I see it as more of an evolutionary thing. Sure the Camaro today is much larger (size, not mass) than the Camaro of 40-years ago. However humans have also grown in size throughout history. Our predecessors were smaller and lived much shorter lives than we do today. The automobile has evolved vastly since the Model T, and will continue to evolve. Small, stripped down no frills cars are a thing of the past.

Is that a good thing? I'm not sure. I honestly think the industry needs to move in the direction of building cheap, no frills appliance vehicles that are primarily for transportation first and foremost. However those types of vehicles are not enthusiast vehicles like the Camaro. Its a double-edged sword I'm afraid.

 

The new Camaro appears "Taller" than the Mustang or Challenger. It has a very im the tallest thing in the parking lot appearance. Also the flatness or lack of much slope over the length of the hood and trunk give it a more boxy/height look. A cobalt next to a cavalier is taller, looks chunkier, but it def a much better/safer car.

 

2010 Camaro height = 54.2 in
2010 Mustang height = 54.5 in
Dodge Challenger height = 57.0 in
2009 Honda Accord Coupe = 56.4 in

So much for that theory. Camaro is the lowest out of all the new muscle cars and even smaller than non-HUGE cars like the accord coupe. Even the previous generation of Grand Am coupe which some said was the perfect size is 55.1 in almost an inch taller than the Camaro.

Look, we get it. 5th gen Camaro is heavier than everyone expected. But it isn't a huge car for 2009 America. You never going to get a Camaro with the curb weight of a Model-T, dimensions of a CRX, 505HP LS7 base engine, 7 star crash rating, and the interior space of a town car.

 

i find that hard to believe. the mustang has a massive amount more head room then the camaro. you even sit higher in the mustang.

 

The Camaro is wider..it is probally wider than the Challenger. That is what makes it seem so big. That and the high rear as mentioned.

As anyone ever looked at like a C3 and noticed how much wider the C6 is?

 

I know there's a lot more than "meets the eye" to the size and weight of newer cars...

But I want my car safe. And safety, to me, means having a vehicle that can greatly help me AVOID any accidents, rather than JUST survive them.

All cars today are much faster, and some added protection is necessary.

I DON'T believe a high belt line will protect more than the problems in visibility it adds.

I believe even the Camaro could have been much smaller while maintaining "the look" but then not an economic case for production when it did, based on available, profitable, architecture.

I think that as people have said, for the price-point Joe Consumer wants to pay right now, and mandated safety, we have what we have...

 

Challenger = 75.7 in
Camaro = 75.5 in.
Mustang = 73.9

Camaro is a little narrower than the Challenger and 1.5" wider than the Mustang. Wider is good in a car like this.

 

The fenders, cowl and waistline are really high too. When you see a Camaro parked next to a Challenger, you'll see what I mean. The Challenger almost looks light and athletic when both are viewed head on.

 

Yep. The C6 is about 400 lbs lighter than the C3 too.

 

Oops.

 

Say whaaaaa??

I haven't looked at them parked side by side yet, so I can't refute you Charlie. But while the Camaro has a "thickness" to it that does bother me, it doesn't give me the impression of size nearly as much as the Challenger does when I see them out on the road.

I'll have to check them out sometime at a show or whatever, where I can see them side by side.

 

Challenger looks like a huge tank. It looks enourmous.

Camaro and Mustang just look big.

I think part of all of this is that all three cars styling is based on cars there WERE smaller back in the 60's and early 70's...

Of the three, I'd actually say Camaro pulls it off best, and many of you will remember how anti-retro styling I was.

I think Mustang will get a pass from many because it's been around for 5 years now, and we've grown more accustomed to it.

That all said, I've driven a few Camaros now, and none of them felt huge or heavy while I was driving them. They do have a large blind spot... that was my biggest complaint.

Camaro felt lighter and more agile than my 04 GTO did, which felt heavy-in-the-butt to me while driving. Camaro doesn't have that issue.

 

And with that, Charlie's credibility finally dropped to zero.

 

Transformers 2 was released today!

 

Well not really. The 70.5 Camaro is pretty close to the size of the 2010 model. The biggest difference is in height (4 inches). Even weight isn't that far off. When you adjust for equipment, a 70.5 Z28 weighs about the same as a 2010 V6, has about the same horsepower and 1/4 mile numbers -- at least going by a period R&T test.

Go forward to the mid 70s smog, bumper, and safety mobiles, and the new one is actually lighter and much much faster, even with the V6.