At 4pm Monday, GM pulled the wraps off the new Chevrolet Camaro. I didn't watch the live press conference. No surprise there. Literally. Everything about the car had been leaked in the week leading up to the curtain pull: exterior, interior, engines and transmissions. Other than that, only two numbers held any mystery: price and zero to sixty sprint times. GM only told us the latter. I'm excited, as a car fan. As an armchair CEO…
Yes, I know: this retro pony/muscle car is a sharp-looking old– I mean new, thing. And the V6 base coupe will power from rest to 60mph in an entirely credible 6.1 seconds. The automatic V8 version will hit 60 from stop in a truly impressive 4.6 seconds, roaring like a tiger about to grab a mouthful of Roy Horn. Every Camaro, V6 or V8, stick or automatic, will have six gears. The car may even handle well. So credit where it's due. Rock on! So who wants one of these things?
Camaro buyers will come in two basic flavors (watch it). Group One: traditionalists. They already think this article is pointless, full of shit and flat out wrong. They've been waiting to buy this thing since there was this thing to wait to buy ('87?). You can no more persuade them that GM should have spent the Camaro's development money improving the Cobalt than you can convince them that mullets were not, at any point in time, deeply fashionable.
The second group: people who want a cool car. They couldn't care less about zero to sixty times or skid pad numbers (ew) or lateral Gs (isn't that a drug-related term?). All they want to know is… price. Which is the only thing GM won't tell them. Provided it's within spitting distance of a fully-loaded Camry, they're going to like the Camaro. A lot. It's cool. And the ones who take the plunge will buy a V6 Camaro (with 300 horses, no shame in that) with an automatic.
While GM will be only-too-happy to suck-up trad buyers' money and props– look for "friends and family" discounts for the old white men who dominate the mainstream media — they know the Camaro's target market will be blue or slightly white collar mainstreamers stretching to make their car payment. That's why GM put-out the word on the Camaro's fuel economy at the press conference: 26mpg highway! How great is that?
Meh. Competitors with 250-300 horsepower (Charger, Challenger, Mustang) all offer comparable MPGs. These days, fuel-conscious secretaries consumers are lined-up none deep for FoMoCo's retro ride. 'Stang sales slipped 14.8 percent in June, down 28.8 percent year-to-date. During the same period, Charger sales tumbled 27.6 percent, down 11.3 percent year-to-date. And LOTS of those sales sailed with the fleets.
Clearly, this is NOT the time to launch a better, cooler, faster Mustang with the same lack of practicality and piggish ways. And that's not because the majority of American consumers suddenly want to go to Vermont to marry their Prius and raise your taxes so they can help people downtrodden by a racist, uncaring society. It's just that these potential buyers are backwards on their "cool" SUV, they're freaked by gas prices AND there are plenty of fun, frugal alternatives. I mean, there will be. You know; next spring.
Sure, there are plenty of old school muscle car guys (Group One) that wouldn't buy a "little rice burner" if you offered it to them for $100 and threw in a case of Jackie D. But they aren't the Camaro's core demographic. And the core demo is tapped-out and moved onto a Scion tC, or an Altima Coupe, or at the more expensive end of things, an Infiniti G37. At best, the Camaro can carve out a big slice of small– and rapidly diminishing– pie. Once again, GM's timing sucks.
Even worse, The General looks set to, once again, turn its back on its sense of identity/history. The last time gas prices whacked distinctively American cars, Detroit neutered everything. Responding to fuel price escalation, they fit their mid to late-70's land yachts with woefully-underpowered engines. In the face of the current gas crisis, GM "tempts" us with talk of a Camaro with a turbo-charged four-cylinder Ecotec engine.
While it's impossible to imagine a Camaro as bad as the old Iron Duke, the turbo 4 runs the risk of either being craptastic, or too good and thus killing V6 Camaro sales. GM made this bed. One way or another, they're going to have to lie in it. But that's no reason to lie about it. Trying to pretend the new Camaro's a Futon couch instead of California King-sized four-poster will fool some of the people some of the time, but not many. This is the time that GM must stick to its guns and get the marketing mavens to earn their crust.
75 Comments on “The Camaro: GM’s Past, But Not Future...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
I think the exact opposite. GM badly needed some good news, and they have it with the Camaro. They’ll sell enough to warranted continued development in a sixth-gen model. Hell, they sold me on one.
