The Camaro will be new and it will sell well in the beginning because there is a large enough group of buyers who have waited for it's return. But you were saying that the Camaro will look new and look like nothing else on the road because of the blunt nose and styling from another era. That really won't be true. The Mustang did it first, and the Challenger followed, and the Camaro will have followed after that. That "look" will already have been around for a number of years before the Camaro even makes it to the street.

I really hope the actual car is a lot more modern than what we saw because that is strait up retro. It is 1st gen all the way with wheel arches. What other gen do you see in there?

The 94' was definatly Ford trying to bring the car closer towards the original, but it was done in a much more abstract way. The only design cues of that car that could be traced to the 64' car are the side vent, a more elongated body, and the tail lights (96'+) and that's really it. The thing is, that was enough for everyone to know that this car was a Mustang.

As far as the Corvette, I think that the Corvette is the ultimate example of how to make a spectacular, modern design and yet not loose the importance of the past. It is not retro in the least. You can not tell me that this car clearly looks like any specific generation of Corvette. The same can not be said for the Camaro we saw.

Ever since the second gen, the Camaro has been a different alternative to the Mustang in a number of ways and both had a following. Now, there will be 3 cars, with the Camaro comming out last, that are essentially very similar. We all want the Camaro to do well, but what is going to make it so great that the others don't offer? Is it just going to be just another offering in the same market segment like a Camry is to an Accord or will it really stand out and make people notice? I don't want to be tempted to check out what Ford and Dodge have to offer, I want to know without a doubt that the Camaro is what I want.

I guess I just hope that the concept we see in a few weeks puts all my fears to rest....................in a good way.

 

Being a big thirdgen guy I see a couple thirdgen styling points in the clay concept. The flares over the wheel openings are right off a thirdgen no doubt about it, you're quick to dismiss that but it's a pretty big styling cue. And if we had a good side profile shot it looks like it will have a angled section on the front of the fenders where the headlight pockets are as the thirdgen had. You can clearly see this on the 3/4 side shot of the concept that was up on the main page here. Without a good profile shot I can't say for sure how heavy this detail will be, but I'm seeing a fair bit of thirdgen there. Looks alot like its almost a blending of the thirdgen and firstgen noses... Obviously there aren't individual pockets for each headlight on the nose like the thirdgen, but that angle is there on the front of the fender area, much different than the 1stgens straight vertical front/grill area.

The rear quarter panel "shoulder" area is very similar to the thirdgens as well, but that again was very similar to the 69 Camaro so it kinda goes with both. And although the greenhouse looks to be designed obviously off the firstgen too, it kinda has the rake and alot of similar shaping with the thirdgen's as well, even though those were hatchbacks...

I don't really see much 2nd or 4th gen cues though. The 2nd gens had similar flares over the wheel wells, but they were less noticeable. These really jump out as thirdgen to me for some reason. I think they could easily use some taillights that would remind people of the 2nd or 4th gen, personally I think I'd like to see some 2nd gen-ish taillights... A small lip spoiler could tie in pretty heavily with the 2nd and 3rd gens as well. They could also do a 4thgen style SS hood scoop for the SS or whatever... Other than that I don't see what else they could do to implement some 4thgen cues, especially the LT1 cars really just had alot of refined thirdgen cues, like the headlight pockets, greenhouse (raked to the extreme, etc). I'm hoping and praying the real concept does not show up with blended sidemirrors into the front fenders ala the 4th gen. That ruined alot of the "coke bottle" shape of the 4thgen and just furthered it's bloated misproportioned look. Maybe this car could pull it off better since it's hood/fender area looks alot longer...



I don't know, it really does not scream retro to me, that's the challenger... I'm seeing a modern take on the Camaro paying homage to the original car's design that got it all started and smaller cues to clearly at least the thirdgen. But I definitely 100% see a modern looking car, not some old fashioned looking ride... Which is what I consider retro, a "new" beetle, the Challenger concept, the tumbleturd er thunderbird, etc. They just kinda look old, the Challenger still looks darn good, but it looks like a cleaned up old car. This Camaro concept looks like a new car with some cues from the old IMO, which is exactly what it needed to look like, again IMO...

I think it will definitely look fresh for at least several years, at which point I think just a few new design cues will freshen it again. It just really screams Camaro to me...

Now whether there is room for 3 muscle cars, I don't know. I don't think retro will have much to do with it, it'll be a question of whether the public goes gaagaa over them and they are seen as the stylish car to have. I'm honestly very worried about how well the Camaro will do coming out last of the three, and I definitely see it as a black eye. But again I don't think being what you're terming "retro" will have much to do with it... It'll be at best the 2nd ponycar to the scene quite a few years behind the Stang. Will it create as much of a splash as the Stang did? I really doubt it just by virtue that it will just be the 2nd or even 3rd ponycar to hit retro or not...

