guionM

Turning into a very interesting thread. Great feedback! I think any GM product planner worth his salt will at least take a look here before making final model level designations.

Pacer, I'm not saying the base models detracted from the performance models. It's that the attention going into performance models should also go into the bread and butter models too. Bread and butter models I'm sure you'll agree isn't base models, which simply don't make money, but do bring in 1st time new car buyers and budget buyers.

Create a model that brings in a large group of people, and we'll have more money to create performance versions, weather economic downturns, and survive the next GM purge when the current management group retires or moves elsewhere. Something we are paying for today since the Camaro's demise happened on the last watch.

My hypothetical mid-level model targets another group that will bring in money, and volume. A version of the Camaro should compete with Solara, Accord, and especially the G35 because that represents the middle ground between the budget shoppers and the hard core guys. Both Solara & Accord are pretty dull cars, so it's safe to say a RWD Camaro with great styling (edgier as you put it ), a powerful V6 engine standard, a great list of standard features and options, and equal quality would do a pretty decent job at taking a good chunk of sales as well as gaining new buyers.

On the price structure, I wasn't very clear. The base Camaros should stay around $20,000, the mid-level would go for $25-26,000 (the major difference from the base model will be trim and some electronics...the nav system would be an option) and the top model would go for about $27,000. All still cheaper than the G35 (which I'm using as a model for the mid-level Camaro) and barely more than the typical base or Z28 4th gen price.

I'll go a step farther, and say the next Camaro SS should be made by GM's High performance division, and be modeled in the same way Ford's modeled the Cobra. A limited edition high content car with a unique engine (perhaps the Z06 engine or a supercharged Z28 engine?). I know a case for something like this is pretty weak at GM, but you could still create multiple models with minimum money:

The base model would also serve the platform for an RS (add ground effects, spoilers & 17" rims ie: Z284ever's idea) & the mid model (add in woodgrain or alumunum trim, some electronic goodies, 17" wheels, and options that might be expected on pricier cars). The performance model would also serve as the basis for an SS trim package much like the current version, but like the base model's across the board powerful V6, why not use the LS6 successor on all performance models? 2 basic cars, 3 different levels, 5 separate models, done for less money than Mustang's 4?

As for Mustangs pricing structure, I also think Ford (while at least addressing the mid-level opening) isn't hitting it the way the old LX and Ghias did. In a way, perhaps mid-level is decieving, since it can be argued that Mustang which has only a base model below the GT doesn't have a mid level. Perhaps luxury or Grand Touring is more accurate sine the model I'm proposing is closer to the performance model in price than the base model.

None of what I'm talking about is aimed at diluting Camaro's reputation, but expanding it back to the levels of the pre 4th gen by basically doing nothing more than raising quality and performance levels across the board, creating a model out of basically an option group, while expanding it's options and giving it a name (Camaro LT?), while keeping a couple of things the 4th gen Camaro already is doing (the RS and SS are already basically trim packages).

Pacer & Red have sold me on the school of thought as to how a mid V8 would be pointless (with the DOHC 255hp 3.6 V6 standard, a 280 horse V8 probally wouldn't be worth certifying), but using the Z28 as a mid model also is pretty pointless, as you are still not offering anything to those who want more of a pretty quick Tourer than a tire melter.



BTW: Camaro spark plugs are nothing. Try getting to the plugs on a Thunderbird SC.

R377

I honestly don't think anybody considers maintenance costs when buying a new car. If they did, they'd pause when they realized how much more the typical Japanese or German car costs to maintain than a domestic. Especially 10 years ago or so, you'd spend a ton of money replacing timing belts and adjusting valves on your Accord, while your neighbour with his Buick 3800 gets by on little more than oil changes.

Z284ever

guion, a couple of things on engine choices.

I don't think we'll ever see the successor to the LS6 (LS7?) in a Camaro. I believe that's reserved for the C6 Z06 and should put out about 500hp.

I'll happily take the LS1's successor...the 6.0L LS2...in my 5th gen Z/28. This is rumored to be the C6's base engine and there are reports that it will produce up to 425hp (maybe de-rated for Camaro).

I think the HF 3.6 V6 is also unlikely for Camaro. It sure would be a great base motor.....but I'd bet that it costs more than an LS2.

