2010 Camaro Review Compilation

[zappr]

http://www.theprovince.com/cars/Firs...869/story.html

[Mr Twisty]

[UCF w00t]

Cars.com video review...

[carsismeZ06]

Everything is good except when I was watching the Edmunds test, the car seemed to slide around a lot during the slalom and the lateral-g @ .88 was disapointing to me.

[UCF w00t]

Two more...
the car connection

left lane news

[SandiCandi]

Gee with all these great reviews everybody's gonna want one - glad I ordered early!

[1MULLET]

O.K.......I have read the reviews and the feedback of others that have read the reviews. WTF people.....Complaining about petty stuff. I have driven my bosses 2009 lambo gallardo at $260K, It aint all that at $260K, blind spots and performance is awesome but at what cost? Is a couple seconds that much? Give me a break. In the 1960's a car in the 12's was rare!!!! This is a factory stock car, the V6 doing 14.6 in the 1/4, WOW. This is a GREAT car no matter how you look at it and will do well in anything you throw at it for the price. A Shelby Mustang costs much more and gives what? I haven't driven the 2010 Camaro yet but I know it will be all I expected and more. Give it a try yourself before you get all down about bias reviewers!! I cant wait for mine

[Tran]

First post compilation updated! Thanks for all the links to reviews!

[wjones14]

Originally Posted by 1MULLET

O.K.......I have read the reviews and the feedback of others that have read the reviews. WTF people.....Complaining about petty stuff. I have driven my bosses 2009 lambo gallardo at $260K, It aint all that at $260K, blind spots and performance is awesome but at what cost?

I'll just say that what may seem petty to you may not be petty to others, and that's why the reviewers try to cover every aspect of the car, positive or negative. We've known all along that the SS was going to accelerate with the best of them - what we didn't know was the smaller details, the ergonomics, and the general overall feel of the car. That's why people read reviews.

And if your point about the $260K Lambo is that it also has poor visibility as well, and therefore the Camaro at $30K is a downright bargain -- well the Camaro is a downright bargain. But the Lambo is not what most people would consider a daily driver either, so the limited visibility of a Lamborghini, IMO, is much less of an issue, especially considering everything else that comes with being a Lambo owner.

[MarkSS]

I didn't read through to check if anyone had posted this link yet, but it talks about the testing conditions and why owners may get better performance numbers than MT did.

http://blogs.motortrend.com/6492567/...ers/index.html

[Chevyrocker]

great videos...mixed reviews...the car I'm sure is going to be awesome.

[camarosc35]

What I got from these reviews was that the interior was generally criticized for the console gauges that had small readouts and not driver-friendly and the use of plastic on the dash, except for the leather upgrade. GM should have known better than to use plastic. Also, the steering wheel was criticized, as well. Oh, the trunk entry is laughably small. Also, driver visibility is limited because of the design of the car. Weight is also an issue, 3780 Lb curb weight worth. I am also concerned about the driving comparisons between the Camaro and Mustang, but, especially "In short, the G8 GXP is a handler before it's a muscle car and that's saying something for a vehicle that can hit 60 MPH in 4.7 seconds..." and " Sure its stinking fast, but it doesn't make exploiting that performance rewarding in the way all the above did so well. It doesn't so much defy convention, as drive like you'd expect a Camaro would, a really good Camaro." (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6363). Handling should be a Camaro forte, not a disadvantage. I wonder if the independent-link suspension is a double-edged sword then, as it gives this car superior ride characteristics, as well. I think future models will offer substantial interior improvements to counter these criticisms. Overall, all the reviewers laud the car's looks, performance, "bang-for-the-buck," and fuel economy. It is only unfortunate that GM took so long to produce it that it faces a financial meltdown in the process of marketing it. It should have come out with this car a long time ago, better late than never, let's hope this saying holds true now as well.

[Tran]

Added: Automotive Traveler -- (Discussion)

[Fredman_Vice]

The Toronto Star had one this morning. Not sure if someone has posted it already.

http://www.wheels.ca/reviews/article/521022