By on September 9, 2011

The automotive world has been eagerly awaiting the Camaro ZL1 ever since it was announced earlier this year. This stunning riposte to the 2007 Shelby Mustang could easily become the HHR to the Mustang’s PT Cruiser. In its excitement, however, Chevrolet forgot to invite TTAC to the media event in which the Camaro ZL1 specs were introduced. Therefore, what you are about to read will be stolen quoted entirely from Eric Tingwall’s post on the Automobile blog last night.

To make it worth your while, however, I will make a few snarky comments in-between quotes. Click the jump and help us pay the bills around here!

Quoth Tingwall,

The 2012 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 will be more powerful than the Cadillac CTS-V with an output of 580 hp at 6000 rpm and 556 lb-ft of torque at 4200 rpm from the supercharged 6.2-liter V-8… The 350-pound weight gain from Camaro SS to ZL1 is right in line with the fattening that a CTS coupe experiences on its way to becoming a CTS-V. Chevy representatives were reluctant to talk about any numbers other than power or torque—top speed, 0-to-60 time, and price were all off the table—at a media event on Wednesday, but they did subtly reveal the ZL1’s mass when they splashed the car’s weight-to-power ratio on the screen. At 7.24 pounds per hp, the ZL1 would weigh 4,199 pounds.

Oh, that’s not so much. Just think of it as a Shelby Mustang with two full-sized adults in the back seat. Or towing a 380-pound trailer. Or a trunk full of taxpayer cash.

That didn’t stop the ZL1 team from taking a direct shot at the GT500, though…. The ZL1, they say, is ready for track abuse straight from the dealership floor

FROM A GT500, THAT IS. Get it? It’s ready for track abuse… from a GT500. Like, the GT500 will beat it around a track. Gosh. That sounded better when it was in my head.

with its standard transmission and rear-differential cooler and cooling ducts for the front brakes.

The C5 Z06 was infamous for overheating its transmission on-track; this is likely a direct result of that experience.

It’s unlikely that the Chevy’s hottest muscle car will undercut Ford’s on pricing, as chief engineer Al Oppenheiser told us

“Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” Wait. Wrong guy.

the ZL1 will be priced relative to the GT500 just as the six- and eight-cylinder Camaros are priced against comparable Mustangs. The Chevys typically land about $1500 to $2000 more than the Fords, so we’d expect a price near $52,000 for the ZL1 based on the GT500’s $49,605 starting sticker.

Then we have some business about the Camaro using the CTS-V’s hyper-expensive-to-service-or-replace suspension, and also having a new swaybar mount.

In a perfect world, we’d have the chance to run the ZL1 around Mid-Ohio back-to-back with a GT500, using our own Traqmate. Opportunities like that are likely to be saved for the color mags who can be trusted to draw an advertising-friendly conclusion to the whole thing (“There are no real losers in this battle”). Nevertheless, we will keep our fingers crossed, and keep you all posted.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

74 Comments on “Camaro ZL1 Will Deliver 580 Horsepower, Arrives Just Five Years After The Car With Which It Is Intended To Compete...”


  • avatar
    MrWhopee

    Well, maybe they don’t want to invite TTAC because you might sent Jack Baruth to the event, then he’d have to drive it (hard), and possibly overheat the transmission….

  • avatar
    swedishiron

    “Or a trunk full of taxpayer cash.”-Excellent!!

  • avatar
    chainyanker

    Long story short, all the numbers will be bigger than the GT500 and they’ll be happy to admit it if you’re talking horsepower. The bigger numbers they won’t talk about are weight, price, track times and probably fuel consumption.

    • 0 avatar
      LeMansteve

      +1

      Excluding the Veyron, I just have a hard time considering any 2-ton car as a perfomance car. Why not just get a base Corvette which is a full 1,000lbs lighter than the ZL1, for nearly the same price?

      To me the ZL1 is worth two things to the automotive world:
      1. It is an exclusive, high-testosterone, potentially very collectable Camaro
      2. It is fuel for pissing contests between the fanboys

    • 0 avatar
      SevenIM

      Can’t blame ’em. 4100 lbs a sportscar does not make.

      “B-B-BUT IT HAS A BIG V8 IN IT!” – Yeah, well so do other cars weighing in at around 3500.

