Couldn't have said it better. And I've owned 2 3rd gens and 1 4th, but I'm only 30 years old, so I was in the target age range I guess during some of that period, but I still like the classic look and dimensions. Maybe I'm just an old fuddy duddy.

 

You can have long hood, short deck styling without having a 16 foot long car though - as others here have said. For the Camaro to be a seller - which we should all hope it will be in order for us to ever see a new one again - in needs to be more in step with the times. The Camaro was a SMALL car in the first and second generations when compared to the other cars on the road at the time. A 1967 full size Chevy was 215" (18 feet) long and 80" wide a 1967 Camaro was 184.6 inches long (15.3 feet) and 72.3 inches wide - almost three feet shorter and 8 inches narrower than the full size car of the day. A 1970 Camaro was 188.0 inches (15.6 feet) long. A 1971 Impala grew to 220" (18.3 feet) long - So the 1970 Camaro was once again about three feet shorter than the full-size car.

Fast forward to the year 2000. The Camaro is now 193.5 (16.2 feet) long. The longest Camaro ever. A 2000 Impala is 200.0 inches (16.6) feet long. The three foot difference between the full size car and "small, sporty" Camaro has now shrunk to a grand total of 6.5 inches. Everything else got smaller, while Camaro stayed big - mainly due to legacy ties to the 2nd gen. chassis. So, it wouldn't be at all illogical to have a Camaro be Mitsubishi Eclipse size - about 14 feet long as it would be much closer to the size ratio of the 1st and 2nd gen. cars in comparison to the full size cars of the 60s and 70s. Heck, if you wanted a "new" Camaro to have the same ratio as a 1967 did to a 1967 full size it would have to be about a foot SHORTER than the current Eclipse. the Camaro always being a "big" car is a myth. It's just stayed the same size while everything else shrank around it.

 

Only my opintion, but if a new Camaro is Eclipse-sized, I am out.

Too small.

A Camaro needs to have a certain size and presence, IMO.

I agree that the overhangs need to be shortened, but that can be achieved a few ways... obviously cutting some length , but also by pushing the wheels to the corners.

 

I agree the car can be shorter, but if its looks anything like an Eclipse, forget it. That car has no presence at all. Shorter overhangs are fine as long as the car still has a musclecar image. However, name any car that fits that description which is being built today with the length you describe. Even the Corvette has an extremely boring look and styling in my eyes, what makes it appealing is its performance and technology.

 

Exactomondo

 

If the Camaro comes back as another full sized car with an interior smaller than a Geo Metro- it will be doomed to die yet again. You don't have to have size to have presence, necessarily. Did the 1967 lack presence? Did the 1970? You might have lost them in those fields of 20 foot long cars

 

I agree that the interior needs to improve as far as usable space, but... I stand by my size thing. I would be willing to accept a marginal change, but nothing that drastic...

 

I'm not a demographics expert or anything, but the thing I've heard the most from people that they didn't like about the 4th gen. was that they were too big - too long, specifically. If you had a Camaro about the length of the current Eclipse, but six to eight inches wider to accomodate a sporty stance and the right styling and V8 power and I think it would work and sell like hotcakes. The Camaro wasn't meant to be a full size car. The 4th Gen. was full size in exterior dimension and sub-compact inside.

 

Absolutely! Size does not equal presence. So many smaller cars have presence. Ferraris, Porsches, M3's, Mustangs, Minivans even.

....my gosh...the Camaro has become grotesquely huge compared to everything else.

Camaro was always supposed to be a relatively compact car.

As the rest of the automotive world became more compact....Camaro grew.

It doesn't have to be Eclipse sized (ALTHOUGH, IF IT HAD A V8 AND EVERYTHING ELSE......I WOULDN"T HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT SIZED CAMARO), but it needs to be quite abit more compact than it is now.

For the rest of you......go buy a Silverado.

 

Was there a pic of the car there? If so, could someone copy it and upload to some place else? For whatever reason, the site is really slow to load. The page loads up half-way minus the car pic, then it stops.

 

Never mind. WOW!!

That sucker is sweet. Throw a Camaro body on it, add a 6 speed coupled to a V8 and you've got my money!!

 

You can still have a very lightweight car, and have the proportions that the Camaro has had for its 35 years.

Maybe they will bring it back under its original name... the Panther back in 1965.

 

The whole relative argument doesn't really fit guys. The sedans have gotten smaller, and many of the sports cars have remained the same size or gotten larger.

You want a smaller car with more interior room? That's not a Camaro. If that's what people want, then maybe GM was better off pulling the plug on the Camaro, letting it die, and bringing back their entry level sports car under a different name.

A Camaro is more than just rear wheel drive and a V8. There's no need to bring on a 5th generation if it's going to be small. Eclipse size is just too short. I have no problem with a car with the dimensions, interior room, and performance that you guys have been talking about. I'd love to see it personally, and I would probably even pick it over a Camaro if they were equally priced. However, I would not want to see one named Camaro. I hope that makes sense.

 

It can have those proportions without having to be gigantic, too. I don't think you can have a very lightweight car the size of an F4 and sell it at a price that potential buyers would find palatable.

We're not talking about having to make the Camaro economy car small, here. It wouldn't even need to be Eclipse small - I was just using that as an example but people seem to gave grabbed onto it like a dog to a bone for some reason - but it doesn't have to be as big as an F4. Camaro wasn't ever meant to mean "bigger than just about anything else on the road."

 

I say move the engine back a few inches, move the cockpit back, and shave off the rear end... desing a new fuel tank, like a pan style fuel tank that sits under a good portion of the car and wraps around some components and it should be fine.