Well, last night LottaBallsCamaro and I got into a big argument about the "New Camaro". Aside from the need to redesign the car to meet the new safety standards (side and head curtain airbags or whatever), we were arguing about what GM would do to the car when they changed it. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I refuse to believe that GM would want to do a major revamp on the Camaro to appeal to the ricers who want v6's and "hi-po four bangers" (that's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one). What we've heard is that when and if they re-release the Camaro, it will be smaller, lighter, shorter wheel base, possibly LS1. They are supposedly responding to the trend of the target age group (something like 18-34 year olds) wanting v6's and riced out four bangers. Well, needless to say, I am really really mad because I am afraid that GM will go and F-up the Camaro like they did the Impala and the Monte Carlo and not put a v8 back into it. Damn if I will sit around and watch GM come out with a ***** Camaro. I mean, I love the way it is now. Change can be a good thing, but I'm a little afraid of the GM design team (I mean just look at the Pontiac Aztec!). I would literally cry if I walk into the GM dealership in 2004 and see a Camaro SS with a 3.8L in it. All my faith in GM would be completely shattered. Anybody else have any thoughts/opinions/inside-info about the redesign?

 

Mrs. LBC,

Where are you getting your data? Have you seen any preliminary designs? I'd like a look...

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
If you want to beat the World, it might reach up and pull you down...
Adobe Acrobat Reader

 

a Camaro SS with a 3.8 supercharged would be nice with a 3in pulley

 

The only possible good 3.8 would be a V8 from Ferrari (even then, no torque). V6s suck, plain and simple.

------------------
91 formula WS6 305 tpi, true dual exhaust

 

Ever see a turbo GN pulling the front tires? Or how about the v6 TA? The little v6 buick is an awesome motor. But you wont see it in any new car, its being phased out. The new corporate v6 is the short star. 6 cylinders of a v8 aurora.

 

Truly, i hope GM elects to NOT demasculate the F-body into another ugly v-6 front wheel drive wannabe-Honda bucket like they've done with everyother car besides the vette. On another note, i was flipping through a friend's car magazine a while back and I saw a picture of a prototype model of the new 2004 Camaro. G-d that thing was ugly....looked like a deformed hybrid of an Audi TT and a chevy avalanche.

 

I've heard all sorts of rumors about the future of the Camaro's. My favorite being:

DOHC ls1 based engine, all wheel drive, styling resembling that of the first gen's.

I've seen no pictures of read anything definitive though.

------------------
89 iroc-z 305 tbi
k&n filtercharger, open element air filter. nuffin' else

 

***** to the walls V-8's all the way!!!! The only way to go!

------------------
Check out My Car Pics http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/Albu...667&a=13599419

Gran Turismo Americano "The Ultimate Firebird"
Smokin 1989 GTA- Bone stock except for exhaust. (no catalytic-stainless pipe into Flowmaster 2 chamber) & AC Delco Rapid Fire Plugs

 

In my opinion, the buzzword in the automotive industry is "retro". Ford has the new Thunderbird(or is it the '49?); when they redesigned the Mustang, they took ques from the first gen model. Chrysler has brought back older styling ques on their jeep(round headlights), and older nameplates. Etc.Etc. Retro is in; how else can you explain the prowler and PT Cruiser(and how well they did in sales).

So, if the Camaro does come back I think that it will have styling accents from older models. I'm pretty sure GM will offer a V8, simply because it would bring the cost down on the 'vette engines(and on 'vettes as a whole). If they spend BIG $$$ on the tooling and manufacturing processes for a V8; might as well get their money's worth and produce more of 'em. Same goes for transmissions. I'm sure a V6 will also be offered.

I don't see GM making the Camaro into an import clone(and to be fair, there are some imports that do perform exceptionally well and look pretty good). For one thing, GM already has their small four cylinder models. Plus I'm sure they know the mentality of the average Camaro owner; and what we like and don't like. There are snack food manufacturers that spend money on market research and test groups to gauge a new product; so I'm sure as big as GM is, they do similar testing.

The reasons I see why GM wouldn't produce the Camaro are sales numbers and competition. IMO Chrysler's sportscar flagship is the Viper; for Ford it's the Mustang; for GM/Cherolet it's the Corvette. And since the costs for a well equipped Camaro/Firebird are catching up to a base Corvette(probably a little more than 10 grand). Maybe GM's way of thinking is why have the Camaro/Firebird compete with the Corvette for sales and/or performance bragging rights(even though the consumer demographics for the Camaro and Corvette are different). I think that if GM doesn't bring the Camaro platform back we will see lower priced Corvettes. There will probably be a lower performance/lower luxury version of the 'vette that'll sticker around low 30's, and a higher peformance/ higher luxury 'vette that will run in the 40's. Then the Corvette will compete directly with the Mustang and Viper. The only thing wrong with that scenario is that there is no history of Mustang vs. Corvette.

