Autoweeks latest editorial raises some interesting points...
09-30-2002, 05:58 PM
#1
Prominent Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Autoweeks latest editorial raises some interesting points...
I found this to be ineresting.......from a few standpoints.
The latest Autoweek article quoted a GM person saying said we might have killed the Camaro by asking for more power thereby threatening the Corvette
So even GM admits that the Corvette is holding us back...
But, it also said that Rick et.al. were still trying to keep the flame alive!!
Sorry this is a 316kb scan of the article, since I don't think it's available on-line yet....9/30/02 dateline.
The latest Autoweek article quoted a GM person saying said we might have killed the Camaro by asking for more power thereby threatening the Corvette
So even GM admits that the Corvette is holding us back...But, it also said that Rick et.al. were still trying to keep the flame alive!!
Sorry this is a 316kb scan of the article, since I don't think it's available on-line yet....9/30/02 dateline.
Last edited by Doug Harden; 09-30-2002 at 06:08 PM.
09-30-2002, 06:28 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
What a bunch of bull. GM has given us a Corvette engine every year since, what, the late 80's? And only now this is an excuse? We're already peeved enough about this situation, then someone has the gall to blame us???? Ok, deep breath.....
09-30-2002, 07:10 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
I'll also call 
on that one.
Typhoon, Syclone, GNX, T/A 6.6, ALL were capable of beating same year Corvettes. Also, since the Iroc 350, Camaros had Corvette engines.
There is typically a half second spread in the 0-60 run & an almost 1 second spread in the 1/4 mile, example:
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...3/page009.html (scroll down to performance ratings).
Again, whoever said that I wouldn't quite take their word as the honest truth.
on that one.Typhoon, Syclone, GNX, T/A 6.6, ALL were capable of beating same year Corvettes. Also, since the Iroc 350, Camaros had Corvette engines.
There is typically a half second spread in the 0-60 run & an almost 1 second spread in the 1/4 mile, example:
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/compa...3/page009.html (scroll down to performance ratings).
Again, whoever said that I wouldn't quite take their word as the honest truth.
09-30-2002, 10:15 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
It wasn't the performance that was too close to the Corvette, it was the price.
It should have not been possible to order a 4th gen Camaro that cost more than 30K. Ever. Unless it was a convertible.
It should have not been possible to order a 4th gen Camaro that cost more than 30K. Ever. Unless it was a convertible.
09-30-2002, 11:35 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
I just read that story again......wait a minute 
...ok, I feel alittle better now.
Since according to him the Camaro became better than the Corvette...thus reducing the amount of available buyers.. and requiring the death of the Camaro....what of the Mustang?
While this incompetent bureaucrat contemplates his belly button in his cubicle at "the tubes"...is he aware that Ford found T*H*R*E*E ** T*I*M*E*S as many "buyers" for the Mustang as GM found for the F-car/Y-car combined?
...ok, I feel alittle better now.Since according to him the Camaro became better than the Corvette...thus reducing the amount of available buyers.. and requiring the death of the Camaro....what of the Mustang?
While this incompetent bureaucrat contemplates his belly button in his cubicle at "the tubes"...is he aware that Ford found T*H*R*E*E ** T*I*M*E*S as many "buyers" for the Mustang as GM found for the F-car/Y-car combined?
09-30-2002, 11:40 PM
#10
Prominent Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
We have a winner.......
Originally posted by WERM
It wasn't the performance that was too close to the Corvette, it was the price.
It should have not been possible to order a 4th gen Camaro that cost more than 30K. Ever. Unless it was a convertible.
It wasn't the performance that was too close to the Corvette, it was the price.
It should have not been possible to order a 4th gen Camaro that cost more than 30K. Ever. Unless it was a convertible.
Combine high insurance costs, high prices and extreme depreciation and you get disaster..........
Camaro's should have NEVER breached the $30k barrier.....
10-01-2002, 07:30 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,504
Good to hear the Baldick is saying some positive things about Camaro... the only thing I had heard from him wa snegative stuff before.
I, too, call complete on the enthusiasts / power of the car being part of it's downfall. Camaro has used a varient of the Vette motor for a long long long time...
I, too, call complete
on the enthusiasts / power of the car being part of it's downfall. Camaro has used a varient of the Vette motor for a long long long time...
10-01-2002, 09:14 AM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Originally posted by Darth Xed
Good to hear the Baldick is saying some positive things about Camaro... the only thing I had heard from him wa snegative stuff before.
Good to hear the Baldick is saying some positive things about Camaro... the only thing I had heard from him wa snegative stuff before.
I haven't heard him voice any perceptable opinion on Camaro/Firebird before....odd because he is ...errr..was the F-car brand manager.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
1
08-03-2015 10:26 PM
detroitmuscle
Parts For Sale
0
07-31-2015 04:21 AM