Drove a 2010 Camaro SS today

[hyperv6]

I got the chance to drive a MFG Camaro today at work. GM has in a Camaro SS with the RS trim automatic with the Brembo brakes.

This by far was the best Camaro I have ever driven. The steering was spot on and had good feel. The engine has good low end torque and was much faster than it felt.

The exhaust had a great sound from inside but not over bearing to make it distracting inside on a long trip.

The Ride was very smooth and not a creak rattle or hollow sound of the old cars to be found. This car may not have ultra high limits but it is a real world car that makes driving fun.

Seeing out my be an issue for some owning an HHR it seemed like it was more open to me but to many others it may take some getting used to. The mirrors are a big help and useful.

Seats are fine for every day but not for ultra performance. It would be nice to see an option on the seats for those who want more.

I had it on a section of freeway and opened it up once I got a gap. It hit 55 to over 100 MPH fast but just did not feel like it. The ride and handling is like my HHR and makes it feel slow on back roads even if you are fast. This is not the normal GM lets put big tires on it and big bars and call it a handling package. It reminds me of a Euro type set up where it is tuned for all types of roads not just smooth fresh paved roads. Like I said it may give a little on the extreem limits but it pays back in better real world driving.

Is there room for improvement yes. There always is. You do feel the weight in this car but the brakes are fast and strong. The car performs well but just does not have that light toss able feel.

If they can give us this power in a Alpha and cut the weight they will have a world class car. That is not to say what they have now is bad.

Now if they could only make it sound like the ZR-1 we had there today..... God that thing was awsome. I thought the Z06 was good. No I did not get to drive that one......!

I will not give GM an A plus on this car there are still some things that could be better. I will give it an A as they did very well with what they had to work with in some very trying times. This car is nothing to be ashamed of and should hold up better in time than the 3rd or 4th gens.

[dwightlooi]

I did not drive the Camaro, but I did see the car person. I give the cabin a B-. It's not blatantly cheap like the classic F-bodies or 1990s GMs. But it is a vast expanse of plastics and not all of a matte sheen. Some parts of the dash has the dreaded "armorall" sheen which is so typical of GMs in the 90s but which the General has done a good job of shedding in recent years. The grey plastics and fat black bezel of the stereo and HVAC, while unique to the Camaro, looks cheaper and less refined than the corporate standard issue stuff in the Malibu, the Kappas, etc. The Shift knob has a shiny patina which look like it has been well used although this is a brand new vehicle. Driving position is barely OK but not great for me; it will be a problem for anyone of a smaller stature. I like to drive with very little seat back recline and with comfortably bent arms and knees. With the steering pulled as far forward as possible, I find myself pushing the seat further forward than I like.

The car also has some dubious decorative elements. The chrome surrounds of the tail lights actually looks (cheap) and makes the production car less pretty than concept car without it. I am not sure I buy the non-functional features like the fake hood scoop or the three vertical indentations ahead of the rear wheel well either. The 20" wheel looks heavy and somewhat contrary to my preference for the the biggest contact patch but only as much wheel size as it takes to clear the calipers (my all time favourite has always been the 225/45 and 255/40 R17 sizes) But overall, it is not a bad looking car if you are into the modernized-retro look and don't mind a few gimmicky bits here and there.

[Chazman]

I will not give GM an A plus on this car there are still some things that could be better. I will give it an A as they did very well with what they had to work with in some very trying times. This car is nothing to be ashamed of and should hold up better in time than the 3rd or 4th gens.

I drove one last week. I'd give it a B-. It was nice enough - strong brakes and motor - but certainly nothing I'd drop $35+K on. The interior is weird and claustrophobic and the car itself is just plain too big and heavy. It's mass plays with my kinesthetic senses, making it not that fun to drive. After I got out of it, I really had no more desire to drive it. That's too bad, because after getting out of cars from the HHR SS to the M3, I couldn't wait to drive them again.

I'll wait for the 6th gen.