 

Sorry Vader, we are only speculating! But since both of us plan to be going into the business management field, we love to discuss what needs to be changed in the auto industry. What I see coming is a Camaro that is less then a foot shorter, with an equally shorter wheel base. An also easier to get in Camaro. They have to sell the Camaro as a sporty commuter with a sporty engine (read: V6) that can be purchased at a low price in order to produce what we love, A ***** out performer!


They will also need to lose the live axle. In order to cover the R&D price and keep it cheap they will have to use either an existing rear suspension from a FWD that is easily adaptible or develop one to use in other cars. They cant afford to use it in just the camaro.

Hopefully the new camaro will have a removable hard top which, if I am correct, is calasified(sp?) as a convertible unlike T-Tops and will not have to have side airbags.

I dont think it will have AWD because even though it does accelerate better out of corners and launch a little better, it hurts reliability, gas milage, price and weight. It is also harder to place going into a corner because of the lack of being able to control the rearend with the throttle as much. Also, like the IRS, its not cheap to use it in one car. Subaru uses the same system in all but the cheapest of its cars.

Along with the above, I believe that GM should focus just as much on making the new Camaro the begining of a new trend towards making a better car.

------------------
You have walked onto the biggest baddest dog porch and you will be dealt with accordingly.

I'd rather be historically accurate than politically correct!

 

Hell yeah Chevey Mad. i am a owner of a buick 87 turbo limited. it has done 13.5 with air filter and good gas with it's little 3.8 v6. These car easily dip into the mid twelves with a few simple mods. That's better than most v8's. Still i love the sound of the v8 and it would suck if GM pulled the v8's from the camaro's. Exspecially with the new ls1 engines. They are simply awesome. Turbocharging is where the power is at.

 

Whatever you read below is solely my opinion, based on my observations and analysis. It is NOT necesarily the opinion of ThirdGen.org.

Coach,

There is only one problem with your analysis of the auto market and production requirements - it makes sense. Mr. and Mrs. LBC, with a first-year rudimentary understanding of marketing and business administration probably could manage the corporation better. Accurate cost analysis and sensitive market projections are a thing of the past at GM, and if they don't get their shìt together soon, it may be their undoing. These people are mostly idiots.

It has been apparent for the last two years that the GM management team is busting it's collective âss to become the number-three auto manufacturer in the world, and relinquish its USA-1 moniker. Ever since Roger Smith left the top chair, the whole corporation hasn't been very true to its heritage and long-standing values. It actually started while Smith was there, but has accelerated since his departure. This new "tie-boy" is going to drag them into the dust if he's not ousted by the board, and very soon. He appears to be a gutless mama's boy, more like a sheep than a corporate leader.

The reaction time of the board room is notoriously slow, so you'd better start writing letters to the board member really soon, unless, of course, you want to start driving "Pontiacs" made in Korea and "Chevys" made by Dhatsu.

Remember, you read it here first.

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
If you want to beat the World, it might reach up and pull you down...
Adobe Acrobat Reader

 

Actually, honey, I have read some preliminary info on the new Camaro, but for the life of me I couldn't remember where it was, cause we read so many car magazines. And it's very possible that what I had read was merely the speculations of the writers.

I'm not trying to knock the 3.8 or any v6's for that matter, and the market is definitely there to sell the v6's. I just don't want GM to make the Camaro into a v6 "sporty car." Like those new Celica commercials: "the Celica Looks Fast." I don't want the Camaro just to look fast. It has to be fast, like it is now. Maybe I'm just resistant to change.

I guess I just want the Camaro to retain it's *****, and maybe get some more with the new design. (I'm a girl, so I don't come pre-equipped with *****-I have to get them from my ballsy car! )

Ok, I realize that there are some things that have to be changed to suit the safety standards, the market, the competition, etc. I just fear that in making those changes, GM will totally lose sight of what the Camaro is, and try to make it into a *****, or a sporty commuter car. I'll stop rambling on and on now. Hey, I get my degree in 2003. Maybe if I can get a job with GM, I can push the release date back a year or so, just so that I could make sure everything is on the right track, and make any last minute changes........ wishful thinking maybe...

