Shno's House of Z

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

The ZL1 seems to be the whole package stock.

It does seem that way.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

The ZL1 seems to be the whole package stock.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

It does seem that way.

Imagine how perfect with a tiny bit bigger trunk, another 2 inches of back seat leg room annnnnnnd just a bit better better visibility. That would have been a world beater.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Imagine how perfect with a tiny bit bigger trunk, another 2 inches of back seat leg room annnnnnnd just a bit better better visibility. That would have been a world beater.

Maybe.

But wouldn't adding those 2 inches of rear leg room would mean adding more wheelbase (can't just move the seats back into the trunk, because you want more trunk room too). Trunk space could be added by making it thicker (can't do that, as it would reduce not enhance visibility), or wider (gonna have to make the whole care wider to match), or longer (adding a couple more inches to the overall size).

Visibility could be improved by lowering the belt lines a bit. But I imagine that would also require lowering the hood height as well as shaving a bit of thickness from the trunk, to maintain the right look in profile. Alternatively, the roof could be raised but I'm thinking that might require the glass to sit a bit more upright.

You undoubtedly know all the interplay of all these things much better than I do. I'm just sitting on the other side of a screen playing through a bunch of if/then scenarios in my head. But the overall impression that I'm left with is that in order to accomplish what you'd like, the car would need to be bigger (ie, heavier) and/or need to lose some of its badass proportioning.

Would doing all that make it a better car? I'm sure it would. But would that make for a better Camaro? I'm not so convinced. Yes yes ... a Camaro is a car. But a great Camaro is not necessarily a great car, and in fact I'd say the two objectives are almost mutually exclusive. The closer you get to one ideal, the further you end up being from the other. And when sitting in the middle, as a compromise between the two opposite ends of the spectrum ... the most common result is something that nobody likes.

I do think that there is a niche for a sports coupe, that is attractive but leaning towards practicality instead of style & performance. Some might call that car a Chevelle, but there are a host of issues with doing that (there would be too much focus on performance & style, and sitting in showrooms beside Camaros, Corvettes, and SS sedans would make for a ton of sales overlap). Personally, I believe a Riviera would fill that role much more nicely. More design freedom, no real performance heritage to be honoured, all the internal GM competition would be sitting at other dealerships instead of right next to it.

Hmm, it seems I've been rambling a bit. I'll stop now.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Maybe.

But wouldn't adding those 2 inches of rear leg room would mean adding more wheelbase (can't just move the seats back into the trunk, because you want more trunk room too). Trunk space could be added by making it thicker (can't do that, as it would reduce not enhance visibility), or wider (gonna have to make the whole care wider to match), or longer (adding a couple more inches to the overall size).

Visibility could be improved by lowering the belt lines a bit. But I imagine that would also require lowering the hood height as well as shaving a bit of thickness from the trunk, to maintain the right look in profile. Alternatively, the roof could be raised but I'm thinking that might require the glass to sit a bit more upright.

You undoubtedly know all the interplay of all these things much better than I do. I'm just sitting on the other side of a screen playing through a bunch of if/then scenarios in my head. But the overall impression that I'm left with is that in order to accomplish what you'd like, the car would need to be bigger (ie, heavier) and/or need to lose some of its badass proportioning.

Would doing all that make it a better car? I'm sure it would. But would that make for a better Camaro? I'm not so convinced. Yes yes ... a Camaro is a car. But a great Camaro is not necessarily a great car, and in fact I'd say the two objectives are almost mutually exclusive. The closer you get to one ideal, the further you end up being from the other. And when sitting in the middle, as a compromise between the two opposite ends of the spectrum ... the most common result is something that nobody likes.

I do think that there is a niche for a sports coupe, that is attractive but leaning towards practicality instead of style & performance. Some might call that car a Chevelle, but there are a host of issues with doing that (there would be too much focus on performance & style, and sitting in showrooms beside Camaros, Corvettes, and SS sedans would make for a ton of sales overlap). Personally, I believe a Riviera would fill that role much more nicely. More design freedom, no real performance heritage to be honoured, all the internal GM competition would be sitting at other dealerships instead of right next to it.

Hmm, it seems I've been rambling a bit. I'll stop now.

More rear seat leg room would have required some changes for sure, and that can impact the wheelbase or just make the trunk even smaller.................or both.

GM even commented on the rear seat stating something to the effect that in Consumer Reports you only get a 1 for the back seat rating in a coupe so making smaller had no impact on that. So decisions were made there. And if you design a car for a 1 in a CR score vs. what a potentially larger customer base might be looking for.........

Other things would have been to give the decklid a waterfall like the other Alpha cars have. But that nice box section provided by a flat decklid and high lift over also adds structure, which a) helps keep weight down, and b) helps the convertible even more.

Big wheels and tires also drove some of the styling, and offering 20" wheels likely required added structure. I think the CTS-V only has 19s. The less rubber (aspect ratio), the more a big pothole load goes to the body structure. But a smaller wheel tire would have allowed the front and rear fender to be lower and maybe a larger 1/4 glass and lower belt line. But no one should think any of these are singularities. They are balanced overall solutions. Some are drivers of the final car, others are resultant of other decisions.

