Lutz reveals B Pillar on the Camaro

[hyperv6]

Here is some note on the new Camaro by Bob on Edmonds

SANTA MONICA, Calif. — GM product guru Bob Lutz has confirmed that unlike the Camaro concept car and the 1969 Camaro it emulates, the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro will not be a true hardtop when it reaches production.

Despite the fact that GM Chairman Rick Wagoner originally said the 2010 Camaro would be "virtually identical" to designer Sangyup Lee's concept that debuted at the 2006 Detroit Auto Show, Lutz confirmed that the production Camaro will in fact have a B-pillar, making it a standard coupe instead of a traditional hardtop coupe.

Lutz said the standard coupe structure is necessary to keep production costs down and ensure the Camaro's frame is as light and tight and possible.

The same fate is true for the Dodge Challenger. The Challenger concept was also presented as a hardtop coupe in 2006, but the 2008 production version will be a standard coupe when it goes on sale next spring.

What this means to you: Cost-cutting has killed the hardtop coupe for the everyman, with the last holdouts belonging to Bentley and Mercedes.

First let me note that this is no suprise to most of us.

To build this car with a 5 star rating at the price point of a Mustang and under 4,000 lbs the b pillar is needed for strength.

That B pillar will save you money to buy and insure and just might save a few Lives here.

GM has to deal with the cards they are delt. They are no different from us and do have limitations placed on them for the things they can or want to do. If there was any way they could match the Mustang in price and keep the weight under 4,000 lbs You whould know they would have done it. The first priority is to keep this car safe and competitive in price and performance.

There has yet to be a car that really ever came out the exact way a company had invisioned it. While we can dream about these cars we still have to understand it is still a buisness and they have to turn a buck or they would not have given the go ahead to build this car at all.

The Charger is getting one too so it is the reality of a car under $50k.

Most of us will have the air on anyway and the windows up. Even the first Gens were driven with the rear windows up 90% of the time as power windows were rare and few took the time to lower them anyway.

We will see a few more changes as this is a real car and not a show car. IF you don't make the changes the price gets away or likethe ergonomics in the SSR were you have to open the door to reach and adjust the seat buttons.

Also note the 2010 date is accurate as it will be released in Feb 09 as a early 2010. This has been a trend of many new GM cars going back to the March 03 release of the 04 GP. So no the date has not been moved back it is still Feb 09.

[Newbiewar]

so, what does that mean

how is the look going to change...?

[Oracle of Delphi]

My oh my, what will SixtyEight say?

[Nick]

My oh my, what will SixtyEight say?

God dammit.

Or at least that's what I said...I'm sure his words will be much harsher...

I can't say I didn't expect this to happen...MB may still make hardtops, but MB's are also much more expensive and heavy.

[balthazar]

hyper: twice you mentioned "under 4000 lbs"; have there EVER been any educated guesstimations on exactly how much weight a hardtop Camaro would have to gain vs. a coupe? I get the impression that some think it's literally many 100s of lbs. Should be no more than 75, based on past weight differences hardtop vs. coupe.

Personally, I do not think this will limit sales, and if I personally was in the market for a Camaro, I'd still buy, but I do think it sucks all the same.

Sixty8... man... sorry.

[EMan]

My oh my, what will SixtyEight say?

I think it will go something like this

[Robert Hall]

No big deal..and besides, the convertible won't have a b-pillar.

[K.C.]

Poor Sixty8! I guess there goes one sale for GM in 15 years.

I don't particularly see the benefit of the hardtop design over a fixed B-pillar. I will love it no matter if it is remotely close to the looks of the concept.

[Z-06]

Probably 68 commited a suicide????

[gm4life]

Ahh this is no big deal nor suprise. Sixty will get over it, I hope!

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I would bet on some sort of blacked out B pillar.

[Cory Wolfe]

No big deal. Would it have been nice? Yes, but they'll still sell just as well had it been a hardtop.

[JBsZ06]

No big deal. Would it have been nice? Yes, but they'll still sell just as well had it been a hardtop.

I agree..

The B pillar means nothing to me either. Black it out so its not visable and thats fine.

I'd rather have a lighter more rigid chassis any day of the week.

JMO

[vonVeezelsnider]

You can always mod the B-Pillar out if you were so desperate...

[PurdueGuy]

hyper: twice you mentioned "under 4000 lbs"; have there EVER been any educated guesstimations on exactly how much weight a hardtop Camaro would have to gain vs. a coupe? I get the impression that some think it's literally many 100s of lbs. Should be no more than 75, based on past weight differences hardtop vs. coupe.

