One final note (before I head out and enjoy today's festivities (before Monterey becomes a car & tourist choked center it was last 4th of July).

Mark Reuss is now in charge of GMs Performance division.

Mark Reuss WAS executive director of operations for engineering and specialty vehicles a couple of years ago.

Let your speculation begin.

 

I really hope that the new Camaro does not go to a more upright sort of styling and driving position. I love my '97 Z/28...The way it looks, the driving position, the handling, (I guess we'll have to settle for struts on the new one...but in doing so I feel like their going backwards, but hey if it works, it works)... I find the car to be very comfortable and very liveable. The other thing is this car had better not go retro, I just feel like that's sort of a dead end road. Where do you go from there??? The Camaro has always been a beautifully designed car and I see no reason why GM can't come up with something original that looks awesome There's a reason the F-bodies have always been better then the Mustang and its time for GM to re-accert that dominance

Back to the driving position and all and it's usefullness as a daily driver, I find no problems with my car. If anything, it's too soft and the handling is too compromised for the sake of "ride quality". I mean I bought a Z/28, and if that designation means anything, (or is supposed to mean anything), it's handling. Anyone that goes out and buys one of these cars and then complains about the ride is out of their mind. If you want a cushy ride go buy a v6 'stang.

I just really hope that when the new Camaro comes out it's something that is clearly better then the 'stang, (as it has been in the past). I don't want it to be a Chevy Mustang. It should be good looking and evolutionary in design. It should be low, wide and very aggressive looking. When you sit in it should feel like your in the cockpit of a fighter jet. I've been in 'Stangs and am completely not into the upright position, high ride height, soft suspension tuning, and the less than adequate handling that comes along with it.

Sorry for the rant everyone, just had to get that out. And so you know this is comming from a 17 yr. old, so my youth could be clouding my judgement...But I don't think so

 

I disagree, why can't we have both?
We need to have an everyday comfy car that can also melt the tires and handle great. The last thing we need is to hand Ford more sales.


The points your making are the main reasons the 4th gen didnt cut it.

 

I do realize that...That's why I put in the last part, lol. On the same note though, I think my car is more comfy than my mom's '02 explorer, the '95 mazda 626 we have, my dad's '05 impreza rs, my friend's '96 gt, my other friend's '92 5.0 gt, and my uncle's '96 gt...Maybe I'm just to busy having fun with it to realize how uncomfortable it is But really I feel that if it is neccesary to make them a "softer" car, that should be an option, they had better not make a Z/28 that rides soft I don't have a problem with them making a Camaro that is more aggreeable to a larger majority of people, but on the same note the platform it's built on should not be compromised to achieve that. Also, from what I've seen from the GTO that should be the car people look at as a comfortable, liveable daily driver. Do we really want a "cushy" Camaro

On the same note though, most of my friends get in my car and are like yeah it's fast, yeah it handles good, yeah it's cool looking...But not many of them actually want one, which is beyond me...Most of them would rather drive some import They generally come away sayin' that they like the car for me but it's a bit to rough, a bit to crude and a bit to compromised in it's design for them to want one....I guess I am just way over on the enthusiast end of the spectrum that doesn't equal good sales for a company

 

Reuss clearly pointed out in the interview that for a Chevy coupe to be successful, it would need to follow the Mustang "formula". He even suggested that the best way would be to follow history and modify an existing platform just like they did with the original Camaro. Enter Sigma and Kappa.

Yes Kappa. GM-NA isn't stupid. To think they did not notice all the public support over a Kappa based Camaro after Holden unvailed the Torana concept would be selling them short. If Zeta was too tall (upright) for Camaro, then perhaps it was good enough for GTO and a Chevy twin. Reuss already pointed out that a powerplant similar to the LS7 would fit in the Solstice. That means they've most likely already successfully shoehorned an LS2 into one. The only problem is the added weight ruins the Solstice as a two seater sports car. However, a stretched Torana sized coupe might not have the same problems.

