I think he was just talking about the V8 models: Z28-GT

 

I didn't imply limited editions.. but realistic expectations of what they would sell, year after year. I was hoping there would be a way to generate some profit. Instead of 2 cars(ala 4th gen fbod) built off the platform, 4 cars would be built off it....with enough parts shared. For example, suspension components would be shared for all 4, engines and tranny's would be used in other divisions, all the little things like window motors and buttons would be shared by other cars. Then all the seperate divisions would have to work on would be the details, which would distinguish the different varients from the others..



I guess my question is, can GM do this: Build a performace 2+2 platform, spin 4 differnet varients off, that go for $20k-35k+, that sell about 40,000 * 4 = 160,000 units total a year. and make a profit.


or is it just not feasable....?..unless they sell one car that would fill the Camaro's void, for $35k+, and have to sell 100,000 a year in order to make money?



IMHO, the Camaro's price went up, cause GM knew they could do it anyways, and had no plans in keeping the line alive in the future anyways, beacuse GM figured they could make MORE money concentrating their efforts on other things. But thats just my speculation based on hunches.

 

If that is the case, lack of a mid-range car, then perhaps they need to offer something along of line of the s/c 3800 (using available engines now) as the 240hp range car... but then I guess the insurance issue comes up again... If that is the case, just offer the S/C 'kit' through the dealers like was suggested for the 4-cylinder...

But I took it as the base car is what all the talk is about... otherwise, why even mention 4-bangers?

 

I don't mean to flame you guys, but most of you are awfully short sided. We are not what makes GM money. Do you own a truck, Malibu or Corvette?

(silence ensues)

GM has a pretty good idea of what sells and what puts bonuses in their pockets. You have no idea how much a I4 or I5 would sell over a V8 model. Not everyone can afford the insurance on these things, or at least they think they cannot. Insurance is not only based on HP, but vehicle history, and availability and price of parts. Also, there is a mystique (is that the right word?) about a RWD car. My parents wouldn't let me get a Camaro when I was looking for a new car (used). Rather, I picked up a I4 Eclipse that was actually within fifteen dollars a month on insurance compared to the Camaro. (And trust me, I wouldn't have settled for a V6)

The I4 CAN sell people, and it would not hurt the image. As long as GM puts out some good aftermarket stuff so all the kiddies can customize their car, then it will sell probably as good as the V6 model. Make it look a little different than the V8 model, and what do you care?

Sometimes I feel that people who own a F-bod, or are hard-core enthusiasts forget what it takes to sell vehicles. The V8 community is the minority, people. Especially those under 25. GM has tried to lure potential Camaro/Firebird customers (under a certain age) to not buy the car, because they didn't believe they could afford it. They pointed them to the Cavalier/Sunfire. I have actually seen a young man (19, cash in hand) be refused to be sold a Z28 back in 1996. I pointed him to another dealer and he got what he wanted. My point is it happens. Some people get that response from a dealer/manufacturer and will not buy that car period. GM needs a bit more of a hook. 'Hey kids, come on in and buy a sporty Camaro. Cheap insurance! Parents will love it! And when you are ready to step up with the insurance and power, come on back in and check out our 12-sec Z28s. We'll give you a great trade-in.'


Some people may not understand, but I know what I speak.

 

As I said in another thread day before yesterday, its debateable that Mustang and Camaro were even in the same class in the end. One was a quick, lively & fun car, the other was a low slung, serious land missile.

The market for fun lively cars is larger than land missiles.

 

I really have no problem with a base 4 cylinder engine, one that can perform repectfully and in the neighborhood of the 4th gen base car (obviously weight closer to 3000 than today's car). The availability of in house poweradder packages and parts would surely breathe new life into the car and attract the younger market. It is also my opinion that if this car were to be offered, you'd have to be very aggressive in it's pricing, near $16-17k, with the turbo/sc package installed approximating $20k. This would put it in good standing with buyers shopping against a comparably priced Neon SRT-4, etc.

As to whether this would damage the image of Camaro, I don't feel it would. As long as a high-performing V8 is continued to be offered, there shouldn't be any question of the Camaros intentions. This is not as big a leap as say, offering a V6 version of the Corvette alongside the V8--a big no-no, especially if meant to be a "Billy Bob" model. Give the Billy Bob's a Camaro Z28 to buy and Billy Bob Jr's a turbo kit of their base Camaro.

