I am starting on my senior research paper and am researching what led to the downfall of the Camaro. I have to have 3 internet sources and I thought there would be no better place then this! Please keep this PG13 because I will have to bring a copy of the thread to school. Please post what you think led to the slow sales, what could have been done to save it, and what changes will have to be made if they bring it back. Thanks!

 

The lack of advertising and not being able to option just what you want on the car. In other words, if you wanted option A then you were forced to get option B and C. But overall I think it was advertising. I can’t remember the last time I saw a Camaro commercial. The only Firebird commercial I remember was the one with the WS6 eating the other car at the stoplight. Compare that to the Mustang which runs a whole bunch of commercials.

David

 

i am not tryin to be a jerk or dis the maro's but just like the mustangs, there are way to many of em out there. why buy a new camaro when u already have one, or at least that is my idea. not trying to start an argument so pleaze be nice with me. i cant help it, its not like im mental or anything

 

Soccer moms with their SUV's

 

plain and simple they didnt sell thats that, car companys make cars that sell, Fbodys didnt sell so they got the axe.

 

Well advertiesment dosen't account for the major reason why the f-body is gone.

First,
there is price, a bone stock z's msrp is 27,000. Alot of car buyers now are really not loyalty buyers like they used to be. Especially since 9/11. The lowest bidder is the winner. You can a buy a nicely equipped Gt for around 24,000. Plus, Fors has a great first time buyers program. You can buy one of the cars under the program(ranger focus etc) and trade out of it in two to three years depending on credit and get into a GT. That makes it very easy to get a mustang. The only first time buyers program that GM has is for the s-10, cavalier, metro. And not alot of people find these cars atractive. But even then you have to have a 675 beacon score or better on your credit to roll over into a Z. You have to really be stable w/ your money to be able to own a z.

Second, the camaro is alot different on the inside. Alot of people want to be able to get in and out of their car w/ ease. the mustang is really more like a passenger car than a sports car. you ride higher, it's easier to get in and out of it, back seats can be actually be used as back seats etc etc. The camaro's back seats are really for putting groceries in and various other small things. I've never driven in a mustang for a long time, but I have heard that their ride quality is a bit better than the f-body's.

Third, Alot of people just cant justify spending 3,000 more for a vehicle that is not as well equipped. Granted they get alot more power, and brand new technology w/ the power plant, it still dosen't justify in the public's oppinion to spend 3,000 more and get less. Now granted that about every chevrolet dealership in the dallas metroplex(especially the one's that are owned by the Van Tyle Corp) are a volume dealership, and the average joe w/ half way desent credit could walk into one of those dealership's and get one for 150 below invoice still dosent help the sales because the average joe is going to half to go to those dealerships all day and have them compete for the sale. once again the lowest bidder wins. Why do that when you can walk into a ford dealership and get one for less that all the hassel you were going through w/ the chevrolet dealers.

bowtieguy01
Showcase Chevrolet
Sales, GM Certified Corvette Specialist
(not anymore)

 

I could talk for hours about how large SUV's make up for feelings of inadequacy in the general population, but I won't.

But I would say it has something to do with "beating the Jones's"... "Margaret, look; the Jones' next door just bought a Lexus SUV! Lets go buy an Infinity SUV tomorrow!" Like these things EVER see an unpaved road!! I nearly laughed my butt off last week when a Lincoln Navigator swerved like a madman- around a pathetic little manhole cover that was raised up about an inch. I barely felt it when I drove over it.

And those damn commercials are the reason the majority of SUV owners drive like morons... I especially loved the SUV commercial where it's a blizzard outside, and you see this SUV blasting through snowbanks, and you hear the sexy voice of the announcer saying "It's 3 AM, and she won't stop coughing- isn't it nice to know you can rely on a [auto maker] SUV for peace of mind in emergencies?" Yeah, real nice. Kill your little girl by flying down an unpaved road, instead of leaving the driving to a trained ambulance driver, who could work on the girl as they go to the hospital. This is why these jerks pass me in 5 inches of snow, as their all-season radials are caked with a ring of ice, with cars coming in the opposite direction-

Aw man I better not get started... but maybe if you look at buying "trends", probably started by the "surplus of gas" and the "gas lower prices" that happend a few years ago. 'Course, these damn things are going to use up ALL our gas soon, but that's another matter I could get started on for hours.

 

The line didn't sell because everyone wants imports. Why do they want them? Because they feel they are more attractive, way more durable, and offer better gas mileage. That is even in the event they have stuffed a 200HP nitrous kit on a 90HP engine. Then to have what is in style AND some performance through heavy modifications kids want the imports. The facts may be screwed up but GM has not made any real effort to change public opinion about American vs. import. Since the f-body always targeted a younger crowd it was just the first to get hit. The kids are the ones that are more about style and what is in, as defined by their friends. As these kids grow older living their whole life under the idea that its better to walk than drive an American car other lines will be killed. By the time they are old farts it will probably be illegal to build an American car. So what killed the product line, ignorance and popular opinion. Maybe one day people will learn something about cars again and swing back. In the mean time I just do what I can to prove I can drive to work every day a faster car than they can trailor to the line.