I imagine the room where GM product development takes place, Picture a room with a giant wheel of……well you get the idea.
Market timing is everything and this company seems to miss despite the ability to produce the product.
I disagree with 2 points:
1) The Camaro’s core demographic has almost always been those “old school muscle car guys.” The secretaries have generally flocked to base Mustangs, which is why the Mustang has nearly always outsold the Camaro and hasn’t been saddled with as much of a ‘white-trash’ image.
2) I don’t really think it matters what engine they put in the base version (as long as that engine is somewhat reasonable, the 2.2L from the Cobalt XFE wouldn’t work, the turbocharged Ecotec should be fine). The V6 version of the Camaro (and the ‘Stang) has never been that fast. The people who buy the base Camaro are mostly buying it primarily for the styling. The perception of the Camaro’s performance amongst the general population has always been driven by the V8 version
I’m just happy that the product is from a company that is based here, and not there. Where ever “there” is for you in your mind as the “other guys.”
News of TRW recently moving their air-bag plant to Mexico has me seeing more Red White and Blue lately.
Sorry, it comes and goes…
I don’t think a less powerful V6 would’ve made it much more efficient, but cheaper maybe? Plenty of people will want this car without caring whether it has 200hp or 300hp.
Has GM released the number of Camaro’s it needs to sell to break even on this? I would expect it to be at least 50K, and probably more than that, but for the sake of argument let’s assume it’s 50K. If the fourth generation Camaro struggled to sell 50K units a year (with 2001 not even selling 30K and 2002 just over 40K), what gives GM the confidence that it could sell 50K a year consistently?
I got to say, I really thing GM missed an oppourtunity here.
That 304hp V6 looks like a fantastic engine, and 400hp is always fun, but… Why does a 2+2 pony car need to weigh 3700lbs?
GM should have kept the retro styling, but downsized the platform to keep in the 2800-3200 range. That 304hp V6 would be amazing in a 2800lb car, and a V8 wouldn’t be needed at all. Fuel economy and handling would easily fall into place. Slap a 4-banger in as a base engine. Keep the price on par with a Malibu.
Why does retro style alway mean retro mass?
“I’m just happy that the product is from a company that is based here, and not there. Where ever “there” is for you in your mind as the “other guys.” ”
N.B. – The Camaro was mostly developed by Holden in Australia.
Happy_Endings, you nailed it. GM desperately needs to improve cash flow (that is, make it less negative), and there’s little reason to think the new Camaro will make a noticeable difference. If it’s basically just a “halo” car, is there much reason to think Cobalts, Malibus and Impalas will start selling better?
I’m no expert on auto manufacture, but it seems like I recall an assembly plant needed a volume of about 200,000 units a year for efficient operation. Seems like the Camaro would need at least a line of its own. Anyone know about this?
You put a four-banger in a Camaro and two words of fear will pop into any Camaro fan’s mind: Iron Duke.
Meh. Competitors with 250-300 horsepower (Charger, Challenger, Mustang) all offer comparable MPGs. These days, fuel-conscious secretaries consumers are lined-up none deep for FoMoCo’s retro ride. ‘Stang sales slipped 14.8 percent in June, down 28.8 percent year-to-date. During the same period, Charger sales tumbled 27.6 percent, down 11.3 percent year-to-date. And LOTS of those sales sailed with the fleets.
Justin,
I think you are a little premature in figuring that the Camaro is not going to be a success for GM, at least initially. All of these cars get a 12 to 24 month free ride where demand outpaces supply, consider the first year and a half of the last Mustang or the first two years of the Chrysler RWD cars.
The trick will be after demand starts to wane, how do you keep the Camaro fresh (Ford: good job on the GT variants not so much on the V6. Chrysler: still paying Daimler for overpriced Kraut parts and can’t afford to freshen the cars).
Lastly, GM still hasn’t ruled out the 2.0L Turbo I4 from the SAAB or Solstice so maybe there is an economical option there.
With a sub-5 second sprint to 60, a usable trunk, and a bit more room in back, will this cannibalize the Corvette?
The Mustang is an old car. It hasn’t recieved a significant freshening since it was launched years ago, that’s a big reason for it’s sales decline. In fact your other example has also been out since the same year without a redesign.
