GM Media Online

 

Forgive me if I'm the outsider, but I feel the more modern the camaro becomes, the more I like the older camaros.

 

On the outside the new Camaro is not what I would call modern. It is designed to be a combination of retro & modern and ends up being neither. Ford took the 1969 Mustang design and shrunk it to 2/3 scale to make the new Mustang a couple of years ago, and sold a bunch of them. Chrysler looks like they are going to produce the new Challenger, and it is almost a clone of the 1970 Challenger with a few custom touches. The new Camaro is supposed to be all new with styling elements from the 1969 model. I haven't seen it in the "flesh", but the pictures I've seen show a body that is "too busy." It has some styling elements from the 1969, but it has a bunch of other styling elements that don't fit. The 1969 was a clean, pure, design. I doubt anyone would do a lot of face lifting on the 69 to restyle it. When the new one surfaced, the Camaro boards were inundated with people redesigning the front end of the new one and asking G.M. to build it with their changes. The new Camaro looks to be extremely practical. It has a high belt line with a "chopped" top. It looks like it is probably quite a few inches taller than the Third Gen, but that causes it to look clumsy to me.

A few weeks ago I picked up the August issue of "Collectible Automobile" magazine at a Borders. It is one of those glossy high dollar mags for collectors of high dollar cars. They generally cover the sort of cars that are auctioned at Barratt-Jackson. I bought this issue because they had a 12 page sread on the 1982-1992 Camaro as a future collectible.

I think when all is said and done, the Third Gen will go down in history as one of the great designs ever made. I think the 1993-2002 models and the new one will probably never rise above being used cars. When a Camaro looks like a 2 door clone of a Chrysler 4 door front wheel drive sedan, I don't see much future for it as a collector car. The new one seems to be a continuation of design elements from the new Cadillac line with a nod to the 1969 model. I don't think it will be a classic. It may be obsolete and considered dated by the time it is available to the public. To me it's one redeeming value is that it is modern engineering. If it goes to production with the irs that they are saying it will get now, it will be a nice mechanical piece. It will be a more practical 2+2 version of the Vette. If the styling were closer to the new vette and less like a Caddy, it would be much better in my opinion.

 

I agree that f-body styling probably cant get any better after the third generation(ie also including the previous generations), and i would never buy this new camaro in silver(looks like crap), but if i ever buy a newer car that isnt a vette it will be a red 5th gen. If you ask me it isnt really a retro design at all . . . there are a lot of throwbacks to earlier gens, but it IS a modern car. and looks damn fine for a modern car. I think the fact that it isnt a retro design(of a single year older car, like the mustangs and challengers) sets it apart from the other new pony cars. its not trying to be something that already was great, the design is a new package that says "hey, all these old cars rocked, ill take a few pages out of all their books and see what new things i can do with them". Some people probably wont like that, but i do. The only generation it doesnt have parts of(design-wise) is the fourth, which is probably the best thing about it.

and more importantly than how good it does or doesnt look compared to the other gens is the fact that it EXISTS. the name of camaro should never be forgotten, and as long as it doesnt become an economy car or an SUV, ill take it. and we know its going to perform. heck, im at least as stoked for the fact that now 6th, 7th, 8th. etc. generations are back on the table!

 

Well, the only hick-up I see is that the 3rd gen cars are considered the "slow" generation by many enthusiasts. Styling-wise, I agree the 4th gen cars don't really stand out, but they marked a return to the horsepower wars of the late 60's and early 70's.

That alone will make them desirable down the line. Even the "hot rod" shows on TV are always dropping LS1's into their project cars these days and there's usually a feature on how to tweak the LS1 on TV or the newsstand.

When's the last time you saw a serious feature on the L98 TPI?

 

Dont everybody get all crazy with the check book just yet.Are we forgetting that the car went out of production for a whole bunch of reasons,most of which still exist. The price of "Gasoline" being one of the biggest.Alot can happen between now and 2008/9.Fords Mustang is still selling very well and trying to take a market share may be a lot harder to do than when gas was $0.55 or less a gallon. Getting the car built may be another issue....GM is not exactly running ahead of the pack with money to burn.Regardless of how many deposit checks and letters they got from people begging for them to bring it back,The Stock Holders are the ones that have to be satisfied and I'm not so sure they are up for a crap shoot on car thats been out of the line for six plus years. I'll keep my 2000 SS only because its one of the last,and I'll keep both the third gens I own because I really like the car.I wish I could afford a first gen,but the "Divorce" would kill me. The second gen I own, the jury is still out on that one, but regardless....I dont ever expect any of them to be worth nearly what I paid for them,but I'm sure my Grandson will enjoy driving them at some point.

