General Motors Says Orders for Camaro Sports Cars Outrun Supply
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
How many models of cars were on the market back the? Today there are more brands and more models. The only cars that sell 250K today are the mainstream family vehicles. SUVs have taken a huge bite out of the market, and now CUVs. The market for coupes just isn't what it used to be.
BTW, how do we explain away the Mustang's success year after year? Oh, I know, "Mustang is Ford's Corvette".
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Well, we could use all the standard excuses. "It was a different time". "Coupes are no longer popular". "People buy SUV's today". All of those have some merit, but mostly that's just an easy way to be dismissive. Those cars were WILDLY popular - and for specific reasons we probably shouldn't be so quick to dismiss.
I'd also add that back in the 'good old days'... 4 doors were..... ugly. Uncool. No one in their right mind would be seen in ANY four door under the age of 40.
Now that 4-doors are considered ok, to even cool in many many cases, it really hurts the sales numbers for a coupe.
BTW, how do we explain away the Mustang's success year after year? Oh, I know, "Mustang is Ford's Corvette".
It helped that they had a Mustang to sell from MY 2003-2009.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
Honestly guys, I figured there'd be more orders for the Camaro by now. Considering all the hoopla surrounding this car, the fact that pre-orders started 10 months ago, and the years worth of pent up demand. Seems to me, demand is outstripping supply because of Oshawa's production pace. Nevertheless, stories like this hit the mainstream press, and on the surface that's probably good for the Camaro's image.
I just wish we went back to the old-school formula where you didn't have to pay over the average transaction price of a new car today to simply get a V8. Years ago, you never had to. Now you do. A shame.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Factor in the status of the economy, the sales pace of the car industry in general, the fact that only a select group of people are willing to order a car without being able to see or drive it first, and you can see why there may be less than you, personally, may have expected.
That said, isn't the Camaro plant the only one authorized to run an overtime shift right now (or at least recently)?? ... if that is the case, it must be doing alright.
You are are pressed to find an available Camaro sitting on the lot... they are out there, but it's not like shopping for an Impala or Cobalt where you can select from an in-stock inventory if 60 cars. Many dealer still can't keep one on the lot.... And someone buying a Camaro, I'd imagine, would be more picky about the color they want, the options they want, etc, over someone buying an Impala or Cobalt.
That said, isn't the Camaro plant the only one authorized to run an overtime shift right now (or at least recently)?? ... if that is the case, it must be doing alright.
You are are pressed to find an available Camaro sitting on the lot... they are out there, but it's not like shopping for an Impala or Cobalt where you can select from an in-stock inventory if 60 cars. Many dealer still can't keep one on the lot.... And someone buying a Camaro, I'd imagine, would be more picky about the color they want, the options they want, etc, over someone buying an Impala or Cobalt.
But it might be a different story if Oshawa could crank out more than 750-1000 Camaro's per week. (BTW, I realize that initial production is purposely going slower).
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
They had CHEAP V8s!!! I can't scream this one enough. It angers me that I can spend $25k on a 1LT base car or Challenger SE, but can't spend an extra $1,500 for a nice V8. This is what I want. This is what an LO3 RS was in its day.
The fact that if I want a V8, I HAVE to spend over $30k is sheerly stupid. The base car's suspension, brakes, whatever is competent enough to handle V8 thrust these days. This, more than the dash, has kept me out of the market. I CAN spend over $30k. I simply don't WANT to.
The fact that if I want a V8, I HAVE to spend over $30k is sheerly stupid. The base car's suspension, brakes, whatever is competent enough to handle V8 thrust these days. This, more than the dash, has kept me out of the market. I CAN spend over $30k. I simply don't WANT to.
I think if you wanted cheap engine options like the 80's then you are going to have to be willing to go back to 80's power levels. Make the 2.4L the base engine then offer 3.0L and 3.6L upgrades. But as long as gas is cheap, why not just offer the 300HP 29mpg 3.6L as the base engine. Would you buy a 3.0L if it was $500 cheaper? How about a 2.4L for $1000 less?
You need to look at it in terms of HP and NOT cylinders.
Last edited by Z28x; Jun 30, 2009 at 09:48 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
I'd also add that back in the 'good old days'... 4 doors were..... ugly. Uncool. No one in their right mind would be seen in ANY four door under the age of 40.
Now that 4-doors are considered ok, to even cool in many many cases, it really hurts the sales numbers for a coupe.
Now that 4-doors are considered ok, to even cool in many many cases, it really hurts the sales numbers for a coupe.