Personally I think being a little retro and really screaming American Pony car will only help steal 350Z/G35 and similar sales, not looking similar to them. They've already got the swoopy very futuristic look covered, the STi/EVOs have the boy-racer image covered. These pony cars need to, and do IMO, scream american muscle...

BTW, I personally still check out new Stangs when they cruise by, didn't like the 300C to start with...

 

The problem with relating the wheel arches to the third gen is that so many cars have that styling element today that it doesn't stick out as "Camaro". That's not necessarily a bad thing I guess.

A side profile shot would have been nice and would have been pretty revealing, but it still looks to follow the 1st gen profile.

I wouldn't say that it is 100% retro either, if there is such a thing. What it is though is a modern interpretation of a 1st gen. Like it or not, that is what it is.



"Personally I think being a little retro and really screaming American Pony car will only help steal 350Z/G35 and similar sales, not looking similar to them. They've already got the swoopy very futuristic look covered, the STi/EVOs have the boy-racer image covered. These pony cars need to, and do IMO, scream american muscle..."



Do the people that buy these cars really care or even want the car if it is American or has an American heritage? I would be willing to bet that the majority of people who buy 350Z's or EVO's or RX-8's are not interested in an "old" looking car. They still associate these muscle cars as old, crude, un-refined, low-tech and any other cliche you can think of. The design of the Camaro is not helping that situation at all.


Also, don't forget, the Camaro will be the 3rd ponycar to the scene.

Btw, That part about the 4th gen really hurt.

 

isnt there supposed to be another RWD car chevy will have out at NAIAS

 

No, I'm sure you're right, the majority of them probably don't want an american car. I was thinking more of winning back defectors who went that direction due to the lack of the Camaro, no particular good offering from Ford prior to 05, etc. There's gotta be a few owners of them who would like a great american pony car I would think and maybe some of them will be won over, I don't know. The diehard import performance guys probably wouldn't buy the Camaro no matter what it looked like, equating it to an old crude american car no matter what. Kinda like I wouldn't buy a Nissan Z car no matter what unless it was really, REALLY mind blowingly looks and awesome performance wise...


Hehe, I think I edited that bit out earlier, it was harsher than it is now. I think those comments hurt my 94 Z's feelings as well, lol. My opinion on the looks of them keeps going up and down. Half of the time I think it looks like a badass jet and the other half I can't figure out how they screwed up the proportions and design that bad... Maybe that is part of the reason I'm somewhat glad they went a little more "safe" with the design of the clay concept at least, staying more solidly with a kinda tried and true Camaro design...

 

I agree. I don't know why everyone keeps saying it's not retro. Mainly the greenhouse and the nose give it the 1st gen look, the rear fascia and sides can pass as a brand new modern car. But you can't get away from the recessed grille and headlamps, which screams retro. It's basically a modernized 1st gen.

There is a difference between being retro and having retro style cues. With this difference you can say that the clay is a half/half. The clay looks like a modernized 1st gen with massaged in modern styling to the sides and rear. But the styling elements of the retro half is VERY strong that it outweighs the modern styling cues and makes you think 1st gen instantly.

 

You cannot be serious? The '94 Mustang was Retro? In what far reaching defintion? The C6 having as much in common with the C3? What rose colored glasses are you looking at the world through? The pontoon fenders of the '30 which the PTC and HHR draw their inspiration are 'futuristic'? I giuess if your'e living in the past.

I've never heard, on this board or outside, the 300 being compared to 1950's styling. I have heard countless comparo's to Bentleys, which is hardly a retro design.

What justifies retro may well be a peresonal view, but IMO your trying a bit too hard to justify un-original designs as the second coming of automotove Valhalla.

The new 'Stang is a spitting image of a '68 with alot of interior and exterior features designed detail for detail off the original. The same for the what we saw in the leaked Camaro pics, and the biggest offender of them all the Challenger (which somehow in it's reincarnation got a worse interior than the original ).

Sure all three will stick out from the crowd, so does a person in a bunny suit. IMO it would be much more adantageous to bring out a breakthrough design that is fresh and original than add to the flood of uninspired throwbacks (there, I found a new word for retro). History, recent and further back, is filled with proven examples of this. Or maybe I just give the American buying public a bit too much credit......

 

what I love is everyone was screaming its gotta look like a Camaro.

My question is..WHAT IS A CAMARO SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE???

Well GM answered that. Is it retro? go look at the Challenger concept and tell me the Camaro is retro. No Camaro is what we see when we look at that car.

Everyone wants americans to build cars like they used to, well they are and then in the same breath they scream RETRO..well Olds did have some great cars with modern american styling and look where they are..

cant please everyone, but history is what will sell these cars, the 300's, the stangs, and Camaro's

you park a 4th gen next to a 1st gen. WHAT IS THE SAME? NOTHING!
But yet they are both Camaro, right?

