By on September 9, 2016

2016 Chevrolet CamaroChevrolet has hauled the axe out of the “break in case of low sales” box, chopping prices on almost all 2017 Camaro models.

The revised prices, effective today, apply to all 2017 model year Camaros — not just those yet to be built, GM Inside News reports. The move comes after a rocky summer for the recently restyled model, which saw the Camaro battle to stay out of last place in the pony car standings.

The price of the range-topping ZL1 stays put at $61,140 for manual transmission models ($67,140 for convertibles), but many lower trim levels see significant price drops. It looks like GM weighed the odds of not incentivizing the new models and the value argument won.

A base, manual 1LT now carries an MSRP of $25,905, compared to a pre-chop price of $26,305. An automatic 1LT coupe drops from $27,700 to $26,600.

The manual 1LT convertible drops from $33,305 to $31,905, while the automatic version falls from $34,800 to $32,600. The entry price of a 2LT coupe stays put at $30,405. A 2LT convertible sees its price cut from $37,405 to $35,605.

Prices for the 1SS  and 2SS coupe stay the same. Both the 1SS and 2SS convertibles see a price drop of $1,000. The Camaro’s 1LE performance package tacks an extra $6,500 onto the price of an SS, while V6 models can have it for $4,500.

[Image: General Motors]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

42 Comments on “Chevrolet Slashes Prices on 2017 Camaro Lineup...”


  • avatar

    I sat in one at the Chevy display at the Woodward Dream Cruise recently. It was like sitting in a high sided bathtub. I actually felt claustrophobic and couldn’t wait to get out of it. This is a major design flaw that a price cut can’t resolve.

    • 0 avatar
      Rochester

      Yep. The car is an ergonomic nightmare. Looks great from a distance, and is a major design fail up close. That’s Chevy for you. It’s what they do.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      I felt the same way when I sat in one. I sat in a Corvette at the same time, and it felt far roomier and more comfortable.

      The only car where Alpha packaging works so far is the CTS, which is a stretch both front-to-back and side-to-side.

      • 0 avatar
        brenschluss

        I sat in a ’17 Camaro at an auto show and actually found it extremely comfortable and well-designed, as far as necessary inputs falling easily to hand. (Notwithstanding the stupid “REV-MATCH” paddles paired with the manual transmission.)

        It was only matched in ergonomic positioning by an M3 and my most immediately lovable interior of the show, the Giulia Quadra-whatever, which I was only able to butt-test because I arrived early, before they’d locked it.

        But, the Camaro’s ergonomic positives are all moot because the sight lines are so g*ddamned stupid. The distance between the top of the gauges and the windshield frame is smaller than my hand. The side window sills are above my chin. Why? A fast street car you can’t see out of is like cake you can’t eat.

    • 0 avatar
      seanx37

      Try driving one. A nightmare. Just changing lanes is a panic attack.
      Although that engine sure is great

    • 0 avatar
      runs_on_h8raide

      Perhaps Chevy/GM want you to feel claustrophobic. They want to give you that ‘coffin’ feeling resembling the middle class target market’s “Heartbeat of America” which is dead anyway.

    • 0 avatar
      craigcars

      Even on the higher priced trim levels , the center dash display unit looks like it was subcontracted out by the sale company that makes FCA’s Dodge Neon in Mexico. It looks tacked on and cheap imho. The space cadet round air vents look out of date as well. Really a bad design inside and out. Notice how the front looks like a Toyota. But not the cool new 86 sportscar. Ugly and pricey.
      Bad mix.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    At least the paint doesn’t peel off the hood.

    (the above was snark – I wrote a blistering review of a base Camaro convertible after living with one for a week back in 2015)

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    And these reductions are pre-negotiation prices.

    With 4.5 months of unsold inventory, I predict a suspension of Camaro production for a few weeks this fall, until things stabilize.

    If you really want a Camaro, now is the time to buy a 2016.

    Heck, even the dying Chrysler 200 with 2.7 months inventory is in better shape. The Camaro has a problem with price *and* product.