 

Yeah, ignorance and "pop culture" contribute alot. Its not the 60's anymore, people put less of a premium on performance and more on style, luxury, and features. There is just less of a market for fast obnoxious gas guzzelers. Also popular culture seems to dictate that any 100hp four banger with stickers and a fart muffler owns the road for performance. In my highschool i've showed many a civic owner a rude awakening thanks to Mr.GTA. After I cream them at the light, they snicker at my GTA wheels, turn up the bass, and drive away...

 

Quite simply, there was too limited a market for them, no one wanted them. The older muscle car buyers are now soccer morons in SUV's. The younger generation that replaced them either car't afford a new car period or want an import.

That just leaves the F body with oddballs like us..which just isn't enough buyers to justify GM continuing to make them.

 

Another thing to think about. If your a teenager and want to buy a sports car, you generally dont have the money. If you do get one, its a used one, and even then the insurance for a teenage male is crazy. Take it from me, I live in NJ, its like mafia loan shark rates here. The people who are older and can afford a 30,000 car can usually afford more so they go with something more exotic like a vette, or something more luxurious like a mercedes. This kills the f-body's niche market.

 

There where many reasons they did away with them. first off no sales. The question is why no sales? Insurance companies had as much to do with it as anybody. If we go in and say V-8 Camaro or Firebird a red flag goes up. Same guy goes in and says 4 banger honda and it half the price. He goes home and puts turbo or NOS on it and there we have a ***** . Beats us on insurance and on fuel economy. Car companies love that stuff more sales. At one time a firebird or camaro stood out in a crowd and everyone knew what they where. Now some cars look like a new camaro at a first glimps. I love camaros and firebirds and have been around them all from the start. I will miss them as much as anybody. It's a shame at this point I feel I should buy a new one well I still can. Maybe if more guys like me had bought them sooner they would still be around.

 

I read somewhere that the Camaro and Trans Am couldnt meet the new crash test standards. If the cars are unsafe to drive, they wont make them anymore. Hopefully though, GM realizes enough people liked the F-body and will maybe retool for a different, revised design and bring it back in the next few years.....

 

Here's my list... not necessarily in order

1. A total lack of marketing

2. Overpriced when options versus cost is compared to other brands

3. Disgusting insurance rates for the young males who predominately drive sports cars

4. Inflexibility of car design... they used the same engine technology for 35 years... even fuel injection was available on Vettes in the 60's

5. Stereotyping of drivers... just because I drive a Camaro doesn't mean I have a ****** and say "hyuk hyuk"

6. Today's generation of families have a lack of disposable cash. When I was young my dad bought two cars and the house while Mom stayed home with us kids. Nowadays both parents have to work just to squeeze by and what money is left over is certainly not going to be spent on a toy car that little Timmy and Cathy can't even sit in the back seat of.

7. Greed... the last I saw GM had 9 billion dollars in extra cash that they couldn't do anything with... a few years ago they had 14 billion

8. Low resale value

9. No longer any "Wow" factor... Most people I talk to say they don't really care what car they buy because they all look the same. Can you tell the difference between a LS1 Camaro and a Chrysler Sebring when seen in the rearview? I know I can't. The PT Cruiser did so well because nothing else looks like it.

In short... young drivers cannot afford the combination of high purchase price, gas, and insurance costs. If you're an older guy going through midlife crisis then you're far more likely to buy a Corvette because money is not difficult to come by.

The F-body will be back within 5 years. Given GM's recent history of garbage/unimaginative cars it will likely be a watered down, front wheel drive car that is one model up from the Grand Prix GT and the Monte Carslo. There may be hope though if Chrysler and Ford keep producing retro style cars that send GM's profits even lower.

 

They quit making them becuase people demande more power for there sports cars, now that they have it in the f-bodies, they got scared of them. why do you think ford went to the modular motors for the mustangs. they won't produce as much power. most women can't and won't handle 320 horses from a stock fbody. add a few bolt-ons and the power climbs even more. people are scared to drive these cars because of the power, not because they were better suited for cruising rather than racing like the mustang is, it's because it's from the power. gm will make the f-bodies again as retro rods like the new t-birds and such. at least i think they will. just my .02 cents

 

#1 reason the cars didn't sale were due to the inadequate ergonomics and driveability of the V6 car to the general population. It's just not a good "car"...especially for the prices and insurance the general population must pay. GM began building these cars (V8s) for the enthusiast. Sales suffered even though their goal was achieved in building the enthusiasts' car.

