Why the new Camaro will fail

[99camaroSS]

anyone who hasnt driven a new gto needs to hush, i was always downing the goat until we accidentally got a 24 hour test drive, i drove 2 new corvettes and the 2006 red gto with a stick in the same month and the gto was on par (if not better) than the vette in my opinion. the gto cannot be appreciated until it is experienced

about the convo about insurance rates on 4th gens... im under 18 and insured as a secondary on a 99 SS and it costs about 2200 a year

and as far as the new camaro goes... que sera sera, whatever will be will be and only time will tell

[longtooth]

If Ford can sell the Mustang for under $25,000, I can't see GM not being able to do the same thing. IIRC, the Mustang GT starts around $25,000, so GM had better be able to give us a V6 Camaro for well under that amount. And I don't understand why he's fussing over insurance-that differs from area to area, company to company, situation to situation, person to person. I can think of cars that would cost more to insure (Ferrari, Bugatti Veyron, Bentley, etc) than a Camaro.

I honestly don't see where this guy is coming from. What did the Camaro ever do to him? Personally insult him?

Ah Hah! Yes, a Camaro stole his girlfriend! Think about it.

[evok]

That's simplifying things quite a bit.

According to that logic the Camry is 15+ years old under the skin

and the Ranger & Crown Vic. are 25 years old, actually those are

much more fair comparisons than the Opel/F-body one.

Hint: There is a difference in a live axle 1982 derived design vs. an independently suspended tweaked Opel Omega last redesigned in the early 1990s with a very modern LS motor.

This is difference between driving a new car based upon an older design than one that is literally old.

[Camino LS6]

Hint:  There is a difference in a live axle 1982 derived design vs. an independently suspended  tweaked Opel Omega last redesigned in the early 1990s with a very modern LS motor.

This is difference between driving a new car based upon an older design than one that is literally old.

I'd go even farther, by saying that the design intent and the execution of both cars is so far apart that beyond the engine/trans, 2 doors, and RWD these cars have almost nothing in common.

[zete]

There are a few problems with the author's arguments. Other than the sexist attitude that few women woudl be interested in a muscular car, the fact is that there's a huge pent up demand for a GM pony car. This is from folks I know who want a pony car but won't buy a Ford -- me being one of them. There are also a lot of boomers who want to relive their youth but can't afford to buy a 67 Camaro at Barrett-Jackson for hundreds of thousands of dollars. What they do want is something cool, fast, that can handle and looks American. The Camaro does that.

The GTO, which was hampered in a number of stylistic ways and insulted with the price gouging did reasonably well. Imagine a true rendition of a GTO and I'm sure the sales would have been better, especially if dealers can keep their greed in check.

As for women, well, I know a great number of them that lust after Corvettes. When shown the concept Camaro they drooled over that, especially if it comes in a convertible hard top. Women today aren't the women of the 60s. They have affluence and many boomer women know that what was considered 'correct' back then -- i.e., a secretary special Mustang -- isn't what they truly desire. They want a V8. They want the power. They want the looks.

Insurance will remain a stickler, but let's face it, it's only a concern for those under 25. Those under 22 are usually in school and those working probably haven't saved enough up for a Z28 or SS Camaro, so the entry-level V6s will do just fine -- and have lower insurance to boot.

Today GM is trying to appeal to a wide swath of car lovers of both sexes, not just a bunch of teens from the 60s as they were way back then. Tastes are more sophisticated and so a more sophisticated car is required. The fact the Camaro will come with IRS is an indication of that. The care taken by Lutz to evolve the car is another indicator. It's not just a retro 67 Camaro but a nice progression to a modern interpretation.

And I can't emphasize enough just how much of a pent up demand there is amongst my friends for a Camaro. The Ford lovers are ecstatic with the new Mustang and the GM fans despondent. That will change soon enough.

In my family I won't be surprised if it's my wife, and not me, who decides to get the Camaro first. And I won't stand in her way, either. Of course, she's hoping for a hardtop convertible ;-).

[evok]

I'd go even farther, by saying that the design intent and the execution of both cars is so far apart that beyond the engine/trans, 2 doors, and RWD these cars have almost nothing in common.

Car for car there is nothing in common. A GTO I would consider driving a TA no way in hell.

But I do agree with someone that posted earlier, the GTO does appeal to the V8 TA void in the portfolio. Before the demise of the TA - sales were only about 30k a year.

[Sixty8panther]

Hint:  There is a difference in a live axle 1982 derived design vs. an independently suspended  tweaked Opel Omega last redesigned in the early 1990s with a very modern LS motor.

This is difference between driving a new car based upon an older design than one that is literally old.

You know that saying "they don't make them like they used to"?

Well some of us like a solid rear axle, it's more durable, less

expensive to maintain & a lot easier to work on. My Infiniti &

Maxima both are RWD with IRS and the quality of my life is not

somehow drastically improved just because the rear wheels

are independently sprung. Sure IRS is superior in terms of

handling but it adds unnecessary cost, weight and complexity.

Evok:

You just seem to be hell bent on proving anything without a

shiny orange "new & improved" sticker to be old, lame &

obsolete. Someday you may find yourself on the ugly side of

progress. I'm not all for progress just for the sake of change,

I'd rather have choices. I6, V6 & V8. RWD & Rear-biased AWD

4dr sedan, 2dr sedan, & 2 dr hardtop. Now as far as the

Camaro give me a solid rear axle and the choice to pay for

IRS if I find it to be worthwhile.