If a 4 cylinder (and implied more affordable than today's base) model reduces insurance rates, breaks the dinosaur and too powerful-to-drive image, and still allows for a top V8 model to be offered--where's the loss? You just end up with more people enjoying Camaros of all levels. I would imagine most people who buy base cars are looking for the look of the Camaro, but more livable in all dimensions (and still have respectable performance). Where is this scenario going to disappoint or alienate these buyers? (A scenario, that I might add, would likely get the Camaro to market quicker to attract the import buyers Cavalier isn't).

I think it's refreshing to hear so much interest in this topic, especially from the Fbodfather himself.

 

Bulldog is onto something. As much as it sickens me to say it, a really cheap I4 base car might be a good way to get younger buyers hooked on Camaro, with the hopes that they upgrade to a V8 model a few years down the road. It also helps them capture a GM customer for life, just like the Ricers that buy civics...when they grow up, get married and are looking for a minivan or a sedan, they will most likely stick with Honda.

But honestly, a V6 coupe should be able to perform the same role if its executed correctly.

 

If an I4 in a Camaro can become a successful sales and image tool...then I say USE IT!

No one has ever looked down on a BMW M3........ just because other 3 series versions had 4 cylinders, (let alone deisel I4's and I6's). All of them are fun desirable cars in their own way.

And on the other hand...I've never heard anyone say, "WOW! I've got to go buy a Camaro! It comes with a V6!"

 

But is dropping some cheap 4-cylinder going to:

A) Drop the price that much.
B) Not make the car a bit of a joke.
C) Appeal to the people they are shooting for anyway, I mean, "Ricer-Boys" hate Camaros as much as many "Camaro-Boys" hate Civics... I just don't see this doing much good at all.

Stick with the V6... GM has plenty of them to choose from... and you can do all the same stuff to a six that you can to a 4...


Why does Camaro need to go after this market anyway? Cavalier, Saturn, Vibe, etc etc ect... there's a laundry list of GM cars that can do this without doing something that will make Camaro look like some econobox by offering a 4-banger...

 

Those are good points and I think it brings us back around to the point that its not cost effective to have more than two engines, so we are going to get a v8 and a v6 and that's going to be it.

But let me clarify I wasn't suggesting Ricer kids would buy the car, what it would do is open up the Camaro in terms of affordability to young persons interested in rear drive domestic coupes who otherwise would not be able to afford one. The other downside is it might hurt resale value, since more persons would be able to buy one new instead of settling for a couple of years old used Camaro. There's that debate between buying a new V6 or I4 vs a used v8 for the same price.

Now, offering dealer installed packages and serious aftermarket support for the V6ers would still help grow the number of "enthusiasts" who might trade up eventually.

I'd still like to see GM offer the same aftermarket support that Ford does. WHen you look at the Mod motor Mustangs, the aftermarket is thin...exhaust and pullies are about it. But Ford puts out a lot of factory backed parts. We GM guys benefit from a pretty large number of aftermarket companies putting out 4th gen goodies (espeically LS1 vs. ford 4.6s), but would it kill GM to put out more than one aftermarket cam for the LS1? Give dealers a larger array of parts and packages to sell and find a way to let them do it competitively.

Imagine going in and shopping for a 5th gen and in the brochure is an insert from GM Perf. Parts with multiple parts and packages for both V6 and V8 models that you could literally take to the parts department and place an order.

 

Now you're talkin'!

 

Maybe this is a good place for the Saturn Sky?

Saturn is supposed to be the 'import fighter' anyway.... it would actually fit there... a small, RWD sporty car...

 

which is leading to what i originally said before...

okay, I'll shutup now.

 

I don't think there is a way to have a 4cyl. camaro and have it be respectable. The car is too big for that ie. over 3000 lbs. There is not a 4 banger available to provide enough power for even a base model. I am not just talking horse power numbers here, we can't forget the torque. Even with a blower, the numbers might not even equall that of a V6 so why have it when it will most likely cost more than the V6. The only reason that I see is that it might be seen as an engine for the ricer crowd and they can modify it from there but I still think it is a bad idea. Now I really like the idea of having a 6 with a blower option installed by the dealer or at least available by the dealer.

 

Agreed!

You still have the non-image buster (anything but a 4-banger) and still have the "strap-on" ( ) horsepower that Scott suggested offered by the dealer!


All without being an insurance problem.