Camaro to Die - Again

24 minutes ago, dfelt said:

I think a 3yr refresh with clean sheet new model every 6 years is a doable solution.

Which is pretty close to the timelines of the 5th and 6th gen Camaros, and the current Mustang. 

Yet Dodge is teasing us on what is clearly a Wide Body AWD SRT Hellcat! 

Hello GM you listening to what the Competition is doing?

45 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Yet Dodge is teasing us on what is clearly a Wide Body AWD SRT Hellcat! 

Hello GM you listening to what the Competition is doing?

 

Way cool.  But GM doesn’t care, since they have 57 flavors of FWD/AWD transverse engine CUVs with despair gray interiors.  

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

Yet Dodge is teasing us on what is clearly a Wide Body AWD SRT Hellcat! 

Hello GM you listening to what the Competition is doing?

 

Of all the issues facing the Camaro, performance has not been one of them. I personally would take the Challenger over the other two but it is silly to act like Chevy hasn’t played the performance card with the Camaro. The problem has always been its other glaring weaknesses, the biggest being pricing and a pedestrian interior. Notice I didn’t bring up the view from the inside. I’m 5’10” and had no more of a problem seeing out of it than I did with the Mustang. I get that I’m in the minority but I do feel that weakness has been overblown to an extent. I do get how it could be an issue for folks not used to the high belt line. Guess that’s what really didn’t bother me because my old Magnum had a pretty high beltline and it also was not an issue. Just my two cents but the big point here is that performance has not been the shortcoming with this gen Camaro. 

Hmmm... I wonder if tepid/indifferent/negative/hostile reaction to the electrified Camaro drag car has anything to do with this?  Blaming the customer for wanting something OTHER than what "Big Sister" THINKS we should have?

27 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Hmmm... I wonder if tepid/indifferent/negative/hostile reaction to the electrified Camaro drag car has anything to do with this?  Blaming the customer for wanting something OTHER than what "Big Sister" THINKS we should have?

Again, this “blaming the customer” game is played by all of them and it sure as $h! doesn’t have anything to do with EVs. You never miss a chance at trolling EVs even when the subject matter has nothing to do with it. The issues facing the Camaro have been pretty well laid out here and not one of those issues have squat to do with your phantom EV issues. 

You have your angle, obtuse as it may be, and I have mine, which is a cute one.  Internet forums have to be about different viewpoints, otherwise they die.

The current Camaro is a performance powerhouse, but it is too hard to see out of.  So instead of improving that aspect, and making the higher trims more affordable, they go their own way, losing the faithful in the process, and blaming potential customers for not buying the car, with its flaws...

12 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

You have your angle, obtuse as it may be, and I have mine, which is a cute one.  Internet forums have to be about different viewpoints, otherwise they die.

The current Camaro is a performance powerhouse, but it is too hard to see out of.  So instead of improving that aspect, and making the higher trims more affordable, they go their own way, losing the faithful in the process, and blaming potential customers for not buying the car, with its flaws...

How are the facts obtuse? It has questionable looks, priced too high, a claustrophobic interior compared to the competition and you think these things are “obtuse”? You’re not offering a “different viewpoint” as much as you are, once again (without question), trolling with your obtuse EV reference. 

And again, the customer blame game is played by everyone so that statement really doesn’t mean as much as it’s made out to be. Besides, this article is based on pure speciation, much like the CT6 a few months ago. Two years from now, it could be the exact opposite is true and they put out a completely new Camaro. 

15 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Two years from now, it could be the exact opposite is true and they put out a completely new Camaro. 

Well it would be nice.  And I hope they spend a little bit of money on glass.  Imagine THIS with four wheel independent suspension and an LS-series engine, backed by a 7-speed manual transmission!

20 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

How are the facts obtuse? It has questionable looks, priced too high, a claustrophobic interior compared to the competition and you think these things are “obtuse”?

I did not say Camaro's current flaws were obtuse.

12 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Well it would be nice.  And I hope they spend a little bit of money on glass.  Imagine THIS with four wheel independent suspension and an LS-series engine, backed by a 7-speed manual transmission!

 

 

 

I did not say Camaro's current flaws were obtuse.

Your words

”You have your angle, obtuse as it may be“

My angle was what I just mentioned above which you were referred to prior as “obtuse”. It’s that simple. 

And Pacer windows might be a little too much on the other extreme lol. 

How about this for a bold move---one way to get more visibility for the Camaro would be to base the next one off of the Silverado.  Great visibility and head room, big mirrors.  Picture a Silverado cab with 2 longer doors, a back seat, a restyled front w/ sloping hood, and a trunk in place of the bed.  V8, mount the Camaro IRS on a short wheelbase Silverado chassis... sit low w/ 2wd, make an AWD version available.

