Honestly, I don't know why all the hullaballoo about "that cockpit feel". By "that cockpit feel" are we saying..."I enjoy driving a car with poor visibility and no reference point of where my car ends".

Not long ago, my friend wanted me to drive his 1980 Bill Mitchell Concept turbo Z/28, (only one of two, BTW). Lots of power and the best suspension I've ever experienced on a 2nd gen. You know what? It wasn't that much fun for me to drive. Too much of "that cockpit feel" I suppose. Hard to go fast and enjoy it, when you can't see in front and behind you. Sort of makes me feel that I'm not in complete control.4th gens are pretty bad as well. 3rd gens are just slightly better.

Sure, I want a swoopy car....but I'd like to see where I'm going, too. Someone needs to benchmark the driving position in a 350Z/G35.

 

I'd have to agree with you Z28.

Our 4th gen camaro isn't that fun to drive sometimes because you can't see over the hood, and you can't where the front is, and theres lots of blind spots, and sometimes the front of the car scrapes when your going up ramp and curbs, and you can't see out the back hardly when the convertible top is up and....

I really hope the new camaro has great visibility, cause im sick of the cockpit feel.

The buying public wants an open spacious car with good visibility.

 

good points Z28 and Morginie. it was just my opinion, but i can see how another "cockpit" might hurt sales across the board. the best camaro i ever drove was a 68 with an lt4 in it. kinda rode like a brick 'cause of how low it was but i liked having better visibility than my 4th gen and the same kind of power band. i guess i just got so used to the cockpit i almost forgot how nice it was to be able to see. my daily driver is a ford ranger with over a foot of lift so visability hasn't been in my vocabulary since i started driving.

 

Definately smaller. By todays standards, the mustang, and camaro at that, is huge. I would like it to be alittle smaller than the gto and weigh in around 3100 or 3200 lbs. I know some will say "then go by a compact" or something to that effect, but pony cars aren't supposed to be as large as intermediate sized cars like the gto, impala, grand prix, etc.

 

I'm in Phoenix tonight and have an '05 White w/black stripe & lettering, V6/Auto....I'm 6'2" 240lbs, and the '05 is a little small.
The high door-line and low side-window-top, makes me think I'm in a "chop-top", add the large "B"-pillars plus huge headrests, hurts vital view-ability of what's going on around me.
I would've loved to see the roofline with a little more arc giving more room for rear headroom, front & rear seats. Combine lower door panels, I would'nt feel so closterphobic and could lean my arm on the door w/o raising above my shoulder height.
While I'm complaining, the passenger side seat belt keeps LOCKING-UP and choking the crap out of my wife...(she's not a happy camper..)
Mild acceleration while cruising is "doggy" unless you push the pedal enough to down-shift.
Transmission is a little "whiney" at low speed cruising, combined with the exhaust note, it reminds me of an upscaled "slot-car".
Despite its upright stance, it bottms out easier than my IROC on moderate speed-bumps etc...I mean it hits the frame! not just scraping the exhaust.
The steering wheel blocks MOST of the Speedo and tach, they're located right in the arc path of the wheel. I had to raise the steering wheel to an unnatural position to see most of each.
Left knee rests on the uncomfortable corner of the door arm-rests...should'nt extend so far forward.
The infamous, "something's loose inside the door" rattle, both doors.

Like's: color changing gages, white by day; green when headlights are turned on.
Window's automatically lower 1/4" when the door is opened, raises automatically when shut.
Very cool soud under acceleration!
Very cool looking exterior..
Rides decent, handles pretty good.
Stands out in a crowd!..

 

I voted for bigger. The interior demensions of the 3rd/4th gen SUCK! Not saying the Mustang is poster child of perfection,But its way better.. I have sat in both front and back (even taking lengthy rides in both front and back) and being 6'2" that says alot.

If you want it smaller then a 05 Mustang (which is packaged pretty good) you might as well just buy a Solstice and drop a LS1 in it. Which does not sound like a bad idea at all. But Chevy wont build that car for ya. Then again it wont be a 2+2..So will it be what a Camaro stands for? I sure don't think so. Maybe they can call it Corvair? I've always liked that name..

 

Driving position and visibility were two of the main reasons I sold my 99 T/A.

 

Why?

I mean, other RWD 2+2's have tidy exterior dimensions with an adequately sized interior.

I think the '05 Mustang is the size that it is - because it's D2C chassis is derived from the sedan based DEW98.

 

The floorpans were started as DEW but not much left of it(Gas tank sections are pretty much it). It just about mirrors the T-Birds 107" WB (.01 or so diff). LS has 114".

GTO comes to mind while going over this thread. Its HUGE and the interior is "ok" but not as big as u would think, IMHO the Mustang is better. Again "IMHO".... If you want the interior of a 4th Gen, Buy a 4th Gen I say.
But with the demand for more spacious interiors I think it will not be as small as u all would hope.I know Curb weight has to be one of the reasons for this topic.

 

Me personally, I'm not really looking for a 4th gen interior. But I feel that it provided adequate space volume...if only it were configured in a more sensible way. The architectural limits of the 4th gen wouldn't allow that however.

Look it. Camaro is a sporty ponycar. I'd want an intimate but comfortable interior, wrapped in as sporty/compact exterior as possible. Not an unreasonable request, I think.

And about your statement that the GTO appears HUGE compared to the '05 Mustang.....well, yes it's abit on the large side....but is only about an inch or so longer than the new Mustang. So where does that put the Mustang - size wise?

 

HUGe.

 

I'm hoping it will be smaller but antisipating it to be larger......

I'm also hoping the back seats will unuseable by all by 3 year olds and midgets.
I know it has to have them but..........I never use them.

 

I like the cockpit feel of the 4th gen that turbo was mentioning. I like feeling like I am in a fighter jet. Better visibility would be fine, but I don't want it to sit like my old Mustang did. Apparently people can get over it if it leads to a good car design, because the 4th gens did sell pretty well before they became old and dated in the public's eyes. 3rd gens sold extremely well, and as you remarked, they were only alittle better.

I am not saying don't raise the seating, I just really like that low slung feel, with everything wrapped around you and shifter right under your hand.

 

Well........there ya go....................

 

I think the interior can be made bigger, it would only take a couple of inches here and there, without increasing the exterior size.
I mean, for one, I thought the "hump" in the Stang was larger than it needed to be, that alone would free up some leg room, front and rear.
And shorten the door armrests a couple of inches, moving the front corner rearward slightly. And maybe raise it toward the window slightly making it useable.
One of the first things I would do if I bought one is remove the headrests, the angle is very uncomfortable, and the large solid design blocks view when changing lanes or backing up.
Just simply rethinking the "roof arc", a "little" looser, would help out inside tremendously. I really think noone would notice or care.
There's a LOT of room for improvement inside without increasing the outside dimensions at all...