Edited September 13, 2009 by Chazman

[ocnblu]

No surprise coming from Chazman. I'd be willing to bet the Challenger and Mustang both have "claustrophobic" interiors as well. The Dodge has a very similar greenhouse to the Camaro, and the Mustang also has giant sail panels with tiny quarter glasses. That said, I love all 3 modern-day pony cars, and would be proud to drive any of them, from a V6 Dodge automatic to a Camaro SS 6-speed manual.

How much does a new M3 weigh? How much does it cost? How quick is it in the 1/4 mile?

[Chazman]

No surprise coming from Chazman. I'd be willing to bet the Challenger and Mustang both have "claustrophobic" interiors as well. The Dodge has a very similar greenhouse to the Camaro, and the Mustang also has giant sail panels with tiny quarter glasses. That said, I love all 3 modern-day pony cars, and would be proud to drive any of them, from a V6 Dodge automatic to a Camaro SS 6-speed manual.

How much does a new M3 weigh? How much does it cost? How quick is it in the 1/4 mile?

No need to bet - just go check them out. Neither the Mustang nor the Challenger have "claustrophobic" interiors.

As for the M3:

1) ~ 3700 pounds , give or take, depending on options.

2) $57,850 coupe/$54,850 sedan.

3) 12's

[dwightlooi]

No surprise coming from Chazman. I'd be willing to bet the Challenger and Mustang both have "claustrophobic" interiors as well. The Dodge has a very similar greenhouse to the Camaro, and the Mustang also has giant sail panels with tiny quarter glasses. That said, I love all 3 modern-day pony cars, and would be proud to drive any of them, from a V6 Dodge automatic to a Camaro SS 6-speed manual.

How much does a new M3 weigh? How much does it cost? How quick is it in the 1/4 mile?

The Challenger a little bit, but not anywhere near the degree of the Camaro.

The Mustang? Not at all.

[frogger]

As others have mentioned, its the interior and the heavy car feeling that dimmed my enthusiasm for this car. I felt it could have been a little more responsive to steering input but that it has a lot of weight to make feel tossable like say a Corvette manages to. I was pretty sure it had the sitting in a bathtub feeling going in, its always been that way as opposed the the Stang.

[hyperv6]

I think if they wanted too they could have made the Camaro a little more tossable but I am sure it would have added to the price.

The Camaro is not that "claustrophobic" . It does have a large blind spot that many other cars do not have today but it is worth it for styling and the mirrors are proper to deal with it.

The Challanger has just a large blind spots with the Mustang not that much better. Just the price for style.

The interiro on the Camaro is not as bad now that I have spent some time with it. The shock value has worn off and the better feeling materials make it more accpetable.

It also is true to itself and does not suffer the cheap feel or look of being borrowed from a large sedan like the Challanger.

The Challanger is like the Challanger in the past. It is larger and cost more than the other Pony cars. It held true to it's original role for better or worse. Chysler could have made a smaller car and changed it but then people would complain it just is not like the original. It was never intended to be a segment leader and is doing the job it was intended. While it is not my kind of car it has done well to fill the old shoes.

The key to the Camaro now is since there is no Z28 coming to upgrade the new car with new features, powertrain and suspension upgrades. These packages need to compete with the Mustang as Ford will offer future Bullit, Mach one and Boss packages. The track pack is also a prime special offering. GM need to do this to compete and keep ahead of the Mustang. Ford is focused on this car and will probe more into the new features. Sorry the puns just came to me.

GM needs to do better than in the past with just sticker special editions. Good example is the Transformer car. It is nothing but trim. They should have offered the Z28 nose since they already have it ready and some other special options.

Also the Camaro needs some Gear options. Check out the available gearing and if needed offer them as a dealer install to by pass the CAFE. This car is geared for MPG and would be much faster with a better ratio.

Maybe offer some Odd limited options in the old COPO style. Like a base car with the V8 and steel wheels? Crazy stuff that would keep interest high.

I was in an original COPO 69 427 today. Even a few COPO cars for track use like the Cobrajet Mustangs for NHRA would be neat. Make 50 with the ZR-1 engines and show what is possible.

I spoke to one of the Camaro team memebers this weekend and they are epecting this to be a Camaro year at SEMA. We should hear soon more on that. Also the road racing team is coming together soon.