How old are those cars you're comparing, and what crash worthiness testing did they have to endure?

+1 for "woulda been cool, but light weight & rigidity > lack of b pillar"

[hyperv6]

hyper: twice you mentioned "under 4000 lbs"; have there EVER been any educated guesstimations on exactly how much weight a hardtop Camaro would have to gain vs. a coupe? I get the impression that some think it's literally many 100s of lbs. Should be no more than 75, based on past weight differences hardtop vs. coupe.

Personally, I do not think this will limit sales, and if I personally was in the market for a Camaro, I'd still buy, but I do think it sucks all the same.

Sixty8... man... sorry.

I have not seen any estimated numbers from those who know as they are not talking specifics. But I have heard them say they are saving weight anyway and any where they can.

As it was explained to me the story is this. GM has to have a 5 star on this car as Insurance companies will shread it other wise. That is a GM priority but it plays havoc with keeping the weight and price down. They can use lightweight metals but cost goes up in a car that can't afford to get too expensive. I know most know this already but it is what those from GM are saying and not speculation.

I would guess the weight is at least 100 lbs if it is a true hard top but also factor in the added cost to make it stronger and the more work needed on the line to build it.

I really think cost it the larger factor in the end. To back this up they have a Convertible coming so we know this car has a stronger platform but keep in mind it will be a little heavier but it will be much more expensive than the base coupe. But in the end Convertibles are never as strong or stiff. Even the best Verts still have some flex or cowl shake.

One other factor is performance in handling. One needs a stiff platform for great handling and we have promised class leading handling by Fbodfather a while back so this show it has also been a priority.

The 80 Mustang is a good example of how much the roof effects a car. The Fox body with a trunk was much Cheaper to build, stiffer and lighter vs the vert or hatch.

Over all reaction here has been better than on the Camaro web site. I know most here deal with reality better as most here have a good understanding of all the factors and challanges involved to build a car like this like em or not.

As for those who don't understand they will just have to find a way to deal with it.

I know a few puist will grumble but in the end you have to do what is best to keep the pice in line and overall perfomance of the car vs a small styling element that most average buyers will never know any different it is there. I am sure it will be hidden in black and maybe even in a flush fit of the glass?

In the long run GM will sell more cars with the benifits [cost, strength and weight] with the B pillar vs the styling effect without. The bottom line is how many in the general buying public that will purchase this car even know what a B pillar even is.

They have looked at this car so much that they really have factored in having a lower perfoming V6 to satisfy those driver [read you females] who don't car for perfomance and just care about style. They don't want to have to deal with a car that could be more challanging to drive in poor weather or could get away from them after they trade in the Cavalier for this car. That may be why they are looking at two V6 models.

I find those who like the Challanger are the ones going to pay the price as it also has the B pillar and I will be shocked if it comes in under 4000 lbs by much. The mules have been every bit as big as the show car and that is a lot of metal.

It may have a Hemi and no V6 but it will need it to move and handling will suffer as when you throw tha much mass around it is hard to change it's direction in mid turn.

[Flybrian]

Very good rationalization, Hyperv6. Thanks for that.

[knightfan26917]

Yikers.....

*pauses*

But, this isn't so bad ... at least the Camaro IS coming back ... right?

Come to think of it, the Monte Carlo was only a hard top for one generation ... 1970-1972 ... the rest of the generations had a B pillar.

Cort:34swm."Mr Monte Carlo.Mr Road Trip".pig valve.pacemaker

WRMNshowcase.lego.HO.model.MCs.RT.CHD = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort

"Can you make folks feel what you feel inside?" ... David Allen Coe ... 'The Ride'

[bobo]

Did anybody seriously think that the Camaro was going to be a hardtop? It was hard enough to make a business case for the Camaro with it competing with less expensive coupes. The rear side window probably would also need to be reshaped to go down, and that would have made for a less attractive greenhouse.

[loki]

will the rear windows roll down? it is a valid question.

[cletus8269]

big honkin V8... check

RWD... check

b-pillar... Who gives a rip

the fact of the matter is everyone cried foul when it was over in 2002... with the exception of ford that is.

most people could really care less and most wont know the difference. i cant wait for them to hit the streets... got 7 long years of backorder camaro whoopings to hand out

[ocnblu]

I can't wait to hear all about the production version, and to see it... wow.