But yeah, there was more stigma attched to a 4 door back then than now. OTOH, there were also dozens and dozens of coupes on the market back then, fighting for the same buyers.And that's to Ford's credit...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
I'd go as far as to suggest that sedans and coupes have basically flip-flopped their market sizes... or at least it seems that way.
And that's to Ford's credit...
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
How much would you have had to spend for a 400HP+ Camaro in the 80's? How about a 300HP? Wait, you couldn't get one. I don't think having to spend $30K for a 426HP Camaro is a lot. Historically this car is a performance bargain. You are getting a ZL1 for the Camaro RS price.
I think if you wanted cheap engine options like the 80's then you are going to have to be willing to go back to 80's power levels. Make the 2.4L the base engine then offer 3.0L and 3.6L upgrades. But as long as gas is cheap, why not just offer the 300HP 29mpg 3.6L as the base engine. Would you buy a 3.0L if it was $500 cheaper? How about a 2.4L for $1000 less?
The V8's you are referring to are long dead. No one would buy a 190HP V8 today. The 200HP-350HP class engine is now a V6.
You need to look at it in terms of HP and NOT cylinders.
I think if you wanted cheap engine options like the 80's then you are going to have to be willing to go back to 80's power levels. Make the 2.4L the base engine then offer 3.0L and 3.6L upgrades. But as long as gas is cheap, why not just offer the 300HP 29mpg 3.6L as the base engine. Would you buy a 3.0L if it was $500 cheaper? How about a 2.4L for $1000 less?
The V8's you are referring to are long dead. No one would buy a 190HP V8 today. The 200HP-350HP class engine is now a V6.
You need to look at it in terms of HP and NOT cylinders.
1) We had 95 HP Cavaliers in 1989. Does that mean Cobalts should have 95hp, when adjusted for inflation? NO, IT DOES NOT.
2) I've talked with THREE local Chevy dealers with new Camaros in stock. There HAS been resistance to the V6, despite the power level, because people don't EXPECT a hi-po V6 in a Camaro...many expect a V8. Period. No other debate is needed on the topic. We can debate 1/4 miles, 0-60, MPG all day long. What matter is what the CUSTOMER thinks.
3) Did I SAY we should have a 190hp V8 today? WHAT, exactly, keeps GM from offering a 5.3, 350hp V8 as a $1,500 option over a DI 3.6? Tell me...
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
What makes me laugh even more about this topic is that the reason we were told there would be no "middle" V8 offering is because of the costs of certification. Yet, GM produces and certifies two "top level" V8s that are so damn close in specs that it amazes me...but we couldn't give cheaper V8 power "to the people," and get something on the competition.
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
This is so short-sighted, I don't even know where to start...
1) We had 95 HP Cavaliers in 1989. Does that mean Cobalts should have 95hp, when adjusted for inflation? NO, IT DOES NOT.
2) I've talked with THREE local Chevy dealers with new Camaros in stock. There HAS been resistance to the V6, despite the power level, because people don't EXPECT a hi-po V6 in a Camaro...many expect a V8. Period. No other debate is needed on the topic. We can debate 1/4 miles, 0-60, MPG all day long. What matter is what the CUSTOMER thinks.
3) Did I SAY we should have a 190hp V8 today? WHAT, exactly, keeps GM from offering a 5.3, 350hp V8 as a $1,500 option over a DI 3.6? Tell me...
1) We had 95 HP Cavaliers in 1989. Does that mean Cobalts should have 95hp, when adjusted for inflation? NO, IT DOES NOT.
2) I've talked with THREE local Chevy dealers with new Camaros in stock. There HAS been resistance to the V6, despite the power level, because people don't EXPECT a hi-po V6 in a Camaro...many expect a V8. Period. No other debate is needed on the topic. We can debate 1/4 miles, 0-60, MPG all day long. What matter is what the CUSTOMER thinks.
3) Did I SAY we should have a 190hp V8 today? WHAT, exactly, keeps GM from offering a 5.3, 350hp V8 as a $1,500 option over a DI 3.6? Tell me...
Gen IV V8s days are numbered. Maybe with the Gen V. But even then I think the 4.9L direct injection V8 is expected to get 400HP
You said you wanted it like the old days. That is what the old days was about 190HP engines. Today is a whole different ball game. We are talking 400HP engine now. You are comparing apples to oranges.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
LO3s are crap in today's terms, but in 1989 terms, they were decent enough. Something like that, in today's terms, would be nice, and someting the other guys don't have. I've been saying this since 2003, on this very board.
