View Poll Results: The 5th gen Camaro should be.....
smaller than '05 Mustang
99
77.34%
larger than '05 Mustang
29
22.66%
Voters: 128. You may not vote on this poll
Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by dream '94 Z28
Maybe we need to straighten out our priorities for the Corvette. 
1.) Historically the car's been about going like stink around curves and high style.
2.) That usually means sacrificing (some) interior usability, cargo space, visability, and ease of ingress and egress.
If you're prirorities lie in factor #2, may I politely point out the GTO.
1.) Historically the car's been about going like stink around curves and high style.
2.) That usually means sacrificing (some) interior usability, cargo space, visability, and ease of ingress and egress.
If you're prirorities lie in factor #2, may I politely point out the GTO.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by IZ28
I am really starting to believe that some of you should not be in the market for a Camaro anymore, or need to recall what the car is. If you want these tiny cars I think it's time to go elsewhere. Camaro's have been 185.5-193.5, anything smaller or bigger would be ridiculous. It's about finding a nice medium and the new M*stang did that. It doesn't look too big and doesn't look like a tiny piece like the last car, which had lousy interior room and felt like you were driving a model instead of a real car.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by IZ28
I am really starting to believe that some of you should not be in the market for a Camaro anymore, or need to recall what the car is. If you want these tiny cars I think it's time to go elsewhere. Camaro's have been 185.5-193.5, anything smaller or bigger would be ridiculous. It's about finding a nice medium and the new M*stang did that. It doesn't look too big and doesn't look like a tiny piece like the last car, which had lousy interior room and felt like you were driving a model instead of a real car.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by IZ28
I am really starting to believe that some of you should not be in the market for a Camaro anymore, or need to recall what the car is. If you want these tiny cars I think it's time to go elsewhere.
"Time to go elsewhere"? There is no "elsewhere" at the moment, for those of us who want a reasonably priced, decently-powered, rwd sport coupe with a modicum of utility.
Camaro's have been 185.5-193.5, anything smaller or bigger would be ridiculous. It's about finding a nice medium and the new M*stang did that. It doesn't look too big and doesn't look like a tiny piece like the last car,
which had lousy interior room and felt like you were driving a model instead of a real car.
The new Mustang is, size and weightwise, a 2-door Town Car. I do NOT want the Camaro to be a 2-door Caprice.
Anyway, it is heartening to read that more people than I'd expected do see the "LIGHT"! No doubt GM WON'T...
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 413
From: Mannheim, Germany
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
How about this...take the interior of a 4th gen, add a little more space in the back seat, get rid of the super long dash. Put that interior into a smaller on the outside Camaro and I will be happy.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Sounds like you're ready for an '05 Mustang my friend. Any day now you'll be dropping the "*" and typing a "u".
I'm really sorry, but anyone that thinks the Mustang is too big is friggin nutz IMO.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 218
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by jg95z28
I saw yet another 05 Mustang up close and personal this afternoon.
I'm really sorry, but anyone that thinks the Mustang is too big is friggin nutz IMO.
I'm really sorry, but anyone that thinks the Mustang is too big is friggin nutz IMO.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,646
From: Portland, OR
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by jg95z28
I saw yet another 05 Mustang up close and personal this afternoon.
I'm really sorry, but anyone that thinks the Mustang is too big is friggin nutz IMO.
I'm really sorry, but anyone that thinks the Mustang is too big is friggin nutz IMO.
) but I see a V6 'Stang every day and it looks big next all kind of cars, and huge next to my 4th gen.Maybe the dims aren't that far of, but it's blocky, un-inspired retro styling makes it look much bigger and really doesn't look like a car that should handle well at all.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,647
From: At car shows and cruise nights!
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
LOL Z284, I think not.