I love the road racing but GM still needs to drag race these cars. Imagine the KB pro stock team out of G6 and in Camaro's? Fords is going to own NHRA soon and GM needs to keep some tie there. I am no drag race fan but it is important to many fans.

[balthazar]

>>"I am not sure I buy the non-functional features like the fake hood scoop or the three vertical indentations ahead of the rear wheel well either."<<

Scoops are one thing (and even 'functional' ones are often not ducted to the air intake, likewise rendering them non-functional in reality), but the 3 indented curves in the quarter panel are character lines; they're not supposed to be 'functional' other that appearance-wise.

Edited September 13, 2009 by balthazar

[ocnblu]

The three indentations weren't functional on the '69... and non-functional, sporty hood trim is traditional. This is just bitching for bitching's sake. Edited September 14, 2009 by ocnblu

[A Horse With No Name]

The Mustang guy on Cheers and gears gives the new Camaro an...A plus.

You guys keep talking about lightweight cars and how heavy cars have gotten. We live in Central Ohio and am involved in Motorsports. I know quite a few people who work for Honda. A bunch of us were standing around an Integra today and talking about how nice and light it was compared to the current SI Civic.

Shawn, my friend (who actually designed and developed parts of the SI package for Honda) said that every engeneer for Honda would give their eye teeth to build a car like the Integra again...but it will never happen because of safety items. We've beat this thing to death on this forum with the whole B pillar thing and why there will never be any more cars without B pillars, etc.

Went out for a coke tonight with my oldest daughter, Elizabeth. Parked next to a Toyota Corolla.

Keep bitching when they give us something good...and you'll be driving a crapbox like the Corolla.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

...and isn't it a little funny that we bugged GM for six years to build this damn thing and then...we bitch about it when it gets here.

How many Camaro's have the fine people at GM sold to C and G regulars? How many of the Half million posts here are about the new Camaro?

Toyota builds the Camry in 52 flavors because they can sell 52 flavors of Camry. GM will sell 52 flavors of bland midsize if they can sell 52 flavors of bland midsize.

Not that the Camaro doesn't have it's faults...it has a ton. But every single car with charactor and personality does. How perfect do you think the 60's muscle cars were back in the day...hmmmm....

I still give it an A plus. But if you don't like it. don't worry. It will be the last of the breed, trust me. In 2018, you can get your Cruze Hybrid XFE and you all will be happy....

Chris

[Chazman]

They weren't functional on the '69... and non-functional, sporty hood trim is traditional. This is just bitching for bitching's sake.

Not true. The '69 cowl inducted hoods were in fact functional.

[ocnblu]

Sorry, Chaz, I edited my post for clarity. I was talking about the three hashmarks ahead of the rear wheel.

Yes, cowl induction hoods were functional... but there were so many SS/RS model hoods that just wore jewelery, I feel it is unfair to single out the new car's mail slot. It's just a little calling card that you're looking at a V8 car.

Edited September 14, 2009 by ocnblu

[Chazman]

Sorry, Chaz, I edited my post for clarity. I was talking about the three hashmarks ahead of the rear wheel.

Yes, cowl induction hood were functional... but there were so many SS/RS model hoods that just wore jewelery, I feel it is unfair to single out the new car's mail slot. It's just a little calling card that you're looking at a V8 car.

No problem.

Actually those rear fender vents were to be made functional on the Z/28 as rear brake cooling ducts, similar to the Z06, before it was canceled.

[Chazman]

...and isn't it a little funny that we bugged GM for six years to build this damn thing and then...we bitch about it when it gets here.

Honest injun, I was bugging them for something different....

Edited September 14, 2009 by Chazman

[regfootball]

The Mustang guy on Cheers and gears gives the new Camaro an...A plus.

You guys keep talking about lightweight cars and how heavy cars have gotten. We live in Central Ohio and am involved in Motorsports. I know quite a few people who work for Honda. A bunch of us were standing around an Integra today and talking about how nice and light it was compared to the current SI Civic.

Shawn, my friend (who actually designed and developed parts of the SI package for Honda) said that every engeneer for Honda would give their eye teeth to build a car like the Integra again...but it will never happen because of safety items. We've beat this thing to death on this forum with the whole B pillar thing and why there will never be any more cars without B pillars, etc.