I'm betting on the cam in block HV 3.9 V6 for base motor.

dnovotny

I'm sure this has been suggested before, but why should the base model be stuck with a 6-cylinder engine? The 3800 V6 isn't an engine that gets many compliments besides having lots of torque. It always surprises me how impressed people are when given a drive in my '01 T/A. They're co-workers (we're all electrical engineers) who own an M3/AMG/G35. They know enough about my car to mention how the pushrod V8 is outdated and make statements about how low tech it is. Until we go for a drive and they experience the power and refinement of the LS1. In particular they're shocked by the high revving ability and like how the car doesn't nail you at low rpms but gradually climbs to a crescendo. The other thing I'm guessing they like is the sound of an LS1, it really does scream at high rpms.

So, to create a segment buster, why not include 3-V8 models all using LS variants. 4.8/5.7/6.? Allow the lowest end V8 to sell for around 23-26K, mid-level 25-30, top 29-35 in today's dollars. All cars should have a nice interior but touches such as brushed metal, upgraded pedals, leather/upgraded seating surfaces/lighting should be added to upscale models. Also include larger brakes, electronic stability control on top end models for more differentiation. Include options such as ground effects packages for base models, these sold very well on 3rd gens. Include IRS on every model for no excuses handling and performance (many people know that 4th gens are rear wheel drive, with a solid axle). Buyers don't frown when you mention rear wheel drive (BMW/Mercedes are very popular for a reason) but a frown appears when you mention a solid rear axle. I believe that a base V8 coupled with a good rear IRS setup will make it hard to resist a 5th gen over a Z/G35/Acura/Mustang in spite of its previous image. Bust the segment by busting the "mullet" image with the best value on the market along with interior and build quality which matches the 25-35K segment (and it only has to match competitors, not exceed when you include the value of a V8 and great handling with no compromises on every model).

Z284ever

True, but they had a narrower horsepower range back then.

The last year of the 3rd gen had 5 engine choices pretty well spread out from 140 hp to 240 hp.

A 170 hp TBI 305 was a good chunk farther up the ladder than the 140 horse 3.1. As was the "base" LB9 from the LO3 at 205. At the top of the range was the G92 5 speed LB9 at 230HP and the L98 at 240.

If we're talking a horsepower range of say mid 200's to 400 as we suspect the 5th gen will have, I can imagine that product planners may have a hard time signing off on a 280 hp V8.

Now, if the "mid-range" V8 can produce 300-325 hp, that's a different story........

dnovotny

This engine, in my opinion would cause the 5th gen to sell poorly from its launch because we'd have a 10/90 or 20/80 split of V6/V8 sales. People will compare a 5th gen to Acuras/Zs which are high revving DOHC engines. Only LS derived V8s will compete.

Z284ever

Yeah, I know what you mean.....but I don't think that base Camaro will or should compete toe to toe with upscale cars like 350Z, Acuras, or G35. Base Camaros will be priced at $8-10 thousand less...let's not forget...there's still Mustang to worry about.

But I think that you've just made a great argument for a 300+ HP upscale V8 Camaro in the same vein as Type LT or Berlinetta.

dnovotny

Actually, I believe you're stuck in the past and your premise is totally incorrect. There was a base V6 for 4th gens, but are there any Camaros/Firebirds still being built? Will a DOHC 6-cyclinder be offered in a 5th gen? No. Only a derivative of the 3800. Our car's sell to enthusiasts, whether they be mild to wild. Anyone buying a 2-door coupe is an enthusiast in my mind. But a 3.9 L V6 with OHV won't cut it on the refinement or performance scale (we're not competing with only the Mustang anymore) and a DOHC 6-cylinder won't be offered due to cost. Also, regarding the volume question, GM has to get over it. Nissan/Infiniti aren't going to sell 100s of thousands of Zs/G35s each year. Neither will a 5th gen, nor does an Integra. But somehow they can make a nice profit and their bean counters found a valid business case for those vehicles. Share the chassis with other higher volume vehicles (or spread the volume around several different models with the same chassis) to limit development costs.

Gas prices shot up a while back, they were around 2.25 here in the Bay Area. That didn't hurt SUV sales much and what gas mileage do they get? We're not in the 70s paradigm.

3rd gens sold well because of VALUE. They had a poor chassis, rigidity, seating, interior quality, gas mileage compared to the competition (not just Mustangs, but Integra, Dodge Stealth, Eclipse, Celica, ...). Yet, they sold. But these same deficiencies are cited as the cause of the 4th gens death, but relative to the competition a lot of these deficiencies were reduced.