      • 0 avatar
        Educator(of teachers)Dan

        Good god, a Cadillac DTS only weighs 4,009 lbs! No wonder people are complaining about this porker! I wonder what kind of fuel economy and performance #s it would put up if the ZL1 did weigh 3500 lbs?

  • avatar
    acuraandy

    +1 @ swedishiron

  • avatar

    I think the ZL1 will have the advantage in 0-60mph times until Ford introduces suspension changes in 2014. Otherwise, the ZL1 weight will make track time more of a choir than fun. I raced my buddy’s 2010 GT500 and he lost all three times to 60mph with a 170hp advantage and 500lbs less weight. He did equal me the last go but he was not happy. I suggested he sell it and wait for more revisions. He is filthy rich so my lack of sympathy was forgivable and although he hated to admit it, he was truly impressed a four door, mid-size, luxury sedan could consistently hook up so well and accelerate with so little power.

  • avatar

    Anyone else reading between the lines and thinking that the CTS-V is about to get a power boost? Personally I’d rather they spent the money on improving that car’s interior (which is *almost* good), but supposedly that’s in the works too…

    And speaking of interiors, that’s another place where the GT500 will have this thing beat.

    • 0 avatar

      It will be interesting to see the evolution of the CTS into a larger vehicle, the introductions of the ATS, and whatever they are going to call the old DTS. I still think Cadillac could sell more CTS’s if they offered an LS3 option. The CTSV is too brash for my liking.

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    “It’s unlikely that the Chevy’s hottest muscle car will undercut Ford’s on pricing, as chief engineer Al Oppenheiser told us

    “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.” Wait. Wrong guy.”

    Thanks for giving me my first chuckle of the day. When studying the Manhattan Project with my students I always gave them that quote to chew on and discuss.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    All that money for a ZL-1 and the rear windows still won’t open? No deal!

    Of course I had to say that, but with all that extra weight, if that’s accurate, how’s this thing going to get out of its own way with any significance to make it worth the extra bucks?

    I suppose Maximum Bob needs to addess that, post-haste!

    I will have become death if I ever bought this and my wife found out!

    • 0 avatar

      Without a doubt Lutz added the 400 lb to ensure that folks who buy the ZL-1 will feel that distinctive Buick ride while on their way to the track…

    • 0 avatar
      Quentin

      I’m sure it will still be ridiculously fast. If that is worth the extra money… well, that comes down to the buyer. The weight will hurt handling, feel, and fun undoubtedly. The ZL1 trim seems to just add more of what the SS didn’t need.

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      You seem a bit obsessed with the rear window thing… this is like the 3rd or 4th post I can remember from you about it! :)

      Time to let it go, the wide open “hardtop” thing you crave has been gone since the early 80s, or about when we figured out that torsional rigidity and crashworthiness was more important than style.

      Besides, for my $50k I would much rather have a resto-mod 69 Camaro than a new ZL1.

      • 0 avatar
        Zackman

        “Besides, for my $50k I would much rather have a resto-mod 69 Camaro than a new ZL1.”

        I think you just contradicted yourself!

        As for the rear window thing – I’m fine w/o pillarless hardtops, but if an OEM is going to the trouble to create and build a coupe, make it practical instead of turning the back seat area into solitary confinement! We pay extra for sunroofs, so I’d pay extra for an open-able rear quarter window! Until that happens, I will not buy a coupe that resembles something that should be more practical than it is.

        I like all things convertible, though, and the Camaro is one of them!

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        Not a contradiction, I just dont look to new cars to be able to duplicate the clean lines of the classics. Even if the back windows did roll down, the rest of the car would still be a compromise, the slab sides, the high front end, etc. I dont think the back windows rolling down are going to make a big difference. I dont even roll my windows down very often as it is.

        And the reason they dont offer it is cost. There are VERY few people who will pay extra for that feature, and it sacrifices rigidity. As you pointed out, the convertible Camaro offers the same style, and the top retracts… bonus! More people will pay for that, like a sunroof, so they can justify the development costs and loss of structure.

      • 0 avatar
        Zackman

        Of course you’re correct on those points and I agree, it’s just I don’t like it!