Went out for a coke tonight with my oldest daughter, Elizabeth. Parked next to a Toyota Corolla.

Keep bitching when they give us something good...and you'll be driving a crapbox like the Corolla.

Chris

or a cruze........what chevy will become......

to me, the biggest camaro flaw is the interior. its just too cheap and sparse. now, considering what else you get it really isn't a deal breaker....or is it. the 010 mustang i sat in recently was a great orgasm in comparison.

but the camaro's body is so sexy. and it has the horsepower to back it up.

Chevy can and should develop the chassis to refine it a bit more. but if this car is to be in production for quite some time i would make it urgent to get a knockout interior in the thing. its not priced cheap, it should at least have an interior that doesnt call attention to itself as 'corners cut'.

[A Horse With No Name]

I see the point on the interior, but none of the Chevy's has a great interior.

The Z06 showed up at our autocross yesterday and I rode in in once...my daughter Joanna rode with Ginger (owners wife) during 5 of her runs. Amazing car. Interior isn't much better than the Camaros.

Not holding my breath for a better interior in the Camaro. Somewhere in an alternative universe a Firebird version of this car is being built and has a better interior.

But that's not the universe we live in.

Chris

[hyperv6]

The quarter gills are nothing but styling and never were. They are a Camaro trait from the first gen and are fine on this car. Now if GM had put them on a new GTO or other car that had no history of therm then it is an issue. It is no different than the Lacrosse side spear.

The hood scoop is very understated and non functional. I would have left it off it it contributed nothing.

I did see a Nickey edition 2010 Camaro and it has the old style open hood scoop to the front similar to a old Baldwin style. The GM engineer told the guy from Nickey at high speed they would have a high pressure area there and he told them there was a good chance he would lose the hood. GM evidently figured this out and that may be why we did not get a scoop like this. I noted even the intended Z28 looked to have a rear opening or it was just closed too?

[Chazman]

Chevy can and should develop the chassis to refine it a bit more. but if this car is to be in production for quite some time i would make it urgent to get a knockout interior in the thing. its not priced cheap, it should at least have an interior that doesnt call attention to itself as 'corners cut'.

I wouldn't hold my breath on Camaro getting a new interior.

[dwightlooi]

You guys keep talking about lightweight cars and how heavy cars have gotten. We live in Central Ohio and am involved in Motorsports. I know quite a few people who work for Honda. A bunch of us were standing around an Integra today and talking about how nice and light it was compared to the current SI Civic.

Shawn, my friend (who actually designed and developed parts of the SI package for Honda) said that every engeneer for Honda would give their eye teeth to build a car like the Integra again...but it will never happen because of safety items. We've beat this thing to death on this forum with the whole B pillar thing and why there will never be any more cars without B pillars, etc.

This is not really true. Other than for the requiring airbags in the 90s, government "safety" regulations haven't changed much over the past decade and a half here. In Europe there is the minimum bumper height nonsense, but apart from that there hasn't been legislative requirements that cars have to be able to with stand crashes much better than they did in the 90s. What we have seen is a great deal of voluntary advancements in terms of crash safety.

If you build a new car today with exactly the same impact safety as a 1994 Integra, it won't earn a 5-star crash rating. But it also won't be illegal to sell in the USA. If you raise the bumper height it'll be OK in Europe too. A Lotus Elise is very light and quite under protected against side impacts and front offset intrusions. It is nonetheless a completely legal car to market in the USA.

Regardless of all of that, it is also quite untrue that cars have to be much heavier to meet today's safety expectations (mandated or otherwise). The 2006 to present Honda Civic is 2750 lbs. That is not that much more than the 2400~2600 lbs of the previous two generations. Most of that comes from the fact that the current model is a much bigger car. So big in fact that Honda has to have a separate Civic model for Europe and the "Fit" to cater to customers stateside who feel that the Civic is too big a car for their preference.