3rd gens sold because you could get a V8 for the price of the competitions 4 cylinder options. Now add an IRS for the refinement factor with good chassis rigidity and interior. But with an OHV 6-cylinder, why would anyone choose a Camaro over any other six cylinder? The buyers GM should be targeting are the enthusiasts, the ones currently buying Zs/G35s/Acuras/BMWs/Celicas/Eclipse. Eating into those companies market share will help put GM back on the map.

guionM

Point 1:
Why not switch to all V8s? Perception is everything to car buyers. If they think Camaros were gas hungry too fast vehicles already, what do you think is going to be the result of having nothing but V8s. Also, fuel economy and performance isn't different enough to warrant this.

Point 2:
If you think people will compare a 5th gen DOHC V6 to an Acura and can't compete, why on earth do you think that an LS1 V8 will? If I'm interested in a cammer V6, it's pretty same to say I won't be looking at a pushrod V8. The 3.6 V6 at 255hp no doubt is right in the fight with other companies DOHC V6s, so I really don't under stand the point here.

Point 3:
Camaro needs to bring in additional buyers to ensure it's future. I have no doubt at all, the 5th gen will be quick & hot handling car, and it's basic quality will be up as well. There is no doubt whatsoever that it will have IRS. So the question is still "How are we going to expand it's customer base without alienating the performance enthusiast & it be financially viable?"



The mistake here, and the whole point of my initial post is to get everyone thinking outside high horsepower and "car on rails" handling. By a couple of posts here, I think you see why I posed the question "Are enthusiasts dooming the Camaro name?" The inability to come up with any credible way (or desire, or...*****!) to regain Camaro sales (Camaro isn't just a ***** out performance name guys) that it's lost to competitors over the years is dooming the Camaro name.

The base car is fixed when you fix the entire line & you expand Z28 & SS's sales because of those of us with Camaros already wanting a new one. But people are still buying G35s, Solaras, Accord coupes, even Stratus and Sebrings. Why? Again, no middle ground that bridges the gap between the base & performance models, or more accurately, a model that brings in people that will support the entire line.

To prove my point that there is a glairing gap in the Camaro lineup, let me pose a question:

If the Infinity G35 as is was a Camaro, which model would it be?

dnovotny

Lets assume the base C6 will have 405 hp. Base-level V8: 350 hp. Top-level: 425 hp.

I believe that a 5th gens viability lies in lower volume, higher price. Leverage what the name still has, ***** out performance. Just add few compromises and better refinement to the list.

They offer only hi-po 6-cylinder options. I will modify my suggestion of 3-V8 variants and just go with two. While Japanese performance lies in high-revving V6s or turboed 4-cylinders, F-bodies lie with V8s. Thanks for making my point, Guion.

We're trying to cover too many bases from an inexpensive base model to a top V8 model. I don't believe GM knows how to deliver a competitive base model, I just don't have faith that they'd put in a good 6-cylinder engine or nice interior for a base models price, without skimping on the top end models. Let the supercharged/turbo Cobalts/Saturns cover the base models price range. Drop the 23-27K segment and just start in the high 20s up to the mid-30s.

Z284ever

I've pretty much spent the better part of my life ( since I was six years old, in fact, when I saw my first '67 Camaro), following Camaro's, ups and downs...it's successes and failures.....and think IMHO, I have a pretty good handle on where and what Camaro needs to be, to be successful.

I think I've posted this thought before.......


Camaro NEEDS three basic models:

1) The Budget GT.

Fun. Affordable. Good looking. A joy to drive and own. Beautifully put together.

2) The Luxury GT.

Fast. Powerful. Comfortable. Upscale. High option content. If you're gonna have a Nav system....this one should have it.

3) The Performance GT.

Very fast. World class braking and handling. Serious look. Content limited.

guionM

You actually just proved my point pardner ! As an enthusiast, you just stated that you favor:

1. Surendering the pony car market for the sake of higher performance.

2. Driving the price of the Camaro up higher for the sake of higher performance.

3. Risking the ability of Camaro making it through the next major recession or drop in the performance car market for the sake of higher performance.

All for something that can be done simply by certifying a drivetrain! Yet you completely blew off the group of people who will very well finance the entire lineup and keep prices reasonable.

Pretty much exactly what I was getting at when I started this thread. That enthusiasts are ready to kill off Camaro's history, and quite likely the Camaro name itself, just to have a car that apeals just to one area, and no one else. A lesson that seems not to have been learned with the 4th gen Camaro and it's current condition.