[scharmer05]

will the rear windows roll down? it is a valid question.

I would guess that no, they won't. I would bet it will be a fixed piece of glass. Would look better that way anyway.

[Camino LS6]

Disappointing, but not devastating. Given the American addiction to the appearance of safety in all things, I guess it had to be.

Too bad really, that we are so hyper-focused on safety all the time. And, that only the wealthy get to have true hardtops these days.

Just another casualty of our over-regulated lives.

[hyperv6]

will the rear windows roll down? it is a valid question.

I would figure it has a 98% chance it won't

[hyperv6]

Disappointing, but not devastating. Given the American addiction to the appearance of safety in all things, I guess it had to be.

Too bad really, that we are so hyper-focused on safety all the time. And, that only the wealthy get to have true hardtops these days.

Just another casualty of our over-regulated lives.

I agree to a point on the over reged on but hand there is a Austrailian G8 Diver today that I am sure is happy that his G8 had a B pillar. Just think how a 1969 Camaro may have looke after 100 Foot divre off a cliff.

Keep in mind with cheaper lighter materials in our near future there is a chance we may see a coupe in the future again at a affordable price.

On the other hand even expensive cars like the 911 have forgone the coupe effect for weight and stability. Targas were not just for looks.

[Satty]

Wow, you mean they announced that the Camaro will have a b-pillar, and I still managed to wake up this morning and the world wasn't on fire. Hold on a second, let me check CNN.....nope, no Armageddon. Huh, maybe a b-pillar on the 5th gen Camaro isn't the worst thing to ever happen, the most catastrophic event in the history of the known universe. The way some people talk, you would think that a b-pillar had killed their father and raped their mother. Boo-f@#king-hoo, life goes on. The one sale GM lost with this announcement will be replaced by the hundreds, maybe thousands of others that they gained by keeping the costs down.

[Robert Hall]

My oh my, what will SixtyEight say?

I suspect his reaction will be similar to that kid that made the YouTube video defending Britney from the press... lots of screaming, crying and whining...

[Sixty8panther]

hyper: twice you mentioned "under 4000 lbs"; have there EVER been any educated guesstimations on exactly how much weight a hardtop Camaro would have to gain vs. a coupe? I get the impression that some think it's literally many 100s of lbs. Should be no more than 75, based on past weight differences hardtop vs. coupe.

Personally, I do not think this will limit sales, and if I personally was in the market for a Camaro, I'd still buy, but I do think it sucks all the same.

Sixty8... man... sorry.

I feel sick to my stomach... seriously. I'm disgusted with GM.

Ever heard of side curtain aribags? Even a $15,000 Suzuki has them!

They (GM) are going to design a drop down rear window & stiffer

floor for the convertible but they have to pussy out for the Camaro.

This makes me completely disillusioned, I guess GM just can't roll up

their sleeves and create enginering solutions like they used to.

f@#k it, guess there's a used CLK500 in my future & I'll never buy a

new car. There's still plenty of nice 1969 Camaros, expensive as they

are and those have no pillar in any configuraton.

[Sixty8panther]

Did anybody seriously think that the Camaro was going to be a hardtop? It was hard enough to make a business case for the Camaro with it competing with less expensive coupes.

True to concept means just that, I'm not expecting the entire engine bay to

be either stainless steel or chrome but 40% of the coolness of the Camaro

for me was the hardtop greenhouse. After having owned a 1968 Camaro I

could never see myself buying a Camaro with glued in glass... maybe I'll lower

my standards in the future but as far as I'm concerned they might as well

pussy out on the whole thing and keep it a concept, they've already done

that with the SIXTEEN.

Funny how, ten years after GM gave up on hardtops the Japanese were still

making a bunch, a few Toyotas & Nissan/Datsuns were sold here in the USA

in the 1980s... Even Mazda had a few nice hardtops... all with thin-as

ricepaper sheetmetal and no effort of reinforcement of the greenhouse and

or floor.

Now in 2007 you;re going to tell me its not possible? Bull$h!.

The rear side window probably would also need to be reshaped to go down, and that would have made for a less attractive greenhouse.

uhhh... no. The 1st gen. Camaro, as well as the concept had an attractive

greenhouse AND roll down rear windows with room to spare.