I personally was planning to buy a brand new TransAm due to its last year. I went and test drove one. I decided not to buy one...and here's why:
1)The interior was less than desirable. My wife also didn't like the interior...including visibilty, humps in floor, no rear passenger room, hood too far out, dash rediculously huge.
2)The power of the "Great" LS1 was not as I expected. If it had overwhelmed me, then I could have overlooked every flaw of the car.
3)Being a 27 year old male enthusiast (whom I feel GM designed the car for)...I would not be able to effectively "WORK" on the car as I would like to.

Therefore I walked away. There are some very special editions such as the 400HP SS Camaro...and a 380HP Black Bird Firebird...but they are out of my price range (40K+).

 

I think it has to do with a few things which contribute to a less than favorble marketplace for the F-body, therefore they do not sell well. Keep in mind the following applies to new cars, not used:

1) The price of the F-body is out of reach of most teenagers/young adults (including insurance).

2) ***** fad-Since young people can't afford them (or the insurance), they turn to the cars they can afford and manage the insurance on (Civic's, Neons, etc.).

3) SUV fad-A lot of people who can afford new F-bodies are caught up in the SUV fad.

4) Most people now days don't give a crap how fast their car is. They want safe/reliable transportation, SUV's, or status symbols, NOT power and performance. I was the only person I knew who was even interested in fast cars for YEARS. Everyone thought I was wasting my money making my car faster.

5) No/little advertising of the F-body didn't help things. But maybe GM saw the writing on the wall with the change in culture going to SUV's and imports???

6) For some reason, I see A LOT of new Mustang's on the road. Many are V-6's, some are GT's, VERY FEW are Cobras. Why does a car that is in the same category as the F-body and the same price range still sell ok, while the F-body dies? I think again it is the change n culture. A LOT of people think of the Mustang as the American sports car. Even they get spanked by the F-bodies, they are a status thing for some people. They just want to say they have a "Mustang", like it's a big deal. I don't understand it, but I hear it a lot, especially from the few teens/young adults who aren't into rice.

 

I think there is perceived mileage problem with these cars, while in reality they get just as good (or better) than other cars. I've talked to guys driving Subaru Imprezas who are getting 18mpg in their brand new cars. Ouch.

LS1 F-bodies get something like 25/30 don't they? The public still thinks they are gas guzzlers.

 

Hatchback. read:No trunk
Too Fast. read:no women buyers (or at least extremely few) Also spilled over to PW men who's woman didnt want them to have a car they wouldnt drive.
Complete lack of advertising and in many cases, availability. read:GM bean counters at their finest hour. I think they purposely intended to kill it.

 

Definately,

It is hard for the mob to smuggle bodies with a hatch back, no matter how fast you go.

More than half the buyers of 'rustangs are women these days. A woman that buys a Mustang isn't my type of babe anyway.

I have been working on a Camaro concept with 4 doors, a V8 and a trunk. It is mostly based on the first gen style, but with better aero and 2 suicide doors.

Dont give put my fellow F-body fans! Haven't you seen the Pontiac Solstice and Chevy Bel Air concepts? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge...

 

well, as for price it wasn't that. the camaro wasn't much more expensive than a mustang by any means. with the old mustang gt's out there, alot of the people that owned them replaced them with new mustangs. alot of the camaro people replaced their car with a truck or corvette. at the end of the third generation, the camaro was getting boring as people wanted more and upgrades just weren't happening. then came the fourth gen, fast and that's about it. styling sure didn't hit it off unless your going to buy a SS model and for drivability, it just isn't there. the dash is too big, visibility sucks, interior sucks, etc. the mustang just plain outdone the camaro in everything but performance and with a performance market out there, it sold the mustang. when the camaro contract was coming up at the spring of 02' and gm found that the camaro wouldn't meet 03' crash standards they just decided to cut it since there was so much else on the board with the silverado in 99, tahoe, suburban, monte carlo, impala, and tracker in 00', silverado hd in 01', and trailblazer in 02, the advertising and devolopment money was just not there. with the new SSR and colorado coming out in 03', gm should be ready to get something going for the f body in 04', but most likely in 05' with advancements from the 04' new body vette. this is pretty much the short of what i discussed with rep's from gm.

btw, the all aluminum 5.3 will be in the trailblazer ext very shortly so not all performance is dead.

 

Unfortunately, Max is right on. The vehicle platform no longer generates a profit that justifies the expense of producing it.

For a multitude of reasons, the market for the vehicle began to fall off as early an 1987. So a low sales volume meant lower total dollars of revenue. Since the platform is older technology, and is still produced in the conventional assembly line process, the fixed costs of building the car were not being offset by the sales.

GM can make more money on less capital investment by building smaller vehicles a lot cheaper, and selling them for less. Add to that the fact that only two vehicles from the GM fleet can be produced on that line, and the costs are offset even less. Conversely, one plant and one assembly line can produce the Buick Regal, Olds Cutlass S, Pontiac Grand Am, and Monte Carlo with very little change and no interruption to flow. Just like the newer Impalas, Grand Prix, and Buick whatever.

