Preproduction Rear Photo Indicates Complete Redesign?

[sbg]

OK, I know I'm beating this horse to death, but all you Camaro folks like beating them horses (Mustangs) to death, right?

I wish I could post my pictures here in this thread, but I guess I've got to link to them rather than upload, so I'm out of luck.

If you compare a high resolution photo of both the concept and pre production rear end shots you'll notice the differences that have been mentioned so far, but I haven't read anyone talking about what I'm seeing....a drastic change in the size and shape of the rear lights and the profile of the rear end.

Here's what has been discussed and can easily be seen from the photo:

1) Backup lights in the rear bumper.

2) Trim ring appears to be missing from the rear exhaust exiting the valance.

3) Outset feature of the lower bumper creating a lip on the rear bumper that didn't exist in the concept.

4) The trunk opening appears to include a smaller trip between the lights, allowing for a larger trunk opening.

5) The rear spoiler is missing.

6) The rear chevy logo, "bow tie" is missing.

BUT...

Look at the shape, size and inset depth of the rear lights...it's not the same as the concept. The concept lights are more flush with the back bumper (they aren't set in as much as this photo) and appear wider and not as tall as the ones on the preproduction photo.

I know the angle of the picture is odd, but can someone compare equivalent pictures side by side and post them.

The more I look at this preproduction photo of the back end, I'm sure that the entire plastic bumper has been redesigned, and in my opinion has changed the bold stance of the concept design.

The preproduction front end looks good, but I'm asking, voicing concern that why on earth did they make these changes to the back end?!

Anyone who can post a side by side of a close up of the concept and preproduction lights would be much appreciated.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think I'm right on this one.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Your stressing over nothing. Because - I can tell you right now, I think subconciously, your mind wants to see something "drastically" different in the rear end, where there isn't.
I'll put in bold my take, and probable reasoning behind most of what you point out, and what has already been said (I'd just like to touch on those points again)

Originally Posted by sbg

Here's what has been discussed and can easily be seen from the photo:

1) Backup lights in the rear bumper.
We knew they had to be implemented somehow...and these are a topic of very little importance (it seems to me) among most enthusiasts for that reason. We knew they were coming - the placement is not terrible, but what are you gonna do?
2) Trim ring appears to be missing from the rear exhaust exiting the valance.
Potentially because this is a V6...possibly because it looked very 'out-there' on the concept. If not - then because it's a prototype, a car that has no use or need for gaudy exaust tips.
3) Outset feature of the lower bumper creating a lip on the rear bumper that didn't exist in the concept.
This could very well be to meet saftey standards that a concept doesn't need to meet. It could also be because Zeta is a different platform than the Caddy chassis that some of the concepts ride on - room needed to be made. Rest assured - they wouldn't have changed anything on the concept if they didn't need to. So, all in all - I think it was executed very well.

4) The trunk opening appears to include a smaller trip between the lights, allowing for a larger trunk opening.
Good. This will appeal to buyers who aren't looking for the seat-of-your-pants experience, but want an awesome looking, sporty car with some level of daily-driver funcionality.

5) The rear spoiler is missing.
Again, possibly because it's a V6...or more probably because they are testing the car intentionally for spoiler effects, and this was the no-spoiler test....
6) The rear chevy logo, "bow tie" is missing.
Prototype.

BUT...

Look at the shape, size and inset depth of the rear lights...it's not the same as the concept. The concept lights are more flush with the back bumper (they aren't set in as much as this photo) and appear wider and not as tall as the ones on the preproduction photo.
No they're not. They're the same depth...look at the attached pictures-it may look that way because the Prototype's rear lamps may not be production (just like the headlights).

I know the angle of the picture is odd, but can someone compare equivalent pictures side by side and post them.

The more I look at this preproduction photo of the back end, I'm sure that the entire plastic bumper has been redesigned, and in my opinion has changed the bold stance of the concept design.
Definitely changed it. But I don't think it was for the better, or for the worse.

We ALL need to keep in mind that the prototype cars are being used for testing purposes. They are not "accesorized" to be pleasing to the eye (even though they are). And a lot of the worries that people have can be based on, and de-buynked by one of two things:

It's dressed in a flat-white (on purpose), and it's a prototype, meant to be driven, not seen.

[sbg]

OK, so I'm not alone in stating that the rear end, the light size, depth, etc. has been changed.

But you say "not for the better or worse". Sorry, but come on...the question really is simple, if you look at the pictures you've provided, try to ignore the colors, which back end looks better?

I pick the silver, concept, back end.

Anyone else want to vote on which back end looks better?

[CedarHillCamaro]

Originally Posted by sbg

OK, so I'm not alone in stating that the rear end, the light size, depth, etc. has been changed.

But you say "not for the better or worse". Sorry, but come on...the question really is simple, if you look at the pictures you've provided, try to ignore the colors, which back end looks better?

I pick the silver, concept, back end.

Anyone else want to vote on which back end looks better?

you can't ignore the colors, the pre-production vehicle was painted that way on purpose.

