need to hide anything. It's like they show us the final version with the concept, change things during development and then show us the final version which we have more or less seen at the beginning. Make no sense.

 

I wouldn't say they don't have their act together considering the Solstice went from concept to production in what, a year. Yeah, I agree this is taking a long time, but I'd rather them take 4 years and offer the best product they can than 1 year and rush a so-so product to the market. Besides, final approval wasn't given until summer of 2006, so they'd done zero development on a production version at that point. By the time it actually begins rolling down late this year, it will have been about 2-1/2 years from the actual production announcement to assembly line production.