    • 0 avatar
      VW16v

      Things will not stabilize for the Camaro. The design team forgot about the actual people buying the car. The claustrophobic thing is real for many people after about 5 minutes of sitting in the car. I could not imagine an adult or even a young adult sitting in the back seat without having a panic attack.

  • avatar
    gasser

    If the car looked any different from the 2015s they would be able to sell them instead of giving them away.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    The high sills wouldn’t be so bad (disclaimer: I’m 6’8″) if the roof wasn’t so damn low.

  • avatar
    Blackcloud_9

    While I think it is a move in the right direction, I would hardly call it a “price slash “. I would consider a price slash a cut of at least 10% if not a lot more (15% to 20%). Cutting the price on a $40k car (1SS & 2SS) by $1,000 or so is a slight discount.

  • avatar
    shaker

    The car is superior in several important ways to its predecessor, but Chevy forgot some big ones; namely, the cramped interior and lousy visibility.

    I was checking them out while I was getting my Volt serviced, and I couldn’t believe how small they are inside compared to my ’97 (and *they* weren’t known for their roominess or sightlines).

    They just chose a platform to plop an icon onto, and priced it like a full redesign.

    • 0 avatar
      Krivka

      The ironic thing about it is it IS a complete redesign. They put big bucks into getting it JUST right and got it badly wrong. I will bet it is currently the hottest topic in GM land and a new team is working on getting this right this time. I was hoping for a world beater and they did deliver on the mechanicals, but who wants to drive it around?

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        As good as the Alpha platform is (from a driving dynamics stand point only it gets heaps of praise) it appears the platform itself has created serious limitations on interior room (ATS/Camaro) and is more of a liability.

        Zeta was a tremendous platform that I think was never fully appreciated – and one that 30 years from now will be looked back on a triumph of the times.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          @APaGttH… ding ding ding!

        • 0 avatar
          raph

          Zeta was a great platform, the only downside was that it was a full-size platform that was shortened up for 5th gen Camaro duty and the 5th gen was a porker for it.

          They solved the weight dilemma with the Alpha car but tried to keep the show car styling on a platform that is designed for something more upright like a BMW 4 series coupe.

          GM needs to move past the 69 Camaro styling. Its fine for a few hill billies trying to relive some glory years they were never a part of but the rest of the world has moved on (well with the exception of the Challenger guys it seems but the big C seems to be catering just fine to a specific market that hasn’t bottomed out yet).

          Its too bad GM didn’t evolve the styling of the 6th gen like Ford did with the Mustang. I suppose that has much to do with Ford’s need to go global with the Mustang and that GM didn’t need to and just had to cater to the domestic market.

          • 0 avatar
            55_wrench

            The great thing about the 69 model was the glass / door height ratio. For that matter, most of what they built in those years had great visibility.
            They need to start thinking about the driver again.

          • 0 avatar
            raph

            @ Wrench, those days are gone for a few reasons. Most notably big wheels and trying to get those to work with the rest of the car. If GM or any other manufacturer proportioned the cars like they did in the 80’s and down we would all be driving around in pope mobiles.

            I also suspect the short green house pays some dividends in strength when it comes to rollover as well.

            Speaking of big wheels I absolutely hate to see wheels large than a 16 inches on most older cars (very few from the early 90’s on down look good with a 17″ or larger wheel).

            Yet I constantly see people putting 17″ and larger wheels on old muscle cars and thinking it looks cool when it really looks like somebody used the reflected fun house mirror image. Scanned it and used a 3D printer to build a car.

          • 0 avatar
            TheDoctorIsOut

            For all the successes of the Alpha platform in terms of weight and chassis feel it is a complete failure in terms of packaging and usefulness. The ATS was the first clue; not just the rather dowdy proportions and lines from the outside, I just didn’t find it that liveable from either the claustrophobic interior or trunk space when I compared it to the Audi A4 or BMW 3 Series. That cramped feeling and Abrams tank visibility naturally was carried into the larger CTS and now the Camaro by the what increasing appears to be built-in limitations of the platform.