It is true, the M*stang is too high and not very wide or sporty looking, it's NOT an F-Body so I expect that. I think they got the length right though. But, WHY are some of you comparing the cars to unsporty commuter imports? Imports have always been tiny and the Camaro was never a tiny car. M*stangs have been, and that just isn't what I'm looking for. If I want a go-kart I will buy a go-kart. I want a car that doesn't look like a joke like those 80's 5.0 LX's. If the car is less than the 185.5-187.5 bracket it will probably look like half of a Camaro and have even less interior space then before.
It is true, the M*stang is too high and not very wide or sporty looking, it's NOT an F-Body so I expect that. I think they got the length right though. But, WHY are some of you comparing the cars to unsporty commuter imports? Imports have always been tiny and the Camaro was never a tiny car. M*stangs have been, and that just isn't what I'm looking for. If I want a go-kart I will buy a go-kart. I want a car that doesn't look like a joke like those 80's 5.0 LX's. If the car is less than the 185.5-187.5 bracket it will probably look like half of a Camaro and have even less interior space then before.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
by Dan Baldwin:::?????!!!!!!
Camaro was NEVER a full-size car. Camaro was never even a MID-size car.
Camaro was NEVER a full-size car. Camaro was never even a MID-size car.
I fail to see how a high-powered rear-wheel drive performance coupe overlaps with a fwd economy car, even it they weighed about the same and even if said fwd econocar has an optional model with a few more horsies under the hood.
Again, how is a lighter-weight rear-wheel drive Camaro somehow a "Cobalt with an LSx engine"
Repeat after me: "Light is RIGHT"
"Light weight is improves EVERY aspect of performance"
"a lightweight rwd performance car is FUNDAMENTALLY NOT THE SAME THING as a lightweight fwd economy car" (not that the Cobalt is particularly light)
"Light weight is improves EVERY aspect of performance"
"a lightweight rwd performance car is FUNDAMENTALLY NOT THE SAME THING as a lightweight fwd economy car" (not that the Cobalt is particularly light)
BTW, not all Sport Compacts are FWD...you should know.
I've driven one. Didn't care for it AT ALL.
It's HUGELY space-inefficient. Big on the outside, small on the inside. Nissan made the same stupid decision with the 350Z, PURPOSELY making the interior small to make it *SEEM* more "sporty", and basically wound up with a 2-seat G35 luxury/sport sedan (minus some of the luxury). This is so wrong in so many ways... Contrast with a 240Z, which weighs 1000 lb. less! I can get 5 race wheels/tires, a medium-sized toolbox, floor jack, and a small suitcase ALL INSIDE my much-smaller 240Z! And the legroom and headroom are comparable, maybe greater. Now THAT'S space-efficiency.
It's HUGELY space-inefficient. Big on the outside, small on the inside. Nissan made the same stupid decision with the 350Z, PURPOSELY making the interior small to make it *SEEM* more "sporty", and basically wound up with a 2-seat G35 luxury/sport sedan (minus some of the luxury). This is so wrong in so many ways... Contrast with a 240Z, which weighs 1000 lb. less! I can get 5 race wheels/tires, a medium-sized toolbox, floor jack, and a small suitcase ALL INSIDE my much-smaller 240Z! And the legroom and headroom are comparable, maybe greater. Now THAT'S space-efficiency.
I'm not against more room on the inside. I am against bigger, higher, more massive exterior proportions. And more than anything I'm AGAINST UNNECESSARY WEIGHT!
The more I think about it, the more it seems to me that the new Camaro should basically be a 2+2 Solstice coupe with a V8.
Bro, you buy a Solstice and build one, let us have our beloved Camaro back, in its true essence...
Last edited by 90rocz; Aug 4, 2005 at 12:12 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
240Z unexciting, uninpsiring?!
Bwahahahah!!!
More of a landmark car than the Camaro was, though it's not surprising that's lost on an IROC pilot. (j.k., j.k.!)
I have YET to have any F-body (even highly modded ones, incl. a twin turbo) do road course race track times anything like what I do in my slightly modded NA 240Z. (also managed a 13.5@106.5 my one and only trip to the drags, with a clogged fuel filter and sporadic fuel pressure)
I DON'T want the Camaro to be a neo-240Z, that's what I wanted the 350Z to be (sigh). But since the Solstice is already WAY bigger and heavier than it was supposed to be, adding 2 seats and a V8 would be PERFECT for a new sub-3200 lb. Camaro.