[nzr]

Who the f@#k cares

[Satty]

Who the f@#k cares

I could count the number of people who car on one hand. If you want the airiness of a hardtop, you can buy the vert. If you want a solid roof above your head, you can buy the coupe. There just aren't enough buyers in between to justify it. A hardtop will weigh more, likely less than the vert, but still more than the coupe due to the reinforcements that would be required. It'll also increase price, and for what? A handful of people who think its still 1969? Its 2007, like it or not, there are rules and regulations and cost prohibitions. The Camaro is coming, but I guess they cant please everyone, since its not going to be a hardtop, its not going to have AWD available(sorry reg, no Camaro for you) and its not going to give you a bj every time you turn the key(another reason reg wont buy one) and probably wont have a useful back seat. Some people just cannot accept that their ideal isn't compatible with reality.

[Robert Hall]

Looks like it will have frameless door glass, like every Camaro in history..that's a nice touch on a coupe.

[nzr]

I could count the number of people who car on one hand. If you want the airiness of a hardtop, you can buy the vert. If you want a solid roof above your head, you can buy the coupe. There just aren't enough buyers in between to justify it. A hardtop will weigh more, likely less than the vert, but still more than the coupe due to the reinforcements that would be required. It'll also increase price, and for what? A handful of people who think its still 1969? Its 2007, like it or not, there are rules and regulations and cost prohibitions. The Camaro is coming, but I guess they cant please everyone, since its not going to be a hardtop, its not going to have AWD available(sorry reg, no Camaro for you) and its not going to give you a bj every time you turn the key(another reason reg wont buy one) and probably wont have a useful back seat. Some people just cannot accept that their ideal isn't compatible with reality.

Perfectly said.

[K.C.]

The lack of a hardtop is all a product of weight saving for more performance. But, like others have said, sorry Sixty8.

[Sixty8panther]

Maybe so many of you do not get it because so many of you think modern cars don't suck.

I wonder how many of you have driven a hardtop? How many of you banged the gears on a

1969 Camaro with a 454/M22 4-speed and all the windows down?

If I never tased a Lindt Hazlenut chocolate bar I might still be convinced that it's no better than

some $0.79 Hershey bar, but I have and I DO KNOW the differance.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Maybe so many of you do not get it because so many of you think modern cars don't suck.

I wonder how many of you have driven a hardtop? How many of you banged the gears on a

1969 Camaro with a 454/M22 4-speed and all the windows down?

If I never tased a Lindt Hazlenut chocolate bar I might still be convinced that it's no better than

some $0.79 Hershey bar, but I have and I DO KNOW the differance.

Ummmm, I have one, a 1969, but I have one.

[K.C.]

Uh oh, here we go again.

Edited September 29, 2007 by K.C.

[hyperv6]

Maybe so many of you do not get it because so many of you think modern cars don't suck.

I wonder how many of you have driven a hardtop? How many of you banged the gears on a

1969 Camaro with a 454/M22 4-speed and all the windows down?

If I never tased a Lindt Hazlenut chocolate bar I might still be convinced that it's no better than

some $0.79 Hershey bar, but I have and I DO KNOW the differance.

Having between my father and myself owning 12 GM Hardtops from the 60's and 70's Chevys some with 4 speeds I can attest they are great when the windows were down.

Now how often they all were down? Seldom.... Even with the lack of AC is some of the cars we never took the time to roll all the windows all down as they were manual and you had to roll them back up once you got to where you were going. So 90% of the time we drove around looking just like the new Camaro will with all the windows up and the AC on.

You can sit and stew claiming your not going to buy this car. Well GM already knows they will not please everyone. Less people are willing to pay the price of the expensive chocolate no matter how good. For every lost sale of the B pillar being in place they will pick up untold sales due to price point and other factors.

GM has to please the majority and not everyone. If the B pillar is a problem your in the minority that were expected by GM anyway and there will be others to buy the car you may have. You made a choice and they had to make a choice no one is wrong and it is just business and they have to make money.

[Newbiewar]

so someone tell me the difference...

hell i used to sell cars and i still dont know the difference between a b c pillers... really havent a clue, but i think each one is a little different and placement...

i remember reading a thing about a 53 buick or some odd year and it didnt have a c piller (i think) but really if the article had said a or z i wouldnt have known the difference...

as to what its like to be in a hardtop...

best friend has a 70 chevelle SS454 LS6 2 68 camaro's a GTX (pretty sure its a hardtop) but i still couldnt tell you the performance diferance, the axiloration of any frame construction...

the only vehicle i know that has added comfort due to frame construction is the Avalanche, that stupid diaganoal thing makes it the most comfortable ride out of all the GMT900's and 800's for its prospective model...