11 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

How about this for a bold move---one way to get more visibility for the Camaro would be to base the next one off of the Silverado.  Great visibility and head room, big mirrors.  Picture a Silverado cab with 2 longer doors, a back seat, a restyled front w/ sloping hood, and a trunk in place of the bed.  V8, mount the Camaro IRS on a short wheelbase Silverado chassis... sit low w/ 2wd, make an AWD version available.

The Camarado. 

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Your words

”You have your angle, obtuse as it may be“

 

My angle was what I just mentioned above which you referred to prior as “obtuse”. It’s that simple. 

 

And Pacer windows might be a little too much on the other extreme lol. 

Correction on the “my angle” remark. 

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

How are the facts obtuse? It has questionable looks, priced too high, ...

'questionable looks' is not a fact.
Neither is 'priced too high'. In general; everything automotive is.

2 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

...more visibility for the Camaro would be to base the next one off of the Silverado. 

Must be creeping up on the 100th time this joke has been told.  

43 minutes ago, balthazar said:

'questionable looks' is not a fact.
Neither is 'priced too high'. In general; everything automotive is.

Must be creeping up on the 100th time this joke has been told.  

Fair point but given the majority of comments here and elsewhere, its looks can certainly fall under the heading of “commonly held belief”. The price part is true for the most part because they packaged the Camaro in such ways that it was routinely priced higher than the competition when viewed by the average Joe. They did not have enough lower priced (or stripper models if you will) models to help sales. I saw this first hand when I worked at a Chevy dealership last year so this certainly qualifies as a fact. It is not debatable that everything is too pricey in general terms. I was speaking in more specific terms though and everything I have mentioned here certainly does not qualify as an “obtuse angle” as ocn stated. That’s my point here. 

Not the sharpest...

Now, on the other hand, this is me...  SHARP

Camaro is definitely has better performance than the Mustang, everybody knows that.  And because of that I personally was seriously interested in it.  However, it took me two minutes exactly at an auto show to realize that no way in hell I would like to live with the Camaro's interior.  I am not crazy about the exterior either but interior, the way it felt and looked was a big no for me.   

Mustang on the other hand feels just right.

I have to say that the Challenger has the most comfortable seats and nicest interior.  But it is way too big for my taste.

6 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Fair point but given the majority of comments here and elsewhere, its looks can certainly fall under the heading of “commonly held belief”. The price part is true for the most part because they packaged the Camaro in such ways that it was routinely priced higher than the competition when viewed by the average Joe. They did not have enough lower priced (or stripper models if you will) models to help sales. I saw this first hand when I worked at a Chevy dealership last year so this certainly qualifies as a fact. It is not debatable that everything is too pricey in general terms. I was speaking in more specific terms though and everything I have mentioned here certainly does not qualify as an “obtuse angle” as ocn stated. That’s my point here. 

How common is it that Chevrolet generally (not just the Camaro) lack base models in order to help out with sales?  Does this issue exist elsewhere at other GM dealerships?

Thanks for the heads-up on that website, Drew.  I bookmarked it.

Having driven several 6th gens for a few thousand miles, and us owning a 2010 5th gen for a year...makes sense.

These are still the best looking (if you skip the 2019 burn victim nose job, they fast removed), but...

Like sitting in a tomb. Can be rough. Price is all over the place, and usually higher, in the GM "we sell less and charge more but look at our profit", interior is not great, etc.

Alpha platform lightweight athletic, but is missing interior space and packaging (same issue with ATS/CTS), and in day to day use, if you're not on a track, is brash, sharp, and not refined or as quiet as others. Track car, turned into street. Doesn't work for most real buyers, or the market...even if it does for Car & Driver.

Having also done the same in a 2019 Mustang 2.3T, and 2 Challengers...

Take the overall liveability and interior of the Challenger & its refinement, add in the dynamics of the Mustang and performance, and the looks of the Camaro...and you'd have a great combo. Love how the Mustang performs and feels, yet hate the seats and interior. Love the interior, functionality, comfort, and "I could drive this for days and still love it" comfort of the Challenger, but it's big and heavier.

Yet, right now, depending on your market, an AWD Challenger GT with the crisp 3.6L and ZF 8-speed for $33k sticker...is a screaming deal, if you want to use it daily, and not race on a track.

You never know what news story means what, but it's not impossible this is true. Look at the current state of all GM vehicles, and it makes sense. A performance coupe is the antithesis of fitting with current automaker goals...plus they also are not being responsive nor do they car, that real world, the Challenger and Mustang are more in demand and desired.