Trucks are more expensive to produce, but the market currently supports high prices for trucks. So the lines keep cranking them out and GM gets a pretty fat margin on them. As soon as that begins to change, you'll see fewer trucks. A saw a complaint in an earlier post that the better 'F' cars are now selling for ove $40K, but everyone shopping for a full sized truck with any amenities expects to pay that much before they even twist the **** on the dealers door.

The newer design Stupid Useless Vehicles are cheap to produce and still generate a lot of margin since people will pay stupid prices for a tin can with big tires and wheels. Throw in a $400 radio and they'll pay $2,000 more. If you don't believe they are tin cans, visit an assembly plant or a junk yard.

Incidentally, you guys would probably crap on yourselves if you knew what these cars and trucks really cost to produce. For those of you that may work with transportation companies that ship vehicles, look at the insured value of a shipment of new Tahoes and Yukons. A shipment of eight full-sized, decked-out, all-wheel trucks leaving the Janesville, WI plant is insured for around $110,000. That's a lot of profit, dudes. When you consider that any THREE of them will bring in $130,000 retail, that's a LOT of profit. The 'F' cars don't have margins anywhere near that level, so they're getting dumped. It's just as simple as that.

And watch out for the Corvette. Even though the market will still pay the price, and someone in Detroit realizes that it is still the Chevrolet flagship, some of those same bean counters may get to them sooner or later. You read it here first.

And as for the post itself, it isn't completely technical, but close enough for me. Maybe Ede will lock it up...

 

As long as we are talking about vechicles that could replace the image/perfomance spot, there are quite a few lined up. Most are off the shelfers that get there power from the new Ecotec and 4200 series engines. The LS1/6 is not viable now, because the plant here in Ontario just shut dow, and will be moving to bowling Green, Kentuky, for a limited run to supply the Corvettes.

The Cars coming out of the Ecotec 4 are light wieght haulers that need only about 200-250 hp. This is done by turbos and a indevelopemnt roots type supercharger. The Pontiac Solstice uses this, as well has the Cavalier SS, and the Sunfire SE.

For the cars requiring the more push, there are really only 2 engines that can step up to the plate: the 4200 I6 and the 3400 V6. Both are exteremly capable, and it wont be unheard of to have hp in the high 300s, especially with the 4200. Of course the Tyfoone/Cyclone are coming back charged, well turbocharged, with 13 second performance, as well as the GTO which I will let you guys chew on just the name.

But there will be one performer with a V8, and the Classic BBC on top of it all! Silverado SS- which John Moss is rushing into production with at least 450 hp on tap. Good for 12s.

 

I think the reason the F-body went down is due to excellent marketing, well not in our favor. Straight off the bat I'm gonna talk about movies, guess which one.. thats right Fast and the Furious. Look at theses cars, civics to del sols to integras to maximas to even a jetta (what man would drive a Jetta anyway??.. oh btw remember when the cavlier z24 used to be a guys car?). I mean well according to these movies these cars are "10 second" cars, supposedly. Is that honestly possible, maybe, but the question is why waste all your money taking a POS car like a civic. Take everything out of the car, waste 15,000 dollars to put better stuff in, and now instant fast car.. supposedly. Hell any car can go fast with that type of money. I mean if you can go 10 seconds with all that crap in a civic, imagine all that money in a Camaro, like what? 3 seconds?!

But where was I, oh like I said its MARKETING. You've seen Back to the Future right?? Ya know that awesome Dolorian (I think thats how ya spell it). Do you want that car, cmon ya know you want that car!!! Why? Cuz it looks real cool, the doors open weird, etc,etc (and the car can actually light up the ground hehe).

Now time for the facts.. Of course the Dolorian looks cool, I mean cmon its hot! But the facts are that aside from the movie, that car is made out of heavy @ss steal! Which is heavy which equals slow. Now the engine.. It came with a 6 cylinder engine, which was garbage, the car was waaaay underpowered! But hey you still want one dont you? Yeah I know you do.

But hey why do you still want it? Cuz it looks good, I don't care if its slow, its real cool.. not only that everyone has seen it, its practicly famous, the "back to the future car" who wouldn't want it?... Exactly. Now time to apply the Dolorian theory to some RX-7, hmmm...

Lets see.. (now not coming from my point of view, but from today's kids point of view.. btw I am a today kid, but I'm not like these rice kids)
Now.. Why would you want that RX-7? Umm, cuz its real fast! And it looks hot! And hey man it beat Ja Rule, I mean cmon now that must mean its fast (hehe). And Vin drives it, I mean cmon.

Now time for the facts.. well not really I dont know the facts on a Rx-7, cuz I don't care about those cars, but they are slow. They might be light, but they're slow, and to those people who I know will complain that the Rx-7 is fast blah blah blah, well then atleast its not as fast as its portrayed in the "Last in the curry race" LOL.