The Mustang is getting a comprehensive freshening that will be unveiled later this year for the 2010 model year. You can expect sales to pick up.
The Mustang and Camaro have traditionally sold well since they were created, even during hard economic times like the late 1970s and early 1980s. I don’t suspect this niche will die off anytime soon if ever.
The Camaro could also be Chevrolet’s future. It could be a good template to model all Chevrolet cars after. I certainly don’t think Chevrolet’s future is going to get any brighter selling Korean penalty boxes, numerous SUVs and crossovers nobody wants or rental-styled Impalas and Japanese looking Malibus.
A automaker’s future is in it’s past and it’s heritage. BMWs have always been ultimate driving machines and have always delivered the same type of style and promise. Toyotas have always been vanilla but very reliable and efficient.
Chevrolet during it’s peak was always stylish, practical but also had performance-minded trims and were unabashedly American. That’s what Chevrolet should always be and that’s what the Camaro delivers on. Every Chevrolet should have as much style, attention to detail and passion as the Camaro exhibits. I’d like to see a Malibu and Impala like that as well as a compact Nova to go head to head with the Civic.
That’s how the past is Chevrolet’s future.
They should offer an electric Camaro that will beat the Tesla on range, price, and performance!
Make it a Pontiac Firebird. Remember the GTA that had the Grand National drive train in it?
I’m holding out for the Camaro Hybrid.
And I’m holding out for a Prius GT-S
factotum:
The Camaro has always had performance close (but not quite matching) to the Vette of its time, along with 2 tiny back seats. It’s also always been heavier and had inferior-handling. I don’t see the relationship between the Vette and Camaro being any different in 2008 than it was in 1969-2002
And the (coupe) Vette has 21 cu ft of storage space under the hatch, which is a lot larger than most people would think, and I’m 99% sure the Camaro’s trunk isn’t 21 cu ft.
I was really interested in this car until I saw the weight. It really needs to go on a diet.
That last generation Camaro got better fuel economy than this new pig.
The OHV V8 is an amazing motor, it’s compact, light, simple and reliable… They should shrink its displacement until it makes the same power as the Camry V6 and then stick it into EVERYTHING.
My perfect Camaro would contain a 3 to 4 litre OHV V8 and would be about the size of a 240sx…
I have a feeling safety standards have killed the idea of ever building light cars again without making them out of carbon fiber and/or aluminum though, or cars with low beltlines that you can see out of for that matter.
@ Blunozer:
“Why does a 2+2 pony car need to weigh 3700lbs?”
You have the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards to thank for that. If only we put the effort into driver training that we put into armor plating the passenger compartments…
@ Captain Tungsten:
You have the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards to thank for that. If only we put the effort into driver training that we put into armor plating the passenger compartments…
And as mistrernee points out, the irony of it all is that the armor plating has totally destroyed visibility from the viewpoint of the driver’s seat. High beltlines, thick C-pillars and kicked-up rear quarters make it easier to see out of a 40-year-old car than seeing out of a modern one. But not to worry…we can have rear-mounted cameras to fix this new problem!
I just want to add one thing to this article.
I didn’t write it with a smile on my face. I absolutely love this car.
Sad times for the automotive industry.
The sad bit is, Die hard chevy fans will actually line up
to buy it. It is more of a cartoon Camaro than the
Charger is, fat and lazy, great combo for a Camaro, look
at the original…
SteveL
I too would love to see a chev 3L ohv v8. smooth without a balance shaft.
The first year the Camaro is out, it should be a bonafide hit unless the economy goes into an even narrower counter-clockwise motion. The Camaro’s styling is definitely distinctive amongst the blandmobiles of the modern day, and GM’s interior for it looks to be far nicer than the one Ford has now for the Mustang.
On those measurements the Camaro certainly comes out far ahead.
There will be a fair amount of halo effect for the General as well…. and no. I don’t believe for a minute that GM should be trying to compete head-on with the imports ten times out of ten. The import bias amongst many Toyonda owners is very strong (not to mention the media spin) and even when GM and Ford offer a comparable product to the Camcords and Corollics, they often get little more than back handed compliments.
You wrote a very good article and 90+% of it will likely turn out to be true. But I think you may want to reconsider the core demographic for the Camaro.