obviously the avalanche isnt as good as the cadillac, but the ESV is better...

so someone give me the abc's and 123's

why is this such a bad thing... obviously it wont look the same as the concept... which might upset a lot of people... obviously that window probably wont be roll up due to structure concerns, and possible leaking issues...

is this hardtop more aerodynamic... sounds like its going to have a higher center of gravity, if it needs aditional strength on the roof, which only means slower turning, even if its microscopic, these things are analyzed by both sellers and buyers of vehicles... also if you can shed 100 lbs, as sugested... that could be mean a 0-60 maker or breaker against the competition, stoping speeds, turning speeds, slalum, road courses (ie. nuremberg), 1/4 mile times... perhaps structureal concerns when dealing with racing the car at tracks... if a car has that extra weight and its unremoveable, its less likely to become a car for the LT1's and LS1 guys to jump on for the ultimate 1/4 mile car

Edited September 29, 2007 by Newbiewar

[cletus8269]

Maybe so many of you do not get it because so many of you think modern cars don't suck.

I wonder how many of you have driven a hardtop? How many of you banged the gears on a

1969 Camaro with a 454/M22 4-speed and all the windows down?

If I never tased a Lindt Hazlenut chocolate bar I might still be convinced that it's no better than

some $0.79 Hershey bar, but I have and I DO KNOW the differance.

sure i think the new stuff sucks... you cant do a freaking thing with it unless you got a laptop and a hook up to it. fact is i would much rather drive my 69 sport coupe impala everywhere i went... but i would rather some idiot screw me over by demolishing my cookie cutter colorado than the sweet sexy curves of that chevy fullsize. few new cars turn my head but i dont feel like one stalk of metal from the roof to the body will keep me from staring at all. besides it might just make the 1st gens that much more desirable because they dont. i hate a 2 dr post with everything thats in me, but the fact that we are getting the camaro back is a good enough compromise to me.

[Intrepidation]

One other factor is performance in handling. One needs a stiff platform for great handling and we have promised class leading handling by Fbodfather a while back so this show it has also been a priority.

That's not what Toyota would have you believe!

Anyway, I'm a little disappointed but not really surprised...and so long as it looks almost identical otherwise and they put the B-pillar behind the glass (like what Dodge appears to be doing with Challenger) I'll be happy. It's coming back, and that's what matters most.

Edited September 29, 2007 by Dodgefan

[CaddyXLR-V]

Doesn't bother me, I'm set on the orange convertible anyway, which doesn't have a b pillar

[FAPTurbo]

B-pillar or not, I have a $8000 sitting in the bank waiting for me to make a down-payment on this baby.

[Intrepidation]

If you think about it for a sec...the only true hardtops are luxury GT... not performance car. The best of he best have B-pillars.

[Cory Wolfe]

Who the f@#k cares

Perfectly said.

[K.C.]

It's not that new cars suck, its that new cars are different because they've had to change with the changing market and the political environment of the country. Hardtop cars were very clean looking, and offered a convertible like windblown look with all the windows down. There is a lot of structural enhancing that needs done to hardtops to help them meet side impact standards, and while side curtain and side thorax airbags offer some protection, they will be useless if not only the side of your car slams into your ribs, but also the vehicle thats just t-boned you. I think GM was weighing their options here. They want to cut weight while still achieving high side impact, offset, and front crash standards, so we get a B-pillar on our Camaro. I love cars as much as anyone on the board, but they aren't worth my life if someone tags me t-bone going through an intersection.

[Newbiewar]

the difference between todays cars and the cars prior, is i beleive their is a significant amount of structure above and below both windshields... rather modern cars, offer very minimal structure in that area, its just a thin firewall...

they ought to start a design with a hardtop... create the cage... then create the frame and proportions, then the style...

[Sixty8panther]

f@#k that.

You want a super stiff chassis? Make a factory accessory rollcage and

give the rest of us an affordable alternative to the Bentley, Mercedes,

Jaguar & Rolls Royce hardtops.

There's a reason why Mercedes Luxury coupes sell so well, because

they do not pu$$yb out on little things like that.

GOD IS IN THE DETAILS!!!

[Sixty8panther]

the difference between todays cars and the cars prior, is i beleive their is a significant amount of structure above and below both windshields... rather modern cars, offer very minimal structure in that area, its just a thin firewall...

they ought to start a design with a hardtop... create the cage... then create the frame and proportions, then the style...

YES!