I was like WTF??? A notch? Thats really the result of the hig sholders on the first gens. I would love to see that as well. A yellow 1st gen styled convertable with black leather interior would be in my garage faster then I could tell the salesman I would pay full MSRP.

 

http://www.carphotoalbums.com/photos...ro05_z-med.jpg

http://dubs.unixprohost.com/albums/a...oncept_001.jpg

If it doesnt look like those I dont want it!

 

Oh no, not again..... I guess it's official...... this is now a retro vs. modern thread. How did that happen?

Personally, I'd like to have 3/4 windows that have some character to them a la 1st gen. They don't necessarily have to flow from the door like that, sans B-pillar - although it would be cool. T-tops though, do need the B-pillar to preserve structural integrity. So they wouldn't be a deal-breaker for me either.

A car that comes out as a blantant rip-off, or as an updated near-carbon-copy like Kris Horton's design (although nicely done and rendered) of the first gen and I'm looking for a low mile 4th gen TA.

Camaro needs to be progressive not retro (and please, not another update of the 3rd gen, it's time to move on)....... heritage touches aside.

 

I don't know if T-tops would look good on a retro looking car.

Targa would though.

 

Errr... I thought that notch, in the rear quarter was caused by what is more commonly referred to as the car's "hips". I could be wrong however.

And the B pillar on fourth gens wasnt too upright and it still looked ok. I am anxious to see what GM has if anything.

Can this car really be that hard to design? An upright 1st gen body style would add sorely needed practicality as well as appeasing many of the faithful if not overly retro.

 

I would only like to see the return of circular tail lights.

 

The car can't be too upright, it's a Camaro. Not even the 1sts were that upright for their time and were advertised as low cars. Being more sporty than the M*stang is a requirement. If not, what's the object?