“Sure, there are plenty of old school muscle car guys (Group One) that wouldn’t buy a “little rice burner” if you offered it to them for $100 and threw in a case of Jackie D. But they aren’t the Camaro’s core demographic. And the core demo is tapped-out and moved onto a Scion tC, or an Altima Coupe, or at the more expensive end of things, an Infiniti G37. At best, the Camaro can carve out a big slice of small– and rapidly diminishing– pie. Once again, GM’s timing sucks.”
What’s really interesting to me at least is that the Mustang is an extremely appealing car to the young (and young at hear), while this one seems to intentionally go in the exact opposite direction. The speed is there… but the styling is much more reminiscent of the older NASCAR contingency than the aspiring yuppie crowd. I seriously doubt that the cars you mentioned will be heavily cross-shopped with the Camaro. Challengers, Mustangs, and perhaps even a loaded 300C (in rare instances) will likely be the most direct competitors.
I should also add the G8 to the list as well.
@ Blunozer:
“Why does a 2+2 pony car need to weigh 3700lbs?”
You have the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards to thank for that. If only we put the effort into driver training that we put into armor plating the passenger compartments…
Subie’s current WRX STi weighs slightly less than 3400 lbs. Subie Specs. Surely GM could have shaved off 10% of the Camaro’s weight…
In any case, I’m not sure how offering me “driver training” would save me against the other doofuses (doofii?) on the road. I might be better able to anticipate, and defensively drive against, stupidity, but at some point stupidity wins out.
This is the ugliest car ever made IMO.
My thoughts as a potential buyer:
I want a Mustang. The Mustang has a solid rear axle. This is both annoying and obvious, and mars a handling package that has otherwise excellent steering. Also, Ford won’t be selling the Bullitt forever, and that’s the best one. What’s most annoying is that the 2010 Mustang retains the same rear axle, so there’s nothing on the horizon that piques my interest.
I like this Camaro. What I don’t like is that it’s too ostentatious, it weighs too much to be fast with the V6 (the only engine that’ll approach the ~26K starting price of the Mustang GT), and visibility promises to be terrible. Otherwise, I expect the handling to be far better than the Mustang, which is probably the most compelling aspect by comparison.
And as yet, the most promising quick coupe appears to be.. a Hyundai?
@KnightRT:
Not trying to be a jerk but –
The V6 Camaro should do 0-60 in 6.1 with the V6 – that’s not up to what you’re looking for in terms of quickness?
It may not have the burble of the V8 I realize, but my guess is that this Camaro will really manhandle the Stang when it comes to handling.
I dunno, but to me this thing is light years ahead of the Mustang. And I really am more of a Ford guy than GM. Unless Oldsmobile was still around, dammit. Would be cool if there was a version of this as a 442!
I think there we be more than just the camaro faithful and secretaries buying this car. The reason I say this is I don’t fall into either group yet this is at the top of my list. I think the new camaro will sell very well and you’ll even see some conquest sales from Japanese brands.
It looks to me that GM executed well on this car. The only thing left is pricing. I’d put money down that it falls right between mustang and challenger (not SRT).
“The V6 Camaro should do 0-60 in 6.1 with the V6 – that’s not up to what you’re looking for in terms of quickness?”
It’ll be neck and neck with a new V6 Camry..
I’m not saying that isn’t fast, but the weight is really holding this thing back and is going to hurt its sales.
I’m really pining for a lightweight coupe though, everyone keeps saying “2010″….
Lets put this in perspective, the Mustang GT and the Camaro SS.
The Camaro SS has a six-speed transmission standard, independent rear suspension, 122 more HP, bigger wheels (20″ vs 17″), bigger tires (245 vs 235), bigger Brembo rotors (14″+ vs 12″), bigger calipers (4 piston vs 2 piston) and a bigger fuel tank (16 vs 19 gallon). All of that stuff adds weight but also enhances performance and drivability.
Guess what happens when you add all of those components to the Mustang? It also becomes heavier, the king of Mustangs the GT500 is a sneeze away from 4,000lbs. And it costs substantially more than the SS. And it’s still carrying a buggy axle out back. So does the Challenger SRT8. The Mustang GT Premium has amenities similar to the Camaro, it’s base price is higher than the standard GT and it’s still nowhere near the new Camaro SS.