I'm aware no one is listening. I'm out on this topic...I'm not going to continue hi-jacking this thread, and I can feel it getting locked. I want no part of that.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,049
From: Confederate States of America
How much would you have had to spend for a 400HP+ Camaro in the 80's? How about a 300HP? Wait, you couldn't get one. I don't think having to spend $30K for a 426HP Camaro is a lot. Historically this car is a performance bargain. You are getting a ZL1 for the Camaro RS price.
I think if you wanted cheap engine options like the 80's then you are going to have to be willing to go back to 80's power levels. Make the 2.4L the base engine then offer 3.0L and 3.6L upgrades. But as long as gas is cheap, why not just offer the 300HP 29mpg 3.6L as the base engine. Would you buy a 3.0L if it was $500 cheaper? How about a 2.4L for $1000 less?
The V8's you are referring to are long dead. No one would buy a 190HP V8 today. The 200HP-350HP class engine is now a V6.
You need to look at it in terms of HP and NOT cylinders.
I think if you wanted cheap engine options like the 80's then you are going to have to be willing to go back to 80's power levels. Make the 2.4L the base engine then offer 3.0L and 3.6L upgrades. But as long as gas is cheap, why not just offer the 300HP 29mpg 3.6L as the base engine. Would you buy a 3.0L if it was $500 cheaper? How about a 2.4L for $1000 less?
The V8's you are referring to are long dead. No one would buy a 190HP V8 today. The 200HP-350HP class engine is now a V6.
You need to look at it in terms of HP and NOT cylinders.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
What makes me laugh even more about this topic is that the reason we were told there would be no "middle" V8 offering is because of the costs of certification. Yet, GM produces and certifies two "top level" V8s that are so damn close in specs that it amazes me...but we couldn't give cheaper V8 power "to the people," and get something on the competition.
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
$7,786.29 for a 430HP LS3
Both from Springfield AutoMart on gmperformanceparts.com
If you are spending the money (lets say $27,995) for a 350HP Camaro, why not just spend the extra $1,439 for the LS3 option. Lets face it, a 350HP to a 430HP V8 doesn't cost that much more to build. I doubt many 2010 Camaro SS owners would check the box for a smaller V8 just to save $1500 when they are already spending close to $30K.
Basically for $30 a month more than could have the LS3 over the LS1, who wouldn't take that?
Oh, and I hear where you are coming from. It would be nice to have all kind of options like in the old days. I'd love to see 5 different LS engines in this car, but I can also see where it is not practical from a business stand point.
Another way to look at it, GM gave everyone a SRT-8 for the R/T price
The old days gave a COMPETITIVE, CHEAP V8 option. Not an INFERIOR, CHEAP V8 option. You're taking me too literally, and I think we both know that
LO3s are crap in today's terms, but in 1989 terms, they were decent enough. Something like that, in today's terms, would be nice, and someting the other guys don't have. I've been saying this since 2003, on this very board.
LO3s are crap in today's terms, but in 1989 terms, they were decent enough. Something like that, in today's terms, would be nice, and someting the other guys don't have. I've been saying this since 2003, on this very board.
probably isn't, but then neither can be the LS3 (same engine just bigger bore/stroke). There is more to it than just engine cost. Everything else needs to be upgraded and certified.
Last edited by Z28x; Jun 30, 2009 at 10:35 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,505
From: Charleston, WV
I was going to go see about trying with the CFO's car, but a quick search shows I dont even have to...
Not one, but two set of golf clubs with complete ease.
What do I win? I think I bet a million dollars or something.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBmrX...layer_embedded
Frankly, by the video, it went even easier than I thought it would.
Again... this is a non-issue.... blown way way WAY out of proportion.
Not one, but two set of golf clubs with complete ease.
What do I win? I think I bet a million dollars or something.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBmrX...layer_embedded
Frankly, by the video, it went even easier than I thought it would.
Again... this is a non-issue.... blown way way WAY out of proportion.
Is it just me or was anyone else cringing when he was throwing those bags in there?
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,505
From: Charleston, WV
What makes me laugh even more about this topic is that the reason we were told there would be no "middle" V8 offering is because of the costs of certification. Yet, GM produces and certifies two "top level" V8s that are so damn close in specs that it amazes me...but we couldn't give cheaper V8 power "to the people," and get something on the competition.
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
No one can sit here and tell me a 5.3 in the $27,500 range making 350hp wouldn't sell VERY well...it would. Maybe GM wants us all to stretch to the $30k+ so they make more money? I mean, seriously...how much difference is there mechanically between a 1LT RS and an SS? Very little...but the price difference is staggering to get 2 extra cylinders....
What is the point of having a different motor with the Automatic? Was it for fuel mileage?