So why all the talk about a modified Sigma? Because there are actually two Chevrolet coupes! Remember a while back I mentioned a friend of a friend had seen the Camaro concept? Remember when I said he was told there would also be another Chevy RWD coupe? This second coupe and its GTO sister car would live on a modified Sigma platform.

Note: This is all pure speculation on my part based upon what information is already out there as public information. You just need to put two and two together.

 

You mean like those Caddys that are smoking the competition in GT racing?

 

You know what I mean And I thought about that comment right after I posted it, thought about their recent racing success and I changed it, lol...

 

Must..........resist...........the...............n eener neener.............urge.

Ok. I'm alright.

slayerxxx213....You can have a great handling car and still have a more upright seating position. The "laid back" seating/ride height was my #1 biggest complaint with my 99 T/A. I understand some folks like it, but I didn't, and I think the "mainstream" has similar opinions.

I bring up "mainstream" soley because it has to appeal to a large audience in order to survive.

 

With Sigma II just around the corner...I am pretty sure the obstacles that Cadillac posed as far as keeping Sigma exclusive to them are no longer there. It is a lot like DCX does passing old versions of Mercedes platforms down to Chrylsers. You basically get two product cycles out of one platform. Quite a bit of work was done a long time ago as to finding a way to make Sigma work for a Camaro..so one could assume that most of the engineering is done, and basically testing, tooling, etc is all that is left. The styling thme has been done for years pretty much..though it is being constantly tweaked. That would lead one to conclude that since the CAW issue should be out the way soon....the only other major step for a approval is showing the car on the show circuit. If there is any opposition to the Camaro's business case...I am pretty sure that a concept lighting the NAIAS on fire would shut them up. That is how Lutz was able to push Solstice through....

On a side note...remember the talk of two front ends...one sleek, and one retro. Then they decided to use only one....
I wonder which won out

Speaking of styling. IMO I don't mind a car with heritage styling themes. The 99+ Mustangs are what I mean in refering to this. It has several themes that pointed to past Mustangs (double hump interior, grille, etc). I thought that was cool. What I don't want to see is the Camaro follow after the 2005+ Mustang and basically be a caricature of a 67 Mustang. I guess time will tell..

 

I think we really need to get off of this dual RWD coupe parallel program theory.

 

We still have a Monte Carlo that's essentially hanging in the wind that had a minor revision with the expectation that the Zeta coupe was going to replace it.

I wouldn't dismiss dual RWD coupes just yet.

 

Hey, for my part I apologize for any fueling of the "dual coupe conspiracy theory". As I now recall (and as Brandon pointed out), there were supposedly two styling variations - one retro; one modern. That, the GTO/Camaro Zeta-mates and the sport-bike I vs II analogy misled me to remember two coupes - as in same car, two different platforms. I erred....

Like Brandon, I can't wait to see which variation won out. I'm rooting for modern with some heritage touches but not necessarily an evolution of the 3rd/4th generation car. Let's move on, please. There's room for a modern, forward thinking design without continuing with that one - and still have the car reek of Camaro-ness. Don't get me wrong, I do love the 4th gen especially the TA, but.... after a 3 year break and counting......

For the record, I will be disappointed if indeed the Camaro comes back with a strut front end instead of an SLA arrangement. I still think the Sigma SLA is a development of the 4th gen SLA. So why can't we have that? A nice heritage cue. I can live with a Salisbury rear-end but reverting to struts up front, well..... we don't have to copy the Mustang to that degree now, do we?

 

I am really hoping that it's the sleek or modern, (however you want to put it), design that won out. Also, if it was an evolution of the 4th gens, I wouldn't be complaining. I really don't think a retro Camaro is a good idea, retro cues yes...complete 1st. gen rip-off, no thanks. I'm sure it could be sweet but that should be left to the Ford guys...Also, I hope they don't go backwards w/ the front suspension set-up....This is probably all very wishful thinking

Also, I like that "laidback" seating position and I realize that has very little effect on the actual handling of the car but it sure does give it a cool feel when your driving

 

Here's another voice from the past who still believes in two "sport bikes" for Chevy.


and an El CaminoSS too.

 

I second that.