15 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

10 years is way too long. Nissan has basically done that with the Z am I couldn’t tell you the last time I saw one and I wouldn’t know the difference between a 2019 370Z and a 2009 370Z. I get what you’re saying but no car goes that long (if they want to survive anyway). Maybe a 4 year mid cycle refresh and 7 years (tops) for a clean sheet IMO. The pricing has gotten insane as well but that can be said for virtually every car and truck on the road today. 

I don't think it is. The 370z never got a mid cycle refresh. That's why it seems as old as it is because it is straight up 10 years old this year. 

They used to go that long.. I understand competition has created an atmosphere where automakers feel the need to update as quick as possible so they always have the newest technology and styling on the market. I get that. But, I also always hear how tight margins are and how an economic downturn could kill these companies..again.. 

Maybe 5 and 10 years is too long.. Maybe 4 and 8 is more appropriate or realistic but 3 and 6 just feels like they're making things tighter than they need to be. 

I think some of the pricing is because they need to get back every penny as soon as possible because they need to put that into the next model that is only a couple years away. 

I also strongly believe this would iron out a lot of the reliability issues they all seem to have now. 

On 6/25/2019 at 2:52 PM, Robert Hall said:

Maybe the Camaro will be reborn as an EV coupe CUV with styling cues from the 4th gen. 

15 hours ago, dfelt said:

I think a 3yr refresh with clean sheet new model every 6 years is a doable solution.

Is that not what Ford and GM are doing now, for the most part. 

14 hours ago, dfelt said:

Yet Dodge is teasing us on what is clearly a Wide Body AWD SRT Hellcat! 

Hello GM you listening to what the Competition is doing?

 

Do you want a brand new vehicle every 6 years or to keep tweaking the old one? That's the biggest difference here. 

19 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Well it would be nice.  And I hope they spend a little bit of money on glass.  Imagine THIS with four wheel independent suspension and an LS-series engine, backed by a 7-speed manual transmission!

 

 

 

I did not say Camaro's current flaws were obtuse.

You can buy a Pacer with an 8.2L V8 right now on Craigs List.

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/82l-v8-amc-pacer-for-sale-on-craigslist-103148.html

Enjoy your zoom zoom zoom.

14 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Not the sharpest...

Now, on the other hand, this is me...  SHARP

So personal insults when you get called out on your BS yet again? Ocn, you are just so predictable and dull. There is a certain amount of irony in you calling anyone “not the sharpest” while you make asinine statements about EVs that have nothing to do with anything other than your constant need to troll them. Again, predictable and dull. 

10 hours ago, riviera74 said:

How common is it that Chevrolet generally (not just the Camaro) lack base models in order to help out with sales?  Does this issue exist elsewhere at other GM dealerships?

It’s pretty common from everything I’ve read. I get they wanted the top of the line profit makers and shed that “rental/fleet queen” image but they just totally neglected the base market with rare exceptions. There was not one Camaro on the lot for less than $30K during my time there. That is just one of several reasons for their sales struggle with that car. 

8 hours ago, ccap41 said:

I don't think it is. The 370z never got a mid cycle refresh. That's why it seems as old as it is because it is straight up 10 years old this year. 

They used to go that long.. I understand competition has created an atmosphere where automakers feel the need to update as quick as possible so they always have the newest technology and styling on the market. I get that. But, I also always hear how tight margins are and how an economic downturn could kill these companies..again.. 

Maybe 5 and 10 years is too long.. Maybe 4 and 8 is more appropriate or realistic but 3 and 6 just feels like they're making things tighter than they need to be. 

I think some of the pricing is because they need to get back every penny as soon as possible because they need to put that into the next model that is only a couple years away. 

I also strongly believe this would iron out a lot of the reliability issues they all seem to have now. 

Is that not what Ford and GM are doing now, for the most part. 

Do you want a brand new vehicle every 6 years or to keep tweaking the old one? That's the biggest difference here. 

3 and 6 years is pretty common for just about every car out there. GM did that the last time with the Camaro (in the 90s). They kept the same car for over a decade with one mid cycle refresh and let it wither on the vine. 10 or even 8 years is too long. Also, two extra years to “iron out” reliability would be a weak excuse for car makers. Besides, the Camaro is actually a pretty reliable car (something that could not be said back in the 90s). Going as long as you suggest would kill the car even faster than it is being killed now (again, refer to the 90s Camaro). 

CAFE can be an issue too as cars and trucks have different standards.   Something like a Sonic can have a tiny engine and get good MPG, the Malibu has a 1.5 liter and they can sell Malibu hybrids that get a big number.  But performance cars aren't CAFE agreeable unless they have electrification which drives up the price.  And GM brass probably figures it is easier to just sell Equinoxes.  

