I know its not small...hence it being a "mid sized" car. I dont want a "small" Camaro. Midsized is what I want, and what GM needs to make.

The 300 and other 4dr supercars would be sedans or muscle sedans. M3 could be part of the "Muslce Coupe" catagory. We cant keep grouping cars into these small segments. The Pony car and Muscle car should merge into one group, and then we wont have to worry about what things make one car a muscle car and one a pony car.

 

You said that the GTO is "very small." Well, whatever.....doesn't matter.

If you want a midsized car, why not just buy a GTO...instead of wanting the Camaro to morph into an intermediate?

 

But... you just said yourself the previous Camaro was even bigger than the GTO, and the 3rd Gen was about the same... it's not really "morphing" into anything... it would be staying what it should be, and not become a small tiny car.

 

If the Camaro is smaller then a GTO, its not going to do well. I want my cake and eat it too. I want a mid sized coupe with a big V8, great handling, and with good looks. The GTO does that quite well. Rake the windshield, add more agressive body pannels, and that should be the Camaro. 400hp and seats 4.

The Camaro going from H2 size to G35 size would indeed be "morphing".

 

I think people are too hung up on sheer numbers as far as length of a car goes, after all how many of you are primed to go down to the dealer in 2008 with your tape measurer looking for the 5th Gen?

185" is my ideal new Camaro length. But I've always said what's more important is how the car wears its length and how it allows for interior packaging. If it looks fantastic I'm not going to go bonkers if the car is, say 189". Make the backseat more friendly (but not large Buick friendly) and tighten up the look with shorter overhangs. That's all I'm really asking for. If that makes me a "non-descriminating pony car enthusiast" then so be it.

 

Im not worried about numbers, but visualy I know whats too big or too small. G35 would be too small, 4th gen would be too big.
GTO looks to be just the right size. long wheel base for great interior room, fore and aft. After sitting in, walking around, and driving the GTO, this is the package Id like to see.

 

Gee Darth...you must LUUUUUUUUUUUUV to see me type! Admit it!

I've said...oh, I don't know...about a MILLION times that the 4th gen was too big. And although the 3rd gen had contemporary dimensions in 1982...it too was too big by the end of it's run.

Doing the things that created failure in the past...will give you the same results in the future.

 

First off, I am a big fan of the 4th gen, so I'm not even remotely trashing the car, but I am trying to be pragmatic about what I think a future Camaro needs to be. In that vein, why shouldn't the Camaro shrink? As a package it was grossly oversized for what it was - an intermediate with about as much useable space as a compact - in fact it was classed as a compact. Obviously this approach lost its appeal somewhere along the lines since the car's widespread appeal took a nosedive after 96. By stepping back and returning the car to its pony car roots and general dimensions, even if it is GTO-sized can only be a positve thing, better still if the gas tank isn't in the trunk. The new GTO is effectively a ponycar by definition if you look at the dimensions, but yet, is still classed as an intermediate. How times have changed. Ponycars were originally built off compact class platforms. Now, the compacts are somewhat more compact. It would seem that traditional ponycar dimensions have remained fairly consistent as it turns out, while while everything else has shrunk to a large degree from their glory years in the 60s.

I know some here are clamoring for an evolutionary approach to the car but I'm not so sure that a 3rd/4th gen continuation would give the car any greater lease on or hope for an extended life.

Clearly the package has to be rethought without changing the essence of what the car was - and should be. If the car is indeed based on the Zeta platform and if this car is fairly far along the development path as those in the know would seem to suggest, then wouldn't switching gears and dropping Camaro on the Kappa platform - effectively starting over- push unveiling the car farther into the future? It's already an excruciating wait, is it not?

 

 

I think it's over simplifying the matter by pinning it solely, or even the majority of it, on the fact that some may think the car was too big on exterior dimensions...

 

...but factor in the short wheelbase and small interior...

 

I agree totally that the short wheelbase and large overhangs were not the best trait of the car...

I have no problem with the new car pushing the wheels to the corners...

But, we all know there were many many issues that collectively contributed to the demise of the car... I think overall exterior size, by itself, would have to be a very very small part of that... now, use (or lack there of) of that size... that I can agree with.

 

How do you figure that....this, I've got to hear!

Repeat after me..... GTO, GTO, GTO. You want a GTO my friend...NOT a Camaro.

Correction: The last Camaro was BIGGER than an H2.
And the next Camaro needs to be quite abit different than the last, for it not to have a "failure to thrive".
Let's use this "hiatus" time wisely.

 

That's all you needed to say. The Camaro never was and never should be a mid size. That is why us have muscle cars and pony cars.

What you described is a mid size muscle car, not a Camaro.

 

Out of curiosity... what do you size folks classify Fiero as? Pony car?