But you still want it dont you? Why? Cuz its real fast, fast, fast, and hey man its furious too!! And its pretty much famous, people would refer to it as that Rx-7 in Fast and the Furious.

Thats pretty much it there and simple, if a car is displayed as FAST in a movie, kids will automaticly think that car IS FAST. What amazes me is that in FATF they still say 15,000 went into the cars, but still kids will go off thinking, that those cars stock are fast, cuz they are shown as fast, a la MARKETING.
Dolorian: in movie=fast, cool; in real life=slow, junk
Rx-7: in movie=fast, cool; in real life=slow, ugly, unreliable

My final message, quote me if you like: "KIDS TODAY LIKE FANTASY, NOT REAL LIFE, THAT IS WHY THEY BUY THESE IMPORTS INSTEAD, THEY FALL SHORT OF REALIZING THAT CAMAROS ARE FAST IN REAL LIFE!"

..whens the last time you saw a Camaro in a movie?.. theres the reason why.. MARKETING.. I don't know if it was GM or who, but someone gave up.

..Oh btw guys, during the Grammys, during the NSYNC performance, did yas see that one red car behind them? It was a camaro!! 3rd gen, I loved it, but it was the type with three "slots" in the nose of it, like 83 or something. Can ya believe that though, the last time a Camaro publicly displayed was BEHIND an nsync performance, not only that, they danced on it, I was like get the fvck off that Camaro!!

Aight guys catcha lata..

 

The Delorian was made out of stainless steel and weighed less then 3000 pounds. It was slow tho. The RX7 may be unreliable but it is a fast car. Just talk to RX7speed. Thanks for all the responces and keep them coming!!!

 

not to break your heart, but the number of imports out there that are used for going fast isn't exactly camaro numbers, but they are out there and do run hard which i give them credit for. now, to my point, don't use the fast and furious **** to say that's what killed the camaro. camaro began dying many years ago and a movie made last year sure didn't put it out. the majority of would be camaro buyers are now corvette owners or mustang owners. the kind of guy that would buy a camaro for the same use as the modded imports, he's not buying the camaro anyway. he would have bought something foriegn to start with. people don't just turn to foriegn, you either like them or don't. i see alot of people on this board cracking on them yet there are many people blowing as much money on a tbi camaro as there is a honda. a tbi camaro sure isn't fast to start with and neither is most stock tpi camaro's, but they are fun either way. now i wouldn't buy something i can't do a four wheel drift in, but there's nothing wrong with a car because it's foriegn. also, very few third gens can take a late model rx7 stock so i'm not sure where the "they aren't fast" came from.

 

Trust me, steel weighs a lot, they even showed it on car and driver.

Believe me we have spoke to each other before.

 

maaaan... that was a lot of reading. some of you guys are pretty insightful. alot of it actualy made me think. but hey, how do u guys know that the killing of T/A's and camaro's wasnt just a marketing plot for them? think of coke when they got rid of their original recipy and replaced it with that other ****. and then when they re-introduced "coca cola CLASSIC" sales went through the roof. mabey this is just a way for GM to re-build the F-body reputation?

 

Yeah thats right compare an OLD camaro against a LATE Rx-7, of course it would be somewhat faster, its a LATER model! Duh!

I just said in my first post, that to those people who "think rx-7s are fast, well then atleast IT IS NOT AS FAST AS IT IS PORTRAYED IN THE MOVIE", got it yet?

And I didn't base it on just Fast and the Furious, as if Camaro didn't go down until that movie was made. Fast and the Furious is pop culture, aka current, popular, right now culture. If they can make a movie based on slow cars made fast and have it sell millions, well then you can see where society is today. Clearly I'm dealing with people who liked that movie. I liked the racing, the girls, and the fact that supra needed two shots of NOS, including its turbos just to stay even with the Charger, funny stuff. Other than that, that movie was a joke! MONICAAAAA!!!!

 

There are only three ways to increase gross sales for a product.

1. Sell more to the same customers and make them clients.

2. Attract new customers who previously bought a substitute good.

3. Increase the price.

Which of the above did GM do??

The reasons that they failed in each of the above, in my professional opinion as an analysist, with an MBA in marketing, and 8 years experience in underwriting companies, are listed below.


1. Sell more to the same customers and make them clients.

The 4th Gen car has no style and no tech improvements other than engine over the 3rd Gen.

Chevy did not update the car or improve it to offer any advantage over the 3rd Gen.

The Camaro buyers did not upgrade each year because there was nothing to upgrade to.

2. Attract new customers who previously bought a substitute good.

No new buyers were attracted because there is nothing spectacular about the car.

There are more practical cars that cost much less.

If the 4th Gen looked as modern as the 3rd Gen when it came out in 82. Maybe it would get some attention.

3. Increase the price.

GM did go this route, but there was still not enough margin in the car compared to other products that they could offer. No margin + No volume = Bad News for F Body. Furthermore why promote a car which may compete with a more profitable product line.