The Impala outsold the Camaro last year and they are ready to drop the Impala like a sack of dirt, so I wouldn't be surprised at all for the Camaro to suffer the same fate.

3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

CAFE can be an issue too as cars and trucks have different standards.   Something like a Sonic can have a tiny engine and get good MPG, the Malibu has a 1.5 liter and they can sell Malibu hybrids that get a big number.  But performance cars aren't CAFE agreeable unless they have electrification which drives up the price.  And GM brass probably figures it is easier to just sell Equinoxes.  

The Impala outsold the Camaro last year and they are ready to drop the Impala like a sack of dirt, so I wouldn't be surprised at all for the Camaro to suffer the same fate.

Another reason CAFE needs to be repealed.  Let drivers buy what they want.

On 6/26/2019 at 6:47 PM, dfelt said:

Yet Dodge is teasing us on what is clearly a Wide Body AWD SRT Hellcat! 

Hello GM you listening to what the Competition is doing?

 

Sadly, no. They just hear Wall Street wants a stock increase.

14 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

3 and 6 years is pretty common for just about every car out there. GM did that the last time with the Camaro (in the 90s). They kept the same car for over a decade with one mid cycle refresh and let it wither on the vine. 10 or even 8 years is too long. Also, two extra years to “iron out” reliability would be a weak excuse for car makers. Besides, the Camaro is actually a pretty reliable car (something that could not be said back in the 90s). Going as long as you suggest would kill the car even faster than it is being killed now (again, refer to the 90s Camaro). 

I'm not JUST talking about the Camaro. Everything gets redone in 3 and 6 years.

It isn't to just iron out reliability. It would be to simply make more money and become more stable as a company.

The Charger and Challenger don't seem to mind being a decade old. The Challenger continues to outsell the Camaro. 

11 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I'm not JUST talking about the Camaro. Everything gets redone in 3 and 6 years.

It isn't to just iron out reliability. It would be to simply make more money and become more stable as a company.

The Charger and Challenger don't seem to mind being a decade old. The Challenger continues to outsell the Camaro. 

More glass and lower prices help that a lot.  Time to rethink the Camaro again.

Camaro dead?

Not dead?

New Camaro held back?

Until 2023? or whenever?

This is what it reminded me of:

Hopes and dreams...ironically in the same timeline.

But in reality, its bad news for Camaro guys (and enthusiasts in general)  as saying that a new Camaro is just being shelved for now, to me at least, means...yeah...say good bye, because she is done if there is no reversal for the love for a Camaro because we at GM, have no real enthusiasm in spending for a new platform....hell, we dont even want to commit in utilizing the upgraded Alpha platform that will underpin the new Cadillac CT4 and CT5 for a new Camaro that we ALREADY invested in for Cadillac's low selling sedans...we wont even attempt in squeezing out a tad more sales through Camaro...because we deem even that to be not worth it... 

Like the Tampa Bay Rays, this "shared" agreement between two cities just means to the Tampa Bay area citizens, yeah...your beloved Rays are gonna be in Tampa and in Montreal for a couple of years and when its officially official that Montrealers are truly commited to a baseball team....say goodbye. Because also... we dont really trust Montreal  either...so...the Rays could even end up in Las Vegas or something...

Eerily the same message I get from both news...that are now 2 weeks old. 

12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Camaro dead?

Not dead?

New Camaro held back?

Until 2023? or whenever?

This is what it reminded me of:

 

Hopes and dreams...ironically in the same timeline.

But in reality, its bad news for Camaro guys (and enthusiasts in general)  as saying that a new Camaro is just being shelved for now, to me at least, means...yeah...say good bye, because she is done if there is no reversal for the love for a Camaro because we at GM, have no real enthusiasm in spending for a new platform....hell, we dont even want to commit in utilizing the upgraded Alpha platform that will underpin the new Cadillac CT4 and CT5 for a new Camaro that we ALREADY invested in for Cadillac's low selling sedans...we wont even attempt in squeezing out a tad more sales through Camaro...because we deem even that to be not worth it... 

Like the Tampa Bay Rays, this "shared" agreement between two cities just means to the Tampa Bay area citizens, yeah...your beloved Rays are gonna be in Tampa and in Montreal for a couple of years and when its officially official that Montrealers are truly commited to a baseball team....say goodbye. Because also... we dont really trust Montreal  either...so...the Rays could even end up in Las Vegas or something...

Eerily the same message I get from both news...that are now 2 weeks old. 

 

If the Rays end up in Montreal, that may not be a big a deal as you might surmise.  NOW, the Buccaneers leaving town would be a true shocker.