[The_Stache]

If your that worried about it.. you might want to look else where, becuase what we have seen so far i gaurantee wont be the only changes you will have to live with.

Personally I have never seen a car company stick so close to the actual concept as they have done with this camaro.

You HAVE to realize that the concept itself cost well over 2 million to make and is NOT street legal. Unless you have 2 million in the bank and a good bodyshop to do your custom work your not going to get the concept in a production form.

[CedarHillCamaro]

Originally Posted by diarmadhi

If your that worried about it.. you might want to look else where, becuase what we have seen so far i gaurantee wont be the only changes you will have to live with.

Personally I have never seen a car company stick so close to the actual concept as they have done with this camaro.

You HAVE to realize that the concept itself cost well over 2 million to make and is NOT street legal. Unless you have 2 million in the bank and a good bodyshop to do your custom work your not going to get the concept in a production form.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by sbg

OK, so I'm not alone in stating that the rear end, the light size, depth, etc. has been changed.

you're certainly not alone. Because I'm sure others may be thinking the same way you are - but I didn't say I agree with you. I think the light size/depth of the prototype is the same as the concepts. I merely said that the lights/lenses themselves, don't look to be production lights, that they're 'placeholders'.

Originally Posted by sbg

But you say "not for the better or worse". Sorry, but come on...the question really is simple, if you look at the pictures you've provided, try to ignore the colors, which back end looks better?

If you'd like a simple answer to that 'simple' question, then I'd have to say that I like the Prototype's rear better.

[GTAHVIT]

If they put the spoiler back on the prototype, I'm cool with the new rear end. The only thing I think I see is that prototype rear may be more rounded from side to side than the concept. The concept looks flatter cross the back. The changes in my opinion are subtle and still retain the overall concept look.

[Pencil.Fight]

Originally Posted by diarmadhi

You HAVE to realize that the concept itself cost well over 2 million to make and is NOT street legal. Unless you have 2 million in the bank and a good bodyshop to do your custom work your not going to get the concept in a production form.

This is an argument that has been used by many people (including myself) to explain the changes to the Camaro. However, the logic really doesn't hold up. The reason the Concept cost $2 million is not because it's really expensive to not have reverse lights, to not have the rear bumper stick out, to add on a spoiler, to have halo headlights, etc. It cost $2 million because it was built all by hand without (m)any factory made parts. If they were to mass produce the Camaro exactly like the concept it would not be a $2 million car to the consumers. It would, however, be much more expensive than most Camaro buyers would be willing to pay, mostly due to interior expenses.

[Jak]

I don't know, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see that big of a difference between the two Camaro's, I really don't. If it wasn't for the larger marker lights, door handles an mirrors you really wouldn't know the difference. We don't even know if the White car's a V-8 or a 6 which might explaine the lack of the trim ring around the exhaust pipe, and spoiler. Also don't forget, that's not the final production, it's just a mule. . . a damn sharp looking mule.

[TAG UR IT]

It is nearly identical. Take away the reverse lights and the lower protruding bumper part (not on the concept), toss on the spoiler and it'll almost look the same. Then, the only difference would be how the rear hatch closes. It's fine. The trunk and rear end look fine. Just wait. There's more to come....and this isn't a FINISHED product!!! Have faith!!!

[2001ragtop]

Top photo: Camaro V6
Bottom photo: Camaro V8

case closed



[/QUOTE]

[DGthe3]

I see the exhaust, bowtie, and the spoiler as potentially being optional styling elements, something not to be concerned about. I don't know whether I like the concept bumper of the prototype bumber better. They both look good to me. I like having a larger trunk opening, makes it more useful. The rest of the changes are functional items that needed to happen in order to make this a low cost car.

One last thing that doesn't seem to get heard enough. This is a functioning prototype of a car that will likely have 3 trim levels or more, plus a set of convertibles. A concept car is the ideal, perfect design, or at least thats what its supposed to be. A prototype is the functioning reality of that concept. All features that can be implemented are, those that can't, aren't. This is a Camaro, not a Veyron. Any styling element needs to be cost effective. It is possible to make a bumper that looks like the concepts and exceeds all saftey regulations, but it may cost 5x as much as a the bumper we see on the prototype. And that is something that alot of people will be upset with, many more than the small minority that put form over function. A similar argument holds for the placement of the backup lights. And the interior, the mirrors, the wheels, and so on. Frankly, I am thrilled that it is as close to the concept as it is. I would have settled for something much less.

One other thing, Dragon, could you take that silver concept and make it white to allow for a comparison where you don't have to ignore colour?

[EllwynX]

Originally Posted by sbg

I pick the silver, concept, back end.

Anyone else want to vote on which back end looks better?

Sure. I honestly think the white preproduction rear is the better looking of the two. Just add a spoiler.

Compared to the white, I actually find the silver a little flat and dull. (I can't believe I just used the word 'dull' in a sentence describing the concept...)