You must listen to me, and only me.........

 

transam8.......you get my vote to run GM.

 

Thats like the same thing me and Z284 have been saying for who knows how long. If its a Z car it should be more fun than the others.

 

It's a PERFORMANCE car.

 

Well, a properly done Z/28 would be more fun to me, and to you and to maybe afew thousand other people per year.....but not necessarilly to everyone, and I guess that's sort of the point.

We need greater model differentiation for Camaro....and less "generica". GM should take a cue from Ford (that's the company that still makes Pony Cars).......Mustang has the niche market covered. It might something worth trying at GM.

 

Yup. They need to look at the other Gens and what the other company that managed to keep their car going is up to.

And for the people that would not want a Z28, they could get the SS.

 

Do you really want a "Chevrolet Mustang" ???

 

I'm talking about how they manage the car with the models, engines, and more variety.

 

Ya, I kind of figured that... I was just yankin' yer chain a little bit after our head butting a bit ago!

 

Yeah. Simiarities can stop there if you wanna call them that because its how the Camaro used to be too. You gotta make things interesting and each model have meaning. And no misuse of designations!!

 

Exactly! One isn't better than the other per say, it's just a difference of tastes and desires. One doesn't have to be a pile of crap, while the other is the be all end all of automobiles. Make them different enough that both Z/28 and SS appeal to a variety of buyers. Give the consumer the choice of which car fits them best. Instead of absolutely defining a "top" model, create a pair of cars that are exciting. Then, the stigma of having to "settle" for the lower model might not be as prevalent.

When some discuss following Ford's formula, I think that we are talking about the marketing strategy (and variety of models) more that the vehicle itself. Lets face it, Ford has done a great job marketing the Mustang, and giving consumers what they want. If GM comes anywhere near the effort that Ford has put forth, I think that ALL Camaro enthusiasts will be very pleased. All we can really do now is wait and see...


-Mike

 

Okay, let me edit my statement:

The 4th Gen Z28 was the least visually inspiring Z28 EVER.

Saying there isn't anything they could have done to make it look better is the most moronic thing I've ever heard. Do you think it would cost more to have some decent 5 spoke wheels instead of those ugly *** 2003 Z28 wheels? Would a slightly taller, SS-like spoiler have cost more? Would a character line or power bulge on the flat hood have costed more? How about not painting the exhaust tips so you could actually see them? Or perhaps having a deep grille opening that more closely matched the look of the early 2nd gen's they tried to capture? How about smoked headlamps like Mustang? It doesn't have to cost more to make a better looking car. And they could have at least made 17" wheels optional.

And damn sure I care about how it looks. I want it to look menacing, not batmobile-esque like a ram air T/A, but clean, smooth, low, dark, wide and MEAN. If it can be confused with a chrysler (I don't give a **** who came up with the look first) it is the WRONG look. The look of the car has a lot to do with why I drive the pony car that I drive.

Even at the lowest points in automotive history (the 70's and early 80's) the Z28 was one of the more visually appealing cars on the road - until the 98+ 4th gen.

PS - In it's early years the 3rd gen Z28 was considered one of the best handling cars sold in the US.

 

 

I would beg to differ. The '98-'02 was a visually clean design, and all of its elements were well integrated and in good taste. The F4 Z28's black roof, like early Acura NSXs, was meant to evoke the canopy of a fighter jet. That's a rare example of positive aviation influenced design - unlike '50s tailfins and "bullet" tail lamps. Similarly, the rear spoiler was a subtle integration, not a tacked-on piece of fiberglass.

I'm similarly positive about the '98+ front clip. Chevrolet used a very subtle central ridge and compound curves to accent the new headlamp design. The headlamps themselves, with silvered reflectors and clear polycarbonate lenses, were also very modern. Overall, the effect was classy. Of course, the SS hoodscoop was icing on the cake, but the rest of the SS visual cues didn't work as well. The "rainbow" spoiler was pointless, and the huge single exhaust outlet was very inappropriate.

I also like the '00-02 style base/Z28 wheels. Here was a modern alloy wheel with depth and style. (The '97-'99 five spoke wheels looked flat and two dimensional. From a distance, they often looked like plactic wheel covers, especially without a chrome finish.)

Throughout the course of the F4, the Camaro was improved with every updating. To me, the '97+ dash is stark and functional, the way any performance car should be. The post 2000 steerwheel was also a welcome relief - who can fault a bigger rim and audio controls. Even the post '97 tail were a nice "European" touch, with nifty amber back-up lights. Finally, I love the black painted exhaust tips. A car is a car, and a motor-cycle is a motor-cycle. Quite frankly, I don't need a shiny tailpipe to remind me where all of the "emissions" come from.

That of course brings me to what the Z28/IROC became from the lowest edd of the late F2s to the end of the F3s. GM speciallized in "over the top" visual effects in this era. Today, the decals, fake loovers and after-though spoilers seem tacky. Even as a kid, I didn't think very much of them - the cars or the visuals.

 

That, is 1 of the wackiest posts I've ever read. I'm with the M*stang owner here!!