Advertising may have helped change consumer preference, but it is doubtful.

If GM had run ads like "image is nothing obey your thurst", "where's the beef", "who let the dogs out", "born to be wild", some attention may have been generated.

Bottom line is that GM had the wrong product at the wrong time and corrected its mistake.

I have mine... And always will. I come from 5 Camaro Family which has owned a total of 10 F Bodies. All represented except 4th Gen. Why no 4th Gen? Why have one. My 2nd Camaro cost more than my annual salary that did not stop me. I could now pay cash for a new 4th Gen. I am a loyal Camaro follower, but even I don't want a new one.

 

According to Scott Settlemyer, the Camaro guy at GM, the problem is a plethora of two door cars at GM. Ford has a really restricted number of them so they sell a lot of Mustangs. But GM has a lot of different two door models that are less expensive than the Camaro, so they suffer.

Anyway, GM is definitely bringing it back online, probably by 2004 with the new Cadillac 4 wheel independent suspension frame, with the 50/50 front rear weight ratio.

Now if they can just provide a killer body style, I think they'll sell hordes of them. After all, there is no greater performance car, dollar for dollar, than the Camaro :hail: :hail: :hail:

 

dont you guys think your being a little one sided here? camaro's have always been ugly, and lacked style. T/A's have ALWAYS been about style. the 4th gen T/A's look ****ing wicked and EASILY stand out from the crowd. i can pick out a 4th gen T/A from a mile away no matter what mirror or viewing point im useing. the 4th gen camaros how ever do have a similar appearance to almost every other american car. plus, whats with that whole wedge look? you know those little triangular wooden wedges that some people stick under doors to hold them open? THATS where GM probly got their inspiration...... did you guys forget about knight rider here? yeah that was a T/A not a camaro..... mabey GM over did it with the whole big *** dash thing, but the 4th gen T/A's were the most awesome looking cars ever, id take one over camaro in a heart beat

 

The 4th gen TA has always looked over done to me. Much too much body styling and scoops and spoilers. Bad taste, in my opinion. I don't much care for the 4th gen Camaros, either, but at least they don't look grossly overcooked like the TransAms.

3rd gen TAs look good, though.

 

Psyte- Please read the beginning of the post and refrain from moving off topic and off color. Thank you.

 

for anyone that believed there was seriously two shots of nitrous was used on the supra or that the charger was anywhere as fast as they portrayed it, it's just not happening. i really didn't care for the movie and my favorite in it was the delivery truck, the lightning. the only reason the movie was that popular is that it was a car movie. if they made a movie similar with mustangs and camaro's, it'd have sold well too. look at how many car guys seen the movie that don't like imports, alot. it was just because it was racing, the brands didn't matter. smokey and the bandit, cannon ball run, knight rider (very slow car), hollywood knights, gumball rally, bullit, catch me if you can, etc. all car movies tend to do well no matter what. as for the delorian, it wasn't the stainless steel that made it slow because it wasn't any more than a mustang/camaro. it was the renault 2.8 v6 that made it slow.

i've heard the same about the camaro with the cts platform btw.

 

funny how i get picked out of the crowd when everyone stoped talking about the topic a few posts ago. is it cuz i dont like camaro's? dude, you know damn well that i read the topic, did you even see my 1st post on here? you should have all the info you need by now, what more do you want? the f-bodies died because of bad marketing, lack of demand(due to pop culture) and poor options/priceing. how much more clear can people make it? the f-body had a fair run in the auto war, its probly time for another champ.

 

...NO! Thats like saying the United States of America had a fair run, now its time for another nation to rule. Hell no, F-body is, will, and always was the champ. *** Bless F-body.

 

3rd gen camaro's look nicer then 4th gen.. they are cheeper.. they are easier to work on.. and it's a CAMARO (as in the namesake, legacy)..
the 4th gen camaro's are... nothing special.. i see one on cruise night.. i just look at what's in the lane next to it.. (even if it's a Talon or some crap like that).. why?.. wedged.. triangular.. it's a square arodynamic plastic thing.. it dosn't get me going.
firebirds.. well.. i feel they got better as the years went on.. but were always second to camaro's.. i'd pick a 4th gen over a third gen.. (especially 98+).. but.. then.. i pop open a hood and WTF? can't get to anything.. how can i have fun doing things on that?! have to take out the motor to do so.. and.. well.. a thrid gen trans am is damn nice to look at.. easy to work on and cheeper.. stick the money that was going to be used up on the 4th gen on the 3rd gen.. fry the 4th then after using that money..
in conclusion.. the 4th gen didn't have much of an apeal over the 3rd gen.. and there's alot of 3rd gen's floating around... why spend soo much money only to say 'I have a newer car' then get smoked by a modded 350 camaro/firebird that cost less even with the mods?.. i wouldn't buy a 4th gen.. maybe a v6 firebird (98+) as a daily driver so my thrid gen can have the week off and be drivin during the weekends... but then again.. those cavalier z24's sure are nice and sporty (not quick.. well.. somewhat.. but it's not fast) and easy to drive for anybody..