Does anyone honestly expect an entirely new fullsize car made of mostly steel with 422hp/408lb-ft and a price tag starting at aroud 30k to weigh much less than the new SS does? The car isn’t priced near the Corvette or higher so they can’t use carbon fiber everywhere. Even big pricier cars like the BMW 545i weigh the same with their use of aluminum and magnesium.
Look at some other cars in the Camaro SS price range too.
EVO X MR = 3600lbs – 291hp
G37 = 3700lbs – 330hp/270lb-ft
M3 = 3700lbs – 414hp/295lb-ft
335i = 3600lbs – 300hp/300lb-ft
Genesis = 3550lbs – ~300hp
Mustang Bullitt = 3600lbs – 315hp/325lb-ft
And fuel economy.
Challenger SRT8 = 18MPG
Mustang GT500 = 20MPG
RX8 (238hp) = 23MPG
EVO X (291hp) = 22MPG
GTR = 21MPG
M3 = 20MPG
WRX STI (305hp) = 23MPG
GT500 = 3920lbs/500hp
Camaro SS = 3860lbs/422hp
The GT500 has 78 additional HP, but the Camaro is 60lbs lighter, has a vastly newer chassis/structure, superior weight balance and a modern fully independent suspension. It will also be substantially cheaper.
It looks like the Camaro is squarely aimed right at the performance sweet spot on the market and has all it’s bases covered from standout styling to performance to a high quality interior full of nice detailing.
Tri,
and out of all of them, I’d take the 335i or M3 (handling is king!)…despite the fact that I absolutely love the design of the new Camaro. I’ll never own one, but I think they’re pretty good to look at. It really looks about as futuristic as a retro design can get, and there’s really no other car on the road that looks like it. IF GM can mek this car even better in gen 2, it could be a bright star in the bog of shit that GM is in. It won’t be enough to save them, but still pretty nice.
Someone brought up the last gen Camaro, and its sales…that car was an absolute mess. Doesn’t surprise me that it sold like crap its final years…dodgy reliability, poor handling, questionable looks (the convertible was absurd).
TriShield:
I agree with you completely. I have no issues with the Camaro’s weight and I think the stats really drive it home.
New cars that are anything bigger than Toyota Yaris are going to weigh 3500 lbs. Especially if you want them with airbags, automatic transmissions, crumple zones, ABS, automatic A/C and whatever the heck else.
Besides, the V8 will do 0-60 in under 5 seconds? Yes please.
“The Mustang and Camaro have traditionally sold well since they were created, even during hard economic times like the late 1970s and early 1980s. I don’t suspect this niche will die off anytime soon if ever.”
Say what? The Mustang was for all intents and purposes gone from 1974-1978, although there was a tarted up Pinto by the name of Mustang II sold then. Most people don’t consider the Mustang II a real Mustang at all. The Camaro/Firebird twins were killed in 2002 due to lack of sales and a dead 2-door coupe market. In fact, two door cars of all kinds have gone from common to relative rarity in the US over the past several decades.
This newest Camaro has missed the market window by several years.
I fall squarely into the group #2 and love the looks of this car. But as an image conscious consumer, my biggest fear with purchasing the new Camaro would be GM’s history of destroying the appeal of once hot or even decent cars through various brand destroying moves. As CSJohnston pointed out, the demand for the Camaro will most likely be strong only for a couple years. So what will happen at that point? Lower production to meet demand? HA! Upgrades to keep it fresh? Probably nothing significant. My money would be on GM filling the local rental agency lots with plenty of decontented 4/6 cylinder coupes and convertibles…. and the image of the Camaro would end up being the equivalent of a V6 Mustang. Damn you GM! Prove me wrong!
@Trishield
The fact that the Camaro matches the fuel economy of the Mustang is amazing in my opinion and shows the strength of GM’s engines. The Mustang GT undercuts the weight of the Camaro V6 by a couple hundred pounds.
The things like tires and brakes are there to deal with the extra weight. 18″ steel wheels shod with P245/55R18 tires on the base model is insane and is going to be a big cost associated with running the vehicle and steel wheels that large/heavy are not going to do the suspension any favours. It was actually my first wtf? moment when I saw the specifications and thought they must have been a typo.