 

Talking about using parts from other lines. How about using S10 pickup parts. Rear end should work, and auto tranny. That 275hp inline 6 oughta fly in a car. Or you could order either the 4.8 or 5.3l engines tuned up for a car instead of towing.Better yet how about that 6.0?

 

Ok my quick and easy fix to all the problems.

1)Give the Corvette the Race bread 427 they use in racing. This will make it stand out more

2)Give the Camaro/Firebird IRS and an LS6, lighten it up and make it cheaper, already have the tooling plant for IRS from the vetter and the LS6 could be the up model of the LS1 that goes into the redesigned Imp SS.

Oh well we can dream can't we.

------------------
1989 Trans Am GTA

 

Ok, here's a question. I believe Pontiac has been running a national ad recently, they actually go through a list of models, and show a somewhat small picture of each. Well I saw it again a few days ago, and actually watched. When they said "Trans Am" they had a picture up of a side profile of a car resembling a early-mid 90's Ferrari Testerosa side profile. I was psyched! Well, I just went to see pics of the 2002 Trans Am, and to my surprise, I saw the standard 4th Gen design. While I like the 4th gen design, this other thing I swear I saw was IMHO 10000x better! I believe that along with the words "Trans Am" or "Firebird" whichever the commercial used, I think were the words "All New" which makes me wonder. So I went and did a google search on 2004 Camaro (since I checked the camaro design also to see if it had drastically changed) and found news that yes, GM is planning a 2004 and yes, it is planned to have a sort of strange retro look. I then found out that some 5th gen F-Body toys were released. I also found news of this, and that they were supposed to be like the 5th-Gen F-bodies will be like. At the time I didn't pay too much attention to the toys figuring it was the dream of some toy designer. But I seem to remember the toy having a side profile similar to the above mentioned Ferrari. Now I am very curious. Unfortunatly all I can find are the concept pix of that camaro! I think I may have to go toy shopping What I could find is that there is a movement in Chevy to keep the camaro, but a similar thing had not been mentioned about pontiac. Supposedly it's the vette crew trying to keep the camaro going, and that's how they can keep it under wraps. They/it will be RWD LS-1 powered. Speculation on a new GTO from pontiac is also going around, but maybe for only one year, it's 40th anniversary. Unfortunatly a lot of the info seems conflicting...and I can't tell who has reputable sources, or dates of publishing. I guess I'll wait till 2004, as by then I should be out of college, into a decent paying job, and able to afford this cool looking Trans Am if it comes out
If anyone else has seen this commercial, please verify/dispell rumors as to what I thought I saw. I hope it wasn't an accidental/intentional leak that would have been revoked after the first showing of it...I don't remember the time/date that I thought I saw this.
One other piece of info, I think everyone has known, was that caddilac (sp) was supposed to pick up where the Trans Am/Camaro left off. I read that there will be a RWD LS-1 powered catera. If they do this, I sure as hell hope they change the looks of the car, I hate the way the catera looks!
Corry

 

The current IRS in the vette will not work well in a 2+2 coupe. this IRS sports a rear mounted trans that would take up to much of the already to little amount of rear seat space. I imagine that they could adapt it without the trans being there but it will be to close to the vette then. You'll have a Vette engine trans and rearend in a lighter car. It doesnt conflict as much when you say that the IRS is based off a impala suspension. Even if its just as good. Its kind of like refering to the 3.4 DOHC motor. GM calls it the 3.4TwinDualCam and the QuadFour. Its a marketing ploy. In this case though, it will work in revearse

------------------
You have walked onto the biggest baddest dog porch and you will be dealt with accordingly.

I'd rather be historically accurate than politically correct!

 

according to the faithful gm mags the new engine due 2006(current ls1 loses it's certification then)will have two cams.the design will be revolutionary!!!this new engine is said to employ these cams in it's current location,that's right two cams sitting side by side below the lifter valley.reason behind it,this setup allows gm to better control the intake and exhaust valve timing well beyond it's current dated design.the other rumors within this area is to have zero cams and use computer controlled actuators to open and close the valves enabling the engineers to design a lower profile engine to fit in even more confined engine bays and sloped/shorter hoods,as well as the ability to rev to whatever rpm they desire..all we can do is wait and see!you gotta believe that gm still yearns to kick Fords *** every chance they get and they aren't gonna stay mute for long.
just pray that the redesigned camaro(i say Camaro since i feel the Firebird will be put out to pasture for good.ever since gmc became alligned with Pontiac the vehicles have become horribly inept at pleasing the buyers so used to buying cars from Pontiac, who has gained the reputation of being the style division of GM)will have a longer wheel base(109in.circa 67-69),the option of multiple engines (5.3=327,5.7=346),and the veneriable 6 speed.
As for the rearend screw an irs setup.a solid axle will rob less power,is more reliable,and within the correct design has been proven up to the task of the handling we have been accustomed to over the years.put the gas tank directly over the rear to help the center of gravity and weight transfer.
A 12 SEC.,2 DOOR,4 SEAT PONY CAR!!!!
I'M GETTING THAT WARM AND FUZZY FEELING!


