Bob Lutz...Genius.
01-26-2003, 04:54 PM
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 143
Originally posted by tls2000
Ok, so now we are all starting to come to a bit of an understanding. As Guion pointed out, the CAW is probably not the only reason that GM kept the car in that form for so long. My mistake in chosing my words.
Now, to get to what bulldoguav was saying, I will concede that the Ste. Therese plant may have had exclusive rights to build any new car named Camaro or Firebird.
But the plant and the union are seperate beings. I really would like it if the people of this site would stop blaming, almost exclusively, the CAW for the loss of this car.
Now, going by Guion's hints, I'm going to surmise that Ste. Therese DID in fact have exclusive rights to those namesakes. I will put that together with BulldogUAV's theory that GM wanted a different platform for the car, but wanted a shared architechture with other cars, rather than an expensive, exclusive body.
Now here's a question for all of you theorists. Ste. Therese is gone. The Union has a new contract that no longer includes Ste. Therese, or Camaro. Why is GM not telling us that they will be bringing out a 2006 model year Camaro at the end of 2005? Surely that would calm down the tensions between the F-Body enthusiasts and GM?
Now, to go deeper into my conspiracy theory:
Maybe they want to debut the new Corvette and Camaro together? Maybe they want to put their eggs in one basket, and beat down all of the competition with one fell swoop into the performance market.
Bob Lutz has delayed the C6 Corvette from arriving due to minor changes that he wanted made. Team Corvette has been working on the C6 for what, 4 years now? More?
Everyone knows that the C6 is coming, F-body programs have been hidden within the Corvette budget more than once. Maybe the new Camaro is hiding in the C6 program, just waiting for it's big sister to make an appearance before coming out with a vengeance.
Oh, and to throw more fuel on the fire, maybe they don't want to announce a new Camaro/Firebird, because they don't want to leech sales off of the C5, C6 and GTO. Especially if the new Camaro comes out with no holds barred ***** to the wall performance, in an ergonomic package, in the $20-25k range.
I'm done with my theories now.
Ok, so now we are all starting to come to a bit of an understanding. As Guion pointed out, the CAW is probably not the only reason that GM kept the car in that form for so long. My mistake in chosing my words.
Now, to get to what bulldoguav was saying, I will concede that the Ste. Therese plant may have had exclusive rights to build any new car named Camaro or Firebird.
But the plant and the union are seperate beings. I really would like it if the people of this site would stop blaming, almost exclusively, the CAW for the loss of this car.
Now, going by Guion's hints, I'm going to surmise that Ste. Therese DID in fact have exclusive rights to those namesakes. I will put that together with BulldogUAV's theory that GM wanted a different platform for the car, but wanted a shared architechture with other cars, rather than an expensive, exclusive body.
Now here's a question for all of you theorists. Ste. Therese is gone. The Union has a new contract that no longer includes Ste. Therese, or Camaro. Why is GM not telling us that they will be bringing out a 2006 model year Camaro at the end of 2005? Surely that would calm down the tensions between the F-Body enthusiasts and GM?
Now, to go deeper into my conspiracy theory:
Maybe they want to debut the new Corvette and Camaro together? Maybe they want to put their eggs in one basket, and beat down all of the competition with one fell swoop into the performance market.
Bob Lutz has delayed the C6 Corvette from arriving due to minor changes that he wanted made. Team Corvette has been working on the C6 for what, 4 years now? More?
Everyone knows that the C6 is coming, F-body programs have been hidden within the Corvette budget more than once. Maybe the new Camaro is hiding in the C6 program, just waiting for it's big sister to make an appearance before coming out with a vengeance.
Oh, and to throw more fuel on the fire, maybe they don't want to announce a new Camaro/Firebird, because they don't want to leech sales off of the C5, C6 and GTO. Especially if the new Camaro comes out with no holds barred ***** to the wall performance, in an ergonomic package, in the $20-25k range.
I'm done with my theories now.
I've never bashed the CAW. They did an awesome job with the F-body, and I'm sure the Equinox will be a great car, too. There are many cost benefits with working with the CAW, but in these days where American jobs are at a premium, there are those who want the jobs back with the UAW (I'm sure they've benn pressuring GM, too.)
Like I said, we'll see. My guesses were that the Camaro would return around 2006 or 2007, and I've been pretty much confirmed with this.
01-26-2003, 05:12 PM
#17
Prominent Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Originally posted by bulldoguav
...........I'll check some of my sources and see) is held under the original terms until said deal expires. Because of the link posted where the employees who went with the parts said their benefits expire under the current deal in 2005, I surmise that the Camaro deal expires at the same time, since I believe 1996 was the beginning of the rumors.