I’m amazed at how fat these cars have gotten. I get a little more dissapointed every time the specifications for some new coupe comes out. The only cars you can get now that come in under 3000 lbs are little fwd econoboxes. The 350Z and G37 are no exceptions. The 350Z actually manages to look fat as well. The only one that has kept weight down is Mazda with the Miata and RX-8.
As far as the old Camaro vs Mustang debate I think it is just going to be more of the same. The Chevy will trail the Mustang sales wise no matter how much better it performs.
The ladies like Mustangs.
Bah, I should just get it over with and buy an RX-8 even if it does look hokey.
To have any sort of gut punch, a car has to break 60 in the low fives. The turbocharged Saturn Sky Redline I tested was a snooze, and that one trips the lights at 5.7.
This V6 Camaro will be priced in league with the Mustang GT. One of these cars is lighter, faster, and sounds better, even if it does have wagon suspension. I expect the V8 SS to start above $30K and break $40K at the higher trim levels. $35K is simply more than I want to spend, so if I want a fast car, it’s unlikely the Camaro will qualify. That leaves the Mustang.
There is no doubt that a Camaro SS will be a superior car to a the current generation Mustang GT (and likely the 2010 version as well since it’s only a freshening) but the comparison made up is totally bogus (not to mention the following list of cars within the SS’s “price range” contains an M3 AND a Bullit… uhm those cars are like 30K apart?). A Mustang GT costs a few thousand less than the V6 version of Camaro, in addition to being much faster and somehow lighter.
It’s unfair to compare cars in price ranges that are so far away. In fact, I’d imagine the MSRP (not to mention the actual market price) of an SS will be much closer to a 335i than to a GT.
Isn’t it Berkowitz after all who reiterates that people cross shop within their price range, not an randomly defined label. Let’s keep that in mind.
Ultimately, if you want a better car than a Mustang GT there’s certainly one here in the Camaro SS – and globs of others as well – you’ll just have to pay for it.
As a side note GM has some sort of test track here in my town and the other day I saw a black camaro on the road coming back from there. And my goodness… it is absolutely STUNNING. Jaw-dropping looks. I mean, the pictures look good but in person… WOW. I can’t emphasize this enough: anyone who likes cars is gonna be in for a real treat when they finally see this thing.
How NEW is this car? With GM’s track record, it is probably just a restyled something else so GM can afford to limit production. My point is, except for paying the stylists, how much (how little) does the General have tied up in a niche car? Can it hurt? I doubt it. I think this will be a gem in the ashes.
Speaking for the under 40 crowd, I know nobody that is taking the new Camaro seriously. And that comes from knowing some honest to god piston heads – a good friend runs a performance shop.
The only, and I mean only, people I’ve seen interested are the old timers that are reminicing their old ‘69 Camaro…but those guys are usually flush enough to buy the Corvette and wouldn’t waste their time with the new Camaro anyway. GM was completely stupid to bring back this rednek heap.
That said, I know plenty of people in my age group that are clamouring for Toyota to bring back the Supra. Retro styling and V8 engines mean nothing to those of us that grew up in the 80’s and not the 60’s. If GM built a smaller, lighter, more “Japanese” style sports car I think the highly sought after 25-40 year old buyer would be more interested. Then again, I would never expect GM to have the engineering skills to design such a car or engine, but I’d like to be proven wrong. I think Ford was going in the right direction with some of their original turbo Probe models, but as always, the old timers axed it for the “new” Mustang. Meanwhile people like me haven’t cross shopped a Detroit 2.8 ever. Their loss I guess.
Say what you will about the Camaro, but one thing I haven’t noticed mentioned in this article or the comments string is that GM, for once in a great long while (this side of the Corvette), leveraged a storied nameplate (i.e., BRAND) successfully. Given the (deserved) criticism of the company’s brand mismanagement, this is significant.
All the arguing doesn’t matter a whole lot until the release prices for the silly thing.
What’s all this talk about secretaries? Can someone explain? As a foreigner, I don’t get the context.
I remember reading at an art exhibition in Montreal that many critics have stated that American industrial design really peaked between the 1930s and 1950s.