KEEP THE FAITH!!!!!!!

------------------
87 trans am,gm crate 350(4 bolt mains 10to1),L98 aluminum heads,LT4 hot cam,slp runners,slp 1 5/8 headers,3in.y-pipe,edelbrock base,hi flo cat,air foil,afpr,as&m ported plenum,gutted airbox,t-5 tranny w/centerforce clutch and a 3.27 9bolt(11.9in. brakes),ed wright's fastchip,relocated iat sensor,160 fan switch&t-stat,tb bypass,accel supercoil,cap& rotor,slp 3in. catbcak,a/c delete.

SHE IS GONE BUT I KNOW THE GUY WILL GIVE HER A GOOD HOME.

best e/t:
3653lbs./full tank+ driver.
14.10@96.53mph 2.01 60'

[This message has been edited by PETE (edited October 24, 2001).]

 

I kinda like the ideas of doing away with cams and letting the computer decide when to open and close the valves. (infinately variable valve timing, essentially.) It'd be even nicer if they made it easy to reprogram when the valves opened and closed, but I suppose I'm dreaming there.

 

Yikes, being a Senior Mech Engin student at a school build be a motor company (Ford unfortunately) I am leary of the electronically controlled valves. I've seen specs on the ones ford is messing with. While it had promise, the electronic motors in there would be undertremendous strain. I have a bad feeling about putting such a crtical componet so close to the heat of the engine. Especially when you combine it with high powered engines with people who love to drive hard.
Just my opinion, may want to combine it with the thoughts of an EE.
And oh yes I saw a sketch of rear of what the 5th gen Camaro is supposed to look like. I wasnt impressed. Looked unamerican to me, definitely had import influence. I would mind a 1st gen looking car myself. Maybe even with a 396 or a 454.
I can dream too.

------------------
1 5/8 Hooker Competetion Headers, custom y-pipe,no cat, modified Flowmaster,Edelbrock open filliment filter with K&N filter in it
160 stat, BF G-Force w-rated tires

 

check out yur local chevy magazines,hot rod magazines or camaro magazine. i forget which but they have the 2004 camaro in there,. omg is that thing sweet. its a redisighned 69 z28 but more aerodynamic

 

PICS PICS PICS

 

A low priced Corvette? Isn't that cute. There's a better chance they'll change the taillights, a new plastic nose, and throw in a POS turbo on a Sunfire, charge 25K and call it the z28. I agree with the idea that gm dislikes having competition for the Corvette, and I think a few hopefuls are overestimating the competence in GM designers. There is a better chance Ford will stop selling crap then there is Gm is going to bring back a nice, retro bird/maro with a flat tail, rectangular tail lights and exhuast system that tickles a warm spot in my pants. You know what we have to look forward to? Gm had an idea back in the 80's where they would pipe "a throaty exhaust note" into the speakers, so it would feeeeeeeeel like you were going fast. Just think of the money our grandkids can save on radar detectors.

 

Fordcrusher, I do see your point; and I understand your reason for chuckling. Even though GM could alter one of their smaller models and call it a Z-28, I don't think it would happen(as far as using the same chassis, engine, etc.). I don't have exact facts and results, but I remember when Cadillac tried something similar with a cavalier(if i'm not mistaken). I'm not sure if that model worked out well in the marketplace.

My basis for that statement about a lower priced Corvette is taking into assumption that the F-Body platform doesn't come back. And I'm not talking about a $20,000 'vette

Now, IMO GM knows that there are two kinds of sports car mentalities around: sport compact and muscle car. GM already has their sport compact models that are affordably priced. If the F-Body is done away with, then the only muscle car they will have in production would be the Corvette(historians may argue that the Corvette isn't a true muscle car, but a sports car/exotic used to compete against porshes, ferrari, etc.); and we know Corvettes aren't affordable when compared to the sport compacts, F-Bodies, or even Mustangs.