        Like you, I do like the increased safety of new vehicles vs. the “classics”, but from a design point of view, if I had a say, I’d still make them worthy of the names they carry and practical, too! Call it “panache”, I suppose.

      • 0 avatar
        korvetkeith

        “Time to let it go, the wide open “hardtop” thing you crave has been gone since the early 80s, or about when we figured out that torsional rigidity and crashworthiness was more important than style.”

        We didn’t “figure it out”, the government mandated it. And speak for yourself, I’d prefer if cars weren’t claustrophobic, slab slided, 4000lb tanks. But that’s just me, a performance or stylish car enthusiast.

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        lighten up @korvet! I was just teasing Zackman cuz he brings it up a lot. If you read what I wrote, I said that having rear windows that roll down wouldnt help the fact that the car is too tall and slab-sided (not to mention 500+ lbs too heavy!). I like the classic Camaro looks better too.

        And the govt didnt mandate B-pillars, as I pointed out, they make convertibles that still pass crash tests.

  • avatar
    gessvt

    Bench racing aside, I’m just happy to be living in an era that is witnessing the most powerful production Mustangs, Camaros and Corvettes in history. 1970 has nothing on these cars. Enjoy before the government starts to rein them in again.

    • 0 avatar
      rudiger

      Except that they were a lot more affordable in 1970.

      Well, maybe the inflation-adjusted price of the Camaro ZL-1 will actually be comparable to the outrageously expensive (and rare) 1969 COPO 427 Camaro. But that’s the exception, rather than the rule.

      But the more pedestrian big-block ponycars of the sixties/early seventies (428CJ Mustangs and 396 Camaros) seemed way more accessable to more car buyers than the high-dollar V8 ponycars of today. At least they seemed to be.

      • 0 avatar
        gslippy

        Just did some research:

        The 1969 COPO 427 Camaro cost $7300 then, equivalent to $45k today.

        This ZL1 isn’t much more money, but is far superior in every way.

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        Except in weight. And style. And attitude. And most likely future collectibility too. :)

      • 0 avatar

        I think the serious big block cars were not that common back then. We may look at the Boss 429 option on the Mustang costing “only” $750 but that was about 1/4 the base price of the car. The high performance options back then weren’t cheap.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        Looking back at my old C&D saves:

        A ’69 HEMI Road Runner with an automatic transmission, radio, power steering, power disc brakes, rear speaker, tachometer, belted tires, and power side mirror had an as-tested price of $4362. Which is inflation adjusted to $26,800.

        A ’69 383 Super Bee with an auto, power disc brakes, power steering, and a few other comfort and performance options totaled $3858. Which amounts to $23,750 today. The automatic Super Bee actually turned in slightly better acceleration numbers than the modern manual-equipped Camaro LT.

        A ’76 Trans Am 455 with a few comfort options came in at $5722, or adjusted to $22,719. The T/A turned in performance numbers (even in braking) comparable to a Nissan Juke.

      • 0 avatar
        rudiger

        The price comparison with the ’69 Hemi Roadrunner is an apt one, because it shows the stark difference in the marketing mindset between GM and its competitors during the sixties’ performance heyday. Ford and Chrysler both bought into the sales philosophy of ‘Race on Sunday, Sell on Monday’ so much that they would spend copious amounts on R&D, then sell their highest performance creations at very little profit (most likely at a substantial loss).

        Besides the 426 Hemi, the Boss 429 and original Charger Daytona and Superbird were all big money losers. Everyone knows the story that the only reason any of that stuff was made street-legal was to get it into NASCAR, the theory being, they would later be known as a ‘halo’ products to get people into the showroom to buy something else where the losses would be recouped.

        GM, OTOH, went a substantially more traditional route, and any specialty, ultra-high-performance metal they sold was going to make a profit immediately. Hence, the extremely high price of the ’69 427 Camaro. You can bet that GM made money on everyone of those sold.

        Ironically, even though selling new Street Hemis in the sixties might have originally cost Chrysler a lot of money, they more than made up for it on the reputation (even though it’s more of myth in terms of street use) and resurrection of the trademarked name on engines being sold a half century later.

    • 0 avatar
      gessvt

      @mnm: I was only referring to horsepower. Agree on your points for the most part.