 

Slow sales = everyone wanting SUV's, and kids don't want to buy a Camaro/Firebird that is a couple of years old and make it faster, they want to buy a slow car (cough..Civic..cough) and try to make it all purty and slower.
To bring it back, they'll need to appeal to the younger crowd like they did in the 60's 70s 80s when kids wanted muscle, now most kids (and I say most) don't want muscle they want rice.

 

They got axed because they were too big, heavy and looked pretty damn ugly. The also were not very practicle at all. The only thing they had going, that was better than a Mustang was the power. Besides that the cars kinda sucked.

 

I agree with Vader about the profit from trucks. Have you heard about the CAFE laws? Basically they say that cars must get 25 mpg, while light trucks only need 20mpg.

So it's cheaper to make a truck because you don't need to put as much money into the efficiency.

People are willing to pay more for an SUV, and GM is like any other company, they care more about profit than tradition. So the F-body gets axed.

 

First I have to laugh because a large majority of people here are trying all they can do to wedge a fourth gen interior into their third gen. Yet that's one of the reasons a lot of you are saying the fourth gens failed. wtf... thats just too funny.

Next. The fbody has been built on its own platform since 71. One platform, one complete fatory, one complete labor force, and only two cars to show for it. It simply doesn't make any sense. The fbody is basically the only rear drive car that GM makes (corvette excluded) GM needed to design a platform with rear wheel drive that could be used for different marques. This would enable them to gain more profit from this one platform; one factory and one labor force.

Also, the mustang came out a year after the fourth gen and has already had I think no less than three makeovers. No I didn't like any of them but it kept the car fresh. The fbody had one makeover in almost 10 years.

Lastly, I live in Florida and no one is too concerned with front wheel drive. It simply is not an advantage down here. When I lived up north front wheel drive was a better sell. Most people wont pay 30K for a car they feel they have to park three or four months out of the year. Guess what???? most states in america face snow and ice in the winter. So owning a rear drive car is a luxury.

As my truely final rant... those of you who said the fourth gen cars were not an improvement over the third gens are kidding yourselves. I have owned both and I loved my third gen trans ams and formulas. (I would still buy one to keep in my garage if I could find a decent one) but my LT1 formula is light years ahead of any of my previous rides. Not only in a speed contest, but also in safety, quality, anti-rattling, t-top sealing etc.

Lata

 

I agree with you Redarrow1, well made points, except for the 3rd-4th gen comparison. The only things I know that you can cram into the 3rd gen from the 4th gen is the seats and console. My GTA, and I believe IROCS as well, already have the seats. Wouldn't mind a cupholder though. The only thing the 4th gen has on the 3rd is performance (except for the 92 Firehawk and the Turbo Trans Ams). The looks of the 3rd gens are better. And the dash, and overall feel of the interior is better. On the other comparisons: ride, anti-rattling, t-top seal, etc...the same in my opinion.

Basically hardly anybody wanted to buy these cars (4th gens)...period.

 

My reasons for the Camaro's demise:

1 - 4th gen looks IMO stink.

2 - cost to drive and insure.

3 - the creation and success of the ROADSTER.

4 - SUV's. I'll be honest here. These vehicles can go fast for their size, have more ROOM, can go places a Camaro can't, are more comfortable to drive, and have a buttload of aftermarket options designed for them.

5 - Not appealing to women. I agree with the previous posts. Don't see to many chicks driving F-bodys down here.....Can't drive 5 miles without seeing one driving a Mustang.

6 - Sluggish economy, aside from the "tech boom" the economy has been pretty much in neutral since the Gulf-War recession, which by the way started around the same time the 4th gens were introduced

 

Chevyluva3: don't diss the RX7 like that, you embaress the other teens on this board like me with blind ignorance like that. Its that kind of blind ignorance that fosters the ***** mentality in our peers, I choose to have a more open minded view. If a car's fast, its fast, I dont care who made it. The key is to buy a car on its actual performance, not its image. I think thats the problem today, simple marketing tricks seem to work wonders on the dumb American public, heh. Unfortunatly thats why the Camaro is gone, it lost its image awhile ago. Some new body styling is deffinitly in order, ever notice how from the back a Chrysler Sebring looks like a LS1 Camaro? *shudder*. Thats why I whent with a third gen GTA. Now thats style:hail:

 

