My son owned a last generation M3 and I found the cockpit claustrophobic. (About as small as his SN95 Mustang was.) If GM can place the Gen5 Camaro cockpit (size not style) in a 3-series sized body with Gen5 styling on the outside, I might consider it. Otherwise...

 

That may be a little to perfect to be reality

Since there will be a small alpha and a large alpha for the new cts , perhaps the camaro would recieve a hybrid alpha chassis sized in the middle of the 2 .

 

Lot's of cars look great with 17" wheels. Like I said, if they look good with 17's, they'll look GREAT with 18/19/20's. If 20's are a requirement to simply fill the space in a wheel opening, I think they lose alot of their agressiveness. Dependence on 20's is different than offering 20's.



I'm hoping for more than a 200 pound drop, actually. And it won't be 1 Series sized, (which I think is too small to package what the 6th gen needs packaged). It's always been described as 3 Series sized to me.

Food for thought....

Was this sedan based on the fullsized Impala/Caprice or the compact Nova?

Exactly. The 1 Series coupe feels like the Camaro inside. The 3 Series coupe seems more roomy inside than the Camaro.

I don't know Jeff. If you find the 3 tight - the 5th gen must feel like coffin.

 

The current 1 Series uses the previous 3 series platform.

I'm not saying at all that the current Camaro or future Camaro should be the exact thing that the 1 series is, but as posted earlier. The only beef that most have with the 1 series is exterior dimensions.

You can sit in the new M3 and the 1 series, and the differences really are negligible on the interior.

I'm just saying that if the Germans/Japanese can make powerful cars, that meet safety standards, in light packages, why does such a task seem to escape our Manufacturers here?

 

Come on now, today's Impala/Caprice is smaller than yesterday's and probably much closer to the size of yesterday's Nova. However I was specifically referring to cowl height.

Nope. I've sat in the 5th gen and loved everything about the interior. (Ok, even I'll admit the speedo/tach are a little too retro, but they're livable.)

Maybe my memory is going. (They say its the first that does.) My son sold his M3 three years ago, so you never know but as I recall it was much smaller than his current car (A4) which although snug, I find livable. If you guys say the 5th gen and 3-series have the same interior dimensions, I guess I'd have to take your word on it, as I haven't sat in the current generation 3-series.

 

Germans? Yes, I'll agree with you on that, however how much do they cost. Japanese? Name one Japanese company that builds a Camaro-like pony car at a Camaro-like price. (The only one that comes close to mind is Nissan, except that the Z is a two-seater and the GTR is priced out of the ballpark.)

 

That all sounds too good to be true. It'll be great if it turns out to be true.

 

Bob. What do you mean there's 4 interpretations? There is only ONE, my friend!!!

When you read articles, do you stop at the headline and assume you know the rest of the story? I'm sorry but I consider you more intelligent than that!

The term "compact" is clarified further into the Wikipedia piece. It uses the term "relatively" to clarify the term. This in essence separates the Mustang and Camaro from today's term applied to cars like Focus.

I'm not interpreting multi-definitions of anything. I am merely comprehending the definition as described. Other people, however,...

Enough already!

 

The problem is that when you go through each generation of Japanese cars, they have morphed into clones of other cars... you cannot link the current cars to the first generations because they have already lost the identifiable genes.

Look at Corvette, the current C6 still retains cues from the original. To a lesser degree, the Mustang does as well. Camaro is more along the lines of your way of thinking... different for each generation (although 3/4 gens were similar). Now you want something different again... pretty much the Japanese way of doing sports cars.

Now, if you want to discuss German cars, they follow the heritage cues more often than not but the key here is that if they see fit to introduce another model to suit that particular market segment, they won't hesitate to build that car - even if it is fresh and even if it stands to compete against its own models - say M3 vs M5.

Here, we are arguing strongly over Camaro being different things to different people... and not all of us can agree. Are Mustang fans so divided on what their next car should be?

In answer to some of your other questions... I like bigger coupes especially American. I'm not into the smaller cars so much. That's something we take for granted in our cars - they're nowhere near as cramped as Japanese and European machinery. I'm not into low slung cars either.

I'm disappointed that Camaro hasn't been getting the reviews it should. Maybe the Camaro had lost some of the VE's performance credentials. I have no doubt that some of the HSV GTS qualities rubbed off on Camaro, it'd be even better but it's up to GM to rediscover these qualities (like in the CTS-V) and give Camaro the necessary ammunition.

The other thing that disappoints me is the quality of the materials in the interior. Why doesn't it get the same quality parts as the VE at the very least (even the VE's plastics aren't great)?

However, I'm also a realist. The current Camaro isn't perfect, but what car is? I'm sure GM will give Camaro its necessary improvements once the money comes in.

I hope my explanation satisfies your curiosity.

 

Simple. They're not designed to take a big, brawny V8 and strong drivelines.

 

One more, then I shall cry uncle, or aunt, or whatever it is....

Here is the paragraph that we have both quoted...

Now, please note the little numbers inside the brackets...ie....[1], [2], [3], and [4]. Each one of those is a footnote, which takes you to the source of that particular quote. They are distinct, separate interpretations of the term "Pony Car". Just for you, here are the footnotes associated with each:

1.^ a b Mitchell, Larry G. (2000). AMC Muscle Cars. MotorBooks/MBI Publishing Company. p. 17. ISBN 978-0760307618. http://books.google.com/books?id=JHV...22pony+cars%22.
2.^ a b c d Grist, Peter (2009). Dodge Challenger Plymouth Barracuda: Chrysler's Potent Pony Cars. Veloce Publishing. p. 6. ISBN 9781845841058. http://books.google.com/books?id=o4w...strian&f=false. Retrieved 2010-01-27.
3.^ Borroz, Tony "April 17, 1964: Ford Mustang Starts Galloping" Wired 2009-04-17, retrieved on 2009-06-18.
4.^ Squatriglia, Chuk "Mustang, the Ultimate Pony Car, Turns 45" Wired 2009-04-17, retrieved on 2009-06-16.

So as I said, those are different, distinct interpretations (or definitions, if you like) of the term "Pony Car". You picked out the word "relative" and applied it to all of them. Charlie used only one of those. I think I like a different one.

I guess I'm just not very intelligent, or perhaps you are use some...uh...artistic license in your reading.

Comprehending must be a relative term, I guess.

 

Bob

Be a good boy and save me the trouble of reading copious amounts of text. What pony car definitions am I supposed to be looking up?

I don't know where you are going with this but you and I agree that the term "compact" is not accurately applied to Camaro and Mustang... yet you somehow seem to disagree with everything I've said.

You seem to want to pick my posts apart but I'm resolute in my thinking... I just don't see what you are trying to say while also being Charlie's bodyguard and spokeperson.

 

Is it me, or does that car look very dated now? Maybe this is where Porsche got the idea for their 4-door.

Does the govt. classify car sizes, i.e. "compact", based on exterior or interior dimensions?

 

I think you're right. That's always a risk going with a fresh design.

But if that's what GM were planning back then, it would look out of sorts today... after only a few years in prod.

Will the 5G age as quickly? Somehow I doubt it.

 

I'm dated. I still like the SS.

Gov't uses interior dimensions to classify a car. So the gov't classification is not so useful when discussing the size of the exterior of a car.