  • avatar

    Gessvt- I know exactly what you are talking about. There is so much power and potential out put in these cars. The thinks that I like best about the ZL1 are the suspension and the dual mode exhaust. From the factory they come with the magnetic ride suspension, which guarantees a nice smooth ride even at high speeds which hopefully they will let us know soon what those speeds will look like. For the exhaust, with the dual mode, when you are going faster, the exhaust is routed through a “Less restrictive path” and when you are going slower it is fully baffled. I can hear it now, and it sounds good…

  • avatar
    BigDuke6

    “with its standard transmission and rear-differential cooler and cooling ducts for the front brakes.”

    Well what IS the standard transmission on the ZL-1? Or is there only one transmission available? Or is this guy referring to a manual tranny as a “standard”?

    • 0 avatar
      Jack Baruth

      Mr. Tingwall can be a bit stilted in his prose; what he means to say is that coolers for both the transmission and rear differential are supplied as standard.

      • 0 avatar
        Southerner

        Hey Jack: Off the subject, thanks for the mini-tutorial on the various Porsche iterations from several days ago. Mighty neighborly, but I saw how you looked at my girlfriend.

    • 0 avatar
      faygo

      @BigDuke6 :
      “Well what IS the standard transmission on the ZL-1? Or is there only one transmission available?”

      same Tremec 6-speed which is in the GT500 (and I believe the Corvette, albeit in a transaxle configuration). the ZL-1 has optional automatic, one presume the same which is available in CTS-V.

  • avatar
    Buckshot

    What´s the point with this car? Racing at traffic lights? Remember that most carbuyers are over 20 years old, and then that sort of behavior is just childish. A weight like a big luxury car?? If it only was beautiful i could forgive it, but it´s ugly as f*ck.

    • 0 avatar
      threeer

      Ugly is in the eye of the berater…I’m not a huge fan of the Camaro, having driven an SS just because I could (had a good friend who worked at Carmax). Driving position and lines of sight were not comfortable for me. Sure, it was fast (and I’m sure this one will be, too), but I couldn’t see it as a DD. Guess I’m used to driving slow cars at closer to 10/10th, vs a monster HP car where you can simply mash the go-peddle and go straight very rapidly. Nobody buying this would appreciate my fascination with the upcoming Abarth, I guess…

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      Remember that most carbuyers are over 20 years old, and then that sort of behavior is just childish.

      Ever Nissan Maxima and Pontiac Grand Prix owner I’ve ever met was into this, and none of them were under 45. Childishness is ageless.

      Never mind that I’ve yet to see a Camaro in the hands of someone under fifty. Not that I don’t think young people wouldn’t want one, but there is no way in hell any kid who can afford (or whose parents can afford) a Camaro would buy one over, eg, any number of interchangeable pseudoluxmobiles.

      • 0 avatar
        smokingclutch

        I own a Challenger R/T (not a Camaro, but same class), I’m 30, and I most certainly paid for it myself. We’re not common, but we’re out there.

        The odd thing is that I’ve never been much of a muscle car enthusiast – the 80s and 90s Mustangs and Camaros make me retch, and spending the megabux money for most classic muscle is just silly. I’ve always been into sporty/sports cars from Japan (rotary Mazdas and Civic Sis, mostly) but I decided I wanted to own one of these modern muscle cars before various regulations and the price of gas rendered them extinct. They’ve done such a great job with the latest generation of these cars that there’s not a loser in the bunch.

        I will admit that the Boss 302 was my first choice, but I refused to pay over MSRP for one. Instead I got a nice leftover 2010 R/T Classic for over $8k off MSRP. I only didn’t get an SRT because I wanted Hemi Orange and there were no HO SRT8 6-speeds within a reasonable distance.

      • 0 avatar
        mnm4ever

        @smokingclutch, you are most definitely rare, especially for that car. Almost every person I have ever seen in a Challenger was pushing the high side of 50, and a surprising number of women drivers as well!

        As for the Camaro, I have to agree with @psar, almost every Camaro I see is driven by either a 50yo or a teenager with very rich parents. My daughter goes to school with 3 guys whos parents each bought them an SS. I also know a few 40yo moms who drive the RS version, probably recreating thier 80s youth with big tall “Camaro hair” :). I have also seen a few Jersey Shore wanna-be looking guys in thier 20s with black SS Camaros, most with 22″ chrome rims added too, usually parked in the gym parking lot.