I am not against safety, but one also has to recognize that tank like crash safety performance is not required by law and perhaps should not be the #1 priority in a sporty car. How many customers will shy away from a sports car because it has a 3.5 stars crash rating instead of 5 stars? On the other hand, a heavy, under performing and somewhat sluggish handling car may turn away good number of enthusiasts. There may even be a niche market for cars which do not even hide the fact that they trade safety for performance, style or driving dynamics -- hey if that isn't true nobody will buy Motorcycles or ride one without a helmet (in states that permit it).

For a mainstream product like the Camaro targeted at young, driving enthusiasts. There can and should be a balance struck between lightness and safety, and it shouldn't be either taken to the extreme. This really is is a choice here for the designer to make; an oppressive safety standard mandating 4000lb designs is a myth.

[cletus8269]

unfortunately, the second thing most people these days look for after fuel economy is crash ratings. a car maker isnt out to set themselves up for another exploder/firestone scenario... well... except for toyota's new problem thats come to light. I am sure that if GM could bury the statistics on the fatalities in 2dr s10 blazers, you'd never here a peep about it again. no one wants the reputation of an unsafe vehicle. VW was practically whoring this fact out a yr ago. after all everyone remembers the Pinto fiasco as well.

[cletus8269]

Not that the Camaro doesn't have it's faults...it has a ton. But every single car with charactor and personality does. How perfect do you think the 60's muscle cars were back in the day...hmmmm....

Chris

that gy-normous red thing pictured below this was my daily driver throughout high school. lets see. it was/is cold in the winter, hot in the summer. lots of wind and cabin noise. irritable at times, runs on 92 or higher, puny brakes...

[A Horse With No Name]

I drove a similar car (it's Chevelle brethren) through high school.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

This is not really true. Other than for the requiring airbags in the 90s, government "safety" regulations haven't changed much over the past decade and a half here. In Europe there is the minimum bumper height nonsense, but apart from that there hasn't been legislative requirements that cars have to be able to with stand crashes much better than they did in the 90s. What we have seen is a great deal of voluntary advancements in terms of crash safety. If you build a new car today with exactly the same impact safety as a 1994 Integra, it won't earn a 5-star crash rating. But it also won't be illegal to sell in the USA. If you raise the bumper height it'll be OK in Europe too. A Lotus Elise is very light and quite under protected against side impacts and front offset intrusions. It is nonetheless a completely legal car to market in the USA. Regardless of all of that, it is also quite untrue that cars have to be much heavier to meet today's safety expectations (mandated or otherwise). The 2006 to present Honda Civic is 2750 lbs. That is not that much more than the 2400~2600 lbs of the previous two generations. Most of that comes from the fact that the current model is a much bigger car. So big in fact that Honda has to have a separate Civic model for Europe and the "Fit" to cater to customers stateside who feel that the Civic is too big a car for their preference. I am not against safety, but one also has to recognize that tank like crash safety performance is not required by law and perhaps should not be the #1 priority in a sporty car. How many customers will shy away from a sports car because it has a 3.5 stars crash rating instead of 5 stars? On the other hand, a heavy, under performing and somewhat sluggish handling car may turn away good number of enthusiasts. There may even be a niche market for cars which do not even hide the fact that they trade safety for performance, style or driving dynamics -- hey if that isn't true nobody will buy Motorcycles or ride one without a helmet (in states that permit it). For a mainstream product like the Camaro targeted at young, driving enthusiasts. There can and should be a balance struck between lightness and safety, and it shouldn't be either taken to the extreme. This really is is a choice here for the designer to make; an oppressive safety standard mandating 4000lb designs is a myth.

The Elise is also a niche market car sold in very low numbers and it costs 50 large.

The Camaro will have to sell to a lot of secretarys and such to be viable.

Do you have 60 Grand to buy a '10 Camaro?

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

...and yes a 94 Integra would be currently illeagal to build and sell in the USA. It didn't meet the 2003 Crash test safety ratings, same as the prev. gen camaro, which is why it went away.

Don't get me wrong, Dwight, I would bring back the 69 Camaro and the Integra Type R if I could, and they would be here tomorrow. It just ain't gonna happen.

The other thing to think about is insurance cost. Without that kind of safety rating a Camaro might not be marketable, as no one could afford insurance.

