The automatic motor gets AFM, the manual doesn't.

In another year+ or so the 6.2L will be the middle engine

 

So it was only for the fuel mileage?

 

The Camaro basically left the market in which it used be considered by school teachers, secretaries, etc. (I too remember a lot of 3rd gen f-bodies in the high school parking lot). It left the mainstream. I think this happened on the 4th gens when GM didn't significantly change the car, and it went after more of a 'muscle car' image. While certain of the compromises mentioned earlier were acceptable in the days of the 3rd gens, by the 1990s and 2000s, the market had moved on and people weren't willing to accept no back seat, little storage, too-low driving position, 4 feet of wasted space ahead of the water pump, etc. The Mustang, on the other hand, was a little more mainstream and kept its sales.

I've mentioned this in other threads, but basically I see the BMW 3-series as the modern-day successor to a Camaro. A car which has a sporty (not necessarily muscle-car) image, but yet is practical enough for small families. It is not overly compromised compared to mainstream cars and is small enough to not feel intimidating. It's a car which almost everyone admires and doesn't require any explanations or apologies for why you bought it. That's exactly what a Camaro was in the late 60s; but it isn't now.

 

We'll see. Honestly, an even heavier (albeit more powerful) Camaro excites me even less than the base SS car. But that's a topic for another thread.

EDIT: Nice post R377.

 

I'm listening, and I agree completely.

 

If they can do it with the G8, they should be able to do it with the Camaro; i.e. 3.6 V6, 361 hp 6.0 and 415 hp 6.3. A ~330 hp 5.3 with AFM option on the base Camaro would be a nice compromise and, IMHO would allow them to push the SS up market a bit more. Yeah, I know 330 hp isn't much more than the DI 3.6, but it would have significanly more torque.

 

In the interest of clarity....


I bought a brand new LO3 / M5 in 1991. They were crap then too. Sorry.

That engine is almost singularly responsible for my getting rid of the car a few years later.

Gutless? Check.
Persistent audible detonation? Check.
Hates to rev? Check.

At least it got good mileage in the era of $1.00 / gallon gas.....

 

With the Camaro, the options might be the 300 hp V6, 420 hp V8, and a 550+ HP V8 if/when they build a Z28, which some people say GM is doing today. So, your 420 hp V8, might be your car.

Besides, you pay about 7k more for a Mustang V6 to the V8.

 

I think that you're comparing apples to oranges here, and kind of missing Jason's point.

First off, even exotic cars didn't have 300 hp, much less 400 back then.

Secondly, lets not get completely fixated on HP. Hundreds of thousands ( over a million??) of 2.8/3.1 V6 and LG4/L03 V8 3rd gens were sold to happy customers. These buyers weren't shopping for a ZL1, they pulled out their checkbooks for a good looking, easy to live with, sporty car with contemporary styling, proportions and dimensions.

R377, I think your post was right on.

 

This may not go over well here but I look back at the 3rd Gens as when GM took the Camaro down a more enthusiast focused direction and away from its mainstream roots. The 4th Gen was just evolutionary from there and further still from the mainstream coupe formula.

This is where I think having the Corvette in stable has hurt the Camaro over the years. Chevy has just about done everything right with the Vette with sharp styling and high performance first comfort and drivability second. To which they have been rewarded with good sales and loyal return buyers for almost 57 years. And yet when this formula is carried over and mixed in with the Camaro it produces a car hailed by enthusiasts and car magazines who are performance first but questioned by mainstream buyers to the point that some feel intimidated trying to drive even the base models.

Ford seemed to get back to basics with the '79-93 Foxbody and refocused the brand further with SN95 and Edge while staying modern enough to compete in performance but mainstream enough of a design layout that it could appeal to women and non-performance oriented shoppers. (FWD-Probe fiasco aside)
The Mustang has never been perfect IMO but Ford has largely kept the mainstream coupe layout with ergo and user friendliness first and performance as an option for those looking for it, second.

 

Really guys? We're still talking about a mid level V8?

The LS3/L99 is the mid level V8. The top level V8 (LSA) is on the shelf for now. A 5.3 in this car would be only slightly better than the V6 and suck a lot more gas.

I'll give you the weight arguement, but this one is a dead horse. Give GM a little credit, in their worst year ever they made a pretty damn good Camaro. No, it's not perfect. It hasn't even been out a year yet. Let's see what GM does with this car over the life of this generation before we consider it a failure.

Just because they sold a bunch of 305s in the 80s doesn't mean that it would work for this one. If they offered a badge-delete option on the SS, but it had to come with cloth seats and base stereo or base wheels, do we really think that would be a sales winner? I don't. GM doesn't make money off decontented cars, unless they sale them at high volume. I don't believe that would work.

 

If you pick it apart, the 3.6 V6 replaced the midlevel V8. The base V6 was killed.

 

This is probably true, but GM did move a whole lot of F-bodies in the meanwhile.

My take is that the Pony Car market ended up diverging from the mainstream car market more and more until it became it's own little specialized segment that sells mostly on style points. Of the "secretaries" I know, none of them drive anything like a pony car, or even a 'sporty coupe' - it's stuff like Civics, RAV4s, and Priuses.

I was never really sold on the idea that the Camaro didn't sell because it wasn't "practical". I think it's more likely the styling got stale, and the marketing got stale, and the car had a reputation for qwality problems. IMO, the lesson here is more that you can't put an "image car" on a ten year model cycle.

 

Did you ever try modding yours? As Charlie knows, I checked out, drove (and ALMOST bought ) a green/gold 25th anniversary '92 RS last weekend...bone stock down to the paper air filter.

With an AT and 2.73s, I won't lie...it was painful. By comparison, my M5/3.08 RS with headers, a full exhaust, Edelbrock TBI Performer intake, open element air cleaner, chip and a few "free mods" will run and hide by comparison. I was shocked how good mine felt by comparison When we get my best friend's '83 L69 back together, we're interested to see how that'll run against mine. With stock 3.73s I'm confident he'll take me off the line, but with the headers and other items I think I can pass him up top. Battle of the high 14s Camaros?

Anyway, I'm making one more post in here and I'm gone...because I can feel myself helping drag this off topic. Pop Quiz, Gentlemen....



If you could buy a 1LT for $25,000, and have a solitary add of $1,700 for a 350hp 5.3 V8...for $4,200 LESS than a base 1SS...well???

Would ya??? I already would've... I ain't spending $600 a month for 5 years to get a V8...period. $500 a month is a LOT more pallatable, and I doubt I'd ever miss the 75hp I gave up...

 

No, because that would make the 300hp V6 look even more like an incredible value. Asethetics aside, I don't see the upside to a 350hp V8 in this car. I'll take the V6 with only marginally less performance, cheaper price tag, and better mileage to boot.