  • avatar
    Krivka

    It isn’t a secret that the car is impossible too “love” on a daily basis. It does look nice and I have been told the look was what they were looking for. I hope the guys who decided that it was a good idea are no longer working for GM. I was told that it was a unanimous decision to go that route because current Camaro owners loved the design. My reply was they already own the cars, don’t you even care about a Porsche owner? The car could easily be a Jaguar f competitor if GM HQ had any car sense whatsoever. The mechanicals are there. It wouldn’t take much to wrap the powertrain and suspension with a world class body and interior.

  • avatar
    DearS

    The uniqueness and prestige of the Camaro is now old, Chevy could only hope for another such illogical hit.

  • avatar
    Whatnext

    Yep, the Mustang was able to deliver an all new product that managed to look noticeably different, retain classic styling cues and take mechanical sophistication up a notch. Advantage Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      VW16v

      Absolutely advantage Ford. And you actually feel comfortable right off the bat when you sit in the car. The Camaro has that ” I’ll get used to not seeing out of the car feel “. GM had a chance to fix the visibility issues and they struck out.

    • 0 avatar
      TheDoctorIsOut

      The amazing thing about the newer Mustangs is how similar the view over the hood from the dash looks and feels so much like a ’60’s model yet have improved it and the experience in every aspect, though I wished they had kept the power point high on the console between the air vents so I could keep the radar detector cord from flopping all over the dash.

  • avatar
    zip94513

    Wow, a $400 savings on a base 1LT. Whoop-de-doo. The savings, if any, will be when GM hangs a 20% off MSRP sign on the vehicle sometime around 1-1-17.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    It’s the LT models that will sell the most, so those are the ones that get the discount. They think that V8 buyers will pay the premium… but that’s a pretty hefty premium over the Mustang GT. The SS I test drove cost a whopping $15K over the Mustang GT Premium that I bought. Mind you, I bought the Ford with Z-Plan + cashback, but the Camaro was still new enough that they weren’t interested in moving off the sticker price.

  • avatar
    seanx37

    Does it matter? There is still a 4-5 month backlog of unsold 2016’s.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      Heh, elsewhere (on a more public forum) I related that and I’ll take a guess that it was a Camaro fan that replied when I said they had a 130 day supply of Camaros that I was full of shit and used a made up metric.

  • avatar
    kosmo

    So using a proportional calculation of the “break in case of low sales” concept, the SS Sedan should have its price reduced by about what, 20%?!

    Sold!

    • 0 avatar
      pb35

      Back in May or June, GM did exactly that by offering 20% off list on brand new, leftover SS models in stock. Of course, I bought mine months earlier.

      I rented a Camaro SS last year. I liked it a lot but it reminded me too much of my 86 IROC. Nowhere to put my left leg, hard to see out of, doors too big etc. When I returned it to Avis, the agent asked me if the car was ok as I was exiting it for the last time. I was like “yeah, it was great BANG” as I hit my head hard on the roof. It was fun for a weekend but no sale!

  • avatar
    whitworth

    The exterior design simply doesn’t work, too cartoonish.

    And the price is absurdly high for what a Camaro represents. Too close to the price of a Corvette.

    For around the last 40 years, a V8 Camaro was about half the price of the Corvette.

    A new Corvette starts at $55k. What does a V8 Camaro now start at? $42k? And let’s not even talk about the Z28 that’s over $70k.

  • avatar
    yamahog

    Just give us the Canadian prices. You can get a V6 manual camaro with the brake upgrade and cooling package for 32k CAD = 24.5K USD.

    Or fall on the sword and release that Buick Concept and address all the issues with the Camaro.

  • avatar

    $4,000 extra for a V8 over the Ford isn’t going to cut it in this market.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • JimC2: *aisle And it has wheels, so nya nya!!
  • bd2: This. The Stinger is basically the fastback variant of the G70. Essentially, the 4 Series GC to the 3 Series....
  • el scotto: Owning this is like saying you have a pair of jail shower shoes from 1978 in mint condition.
  • ajla: I’m sure no one would have bought it during the CUV times but a Lacrosse EV with the Bolt’s...
  • DenverMike: The kids that were given air-cooled VWs, especially girls, or it’s all they could afford, are...

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