He also said there would never be a GTO and that those cars would never come here. I think they intend on using the same engine and making noticably different power levels, which is almost the same thing.

 

Sure you gotta put the seats down. If you do and load up everything possible, you can fit a surprising amount of stuff in there. I'd never do it to mine, but I've seen others. Couldn't believe it actually.

 

Pretty good information!

I have the following to add...

I would agree that getting in & out of a Mustang is easier than a Camaro, so I think the taller, more upright stance is an improvement. The 4th Gen coupe is 51.4" tall... so if the 5th Gen comes in at 53-54", no big deal.

I've always felt the interiors of Mustangs were smaller and more cramped than a Camaro.

Trunk with fold down seats... I like it.

T-Tops or Targa? Why not both?
Removable T-Tops like we've all been used to, plus a removeable bar in between. Well, ok. Maybe my mind is imagining more than is feasable for that one. But the 5th Gen better have T-Tops. I'm sure something good will be designed for the stowage of the tops in the trunk... maybe lockable slots for them at the top of the trunk or something. Or hmm, maybe dual power retracting sunroof type t-tops... ok there I go crossing that feasability line again, lol.

As far as the weight issue goes, I'm not real crazy about the idea of a heavier car. I would hope that something can be done to remove weight instead of adding it.

IRS is something I would like to see as an option. But again, I dunno if that's really a feasable idea. Plus that being an option would not only add to R&D costs, but add to the bottom line of the car, making all the models more expensive. Additionally, IRS I think would come in at about a $1200 option. However at the same time, any live axle that would be used better not be made out of glass like the 7.5" 10-bolt is... weakest part of the 4th Gen if you ask me. How about an 8.5" 10-bolt? Wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would sure help.

And now that I'm on the drivetrain...
Transmissions.... I think a 5-speed auto would be cool... maybe even a 6-speed auto. And of course a 6-speed manual too as would be expected. Hopefully the new transmissions can be beefier than 4th Gen trannys.

Engines... Variants of the LS2 just makes sense. Plain and simple. Although I'd kinda like to see more of a difference between Z28 and SS... instead of 310hp and 325hp as 4th Gen, maybe something like 350hp and 390hp. As for the base V6... could the new 3.9L show up in there? Maybe something was said already about this and I'm just not recalling it right now.

Ground effects... Yes please. I wasn't real sure if I liked the ground effects on my current Z28 when I bought it. But after owning the car for a couple months, I love them. I would really like to see this option on a 5th Gen.

But overall... good news indeed. Glad to see a 5th Gen is on its way.

 

2001 production was so small (only 29,009 units), that T-top demand can't be determined. You need to look at the demand over the last 20 years to see a trend.

Besides, GM is going to load the the last two years of production with options - look at the numbers yourself, they built many more V8 models (43.6%) than typical.

The fact that GM EQUIPPED the car with T-tops doesn't mean the customer prefers T-Tops. I would have much prefered a factory sunroof (or Targa top), but my only option was the T-top.

My expectation is GM will not offer the T-top on the 5th Gen. Heck, they dropped the pop-up headlamps on the C6, dropping the T-top on the 5th Gen only makes sense.

 

Interesting comments on the preference of T-tops. Since dealers order quite a few cars--they typically load them up with options to increase their profit margins.

Mostyly high content Trans Ams and too few Formulas. People would see a C/E Trans Am and be so shocked at the sticker for thye car--theymight be scared off and think they all cost that much.

I usually found local inventory to be quite pricey--over 36K Canadian, might have turned people off. Esp since the Ford dealer had Mustang GT's at 31K--and typically had quiet a few priced there.

 

....because he told me just the opposite....

 

....a theoretical mid-level V8 would have the same or different displacement as a top V8?

 

i think this is a great idea
i would prefer a live axle over the heavier irs (if it does come heavier) rather than have that nice daily driver comfort
an option would make everybody happy, except for sharing the r&d costs, etc.

 

Same here...Doug, I PM'd you on this one

I'm telling ya, if more people than me, Doug and poSSum had shown up at breakfast, you'd be more enlightened like Doug and I guion, whatever happened to you anyways? I thought you had posted way back you were coming out? I never did get to meet you...

 

As for t-tops, t-tops will be mandatory as an option, for sure. Sure, some of you don't like them...

But I remember Scott saying that something like 70% of '02 buyers had them. You can't ignore that fact. When I sold them, if they didn't have t-tops, they didn't sell...period. Given the choice, buyers always wanted them.

And as for more money for the dealers, as one un-enlightened person stated above, lemme tell ya...the mark-up on t-tops was no more than $150...so I don't think it was the dealer forcing the option for little more than $100

 

Bottom line we need to build a car that's faster than a Mustang and cost less. If we don't do both they won't sell.

I wouldn't want 3 different engines but I'll take 3 different hp ratings. Why would they want to make them heavier?

ZO6 460
2007 Vette - 430 hp? 53k
Buick/GTO 415 35k

Camaro/Bird 390 SS & WS6 30k
335 Standard 20-25k
270 V6 15k

 

With production coming to and end, the FACTORY is going to load the vehicles, regardless of what the dealerships request. At only 29k units in 2001, dealerships have little say. The factory already has a history of what the dealerships can sell, and will load the vehicles, to get as much profit out of the small production run.

T-tops may add $150 profit for the dealer, but the factory also makes at least that.

When the Camaro returns in 2007, it will never meet past sales volumes. It must share an existing platform and factory, it must share as much development as possible, and it must share as much content as possible, in order for GM to turn a profit on it. GM will drop the T-top option, when it already has a sunroof available on the same platform.

I would rather GM take the money it would have spent designing in a T-top, and apply that to better performance, quality, and reliability.

 

I for one love T-tops. I hope a T-top or targa option comes back, a sunroof is lame to me. What is the point, it's no better than a glass window in the roof. It does not even compare to the sensation of having the top off.


C'mon T-tops, I'm pulling for ya................

 

I just don't see how anyone can compare a sunroof to T-tops. I've never had any use for a sunroof, something any aftermarket company can install. You get no real open-air feeling with a sunroof. T-tops and targas give you the real best of both worlds: lighter and more structurally rigid than a true convertible and much more of an open cockpit feeling than the alternative.

 

I'd love to know where the HELL you got your ideas for this price chart...with all due respect.

A 2002 SS was considered a solid deal at $30k, with 325hp. What in the world makes you think 5 years later, we should get a new-from-the-ground-up car, 5 years newer, for the same money, with 65 extra HP?? Glad you aren't running GM's price scale...

And you can't even get a Cavalier these days for $15k (ignoring rebates), so I don't know how the hell you expect GM to produce a 2007 Camaro for that....

T-tops will happen, without question...I don't even worry about that one...