i was thinking about how all these people say they want all these options and everything (power seats, onstar, nicer interior, etc.) and these are like big dollar items
well does keeping the firebird dead help to bring any of these to the market on the F5 and still keep it at a reasonable price?
personally i think we're envying all the stuff other cars have (higher price cars like cts, etc.) by saying we want all this stuff, but could the firebird staying dead help in gettin all this?

 

What I mean is that the first gens pretty much used all the same parts with exceptions such as grilles, taillights, etc. - simple items.

It was not until the 2nd - 4th Gens where the cars really moved in different directions in body metal & interiors, thus creating complexity.

However -

It seems to me that even given the different sheet metal & trim, that there would have to be some economies of scale regarding the platform itself as you would have more cars total to split it by.

Kinda depends on how Pontiac/GM view the GTO - if Chevy does not get a revamped Chevelle type car, the keeping the F exclusive to Chevy kinda makes sense.

That's my theory - hopefully someone in the know will chime in.


Britt

 

Kill it. At least for now, don't bring it back unless the 5th gen proves to be successful.

P.S. I really dislike the term "F5".

 

Not sure if I follow you here.

Items like power seats, OnStar, and such are standard parts bin item, meaning with minimal if any minor changes, it's the same piece that's on other GM cars with that same feature, from Saturn to Cadillac. Adding it to a particular car isn't a big dollar item. Car makers make a great deal of money when you load your car up with options that actually cost them very little to make.

As far as keeping Firebird dead, I'm pretty indifferent on that. On one hand, Firebird hasn't sold in impressive numbers for years. If I'm not mistaken, even the Corvette's been outselling them for most of it's last 10 years. On the flip side, it doesn't cost much or take much effort to make a Firebird out of a Camaro.

The one ridiculous thing about Firebird was that it had at least 4 model levels, at least 2 front ends, 2 rear bumpers, at least 2 separate interior trim levels, and finally 3 separate hoods, while normally selling less than 2,000 cars per month, yet although Camaro normally sold 3,000+ per month, getting anyone to accept the idea of something as simple as a mid-level trim model creates images of the apocolypse in some people, both here and at Chevy.

Pretty bizzare group.

Again, I don't understand why killing the Firebird has any bearing on this. Nothing is being proposed that already won't be on the car as an option group, beyond a few interior trim pieces.

 

Huh?

You got that all wrong skippy!

The first-second gens had completely different drivetrains, as well as sheetmetal, trim... etc. ; whereas the 3rd-4th gens were basically the same content in a different wrapper. (The TurboTA being the exception.)

By the end 4th generation, the only differences between Camaro & Firebird were cosmetic.

 

what im trying to relay (it might be a stupid, i'm not totally sure) is that everybody wants to keep the price down right?
there are some people that wouldnt mind paying more, but they still want it to be cheap (in dollars, not quality)
would the firebird staying dead, help keep the cost down, at all?

the part about the options was that i was under the impression that adding hud, onstar, etc. was more expensive than you make it out to be. and i was thinking if the firebird stayed dead, it would help to keep the price down on camaros. so maybe the options part was relevant, maybe not.

get back at me if i'm still not clear
i dont know if i make sense to myself right now

 

Although the Firebird wasn't as popular as the Camaro, we have another thread that's talking about increasing sales across the board. How can we afford to drop Firebird owners?

Interior/exterior differences were very important for some, since the Firebird models cost more yet many were still sold. I, for one, wouldn't have bought a 3rd/4th gen Camaro. I preferred the 1st gen Camaro looks, but the 3rd gen interior just plain sucked and the 4th gen interior/plain jane exterior were just plain uninspiring. The WS6 T/A from '98-'02 had muscular aggressive appearance that carried on the muscle car styling tradition. Both Camaro/Firebird had the performance part down pat.

Styling doesn't matter? How are you planning to increase sales when you're ignoring the taste of 40% of 4th gen buyers.

 

But, during the time of the first & thru most of the 2nd gen each make had it's own engines - not the case anymore w/ corporate engines.

The 2nd, 3rd, & 4th gens had different sheetmetal & interiors.

As far as the 1st gen, Poncho got in the game late and was pretty much stuck w/ the Chevy sheet metal, although they were able to differentiate it thru different hoods, grilles, & taillights.

My point is that if you are using the same basic chassis, and chose to offer a Firebird again you could keep most of the exterior metal the same and spread the cost across a greater qty. of vehicles.

Just a thought.


Britt

 

I think you will see a Firebird if the right car comes along...if we get a GTO based Camaro it won't happen. If the Camaro ends up on another pltform then you options open. Also there is that Solstice thing that could get the name.

 

Actually there was much more that was different. The only things the same were the roof section, doors, hood cowl and truck lid. Bumpers, hood, front & rear quarters, rear valence, interior, spoilers... were all Pontiac unique.

I understand your point, however your making it sound like the first gen Firebirds were merely rebadged Chevies, when in fact they were just as far apart as the second gens. Whereas in the 3rd and 4th generation Pontiac started using Chevrolet engines in the Firebird. (Just a Camaro in a different wrapper.)

As far as the premise of this thread though... it does actually help Camaro more financially if the Firebird stays dead, mainly because it reduces R&D and design costs required to make two separate versions of the "F-body".

Furthermore, as long as Pontiac is sinking their money into GTO, there is going to be a better chance for Chevrolet to develop a similar RWD V8 2+2 coupe for the same target audience... especially if the GTO is successful from a sales standpoint. (I honestly think Chevy might be waiting to see how well advance sales of the GTO go, before deciding on their own version of the Monaro/GTO called Chevelle SS.)

 

If Chevy isn't even sure if they can give us a RWD Monte and Camaro, why would Pontiac go with a GTO AND a Firebird?

As Pontiacs new image as a purveyor of sleek, sophisticated, clean designs, where the HELL would a Firebird fit in? Maybe if it didn't have a 4 foot tall rear spoiler or an anteater for a hood...

Sorry...wasn't a big fan of LS1 WS6s, AT ALL...when I ordered cars, I ordered Hawks if for no other reason than a normal hood!!!!!!

GTO fits better with Pontiac's mission. At the same time, Chevy may have the sales volume Pontiac lacks to justify both a Monte and a Camaro...I hope this happens...

 

Who said anything that sounded remotely like "styling doesn't matter"?

Think you are assuming that the next Camaro will automatically be unappealing.

Personal opinion? Firebird's quanity of less than 2,000 units per month doesn't justify a model onto itself (that's less than 2/3 of the Corvette's sold, so you can't claim they sold well), and most who would buy one, would go to Camaro or more likely, Corvette (there's less than a $10,000 difference). IMHO, Firebirds died with the 3rd gen.

In my other than personal opinion, although Firebird is barely more than a reskinned Camaro, it wouldn't cost much to do.