Under what you proposed, Camaro isn't likely to sell more than 20,000 per year, and if made in the US would most certainly have to sell for more than $30,000 to be profitable. During the course of all this, Mustang continues selling 150-180,000 cars per year.

Pony cars in the 70s died out (and very nearly Camaro as well), and the ones that survived had a strong mid-level base. People turned against expensive performance cars in the 1990s, and it killed the single purpose Japaneese performance names like Supra, RX7, and cut into both Mustang GT's & Camaro Z28's sales. If both had to rely on just the sales of those 2 models (especially at a higher price! ), both would be dead, instead of just the one without a middle market.

Again, back to my original premise: Well meaning people tend to do the worse damage. Enthusiasts, with the tunnelvision focused on performance and nothing else, will doom Camaro in the marketplace.

There's no way I'd be willing to surrender market, price, and history of a nameplate simply to cater to one contengent and ignore everything else. At least if I was the one given the responsibility of continuing the Camaro name and taking on the Mustang.

That's what a competitive spirit does to you. You don't sell yourself or abilities short.

PacerX

Welp, methinks we are having a good meeting of the minds here.

To that effect, let me make a point...

As you have deduced, car companies tend to make most of their money on options. Whether the options are little individual boxes you check off or packages, base cars don't tend bring in tons of cash... except for trucks... which bring in tons of cash no matter what.

Now, that being true, there SHOULD BE a set of features OR options in my opinion that fill the need you are referring to make the car more appealing across the board as a V6. If cost can be controlled on the base car to allow a terrific interior as you describe, then we shouldn't neglect that - but can spend some cash on an uplevel interior (without 30,000 Firebirds a year screwing things up for us). Understand though, that we will be pricing this V6 out of reach of most first-time buyers.

An interesting idea would be to have a "Grand Touring" interior and a base interior. To differentiate the models, you could have a base car, a midlevel with the "Grand Touring" interior and suspension, a Z28 with the base interior and the V8, and the SS with the "Grand Touring" interior (with some more doodads like badges and stuff) AND a set of GMPP powertrain improvements. Maybe we could call the Grand Touring V6 the "Berlinetta" just for giggles...

I would expect this "Grand Touring" interior to be a considerable step above the Accord and Solara and go nose to nose with the 350Z (no big problem there...) and approach the G35's standard.

But, along with that, we have to realize that the high-horsepower cars will bring in enough money to justify themselves. In truth, on a per car basis, they most likely bring in more due to the ability to charge through the nose for them and have the trucks pay the drivetrain development overhead for motors and transmissions.

Here's the trick:
A full book, convertible SS with every option available must be at a significantly lower price point than Corvette, much like the 350Z, Cobra and RX-8 have headspace above them. THEN, the price points for the rest of the line has to continue to fall below from Z28 to the V6 "Grand Touring" car to the base car.

In those numbers, we have to consider that T-tops are around a $600 option and a convertible is going to tack on a few thousand - but a convertible might be allowed to "step on" the next level up a little. I am concerned that a $19,000 base car means that a not-so-good interior can be fitted... but I like your idea for a pricing structure.




Gotta lay the smack down on the Mustang. Have to. No compromises there. Just think of the advertising... a Camaro on a horse track terrorizing War Admiral and Seabiscuit... the possibilities are endless. Maybe Mustangs being unloaded off a car trailer and lined up to enter a glue factory...

The 350Z and and RX-8 are the target for the V6 cars, the Z28 takes the Mach 1 and Cobra to school, and the SS lays down the law. Much like the last generation, a full-book SS with all the performance goodies should be SLIGHTLY quicker than a tall geared, automatic equipped convertible Corvette - as long as that means it's faster than a Cobra.



Cut it to 4 models and I'll bite.



Done properly, the 255hp 3.6 V6 could probably touch 275-280hp anyway. All it has to do is be more satisfying than the 350Z and RX-8 and give Mustang GT owners pause to consider their mortality.

PacerX

Forget it. Too close to Corvette.




Your point ignores CAFE, which will be moving up soon.




Not enough headroom for price. The convertible option alone is a few thousand dollars. The base car needs to stay right about where it was at the end of the 4th gen.

Z284ever

Since this engine seems to be a centerpiece for this discussion...do you think that their's even a prayer of a HF V6 reaching a Camaro?