The Camaro seems to be the perfect example of the difference between Asian and US/Euro attitudes towards car production. Americans, and Germans, have a tradition of being car enthusiasts — traditionally great designs, the performance, technology, etc. However, GM/Ford (as well as the Germans) are just “decent” at making mass-market low-end cars, but are fantastic on the higher end. Even looking at GM’s global small car, the Opel Corsa — Beautifully designed and engineered, but still at a 20% premium over most other cars in its class. Even the Polo / Golf are not price competitive with imports, although obviously created by folks who enjoy cars. BMW does not even attempt to make a sub-30K car.
On the other hand, the Civic, Accord, and Camry, although solidly-manufactured and engineered resemble more mass-marketed consumer goods, than revealing any boyish enthusiasm about the product.
The problem is that car enthusiasts have trouble making cars that are cheap, basic, and reliable. Asian manufacturing has simply pushed Western goods upscale. The problem is that with so many Americans living at the edge of their income, price becomes the most important consideration.
I love the new Camaro (minus the interior, but if I were in the market for a car like this I’d still consider it), but it sure isn’t going to save GM. It will be a flash in the pan for GM just like the 300/Charger was for Chrysler. History haunts the domestic 3 and they do not seem to learn from it as current event show.
Ingvar> A secretaries car refers to a stylish car that is underpowered and inexpensive. It doesn’t need to go fast nor handle well it just needs to look sporty. The V-6 Mustang automatic falls into the category and many are bought by women who may or may not be secretaries (it’s a bit of an old term and not especially politically correct anymore).
For instance a Mini Cooper auto would be a secretaries car but a Mini Cooper S manual with sport package or a JCW Mini would not.
Also who says a Camaro SS won’t handle near as well as a BMW. Doesn’t the G8 GT handle almost as well as a 5 series? I’ll be shopping a loaded SS, 08 M3 and a 08/09 S5 in summer 2010. Very good chance the SS will win my $$$.
I am so tired of the whole cycle of “The Car that Will Save GM” covers on the rags and the Camaro just continues the cycle. We’ve seen drawing after drawing and test mule after mule for, what, 4 years now? Every time a new Camaro leak (truth or not) hits the wire, each auto rag blasts their load to put it on the cover. JUST BUILD AND SELL THE DAMN CAR!!!
But where have I seen this before??? Mmmm….
The X-bodies
Fiero
GM-10 (one of the worst money pits of all time)
early 90’s Camaro and Firebird
Caprice and Impala SS (the Shamu design)
The mid-90’s Malibu that won CotY
Each version of their full-sized trucks and SUVs
The total disaster of their SUV hybrids
The Pontiac/Saturn twins
6000STE
Aurora/Intrigue
Reatta
and many more deep in my memory.
What do all of these have in common? They were all hyped to death by the GM trolls so they could get the auto rags into full spin mode and then the finished product just wasn’t what was promised. My money is the Camaro follows that same path.
I just want them to ease up on the whole “it’s coming…maybe next year” junk and build something that surprises us, not something that is a huge let-down.
…and the clown that thought 5 foot “HYBRID” stickers on their SUVs should be fired on the spot. Real classy guys. That sticker is yet another reason why they could be failing…or maybe it’s the sticker price.
Secretary cars – stereotype of the probably single 30-40 something that wants something that looks “sporty” with their “lifestyle” but doesn’t have the budget and/or driving skills to handle a stick shift or powerful engine. Picture V6 Mustang with an automatic, that Escort ZX2 thing I still see on the roads, Ford Probe 4cyl, and any older Camaro that doesn’t have a V8.
Might I recommend a used Ford Ranger “Splash”? The graphics add 20hp!
Hey… leave the 6000 alone. It was one of the few midsized sedans whose MSRP was less than 10,000 and there are many versions that actually went well over 200,000.
http://www.carsurvey.org/review_10728.html
That 304hp V6 looks like a fantastic engine, and 400hp is always fun, but… Why does a 2+2 pony car need to weigh 3700lbs?
GM should have kept the retro styling, but downsized the platform to keep in the 2800-3200 range. That 304hp V6 would be amazing in a 2800lb car, and a V8 wouldn’t be needed at all. Fuel economy and handling would easily fall into place. Slap a 4-banger in as a base engine. Keep the price on par with a Malibu.
Why does retro style alway mean retro mass?
Blame safety equipment and technology. I disagree with the majortiy of thie editorial. This car will be a “bright spot” for GM and will make them some money, but probably not much… Stealerships will love this car, because they will be able to gouge for the SS / Z28 model in the first year or two.