So what is left for those consumers that want an F-Body. He/she most likely can't afford a Corvette. Many aren't going to want to buy a sports compact. GM will lose potential buyers by not producing an affordable muscle car(V8 powered). Unless GM doesn't care about losing those potential customers, then the Corvette won't see any real changes(as far as price goes). I don't see that happening.

Just like there are, and have been, different versions of the Camaro/Firebird (RS, Z28, IROC, Berlinetta), the Corvette could be offered in different trim levels(besides coupe, convertible, etc.); and priced accordingly. We could eventually see a no-frills base Corvette with cloth seats(non electric), lower powered V8, standard suspension, etc.. Then they could offer a higher priced version with a performance suspension, more HP, leather interior, dual climate HVAC, satelite navigation, etc. etc.. Of course there would be option lists for each car.

Actually this system of different trim levels would help grassroots racers(in some ways). Why pay for heavy electric seats, GPS system, fancy a/c system; if he/she is just going to discard all of that weight anyway. And since a lot of racers use aftermarket brakes/suspension components(if rules allow it), why pay more for stuff you're not going to use.

Of course I could be all wrong about this. Since sport compacts and trucks/SUV's/hybrids are the hot ticket right now, maybe GM will just focus on those models and leave us out in the cold They would use those models to make up for the lost revenue(from potential F-Body sales). Of course, they will have to produce more of those models or increase their sticker price(something consumers don't respond well to).

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. We haven't touched on political issues, as well as other ever-changing economic, and social aspects affecting GM's judgement and way of thinking.

About the exhaust sound being sent("piped") through the speakers; that reminds me of a product that I saw a while back. It's a little box that fits under the seat and transmits vibrations(in sync with the stereo) that way it would feel like you had big subwoofers vibrating everything.

Sorry for the long post.

[This message has been edited by coach (edited October 25, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by coach (edited October 25, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by coach (edited October 25, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by coach (edited October 25, 2001).]

 

I think the trim level thing would be good. When Ford was researching what future buyers of the mustang wanted, they found that buyers would sacrifice some performance for a better price hence the macpherson strut front susp. as opposed to the camaros SLA front susp. Then there is the engine, Ford decided that a lower power rating would help the affordibility factor to. Less R&D is demanded, the parts dont have to be as strong, and insurance is lower.

I am going to call the engines LS1's but I am just using that in place of whatever would be used.

You could have the commuter car that has a V6 LS1 with the shorter stroke(this would help reduce the price of all the models) with a soft suspension. It would have a Macpherson strut front susp. too. Maybe higher seats to aid visibility with more sound deadining material to add comfort. It would have a price range of $16,000-$22,000. Maybe it could have an option for a "*****" version that came with the RS GFX, a spoiler and a showey exhaust.

Then you would have the RS with a short stroke LS1 V8and a macpherson strut susp. It would also have model specific GFX. It would range from $20,000-$26,000.

Above that you would have the Z28 that had could be had with all the bells and whistles, leather heated seats, upgraded interior. On the power side would be the LS1. And for suspension you would have an SLA with slotted brakes, braided brake lines and various other performance upgrades. This would also have specific GFX and a model specific wing. It would have a price range of
$26,000-$30,000.

Then how about an SS version that was a stripper with the engine and performance goddies of the Z28 but was lowered, had a louder exhaust and had about 20 more hp. This would sport the same GFX as the Z28 But a bigger wing. You could also sell a limited amount of these to help make them more desirible. But also keep the dealerships from jacking the prices up by refusing to sell to those that would. It would have a limited price range of $30,000-$32,000 with the only option being the upgraded Z28 interior but would be personilized with a series nameplate with the owners name inscribed on it.

Maybe you could also have an option for a nitrous kit on some of the models(this is just wishful thinking).

What I'm getting at is the fact that I just discussed a price range of $16,000-$32,000. This would allow A person to tailor the car to whatever they wanted. With whatever price they wanted.

It would also keep it from competing from the 'vette because the SS could almost perform as well but didnt have the ammenities of it and the Z28 would have the ammenities almost equivilent of a 'vette but wouldnt perform as well.

[This message has been edited by LottaBallsCamaro (edited October 25, 2001).]