Call it what you want, retro heritage whatever I call it american car design.
sure they are taking a page out of thier history books but gotta take a step back to take a step forward, cus as in my sig. American car companies cannot build an Import, build what we know how to build an American car.
Heck were not trying to copy Toyotas trucks are we no we know how to build trucks. Same thing for cars, learn how to make the cars that the people loved and I guess thats where the retro comes in. Gotta get them to embrace the cars again, the style the pasion and the idea that american cars are everyting we remembered and alot more now.

 

OK, but I think it's just as easy to say 'You've got to take a step backwards to take a step forward'

There was no backwards in steps between the huge leaps from the first-to-second-tothrid gens. No step backwards in the '93 LH cars, or original Minivan, or the '83 AeroBird.

 

No, Scott already squashed that rumor.

 

Excellent points!

 

Why does everyone think that the only way to build better cars and regain the American automotive prestige is to copy designs from the past? That makes little sense if you think about it. You turn to the past when you have lost faith in the future. All these retro designs say to me is "we can't cut it in the market with our current cars so lets dredge up the past and try to rely on vehicles that once were great". It's almost like a defeatist attitude.

For the people who think retro is great and we should look to the past to find our "souls" again, where does the "looking back" stop? Do we have a whole line-up of retro vehicles? Ditch the Cobalt and bring back the Vega? Make the Corvette look like a little cruiser ala 50's Vette? Impala with fins?

YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A RETRO DESIGN IN ORDER TO HAVE AN EXCITING CAR THAT CATCHES THE ATTENTION AND HEARTS (and wallets) OF THE BUYING PUBLIC!

It's been done for over 100 years and I am betting that it is still possible.

 

You say lost faith in the future, I dont see it that way. Why reinvent the wheel? I'd rather a name plate fade away than be slapped on some clapped out imitation euro or asian wanna-be with the only thing in common with past iterations being V8 and RWD. I like cars that display a strong sense of automotive DNA.

 

No one is doing an exact copy and I think it far more difficult then you think to combine classic styling on a modern chassis and meet all the strict regulations that didnt exist back in the day.

I diagree, you dont turn to the past if you lost faith in the "future" you only look to the past for education because you want a 'future' to look forward too. I agree that people can focus on the past too much and there's a saying I like that sums it up: "You can't play today's game on yesterday's score".

I don't want to relive the past, but I also don't want to through the baby out with the bath water either.


History is the best judge of beauty and not all the cars in the past are considered beautiful and worthy of being reinterpeted within the constructs of our modern culture.

True, but there is no need to draw a line in the sand and say 'NO RETRO' either. The auto industry is large enough to offer multiple styling themes to meet the needs of their customers.

I agree 100%. But if you are making ugly (but very reliable) cars that you have to give away to clear dealers lots then its time rethink what you are doing. I just want to see those great design elements brought back into modern designs and Im truly optimistic that a true-new American style can result in the merging technological advancements of today with the artistic creations of the past to make a future that will make us all happy.

 

I think it would be fine to have one retro car in the GM line-up for Chevrolet only. A retro car makes no sense in any of the other brands except maybe Pontiac with the GTO. So for Chevrolet that means that the retro car could be the SSR or HHR but now you are looking at 3 retro cars in the line-up and it is starting to get a little silly. If the Mustang wasn't retro, then I could understand a retro Camaro. I wouldn't like it but I could understand. Now, with both the Mustang and Challenger doing the retro thing first, it is a bit rediculus and sad with the Camaro following like this. I really want to like the Camaro, but I can't. I have only owned Camaro's and I was really looking to buy my first brand new Camaro but I may go for the GTO or Corvette now.

One way to create exciting and desirable designs again is to let the designers do thier job and let them loose. Don't play it so safe. The auto industry is starting to do this and it seems GM is too. The auto designers are some of the most talented in the world and they are capable of great things, they just need to be allowed to do so.

How about this: What would have happened if GM said "let's bring in some designs from the past for Cadillac's resurgence"? It would not have worked. You wouldn't have the bold new look of Cadillac and would probably have been stuck with the same older demographic buying thier vehicles. There would not have been the huge buzz about the new face of Cadillac and the whole world would not have taken notice. I don't see Cadillac trying to convice everyone that they are a new company ready to compete with anyone with new world class vehicles with designs from 30 or 40 years ago. Who would take them seriously? How would this lure import buyers? The Camaro needs to lure import buyers. How is this going to lure import buyers?

I'm saying that every design has to be 100% new because for certain vehicles, that would be a mistake. That includes the Corvette, GTO, maybe Impala, and of course, the Camaro. The name plates that are legends and have spanned many years should have some traces of the past but have a very modern and progressive look. One touch that I think is really nice is the portholes on Buicks. I think that is a great styling element and it connects and identifies the cars to the past without being retro. Just look to the Corvette for the perfect example of design touches from the past but staying modern and not going down the road of retro.