Eric, I think you've got me there.

The last serious Chevy effort on that front that I can think of is ,the Beretta GTZ.

 

This thread shows the exact reason why manufacturers should abandon the use of any vehicle names from the past. Too many people have distorted views of those names.

Z28 correctly pointed out that that the Chevelle name in essence was chevy's fleet and budget car, much like todays Malibu or even Neon. Hearing some opinions on this is like hearing someone in the not too distant future say the Dodge Neon is a proud and performance oriented name because of the few SRT-4s left on the street. Yes, it's that bad.

Camaro is a totally different bird. Camaro's purpose is to be a performance car (till the 3rd gen, Pontiac Firebirds were traditionally quicker). Malibus, Novas, Chevelles, even Impalas were GM's budget-fleet-and rental cars. A few SS models don't change the car's purpose or what 3/4 or more were sold as.

No one keeps & maintains common cars, it's the special or limited editions that get garaged, restored, or pop up at car shows. And those unfamiliar with a car's history naturally think that all cars with a particular name were performance cars, because that's all they see.

So, because of this, IMHO returning names from the past is not a good idea. The expectations are too slanted, and someone's always going to complain about it's look, and which end the drive wheels are on.

 

One thing to keep in mind, guionM - those names may have been attached to mostly mundane vehicles, but at least those vehicles were world-class in their particular segment at the time. I'm sure that most performance types would still complain, but I might be able to keep my mouth shut if Chevy would use these names on vehicles that were a bit closer to being the best on the market.

The opposite side of this is that GM seems to be unwilling as of recently to put historic names on cars that genuinely kick ***, except for the Vette and GTO. I'm thinking primarly of Cadillac when I type this.

 

Camaros were faster in the 1st Gen too.

 

Yeah but most don't even recall them and the name is viewed as a musclecar.

 

On that, we are in complete agreement.

 

I think quite a few FWD cars should be considered performance since the Berretta GTZ (HO Quad 4 180 hp). What at about the Berretta Z26 (160ish hp), the Lumina Z34 (210 hp w/manual tranny), Monte Z34(underrated 215 hp), then you will have the olds, pontiac versions of the same cars. While the monte and lumina's weren't compact they were good cars and get bashed undeservingly. Heck I would be willing to wager that most here don't even know the Quad 4 is the Basis of not only the LQ1, DOHC 3.4 v6, but also the Northstar and the susequent short star motors. So just because something isn't FWD don't bash it, mmmKay.

 

Mmmmkay! Though I wouldn't actually buy a FWD car for myself, I recall all the cars you mention were quick for their day compared to it's competition, and by today's standards still are pretty special.

Anyone doubt this? When was the last time you saw a 4 cylinder make 180 horsepower without a turbo or supercharger, and without variable timing? Did you know the Monte Carlo's DOHC V6 was initially planned for the FWD F-body, and was designed to have a whole lot more power than what it came out with (it had to be dialed back because the transmissions couldn't handle it.... ie: todays blown Grand Prix!).

 

Ok, I'm finally gonna chime in on this.

Let's look at the facts so far:

Fact: There was an article saying that Chevrolet wanted to bring back the "Chevelle" by 2004-05 in the Chicago Sun Times last fall. (Check the archives). It also specifically mentioned a Chevelle "SS" performance version.

Fact: Chevrolet is replacing the Cavalier with a yet named FWD replacement some time "around" 2004-05.

Fact: The mystery "red car" from the GM/Make-A-Wish photo that was posted recently could be the Cavalier-replacement, as mentioned by another poster. (I'm more convinced now that it is a FWD Cavalier replacement and NOT a Chevy GTO/Monaro derivative or a 5th-gen Camaro.) Someone also mentioned that they had "inside" information that it would be called "Chevelle".

Fact: There exists on the GM RPO list a future RPO for a supercharged version of the ECOTEC 4 cylinder engine.

Fact: Chevrolet currently has "SS" trim options on the current FWD Impala and Monte Carlo planned for 2004.



Conclusions?

The Cavalier FWD-replacement may be called "Chevelle". Chevrolet may offer a "SS" trim option with a supercharged 4 cylinder.

As a former Chevelle owner I'm not quite sure how I feel about this?

Yes I'd rather see a GTO/Manaro based Chevrolet derivative, however GM already offered such a vehicle through GM Arabia for our friends in the Middle East. (That vehicle was called Lumina SS. It was available through 2002, however if you look at the 2003 GM Arabia lineup, the current Lumina SS is now a 4-door and no longer based on the Monaro platform.)

However, even if GM does "bring-back" the "Chevelle" as a FWD Cavalier replacement, the idea of a possible supercharged "SS" version intrigues me.

Why?

Because it says two things. First that performance isn't dead at Chevrolet. (Who though it was.) Secondly, it says Chevy is going after the younger tuner crowd. To me these are all positive moves that will eventually lead to the 5th gen Camaro becoming a reality.

 

One potential 'hole' in your thoery of that "red car" being a Cavalier replacement... It was still in the tooling setup... it looked like the clay model was still being worked on. Look closely at the computer comtrolled scribing tool (or whatever that is)... it looks like that car is a work in progress.

Now, the Delta based Cavalier replacement would be WAY past this. In fact, they have the tooling at least partially setup at Lordstown Assembly to begin the new Delta car already, from what my 'inside people' at the plant tell me (Lordstown is my local plant, and I know tons of people who work there)

My best guess on that red car is still a Chevy version of the GTO to be called Chevelle.

 

I posted something here not to long ago about Hot Rod Magazine doing an in depth concept drawing of a 2005 Chevelle based on the Holden Monaro platform. It was really good.

 

IMO, a new Chevelle doesn't HAVE to be a performance only model. What's wrong with having a 3800 V6 powered RWD midsize car called a Chevelle, with an SS option? Four door and coupe, perhaps with an optional 5.3L V8 option, and the SS could have an LS1. That seems to pretty much fit what the Chevelle used to be, albiet with a 200 hp V6 instead of a low level V8.

 

Well Darth, if the Chevy version of the Monaro/GTO is going to be called "Chevelle" then explain this....

http://orindahoops.com.tripod.com/camaro/luminass.jpg

Not photoshopped, but the actual picture off GM Arabia of last year's 2002 Chevrolet Lumina SS. What is obvious is that this shape and form is clearly based on the actual Pontiac GTO and Holden Monaro. There are enough differences between these and the "red clay model" http://orindahoops.com.tripod.com/ca...uturechevy.jpg to make the observation that it clearly isn't the same vehicle.

While the Delta based Cavalier-replacement is most likely further along, they could be working on styling refinements for the "SS" version which could come 1-2 years after the initial Delta production vehicle.

As for the HotRod Chevelle/Monaro Concept... that's just a HotRod pipe dream. And yes I do know about it because I posted the picture of it before you even mentioned it USHotRod.

http://orindahoops.com.tripod.com/camaro/05chevelle.jpg

 

When I say it will be Chevy's version of the GTO, I mean the next generation GTO which would be currently under development, and very possibly at the stage where clay mockups would be designed and created.

I do not mean a Chevy verison of the 2004-style GTO.

 

Well...pipe dream or not, it still looks good. Like they said, the first goat was a concept out of car and driver.