[evok]

Now as far as the

Camaro give me a solid rear axle and the choice to pay for

IRS if I find it to be worthwhile.

I am sure you can find one in a used car lot and of course there is aftermarket.

[NOS2006]

about the convo about insurance rates on 4th gens... im under 18 and insured as a secondary on a 99 SS and it costs about 2200 a year

You're getting a hell of a deal. My '98 V6 Camaro costs me about $2400/year.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Why is everyones insurance so cheap? Mine is $1440 for 6 months. I checked what they wanted for a 98 Corvette- $470 per month.

I hate insurance companies.

[Northstar]

Wow, you guys are getting screwed. It costs us $750/year to insure the GTO (my dad is the "primary" driver) and that includes me (18yo) and my sister (20yo), and the GTO would be a easier to get into trouble in than any of the cars you guys are paying those rates for.

[ocnblu]

I am over $1000/yr with Progressive.

[NOS2006]

Wow, you guys are getting screwed. It costs us $750/year to insure the GTO (my dad is the "primary" driver) and that includes me (18yo) and my sister (20yo), and the GTO would be a easier to get into trouble in than any of the cars you guys are paying those rates for.

WTF! My dad's the primary driver on mine, too (well, technically I pay for two vehicles, but it's cheaper that way than for me to be on just the Camaro). Is that full coverage?

[CaddyXLR-V]

I checked how much it would be for a GTO also, same as aCorvette, $470 per month, though I would be the primary driver. I have to wait until I'm 25 for my rates to drop.

[wilde1988]

This guy doesn't have a vast clue as to what he's talking about. First off, GM has gotten excellent reviews on the new Camaro, citing not just it's performance but also it's quality (even though it's still a concept car).

Another thing he's highly mistaken on is the insurance factor. I'm an 18 year old male and I can afford to pay the insurance on my Z28, and yes I have full coverage.

The enduring genius of Ford's Mustang is that it transcends testosterone -- and the muscle car era. Fitted with a hi-po engine and stripes, it's a car that guys absolutely love.

Hi-po? How is a 300 hp engine considered high performance when he's comparing it to the 400 hp LS2 in the Camaro?

[cletus8269]

I dont think the gas or insurance will be a problem for sales. i have a buddy thats 22 has a v6 firebird and his insurance is insane, couple bad breaks on his record but its a v6. It doesnt always boil down to the kind of car you drive. As for frequent stops at the pumps, dodge has that downpat with the hemi. GM has a 505hp motor in the Z06 that gets up to 26mpg. I guess thats just a minor point that doesnt need to be mentioned in the column though right?

[Chicagoland]

The main buyers will be drivers 35-60, who have the $$.

[sberry00]

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9973

[sberry00]

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=9973

Stupid article. I'll give it insurance concerns and gas mileage concerns, but as far as appeal? This car is the best looking camaro since the late 60's and if priced right, GM will sell the heck out of em.

[goblue1999]

So... the Camaro will fail because the GTO did, because it's assumed that it will get poor gas mileage, because of its styling with respect to the more bland mustang, because it's  assumed that women hate it, because it's assumed that it will be too expensive...

I agree! 

You can bet your A$$ that the Camaro won't fail for fuel economy. Just take a look at the Vette.....28mpg plus on the highway, ripping asphalt all the way.

[zhawk]

After checking with my agent I expect to pay about $70 per month or $840 per year for a new Z/28 when they arrive.

I'm not sure what this guy's beef is but I think he is far out there that he probably thinks the best Mustang was the 74 Cobra II.

[tama z71]

I sent a letter to the editor of that pissant website...

I just read Eric Peters’ editorial on the new Chevrolet Camaro. Good lord. If I may, that was the most self-fulfilling, masturbatory new-car analysis I’ve read in a long time.

Every point he makes is based on the assumption that the production Camaro will match the concept bolt for bolt, the assumption that gas will continue to climb in price, and the assumption that everyone who wants a V-8 powered American muscle car has already broken down and bought a 1998 Honda Civic.

While those of us who retain possession of our testicles hope the new Camaro replicates its concept self, nothing is guaranteed. If you want your fledgling publication taken seriously in the future, see to it that writers such as Mr. Peters spend less time scanning their pocket dictionaries for uselessly big words and more time understanding what they are bitching about.

[zhawk]

I love it, great letter.

[ketch]

Funny read that 'article' ; IN fact, my wife only wants a Camaro, never a 'stang. So there. Nice work of writing dis-information. I hope to prove that idiot wrong when it comes out...oh and the wife agrees!

p.s- with DoD it will get 18 in the city, so like a v6- so there twice!

(current ride is a 2000 Olds Intrigue GL SLP-R, and I am 46, so I suppose I am too old for a Camaro- LOL)

Edited June 30, 2006 by ketch

[Northstar]

WTF! My dad's the primary driver on mine, too (well, technically I pay for two vehicles, but it's cheaper that way than for me to be on just the Camaro). Is that full coverage?

Yep, full coverage.

[Mr.Krinkle]

why even waste your time? you couldve just sent them the link to this site.