...........I'll check some of my sources and see) is held under the original terms until said deal expires. Because of the link posted where the employees who went with the parts said their benefits expire under the current deal in 2005, I surmise that the Camaro deal expires at the same time, since I believe 1996 was the beginning of the rumors.
...............Like I said, we'll see. My guesses were that the Camaro would return around 2006 or 2007, and I've been pretty much confirmed with this.
(I'm a man of few words today...in the middle of putting C4 front disc brakes on my 1969 RS/SS Pro Touring Camaro....
)
01-26-2003, 09:14 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
Uh no. That was the stupidest thing ever to happen to the F-Body. If they didn't have morons in there running things at the time (thankfully, they are gone now) not knowing how to handle the car and do things correctly, (make good business decisions, not only care about $$) there would be no hiatus and a completely brand new car/Gen could have been built and designed while the previous Gen was still going. The "hiatus" is an embarrasment to a car that didn't deserve that BS. To those that know what really made all this happen, the idiocy of the entire thing is just incredible.
Last edited by IZ28; 01-26-2003 at 09:18 PM.
01-27-2003, 09:28 AM
#20
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 143
Another thing I don't get is, how many of you people who are so pissed off that there is no 2003 model would have actually bought one?
Bueller?
I'm not upset in the least. When it comes back, I'll have the dough to cash in on the new design.
Bueller?
I'm not upset in the least. When it comes back, I'll have the dough to cash in on the new design.
01-27-2003, 10:29 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,504
Originally posted by bulldoguav
Another thing I don't get is, how many of you people who are so pissed off that there is no 2003 model would have actually bought one?
Bueller?
I'm not upset in the least. When it comes back, I'll have the dough to cash in on the new design.
Another thing I don't get is, how many of you people who are so pissed off that there is no 2003 model would have actually bought one?
Bueller?
I'm not upset in the least. When it comes back, I'll have the dough to cash in on the new design.
01-27-2003, 10:44 AM
#22
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 143
Originally posted by Darth Xed
If 2003 were an all-new, modern Camaro... Yes, I would have bought one no, question, unless I found it to be more repellant looking than a Pontiac Aztek.
If 2003 were an all-new, modern Camaro... Yes, I would have bought one no, question, unless I found it to be more repellant looking than a Pontiac Aztek.
01-27-2003, 04:52 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
There's is a couple of things to add.
First, GM-NA doesn't have anything to put a new f-body on. Till less than a year and a half ago, the only RWD cars GM planned to make were the Corvette, a Buick, and the entire Cadillac line. They looked into putting the F-body on the Australian version V-chassis (as they also planned to do to a certain Buick), then they looked at actually putting it on a smaller mid sized FWD Chassis. It obviously can't go on a CTS structure, the current V chassis is extinct in 2 more years, and the Bengal chassis (4 place version of the Solstice structure) won't be out for a couple more years.
Second, the 5th gen Camaro...er sporty coupe, would be (theoretically ) a fairly recent development. Those comments about there being no Camaro program are actually true (even though ideas were looked at).
In 2005/6 GM-NA will have at least 3 (
) RWD structures not counting Corvette. If Camaro was kicked off again last year, it probally would take at least 4 years to get it to production.
Also worth pointing out, there are alot of points here that may answer why GM can't come out and announce replacing Camaro. Why persist in pursuing it?
Just asking.
First, GM-NA doesn't have anything to put a new f-body on. Till less than a year and a half ago, the only RWD cars GM planned to make were the Corvette, a Buick, and the entire Cadillac line. They looked into putting the F-body on the Australian version V-chassis (as they also planned to do to a certain Buick), then they looked at actually putting it on a smaller mid sized FWD Chassis. It obviously can't go on a CTS structure, the current V chassis is extinct in 2 more years, and the Bengal chassis (4 place version of the Solstice structure) won't be out for a couple more years.
Second, the 5th gen Camaro...er sporty coupe, would be (theoretically
) a fairly recent development. Those comments about there being no Camaro program are actually true (even though ideas were looked at). In 2005/6 GM-NA will have at least 3 (
) RWD structures not counting Corvette. If Camaro was kicked off again last year, it probally would take at least 4 years to get it to production.Also worth pointing out, there are alot of points here that may answer why GM can't come out and announce replacing Camaro
. Why persist in pursuing it? Just asking.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Z284ever
Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion
26
01-19-2003 09:26 AM