For sure it would have been a slightly bigger car, and weighed maybe 50 to 75 pounds more.

You guys know my going in was I wanted a great coupe first then a great Camaro. GM gave us a great Camaro first with some warts if you look beyond the performance.

Most people buying the Gen6 right now seem ecstatic about their purchases. My only worry has always been the people that aren't buying Camaros.

Are there people considering a Camaro that are "rejecters" for the very same reasons that make the Gen6 almost a sports car?

But the ZL1 to me starts just getting too close to the Z06 mission. With the Camaro now having less accommodation in the rear seat and trunk, it starts to offer not much more than trunk vs. hatch.

I am very much looking forward to the ZL1 and Z/28 variants. I can almost guarantee right now they will be truly exceptional automobiles.

But so far it seems GM is putting a $10,000 premium on the LT4, give or take. So that alone would put a well appointed 2SS at $60,000. If GM prices it there or close, does that take sales away from the Z06? Or even the CTS-V? If all you want is a 650 HP car, a ZL1 priced at $60k would be almost a bargain. I have a hard time calling it a bargain as that is still more than my first house. So "almost" a bargain.

As for the Z/28 the more I think about it, the more I think GM will just hot rod the LT1 similar to the LF3/LF4. GM worked an extra 40 HP to make a specific engine for the ATS-V that so far hasn't shown up elsewhere. But simply for marketing, does that engine have to have 500 HP as the starting point?

The more I think about it and participate in discussions on Camaro6, I think GM made the decisions on the Gen6 to accommodate the performance variants and then let the I4 and V6 suffer from those decisions. And I say suffer because I know there are things that buyers are looking for in a "sporty coupe" that the Camaro cannot offer. But if you want near sports car performance for a price that looks really good next to a Corvette, then the Camaro is a very clear winner.

[2cnd chance]

What is the HouZe's guesstimation on base pricing for the 1LE, ZL1 & Z/28?

[Bhobbs]

1LE - $4,500
ZL1 coupe - $62,995
Z/28 - won't guess until I know it's real and what's in it.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

1LE - $4,500
ZL1 coupe - $62,995
Z/28 - won't guess until I know it's real and what's in it.

Those guesses look pretty good. I'd guess the 1LE at $4990 (on top of the 1SS), the ZL1 $59,900 & the 6Gen Z/28 being $69,900. All base pricing.

[69L48Z27]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

Those guesses look pretty good. I'd guess the 1LE at $4990 (on top of the 1SS), the ZL1 $59,900 & the 6Gen Z/28 being $69,900. All base pricing.

I think your ZL1 price is low. Closer to $70 will be the base.

[Number 3]

Well 1LE has at least a $3,000 brake upgrade included. So $4,500 to $5,000 doesn't seem out of whack over a 1SS.

I think GM us putting a $10,000 premium for an LT4 so add that on top of a 2SS with 6 pot calipers and you are around $62,500 for a ZL1 but I think maybe more depending other exclusive content.

Z/28 depends on CC brakes and what engine. If it has to be the fastest track Camaro it will likely again top the ZL1 in price.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Based on last generation's pricing strategy plus the increased costs of today's cars, etc...My guess is about 61-62k starting for the ZL1 (before GG tax), $6000 for 1LE, and 75k for Z/28...

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Based on last generation's pricing strategy plus the increased costs of today's cars, etc...My guess is about 61-62k starting for the ZL1 (before GG tax), $6000 for 1LE, and 75k for Z/28...

Which begs the question.............should the Z/28 be the highest priced car in the stable?

Depending on the engine they choose, it doesn't necessarily have to be. And the choice on CC brakes is simply $5,000 more on top of whatever the car ends up being.

I might wonder if it were better to have the Z/28 be a specifically powered 1LE with an engine that didn't carry a huge premium like the LS7.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by 69L48Z27

I think your ZL1 price is low. Closer to $70 will be the base.

Could be, however I'm at almost $5K over the 5Gen. Again I'm speculating on base price.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Which begs the question.............should the Z/28 be the highest priced car in the stable?

Depending on the engine they choose, it doesn't necessarily have to be. And the choice on CC brakes is simply $5,000 more on top of whatever the car ends up being.

I might wonder if it were better to have the Z/28 be a specifically powered 1LE with an engine that didn't carry a huge premium like the LS7.

It's main competitor (now that Ford has upped the Mustang) is the GT350R. It's performance is 0-60 4.0, 1/4 12.3 @ 119 with a weight of 3,650. The Z/28 wouldn't have to go too far to beat these numbers, but GM seems to want to really kick the competitions butt. So how much HP is necessary?

We already know GM is great at the handling aspect of the Camaro.

[Scarrzz]

.

So, I sat in a 6th Gen for the first time today.

It felt smaller to me, and I thought the sight lines we supposed to be more open. I haven't been driving a fifth gen, but is this just my perception, or do Yall agree?

The tech is outstanding and the trim was super nice, but I was feeling a bit cramped.