Anyway, don't you worry, I'm sure that if there is a new Camaro, you'll get the 3600 lb. 2-door Caprice "coupe" you want so bad
I do time trials at tracks throughout New England and into Canada (incl Watkins Glen, Lime Rock, NHIS, etc.) with the 240Z with a club called COMSCC (www.comscc.org), so if you ever want to experience what EXCITING and INSPIRING is all about, do an event with us and I'll take you for the ride of your life
http://www.comscc.org/results/nhis0505.htm
Bwahahahah!!!
More of a landmark car than the Camaro was, though it's not surprising that's lost on an IROC pilot. (j.k., j.k.!)
I have YET to have any F-body (even highly modded ones, incl. a twin turbo) do road course race track times anything like what I do in my slightly modded NA 240Z. (also managed a 13.5@106.5 my one and only trip to the drags, with a clogged fuel filter and sporadic fuel pressure)
I DON'T want the Camaro to be a neo-240Z, that's what I wanted the 350Z to be (sigh). But since the Solstice is already WAY bigger and heavier than it was supposed to be, adding 2 seats and a V8 would be PERFECT for a new sub-3200 lb. Camaro.
Anyway, don't you worry, I'm sure that if there is a new Camaro, you'll get the 3600 lb. 2-door Caprice "coupe" you want so bad
I do time trials at tracks throughout New England and into Canada (incl Watkins Glen, Lime Rock, NHIS, etc.) with the 240Z with a club called COMSCC (www.comscc.org), so if you ever want to experience what EXCITING and INSPIRING is all about, do an event with us and I'll take you for the ride of your life
http://www.comscc.org/results/nhis0505.htm
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 859
From: AR (PA born and fled)
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by 90rocz
???It has always been clasified as a Full-size sports car. Ever read Consumer Reports, rent one at any rental company???BTW, the Mustang is Full-size also...
The EPA gas mileage area of the window sticker lists "subcompact". BTW the sticker from my '91 AND my '96 both state this.
In fairness I'm pretty sure this is based on interior space although I may be wrong.
Originally Posted by 90rocz
Repeat after me, "TOO LIGHT IS WRONG" ask some of the suspension junkies here...
How (or why) is it that the C6 is both lighter and smaller than the C5 yet has more interior space and a slightly lower sticker?
Such things are possible if careful engineering is applied.
Last edited by Chewbacca; Aug 4, 2005 at 06:24 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 413
From: Mannheim, Germany
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by Chewbacca
Ever buy a new one? Look at one in the dealership?
The EPA gas mileage area of the window sticker lists "subcompact". BTW the sticker from my '91 AND my '96 both state this.
In fairness I'm pretty sure this is based on interior space although I may be wrong.
Repeat after me...LIGHT IS GOOD. It helps drag racers AND road racers AND autocrossers AND daily drivers (gas mileage).
How (or why) is it that the C6 is both lighter and smaller than the C5 yet has more interior space and a slightly lower sticker?
Such things are possible if careful engineering is applied.
The EPA gas mileage area of the window sticker lists "subcompact". BTW the sticker from my '91 AND my '96 both state this.
In fairness I'm pretty sure this is based on interior space although I may be wrong.
Repeat after me...LIGHT IS GOOD. It helps drag racers AND road racers AND autocrossers AND daily drivers (gas mileage).
How (or why) is it that the C6 is both lighter and smaller than the C5 yet has more interior space and a slightly lower sticker?
Such things are possible if careful engineering is applied.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Should the new Camaro be smaller or larger than the "05 Mustang?
Originally Posted by Chewbacca
How (or why) is it that the C6 is both lighter and smaller than the C5 yet has more interior space and a slightly lower sticker?
Such things are possible if careful engineering is applied.
Because team Corvette had the WILL to do that.