        Dont get me wrong, I happen to love the Camaro, along with the Challenger and the Mustang… my personal favorite is the Boss 302 as well (you should have waited, or come to Tampa, they seem to be easily available here for sticker price). Its just that these cars tend to attract some very specific buyer types.

      • 0 avatar
        rudiger

        Almost every person I have ever seen in a Challenger was pushing the high side of 50, and a surprising number of women drivers as well!

        Not that surprising. Although I’d love to have seen a manual transmission option, Chrysler made the correct call by making an automatic the only choice on the base Challenger SE. For about the same price as a base, manual transmission Mustang or Camaro, you get a larger Challenger with an automatic. I’m sure this played a big role for most women choosing the more unwieldy (but cheaper) Mopar, particularly when considering the lackluster performance of the weaker Chrysler V6 in comparison with the Ford and GM products.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      What´s the point with this car?
      They’re for “cruise nights”. Most of these cars will rarely experience life beyond the performance envelope of a 1st generation Prius. Nothing wrong with that.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    I wonder, so I do, what is it that GM seems to know about CAFE and oil prices that the rest of us do not, which makes it tenable to produce this car; and, as a previous poster forecasts, follow up by ratcheting up the horsepower in the CTS-V in response….?

    Not that I’m bitching about it…I love a utility-compromised Pony car with a V-8 engine powerful enough to launch small satellites into space as much as the next balding, post-peak-testosterone, red-blooded American male. But with CAFE of 50+ mpg on the horizon, wouldn’t it seem to make sense to sort of, um, you know, maybe, kinda start thinking about designing and marketing some practical vehicles that will get us there? Otherwise, while rich weenies are tooling about in cars like this (cuz they can) the rest of us will be driving government-engineered sardine cans (cuz GM spent their engineering resources on projects like THIS…and figured the rest of us proles would just buy their latest eco-turd Aveo/Sonics like good little democrats…..)

    Government Motors seems to be tossing around an AWFUL lot of engineering resources here, in a dick-measuring contest against the Blue Oval Boyz, answering a question that damned few are asking…

    Jus’ sayin’…..

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      This Camaro is a halo car that has been put together from the GM parts bin, although it is one hell of a parts bin. The drivetrain components are already on the shelf, and the little bit of suspension tweaking is not rocket science. The resulting engineering costs ought to be pretty low. Guys have been doing the same work in their personal garages for years without too much trouble.

      The resulting car will pull some people into the dealerships, and the few they actually sell should be very profitable. Why not do it? In twenty years when we are poking around in glorified golf carts we can look back on these muscle cars and smile.

    • 0 avatar
      faygo

      the CAFE impact of a few thousand ZL-1s is meaningless.

      if they have customer demand (which they do) and they price them at an appropriate level (they will) they will make good money on them. which is ultimately the whole point of a car (or any) company.

      the incremental engineering to do something like this program isn’t nearly as much as you’d think it would be, at least not relative to other programs which you barely notice. performance/halo vehicles get a lot of press (by design) and provide useful distration/rallying point for companies, but they don’t actually cost that much money in a relative sense when you are talking about billions and billions in engineering spending every year.

    • 0 avatar
      LeMansteve

      GM and everyone else know that CAFE is based on production numbers. While the ZL1 is a relative gas pig, GM can restrict production in order to get their CAFE in line.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy

    • 0 avatar
      DC Bruce

      Well, perhaps the function of this car is to get people into the showrooms, knowing that, for any number of reasons, they’ll probably end up buying a lesser V-8 or even V-6 powered version of the car.

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      “dick-measuring” as you call it is also called competition – BMW M vs Mercedes AMG vs Audi RS do it as an example.
      Glad your substantive points about engineering resource and CAFE were answered by many other commentators. I will leave the pointless politics aside.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      You mean like the Cruze and the coming Cruze diesel, and the Sonic, and eAssist across the entire Buick line, and going 4-cylinder only and eAssist on the Malibu, and…

  • avatar
    Educator(of teachers)Dan

    I have seen some of the V6 Camaro’s almost optionless, still wearing their black steel wheels in the hands of people 25 to 30 something. Every SS I have seen in the hands of 45 plus year old male. The baddest one in town (black, tinted windows, SS badge, most expensive wheels) belongs to a local elementary principal who is past 50, owns a cattle ranch, and is working on his second retirement (already having retired from the Bureau of Indian Education). Mustangs on the other hands I see being driven by all types of people in all trim levels. The Camaro does truly seem like a middle age fantasy car.