Chris

[hyperv6]

The 5 and 4 star ratings are required by almost all automakers if they want a car that is insurable.

A GM rep stated to me that they had to make the Camaro to a high standard or the insurance would kill it. The other issue he said they had to deal with is cost. To keep cost down cheaper steel is used. They can make a strong light car but few people can afford it or want a car that small.

It is not the customers that are asking for the crash rating untill they have to pay the insurance. I in the past has to pass up a Z28 due to the high cost of insurance just becaus of my age with a good driving record. A car with a poor crash rating that increases the premium will kill sales to people who will not pay the premium. I know as I have been there as I could afford the car but not the coverage.

There is not an engineer out there that would not want to lose weight in a car but they understand the car needs to remain afforable. That is unless you are in some high buck car. The Camaro is not in that class and has to remain affordable.

Until prices on Boron Steel and Carbon Fiber get cheaper weight will be an issue.

Edited September 16, 2009 by hyperv6

[Robert Hall]

Ford seems to have achieved good crash test ratings w/ the Mustang and kept the weight reasonable.

[Chazman]

Ford seems to have achieved good crash test ratings w/ the Mustang and kept the weight reasonable.

Actually, Mustang's crash ratings are better than Camaro's.

[Robert Hall]

Actually, Mustang's crash ratings are better than Camaro's.

That's what I thought.

[regfootball]

the use of cheap steel is proliferating. just not as fast at GM and Ford. part of me thinks they are not pushing the usue enough on that item. why is a ford edge 4500 pounds?

at the same time i do not mind extra bulk if the vehicle is more solid. but if something like a saturn vue weighs 4400 pounds, then its a big problem.

the new camaro is physically a large car. it would be nice to see them take 100+ pounds off the front end, even it out 50/50, and make it lighter. if anything BMW makes its 6000 pound aztek feel a ton lighter, i am not sure GM couldn't do the same.

narrow up the tires a bit, quicken the steering, a little less cush in the suspension... if the car feels heavy it might just be as much about the interface feeling sloppy and unresponsive in comparison, as anything.

of course, the huge wheelbase has something to do with it too.

[A Horse With No Name]

Nice to discuss on an internet forum, but the Camaro is not going to get any lighter.

The cost of fuel is going to go wayyy up a petro supplies go down and China and India get into the car act.

Get your Camaro now, in a short while it will be gone with the wind. There will be no 2018 or 2020 Camaro's, methinks.

Chris

[gm4life]

Nice to discuss on an internet forum, but the Camaro is not going to get any lighter.

The cost of fuel is going to go wayyy up a petro supplies go down and China and India get into the car act.

Get your Camaro now, in a short while it will be gone with the wind. There will be no 2018 or 2020 Camaro's, methinks.

Chris

Your right I think the design life for it will make 2015 the last model year. So in my family we are going to have to decide who is getting one and what year... Might as well wait for 2015, and have the last of the bread. Then it would be exactly 10 years newer than my SLE.

Edited September 18, 2009 by gm4life

[Chazman]

Nice to discuss on an internet forum, but the Camaro is not going to get any lighter.

The cost of fuel is going to go wayyy up a petro supplies go down and China and India get into the car act.

Get your Camaro now, in a short while it will be gone with the wind. There will be no 2018 or 2020 Camaro's, methinks.

Chris

6th gen is already in the works....

[hyperv6]

6th gen is already in the works....

Yes and it will be lighter. Abeit a lot smaller. The only way cars will lose weight cheaply will be to shrink in size.

[ZL-1]

6th gen is already in the works....

Hope that means Alpha is being designed with a high degree of modularity so it can be used in a wide variety of RWD/AWD cars.

[Chazman]

Yes and it will be lighter. Abeit a lot smaller. The only way cars will lose weight cheaply will be to shrink in size.

I welcome that...

[Chazman]

Hope that means Alpha is being designed with a high degree of modularity so it can be used in a wide variety of RWD/AWD cars.

That wasn't the case with Alpha initially, but it seems that's what it's evolved into.

Edited September 18, 2009 by Chazman

[dwightlooi]

...and yes a 94 Integra would be currently illeagal to build and sell in the USA. It didn't meet the 2003 Crash test safety ratings, same as the prev. gen camaro, which is why it went away.