Just my

 

The Ls series is the current darling of the media. There is still a lot of interest in tpi motors. Go to any cruise night/car show and see how many street rods are running tpi motors. Stock 3rd gens may be slow by comparison, but they aren't slow for people who know how to build a first gen sbc. Out side of Cali. where anything seems to be ok as far as smog is concerned, and third gens respond as well as any small block Chevy to old school mods. I think sometimes we denigrate our l98s because we have heard the 4th gen guys beating on us. Most of the ones I met who talked down on 3rd gens only got whatever horsepower came from the factory, or could be bought from someone knowledgeable. I don't know that I ever met any of those guys who had a clue how to make horse power other than by writing a check to someone else.

The horse power numbers on the 4th gen might make them collectable eventually, but right now in terms of collectability they are where the 3rd gen was 10 years ago.

 

like russ said, its just because of the time period we're in. In 1992 TPI was all over the magazines. And TPI has and will stay popular because its the only [good] factory fuel injection that you can put on a regular SBC block. LTx/LSx dont(bolt on at least for LTx).

gasoline prices are going to rise, and people are going to get over it. earopeans pay the equivalent of $7 a gallon, and no one gives a ****(they have better public transportation, but still). I dont drive back from school for breaks because its already the same price to fly(not counting wear an tear or mishaps). GM's DOD is gonna help a lot on the mileage issues(although the other companies will probably have the same thing by then). GM has been(and/or is) making major efforts in the quality arena(or so ive heard), and a lot of the problem with 4ths was(besides the nonchalant looks, which is major) build quality.

I'm not saying its going to be a huge success, just that i think it has as good a chance as any platform(well not the vette).

 

I understand what youre saying,however I know plenty of people that the price of gas drives almost everything they do,myself included.I drive thirty two miles one way to work and believe me 19 mpg does not thrill me.If I was not in the middle of trying to sell a house and refi the one I bought,I would be parking the daily driver and buying a multi mpg anything just to pound back and fourth.As for the fit and finish of the 4th gen, outside of the fact that my SS had to sit outside under a cover for most of its six years(and it shows) I think it was really well put together.Everything works it doesnt leak and where ever the paint has not been damaged by the cover wear,it looks great.Perhaps I got a good one who knows,but even the 6yr old battery just died.I wish I could be as happy about the 84 HO Z-28 I am the original owner of.Before I can start it,I will have to fill the Transmission.Just one of the many problems that car has(long story).
Believe me,I would like nothing more than to see a new Camaro,and heres hoping that GM can come up with something that gets better than 30 mpg to put under the hood.Otherwise I dont see it. Once I get everything moved I'll bring the SS to one of the meetings and you can check it out for yourself.

Just my

 

I grew up in a decent sized family(on a qausi-farm), so we've only ever had minivans and trucks that get under 20 mpg, so that probably accounts for the difference in our attitudes toward gas mileage. My 92 gets 3-5 more mpg(highway, probably a few less in town) then the next best car in my family!

from what ive heard the DOD easily gives over 30 hwy mpg with the proper amount of overdrive, which is another reason why i'm not too worried.

found this:
"The bottom line is, DOD on more cars could mean more--and better--choices for enthusiasts. As an example, an early prototype C6 Corvette with an LS2 running DOD provided equal power and acceleration to an LS2 without DOD, but produced 35 mpg instead of 30 mpg. When applied over a large volume of vehicles, GM could have the choice to pocket the improvement in economy and reduce the need to import small outside-sourced cars, or it could build a larger V-8 with more power (say a 6.5L V-8 with 430hp) and keep the same 30 mpg. In the end, for reasons not entirely understood by us but conceivably related to exhaust packaging, DOD technology did not make it into the C6 Corvette, GTO, CTSv or any other performance application as we had hoped. One thing Meagher did share with PHR is that the goal of DOD (on the limited range of SUVs currently planned) is to allow additional vehicle mass (in the form of increased content) without a commensurate decrease in fuel economy or performance."
GM displacement on demand technology
35 mpg when they put it in a c6!

bottom line I can definitely understand if rising gas prices effect some people in major ways, i wasnt suggesting it wasnt a problem. but i do think that most people will adjust to it fine.

and the 4th gen thing, i dont know that much about them(really just heresay), ive just heard people saying that was a problem. i guess im just prejudiced against them because of their looks.

 

G.M. has had build quality issues for the last 30 years. It doesn't seem to matter too much what model you buy.

 

Again I understand exactly where your coming from. I put over 300,000 miles on my 76 Chevy Blazer,4-Wheel Drive over a 15 year period.I would have continued to drive it had the current engine not gone sour.The mpg ran from a low of 8 to a high of 16 depending on which engine was in it at the time.I never gave it a thought. However dropping a $100.00 to fill the tank today is simply out of the question. I stopped driving it daily in 99 and it was at that point that I started driving my 86 TA
Sorry you dont like the look of the 4th gen,How I ended up with mine is a long story,but suffice to say of all the cars that I have owned over the years,and perhaps its because I'm a long way from the kid in his 20's doing 120+ down Hwy99 in a 69 Z-28,the SS is a whole lot more creature comfort combined with a whole lot faster than that 69 ever was. And believe me Solid Lifters singing along to the chambered exhaust at anything above 80 was the sweetest sound anyone could ever hope to hear.


Again just my