  • avatar
    Short Bus

    I want a trunk full of taxpayer cash! Maybe this is the right car for me.

  • avatar
    gslippy

    Can’t get past the garish looks of this generation of Camaro. I’d much prefer the Mustang and its solid axle.

  • avatar
    NorthwestT

    I’ll take one with the optional 400 lbs of cash, please. In twenties, I figure that to be just south of $4M.

  • avatar

    Where is Silvy? I think he’s eminently qualified to reply to this.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Mustang vs. Camaro? Bah – it is a pretty pointless debate. It’s all in the eye of the buyer and they both have very strong followings. A Lotus Elise has what, 185 HP but is vicious with that tiny amount of horsepower. Numbers are meaningless and don’t translate into passion. A Chrysler 200 with the V6 can go 0 to 60 in 5.5 seconds, a V6 SE Camry can do it in about 6.0 seconds — impressive numbers — but does either car inspire passion in the buyer and the owner? Laughable. (well OK, if a Camry SE gives you a chubby it is likely you like English porn and missionary position twice a month is just fine, thank you)

    No one even mentions the other pony car, the Challenger, or mentions the 370-Z or RX-8, which could slide into this class on technicalities (and why not the 3.8 Genesis coupe).

    The Mustang is the best all around of the three US pony cars. Followed by the Camaro which only clings to second place against an increasingly updated Challenger. The Challenger remains the softest of the three, and is gigantic compared to both. The Mustang has the most practical interior, the Camaro seems to be devoid of transmission and technological issues, but has a near useless interior given its size. The list goes on when you debate the three.

    Like it or not, the Camaro has a following, a heritage, and a devoted audience. Just like the Mustang. Just like the 3-series. Just like the VW GTI. Just like the AE-86 Corolla. Just as I can easily find BMW 328 owners that will sing the praises of the pure awesomeness of a 230HP 3-series – so can I find Camaro owners that lament for the good old days of ill handling, under braked, leaky, creaky, flexible F-Bodies. Oh if they would just build ’em like that again!!! That’s passion – what’s wrong with that?

    Do you really think the mouth breathing drooling consumer masses while watching the latest iteration of Michael Bay’s EXPLOSIONS (sorry, meant to say Transformers) are leaning next to each other between handfuls of popcorn and a gulp from the 55-gallon drum Coke they bought going, “gee, Bumblebee looks like he’s put on a few pounds, must be partying too much, BURP!”

    They don’t care, well 98% of them don’t. What they do care about is having Bumblebee in their driveway, like it or not. That’s marketing baby, and you have to admire it.

    Age of buyers? Ya, buyers of the ZL-1 under 40 are going to be thin. On the other hand buyers under 40 aren’t buying a whole lot of cars period, let alone cars that will sticker over $50K and easily have $10K to $20K of dealer markup on them (have we already forgotten the BOSS 302 Laguna Seca Mustang dealer gouging). The under 40 set is struggling to stay employed, pay off their debt, dealing with an upside down mortgage, and has little stomach for toys, especially $50K toys (and then figure $2.5K sales tax at least in most states)

    That probably brings up the biggest issue. For $60K to $70K (with ADM) I’d rather get me a Grand Sport Corvette for less bones and a rebate added on with a good interest rate, if I just look at GM’s stable. Shoot I’d rather have a loaded out Audi A6 and keep the change if I had $70K laying around to waste on a car.

    GM will sell every ZL-1 they build, because they will likely only build 1,000 to 2,500 of them for a specific niche market. Collectors, people with more money than sense, and diehard Camaro fans will gladly snap them up. At the end of the day, as an American citizen and by proxy a shareholder in GM – I see that as a good thing.

    • 0 avatar
      LeMansteve

      Yes.