Don't get me wrong, Dwight, I would bring back the 69 Camaro and the Integra Type R if I could, and they would be here tomorrow. It just ain't gonna happen.

The other thing to think about is insurance cost. Without that kind of safety rating a Camaro might not be marketable, as no one could afford insurance.

Chris

The Integra did not go away. It was replaced in 2002 (as a 2003 model) with the RSX after an uncharacteristically long (for a Honda) 8-year run. The RSX is still the Integra in other markets, but was given the RSX nomenclature to bring it in line with the rest of Acrua's lineup which do not have verbose names.

The K20 powered RSX is a 2700 lbs car. Not appreciably heavier than the 2643 lbs outgoing B18 powered model. The RSX is still on sale today and it is still available with the 8000 rpm 200 hp engine if you want it.

No, it is not a particularly expensive car to insure nor is the old Integra for that matter.

The Camaro is HEAVY because it is a Zeta and it is a HUGE car. It sits on a full size, RWD, sedan platform designed to support the Holden Commodore, Statesman and Caprice. It is like building a sports car on a Crown Vic (Panther) platform -- well maybe not quite that bad but you get the picture. Whatever the Alpha turns out to be, it'll be smaller and it can be substantially lighter. And, if has the cabin the size of a 2001~2006 C-class or 1992~1999 3-series it'll be plenty for the kind of shoppers it targets. Those who want a bigger car can always be shown the Zetas and Sigmas.

[hyperv6]

The Alpha was held up to find a away to make it affordable for CHey to use just as they did with the Zeta.

Look at the size of the small Caddy in the 60 return spot and that is the size a new Camaro will be headed if it is to be continued. I also will be shocked if it has a V8. The present V6 car is being used to pave the path to it today. Note GMPP is making many performance parts for it. GM is out to prove the V6 is a performer.

I just wonder what engine will get the Turbo? Ford is looking into the same for the Stang.

[Chazman]

The Camaro is HEAVY because it is a Zeta and it is a HUGE car. It sits on a full size, RWD, sedan platform designed to support the Holden Commodore, Statesman and Caprice. It is like building a sports car on a Crown Vic (Panther) platform -- well maybe not quite that bad but you get the picture. Whatever the Alpha turns out to be, it'll be smaller and it can be substantially lighter. And, if has the cabin the size of a 2001~2006 C-class or 1992~1999 3-series it'll be plenty for the kind of shoppers it targets. Those who want a bigger car can always be shown the Zetas and Sigmas.

Great analogy.

Edited September 19, 2009 by Chazman

[Chazman]

The Alpha was held up to find a away to make it affordable for CHey to use just as they did with the Zeta.

Look at the size of the small Caddy in the 60 return spot and that is the size a new Camaro will be headed if it is to be continued. I also will be shocked if it has a V8. The present V6 car is being used to pave the path to it today. Note GMPP is making many performance parts for it. GM is out to prove the V6 is a performer.

I just wonder what engine will get the Turbo? Ford is looking into the same for the Stang.

As far as a V8 goes, it may be too soon to tell. I believe it is being package protected for a smallblock. In the end though, if Mustang packs a V8, the pressure for Camaro to have one also will be overwhelming.

[Drew Dowdell]

Keep bitching when they give us something good...and you'll be driving a crapbox like the Corolla.

Word.

[dwightlooi]

The Alpha was held up to find a away to make it affordable for CHey to use just as they did with the Zeta.

Look at the size of the small Caddy in the 60 return spot and that is the size a new Camaro will be headed if it is to be continued. I also will be shocked if it has a V8. The present V6 car is being used to pave the path to it today. Note GMPP is making many performance parts for it. GM is out to prove the V6 is a performer.

I just wonder what engine will get the Turbo? Ford is looking into the same for the Stang.

I think they need to simply keep it simple and small.

Try MacPherson Struts in front and Chapman Struts in the back simple. Reduced mass and proper tuning does more for handling than double wishbones and five link arrangements. Doubters should drive a Boxster or Cayman one day... its not bad... really.