 

from the news i get if gm does even release the camaro again it'll be a 2005 before it's released. i'd be expecting the mostly discussed retro look similar to the 69' model. it should utilize an alumimun subrame similar the the impala and a subframe structure again. i would expect the transmission to be put in the back similar to the corvette. this would allow the front two seats to be moved forward due to the extra legroom with a smaller transmission tunnel therefore allowing a bit more room for a ten year old in the back seats instead of a four year old. as for the engine, it should be the LS1 or LS6 unless it has been revamped by then and would be introduced as the new twin cam engine. i am expecting that engine in 2004 or 2005. (and for the person posting the 5.3 as a 327, it's a 325, not a 327). the 3.8 is on it's way out the door once they find a replacement as the 3.5 dohc has already had it's plug pulled. comparing to everything out there the 3.8 is mearly adiquate and is underpowered in some cases. trans should be 5 speed auto or 6 speed manual.

i would expect the cheap corvette model to be released for 2003 or 2004, but it's not going to be mustang cheap. maybe 40k or just under, but they won't take that much out of it. chevy is calling the ssr with it's 5.3 aluminum block and head engine the current replacement for the camaro. i expect this to sell about as well as the camaro or less. it's mearly built for looks and that's about it. fortunatly for us camaro fans, the mustang still sells like crazy meaning gm is going to figure out again how to get back into that market. not like they want to be left out of that many a year sold.

 

I have seen concept pictures floating around thirdgen on another board, so I'll search for them and post them here. The concepts, in my opinion, are crap. Maybe I'm just resistant to change or something. All I can say is that I hope to G-d they don't try to turn the Camaro into a lower priced ***** car. I have a strong feeling that they will try to make it more commuter-friendly, with a shorter overall length, easier to get in and out of, etc. That is the biggest complaint they have about the car, is the commuter-friendliness of it. I just don't have very much confidence at all in GM's design team, or their marketing dept either, for that matter. I mean, how many people could they have surveyed that actually wanted the Aztek?

------------------
*** bless the USA!

For all those flag-burning-sons-of-bitches: just remember who's over in Afghanistan protecting your right to do such stupid ****.

 

I've seen looks of having a retro look to the car. I think that right now it may just be a bunch of wishful thinking from the magazine publishers (and they may try to push GM to support it). Why would this be though. Here's what I think: Most of us growing up have heard about the power and have always wanted a car that looks like a '68 or '69 camaro, but they are hard to find and very pricey. If they could kind of bring that look back, we'd probably be on the boat for it. I personally believe that the 69's were by far the best looking camaro's I've ever seen with the brand new 4th gens a close second (for the camaro line atleast).

About the engines though. I could very well see two engines being used. One will definatly be a V6 or the new Inline 6 that GM is releasing. Ford did it with the mustang and proved that people don't by these cars to go fast but to look good. In the 80's the camaro and firebird were by far better performing and better looking but the sales were starting to slip due to emissions and sale prices. In the early fourth gen camaro's though with the wedge design the mustang definatly had something up on the looks of the camaro even if the camaro was a much better performer and more reliable car (Ford ignition modules, I'm looking at you). However, even with the reliability and the power output of the camaro/firebird sales were crushingly against GM. GM will rerelease the camaro and probably firebird too, the break is most likely for retooling meaning that GM is finally getting off of the frame that the 3rd, 4th, and maybe even 2nd gen camaro uses.

The question shouldn't be how is GM gonna screw this up, but rather how is GM going to correct the issues with the car? What sank the camaro/firebird?

Obviously many problems arose. In the magazines that I read from last year I remember a lot of complaints dealing with:
1. The long head-severing dash board
2. The dip in the passenger seat footwell (which makes the car go from a two-seater to a single seater due to shear uncomfort).
3. Lack of fuel efficiency/economy (One main reason that the Mustang V6's are so hot right now)
4. Insurance rates (with more power comes increased rates)
5. Lack of creature comforts.

These aren't my reasons, these are just ones that I remember reading.

We need to keep in mind that we are not the average buyer. We would probably buy a ford fiat if we could get a chevy 350 dropped in and some 4.11 gears just to show that we did it.

Ford did a good thing to adjusting to consumer needs, instead of attempting to tell the consumer what they want like GM did, by making their car a domesticated import.

Don't worry though, I have confidence, no matter how shaky it is, that GM will build a Camaro with consumers like us in mind.

And thats my rant...
-=-Mike

------------------
1989 RS.. 355, Hypereutectic pistons, double roller cam, double roller timing chain, accel wires, blue streak cap and rotor, rapidfire plugs, chevy caprice 350 chip, 200* fan switch, 3 angle valve job, 3 inch cat-back exhaust, 3 core radiator, 3.73 gearing with POSI.

[This message has been edited by burntblues (edited October 26, 2001).]