      See my post near the top regarding the Corvette. The ZL-1 makes almost no sense when compared to the ‘Vette, especially after the inevitable dealer markup. In most cases, I think this would classify as brand cannibalization, but I believe these two cars will serve two distinctly different sets of customers. I almost consider the Corvette a brand completely separate from Chevrolet. Heck, I’d bet most ZL-1 customers will or already own one or many Corvettes.

  • avatar
    jj99

    I would be embarassed to drive a ZL1 or a Boss. Total working class beer drinking machines.

    GM should stop spending engineering money on this junk and invest into a car so they can compete with the 12 Camry. However, the Vette should stay.

    Ford should also stop waisting engineering money on the Boss and Shelby mustang and invest in the Fusion.

    Ford and GM has never been able to match the Camry, but they waste money on stupid vehicles. Dumb business decision. The profits are in out engineering the Camry.

    • 0 avatar
      SlowMyke

      So… GM should only make cars you like, or that compete with the Camry. Are you going to buy them all? They won’t get very far trying to please just people like you. The problem is that there are a lot of people that want different things, and regardless what greenies or foreign car fans think, GM is in the business of being in business. They aren’t trying to save the planet, they are trying to destroy it. They are operating within a market that wants various things. They are trying to provide these things. Camaros are one of the things that a lot of people want.

      Additionally, there are a lot of reviews out there that suggest that Ford and GM can hang with or beat the Camry. Sales figures will catch up to this reality as market perception catches up with reality.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      I would be embarrassed to drive a ZL1 or a Boss. Total working class beer drinking machines.

      That is part of their appeal, my friend.

    • 0 avatar
      psarhjinian

      Few beer-swilling blue-collar working-class folks can swing this car. It’s the four-wheel equivalent of a Harley. Or, to put it bluntly, the purveyance of dentists and comptrollers.

      • 0 avatar
        Toad

        You might be surprised how many working class people can easily afford this car. Many cops and firemen make well into the six figures, as well as other municipal workers. Longshoremen, tradesmen, etc can make a lot more money than most college grads.

      • 0 avatar
        golden2husky

        pasar, I get what you mean, but it is is not fair to the Camaro to equate it to a Harley. Other than the beancounter interior, the car is a very modern rendition of the classic muscle car from the factory itself (anybody see “Ultimate Factories” on TV} to the car. Sure it has pushrods, but with the power, efficiency, and reliability of that engine, it owes an apology to no one. A Harley owes no one an apology either but there is nothing modern about it at all. I view a Harley as if GM suddenly could start building brand new mid sixties muscle cars – actually scrap the muscle part as power is not part of the Harley lexicon – say inline sixes. Would it be cool to buy a brand new sixties car? Sure, but as a daily driver? No thanks. But if you are mean purchase price, I hear you. Antiques are expensive, even if they are brand new.

  • avatar
    ajla

    I’ll wait for the Pontiac version.

  • avatar
    BigDuke6

    “Mr. Tingwall can be a bit stilted in his prose; what he means to say is that coolers for both the transmission and rear differential are supplied as standard.”

    OK, I get it now. Thanks Jack.

  • avatar
    Rican5.0

    I have tried to like this machine’s looks, I really have, even though I’m a Ford lifer. Anyway, it’s just too much of a hog, there’s no subtlety or athleticism to the design. It becomes more apparent when you compare it to the ’66 or ’67 model. Those babies looked agile, these new things are just thick, bloated lumps.

  • avatar
    TomHend

    I am a Ford man any day over GM, but Ford Credit took a ton of taxpayer money too, more than GMAC.

  • avatar
    beefmalone

    You mean GM didn’t invite you guys to a media event? TTAC? Really??? Do you want some cheese with that whine?

  • avatar
    Nick

    I’d buy one if I had tons of cash (and if I fit), however, it’s quite a porker.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • JMII: I rarely get fooled by a car but there are certain models which just all blend together. For example some...
  • MRF 95 T-Bird: The police department in the town I grew up in had the R-body Dodge St. Regis with the police package...
  • Moparmann: Lessee, in descending order & cubic inches: 440 c.i. Mopar (Dad’s car) 340 c.i. Mopar 318 c.i....
  • DenverMike: They just need you to hesitate long enough and put off buying what you were about to buy, until you can...
  • Halftruth: This car is not Chrysler’s best example. They slapped it together and shoved it out the door. They...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber