Camaro Falling Apart?????

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by nasty2ss

I'm so tired of hearing first model year so theres going to be problems. BS how long has GM been making cars? I got an idea how about getting the bugs out before you mass produce it.

Do you work in the Industry? Have you ever built a car? What about a few thousand a month?

And just how would you suggest "getting the bugs out before you mass produce it"? The cold-hard truth, is that for most brand new cars (which the Camaro is...it's almost one-of-a-kind in GM's fleet)...the only way to get 99% of the bugs out is to build tens of thousands of them. That's why first-year cars generally have issues...sorry that upsets you.

Originally Posted by nasty2ss

You pay 40,000 you shouldn't have to take your car in every other week to get something fixed.

Absolutely. But unfortunately, some of us get the short straw. Not every Camaro needs to be brought in for service a few times a month...this is not typical, and so there's nothing to get angry about.

Originally Posted by nasty2ss

Knock on wood my car has been perfect so far had not been for the camaro I never buy a Gm car or truck because my opinion there junk.And I know I'm not going to make any friends by saying that. Just speaking from past expercinces

A Visit to your local dealer and some research seems to be in order. The Camaro is only a peek at the company's entire modern fleet of vehicles.

[nasty2ss]

Originally Posted by coolman

That's nothing I got two chevy work trucks the have over 400,000 miles on the origanal drive train and they go to the job site everyday. I thought you were talking about a new toyota. My buddy got a new one after a year because the frame rusted out and now I see their having the same problem in the tundra. I also don't like the random acceleration option they put in their cars and trucks.

What year trucks had a 76 chevy that would't die.Thats why I was very disappointed with my 2002 silveraldo.Also need my truck for work and can't afford to have it in the shop even if it is warranty

[Coldpants]

Originally Posted by DkknightX

I think the development of the SHO and the Camaro were headed in different directions. Firstly, you are dealing with two different R&D teams with different sets of goals. Secondly, the goal of the SHO Taurus R&D team had to refine their car in more "practical" areas, such as interior, conveniences/amenities and fuel efficiency, to name a few. The exterior of the car really didn't need to be a priority, so they didn't have to sacrifice the looks of the car to make sure the tail-lights don't fill up with water, or use special metallic paint that doesn't appear to be different colors. Thirdly, as practical as the V6 Camaro is supposed to be, it wasn't designed like a Taurus. The Camaro R&D team wanted to really focus on striking looks instead of all the refinements you would find in a Taurus. Yes, I'll admit, there were probably a few corners cut to make the Camaro work given it's price range, but to expect the Camaro to be built as well as an SHO/Taurus should be is expecting a bit much. Different classes of cars my friend and I say that with the utmost of respect!

Wait what do the looks of the car have to do with not sealing the tail lights properly? Thats a QC issue.

[Myothercarisafireengine]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Do you work in the Industry? Have you ever built a car? What about a few thousand a month?

And just how would you suggest "getting the bugs out before you mass produce it"? The cold-hard truth, is that for most brand new cars (which the Camaro is...it's almost one-of-a-kind in GM's fleet)...the only way to get 99% of the bugs out is to build tens of thousands of them. That's why first-year cars generally have issues...sorry that upsets you.


Absolutely. But unfortunately, some of us get the short straw. Not every Camaro needs to be brought in for service a few times a month...this is not typical, and so there's nothing to get angry about.


A Visit to your local dealer and some research seems to be in order. The Camaro is only a peek at the company's entire modern fleet of vehicles.

Well, I guess we know who works for GM now don't we?

It is a reason top be upset and angry. I did not pay to draw the "short straw" and that comment is pure BS...bet if the straw was yours, you wouldn't be so peppy!

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by Coldpants

Wait what do the looks of the car have to do with not sealing the tail lights properly? Thats a QC issue.

Mostly it is, but the plastic has to be molded and the odd shapes and curves of the Camaro might not afford these kinds of situations to be as easily remedied as in other cars like the SHO/Taurus. Yes, I agree, it should be a QC issue and likely is the case here for many of this woman's problems, but we can't deny the fact that simple designs are easier to work with and make more secure (thus has fewer problems) than working with parts that are more complicated in design and thus, more prone to failure. There are trade-offs and sacrifices that need to be made in order to manufacture a Camaro and keep it under the $40,000.00 price range. I'm not saying these issues can't be worked out. Right now, it just might cost a whole lot more expecting SHO/Taurus workmanship and reliability versus a Camaro (though I believe the Camaro's workmanship is superb but not perfect). It would be easier for the SHO/Taurus R&D team to use an easier, safer design for that car by mimicking the success of those same parts on other Ford vehicles in the fleet. No other car in GM's fleet is designed like the Camaro. Hence, The SHO/Taurus is a great, reliable car with vanilla looks, whereas the Camaro is a hot, sleek, aggressive, fast muscle car. I think if we had the quality of a Taurus in our Camaros, we'd be looking at probably another 10 grand tacked on to each trim, IMHO.

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by Myothercarisafireengine

Well, I guess we know who works for GM now don't we?

It is a reason top be upset and angry. I did not pay to draw the "short straw" and that comment is pure BS...bet if the straw was yours, you wouldn't be so peppy!

Nah, Myothercarisafireengine. Dragon doesn't work for GM, but many of the moderators and administrators here know many fans, dealers, executives from GM that frequent the site here. This is why I encourage you to throw in the fact you are a Camaro5 member and do it discreetly. I seriously doubt there isn't a DM that doesn't know about this site and if they know what is good for them and their job security, they won't ignore your requests. In the very least, they should be as professionally interested and respectful as possible even if they don't resolve all of your problems.

[Bert]

yep at this point I'd be looking into the lemon law pretty hard . . . even if they are just a bunch of "small" problems, when you get to feeling that bad about it, there probably isn't any going back

bummer . . . and making me think that waiting until they get a few thousand more builds under their belts is a good idea . . .

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by Bert

yep at this point I'd be looking into the lemon law pretty hard . . . even if they are just a bunch of "small" problems, when you get to feeling that bad about it, there probably isn't any going back

bummer . . . and making me think that waiting until they get a few thousand more builds under their belts is a good idea . . .

Problem with the Lemon Law is that it has to be one problem repeatedly. If they fix one, what about all the others?

[Coldpants]

This might be a bit of a jack but its related. Was anyone bothered by that guy who gets to override the computer that checks the frame to make sure its in tolerances? A properly programed computer is NOT inferior to a human, if you tell it to do something it will do it over and over and over in much smaller tolerance than any human can detect. By allowing that computer to be overridden simply lowers costs for GM at the expense of quality and I think some people are experiencing that trade off.

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by Coldpants

This might be a bit of a jack but its related. Was anyone bothered by that guy who gets to override the computer that checks the frame to make sure its in tolerances? A properly programed computer is NOT inferior to a human, if you tell it to do something it will do it over and over and over in much smaller tolerance than any human can detect. By allowing that computer to be overridden simply lowers costs for GM at the expense of quality and I think some people are experiencing that trade off.

Yeah, that comment was a little...wrong. If you can cover a car in paint evenly every time with robots, doing it by hand would likely cause body shop guys to overuse paint and materials (wasteful) to accomplish the same goal. He is right about losing jobs to machines though. That DOES suck.

[derklug]

Where I see the problem is not in the OP's car so much as in the dealership. Having worked at various dealerships, I have seen good, bad and horrible. Often warranty work falls under the "light line" side of the shop. These are usually the least experienced technicians, and if they work flat rate, are just trying to get the car out as quickly as possible. Combine this with Service writers and managers who are being pressed to turn more vehicles and increase profits, and you get a dissatisfied customer. Once a customer is po'd, they notice every little glitch.

[5thGenOwner]

Originally Posted by Coldpants

This might be a bit of a jack but its related. Was anyone bothered by that guy who gets to override the computer that checks the frame to make sure its in tolerances? A properly programed computer is NOT inferior to a human, if you tell it to do something it will do it over and over and over in much smaller tolerance than any human can detect. By allowing that computer to be overridden simply lowers costs for GM at the expense of quality and I think some people are experiencing that trade off.

You might want to tell everyone you were referring to the Ultimate Factories: Camaro you thread jacker .

But I agree, that disturbed me on the inside. It makes you think 2 things...
1-Either the computer isn't doing it's job correctly (since the human let it go by).
2-Or, the human is letting bad frames get by.

Although I don't know if any of that stuff was real or just set-up for the show. When the guy found the issue with the paint and "sanded and buffed" it out... it looked staged.

Edit: As for human painter vs. machine, I'll take a professional human any day... just like the experts.

ok, thread jack is over

[Black5thgen]

I've had no problems with mine and love it. 5200 miles. The only thing was the spoiler bolts. I don't understand the delicate paint complaints, mine had a scratch and the body shop wet sanded and buffed it out with no trouble. As for paint mismatch, you just ordered the wrong color. All my panels match.

[gregus73]

sorry to hear that.
I was in a bad spot in with my 2003 RX8.
liked the design, and the car handled great.
it was in the shop every other week.
I owned it for 2 years, and did not trust driving it accross town.
yet, a friend of mine had the same car, w/o any issues.
pieces litterally started falling off in front of me.
I ended up trading it in, and was very glad to be done w/ it.
in retrospect, the car was a lemon.

find out if you have a lemon law, and see what can be done.