New Camaro Is Now Officially A Go

On 7 Aug 2006 16:28:13 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote something wonderfully witty:

Wow two V-8's and a V-6 all wedged into the same damn car. Ought to be a real shit screamer. Is it going to be a front engine, mid engine & rear engine configuration? :) "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." -- Alexander Tyler

hopefully it will not have a torque limiter on it like the 2005-2006 does. Shameful.

That would *almost* put the Jeep Hurricane concept to shame in terms of mechanical complexity... :)

GM will screw it up, trust me.

These days I believe GM could screw up a cast iron cannon ball.

Here is my predication:

They will make the V6 a wheezer motor.

The big V8 will be grossly overpriced.

The entry models will be so stripped of options they will turn off people from the get go (ie: You mean power windows;door locks is an option?)

They will make the inside like an old fart car OR they will try to go retro and pick the absolute worst Camaro's to copy (1982 F bodies in my book).

They will price the car way too high. If a Cobalt SS is about $25k, what is a V8 Camaro going to cost?

....and so forth

GM needs to flush their design department right down the sewer. The Cobalt is one of the better models, but those Monte' SS cars? Yikes!! Everything else sucks. Impala yuk Malibu double yuk

Drive through a GM dealers lot and it looks like a trip to a rental car place.

One of the biggest reasons the new Mustang has been a sales success is that even the entry model is a well equipped, nicely done car.

The options are more or less reasonably priced and packaged although I feel the interior upgrade package should be part of the Pony Package, anyway.

GM is going to hose the whole thing.

You watch and see.

BTW I'm a GM guy, but there is a Ford Mustang in my very near future. Only Ford I ever owned was an 87 3.8l T-bird, don't ask. I'm giving Ford another chance because I like the Stang and always wanted one. I refuse to give my hard earned money to a rice burner. I don't fit in most of them anyway :)

Willy wrote: >

I hope I can get the V8 w/o power windows/locks! But, like everything else, it'll be overoptioned.

Thanks, Scott

Is it true all Honda cars now have power windows?

Al

Lest SOME of you forget why the model was discontinued in the first place..

1. Tone down the 'aggressive' look on the nose.

1. 225 HP V6

2. ALL Convenience options: PW, PL, PM, Rear Defrost

If the 'seccetaries' dont buy it, it will fail AGAIN for the same reason!

I completely agree. GM should spend 95% of its design effort toward making the base model competitive with the base Mustang and some of the sporty foreign models. It's easy to make a car fast but not so easy to make it desirable to the masses.

Not if the Corvette boys have a hand in it.

I doubt it'll be any worse than the Mustang's V6.

All they have to do is get it under the $40k-$41k the GT500 is going for which shouldn't be hard considering the Vette's V8 is already bought and paid for and doesn't require a blower/intercooler.

I see no evidence of this in GM's current lineup or the previous generation Camaro. If anything, IMO, GM tends to go overboard with options.

Their inspiration was the '67-'69 models. And from the photos it looks like they'll use that interior design as a base. Let's just hope they don't use the old-style gauges Ford used on the Mustang.

I'll guess and say the base V8 will sticker at about $26K and the big dog V8 will sticker about $33K-$35K.

Agreed.

But the Vette, Caddys and Hummers are all lookers.

The same can be said of Toyota and Ford

It would be better with the new 3.5 liter V6.

GM does have a history of not finishing the job -- i.e. SSR, Solstice (still needs works) and previous-generation F-bodies.

But, hey, let's be happy they're building Camaros again! Patrick

I don't think the camaro is going to have the clout to stop bean counters and marketeers and general stupidity the way corvette does.

I have seen that 100,000/yr number also, and there is no way they can hit it, year after year after year. To sell that many cars requires a plain vanilla, lowest common denominator approach. The Crapmaro concept misses that target for at least two reasons -- the styling is ridiculously cartoonish, and it sits too low for comfortable use as a daily driver by big fat Americans (male AND female). At the very least Chevy should buy a Mustang and take a tape measure to it and copy, to the 1/4 inch, every important dimension.

180 Out

I don't see them selling more then 100k cars past the first year even if that is possible. With the revised 2009 Mustang looking more like the aggressive '69-70 Stang, a new Dodge coming out, and the new GTO on same platform as the Camaro that's allot of competition.

GM couldn't sell 100k Camaro/ Firebirds combined let alone one flavor. If they would only market these two cars again as a one two punch they might succeed 100k altogether. For instance the cars were to similar and competing with each other. The Camaro should be raw power, moderate looks, straight axle, less costly. Trans Am raw power, better handling, IRS, exciting looks, more costly. Hmm might be nice if Ford did the same with the Mustang and Cougar? Also why not make the GTO almost on par with the Vette rather then another Pony car? It already shares the same engine and might increase at least another 10-15k cars on that platform. And for crying out loud make the Vette a Mid engine car like they've discussed since 1975! Then for sure they wont be competing within. I hope someone from GM and Ford is listening cause I am not done talking lol.

Next rising gas prices will certainly have adverse effects on this market segment. Could you imagine what higher EPA standards (example CAFE) in the nearer future might do? I sadly have a funny feeling that with rising gas prices we will see a repeat on what happened to big block cars in the 70's and Ford might have it right with sticking with a 4.6L and forget the cubic engine war as GM/ Chrysler Scramble for a smaller more economical engine. All Ford will need to do is put their cars on a diet and weigh about 15-20% less.

Nick

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote: >

You can spend almost $40K on a TrailBlazer SS, but that doesn't mean you can't get a Tahoe for $34K. Chevy will need to price it in the ballpark of the Mustang GT, so I would agree that $26-27K for the base V8 is a good range.

I'm curious what V8s they would use. I assume the higher model would use a "detuned" (only on paper) LS2. I think they should use an AFM 5.3 (or similar) for the base V8, behind an optional 6-speed manual, and really get awesome mileage numbers while making 320-hp or more.

Thanks, Scott

"Nicholas Anthony" wrote

What? Where'd that come from? The only thing I've heard is that there will be an update. Where did that specific info come from?

Had the same question... did some googling all I turned up was a rather stylized sketch that could have come from anywhere. Kind looks like it has some influence from the ~1967-8 show cars and concepts for '69...

"Brent P" wrote

Yech!! I still like the original concept introduced 4 years ago better.

Well,

Just check the stock price of GM and Toyota on hte NYSE. that says it all. in my mind, it is ALL about quality. GM is building crappy cars. check out a Consumer Reports magazine. say what you want about the magazine, but GM cannot construct a safe reliable vehicle at this stage. ever wonder why a 5 yera old camry sells for more than a 2 year old Alero? because a toyota with 75000 miles will have fewer problems than a GM product when it is new. seeing that GM is bleeding losses, i doubt that they can produce a high quality Camaro that can compete with well-built sports cars that sell well, and decent gas milage (Miata, the Scion coupe and RSX acura).

i have owned 3 stangs (93 LX, 96 Gt and a 01 GT conv.), and a Maro (98 z28 m6). The only the 93 and that 01 ran well. the 96 blew out the upper intake, and the camaro was a total mess of factory defects. GM refused to repair the Camaro's defects under the warranty until i threatened to go to court. MY 93 was a stripped 5L lx and had few options - so nothing much broke on it. mind you with only 3000 miles on it, the innerds of the rear ax were bent and had to be totally redone. this was a 2500$ job under warranty. my 01 GT's was a nice car, and drove well. But keep this in mind, all you had to do was grab the door handle of the 96 or 01 on the outside or pull the door shut on the inside and you can feel cheap plastic flexing and creeking. the bottom line, these were all nice cars, but built in a cheap flimsy way. if a loyal Miata owner tests a camaro with sad plastic handles like that, there is now way they will gamble on a GM car with garbage reliability.

If GM makes a camaro, they better build a reliable car that hints that quality was an objective. i like look and nostalgia of the "old" 69 design (with is a beautiful car), but those old cars were also really poorly built. bad quality is something that GM should be actively trying to help those buyers to forget.

Harry in montreal

Harry in Montreal wrote: >

Quality? Are we thinking about the same Toyota? In 2005, industry wide recalls slight dropped, but Toyota's recalls more than *doubled*. Quality?!

Thanks, Scott

Scott, you are correct - toyota's recalls have increased. what is the number one selling car in america? did you see that JD power has named lexus #1 for quality? Consumer reports loves all toyotas except the useless solara? Have you owned or driven both? i sold my 1998 4 runner to a guy on the phone sight-unseen with 150000 miles on it for $7k. he exported it to africa. over the 7 years i had it, i just did hte oil, lubes and the brake pads and shoes once. only once. that is quality. it never once left me stranded - it always ran nicely. it was a sick truck. if i had bought a GM blazer, do you think i would have been as satisfied? when the explorer had their issues with their tires, toyota sent me a letter to voluntarily replace all the springs on the truck for free to make the ride smoother and improve emergency handling. i never received something like that with any of my ford or GM products. keep in mind that Ford cruise control modules have been burning down homes for years, and only now they are recalling them. its sad. when you buy a toyota, you'll understand. dont be influenced by some dumb media outlets saying that toyota's quality is slipping, when their design and initial quality is incomparable to the big 3. going back to the original post, i would buy another stang or camaro, or even the challenger, but only when they get their act together and build a quality product. it seems that with the price of cars today, if i dump

30k on a car, i would like to have a reliable ride for 7 years. GM and Ford aim for about three. that is pretty weak. they have lost me as a customer, and i am not alone.

Harry in montreal Had: 93Lx, 96GT, 01GT, 98 Z28 mm6. Now: a house and a subway.