Ok, here we go.......
Back when the Camaro was born, Chevy (Not GM) had 30 percent of the american car market. They did this with the intermediate (Chevy II/ Nova) and full size (Biscane / Impala) platforms, plus the Vette and Camaro. Nowadays we have the Cavailer, Malibu, Lumina, Impala and MonteCarlo, all on different platforms, plus the minivans and SUVs. GM feels that each of it's branches should build a car for every segment of the market, and the proliferation of models cost so much money, it killed Oldsmobile. In their effort to make a whole bunch of different cars, no one car got really good. In fact, they all got kinda crappy.
The F-bodies were not big volume sellers, so they didn't get a whole lot of development, resulting in the less than stellar redisign in '93. In my opinion, the '82-'92 cars were better designed, less compromised vehicles than their replacements. I've driven and ridden in a couple of '97 machines, and the suspension felt less precise and the body less solid than my '86 T/A. Except for the lack of power, Dad's Sebring Convertable felt tighter and more solid than the hardtop 4th gens. (zips up Nomex)
Speaking of compromise, the F-Bodies had a limitation that the Mustang never had to contend with: The Corvette. The 'Vette was the flagship, so no matter how hot the Mustang got, the Camaro could never get hotter than a Corvette.


On Rear Wheel Drive:
Rear wheel drive is THE way to go for high performance use. Other than rally cars, all purpose built race cars are rear wheel drive. "Yeah, but they don't run in bad weather" Last I checked, BMW's have all been rear wheel drive, and again, last I looked, the weather gets pretty crappy in Germany. Used to be, Front wheel drive was the exception, rather than the rule. In bad weather, people drove more cautiously, and when it snowed, bolted on the snow tires.

BTW: All of my daily drivers have been rear wheel drive, and the 305 in the T/A is the smallest powerplant i've sat behind.
'70 Ford Deluxe Wagon 390
'79 Pontiac LeMans Wagon 350
'86 Pontiac Trans Am 305
The T/A is also the best in the snow of the three, It has the tallest gears (2.77) and the only Positrac.
The only car I ever crashed in the snow was a Front Wheel Drive Plymouth.

 

hehe so I have nothing to do and I am reading the boards on RX-7 related stuff

but the rx-7 is not a unreliable car

they are a touchy car yes but if things are done right they can last as long as a piston motor if not logner

my N/A has 171k on it and still to this day running strong with NO motor work done to it at all



and chevyluva the RX-7 STOCK would not be that fast like the fast&furious

but.... go to www.rx7forums.com
there are quite a few guys running in the low tens and I think there is even a guy or two running in the 9's on a STREET CAR.

big turbos do quite a bit as for how fast a car is

and also if you take a 93 rx-7 vs a 93 camaro/firebird I would almost give the win to the rx-7
if it is a stock thirdgen vs rx7
rx7 wins all the way
but the thirdgen car is a nightmare cuase the stock computer sux ***.

 

The price of Mustangs killed the F-body!!!!!!!!!

 

I don't think price had much to do with it. I believe the Camaros were actually cheaper than the Mustang. I am sure the f-body had a better resale value. At least in my part of the world. The only thing price wise that may have hurt was that toward the end it was impossible to order a stripped V8 car. They all seemed to have most creature comforts standard. I really wanted an 01 formula with just A/C CD player and six speed, RamAir and T-Tops. But mandatory by the factory was that I had to get PW,PL,Cruise,Keyless entry, etc..... the car stickered at 28,000. According to GM the reason they were loaded was that is how everyone was ordering them. My feeling is that they knew they were going to cease production and had to get rid of all the f-body specific parts so they started making everything standard. I noticed even the Camaros have the steering wheel radio controls now. (used to be firebird exclusive)
Lata

 

1) I don't think that gas milage had anything to do with it. I got 30mpg out of my 97 formula with a 6 speed. What is sad is that they underrate the gas milage and don't use that as a selling point.

2) The packaging of the 4th gen wasn't as user frendly as it should have been ie: not easy to get in and out of THE CAR DOESN'T HAVE A FRIGGIN TRUNK which makes the car hard to travel with if you have a wife and kids. plus it would make it easyer for me to carry the parts I pick up if I had a trunk.

3) The price is good for a car with so much technology packed into it but unfortunately not priced right for the larges folowing of this car which is young testostrone driven young men that can't afford the insurance if they sell their kidneys.

4) The 4th gen cars are a 4 star rated vehicle for safty so I dont' believe that is so much the problem for the former sells as other factors but the car can't be made to have the side impact airbags that will be required in 04'.

5) ADVERTISING. Gm didn't advertise the camaro and firebird as much as nessary for the product to sell.

6) Design the f-body isn't designed very well for most females to drive comfertably. If you haven't noticed most short women can't see over the dash. case and point I have a friend that drives a cobra but he wants a f-body but his wife can't see over the dash well enough to drive one so he can't have one. I had a girlfriend that had a 98 trans am but it scared the living crap out of me to ride with her because she couldnt' see very well over the dash.

7) the car is due for a remake and gm doesn't want to fork over the cash it would take in development to redesign the car.

Overall I think the camaro will be back it will just be a matter of time. It will likely come back on the sigma platform and will be better than ever. GM will address the issues that they have been facing for the past two generations of the car. I have talked long enough on this rant good luck on the paper man.