GM VP: Camaro Z28 confirmed (again)! 6th Gen Camaro on Alpha platform.

[Z/28orSs]

just a wild guess BUT i think the SS will move to the top dog and the z28 will repalce its shoes !!!

[92z28]

Originally Posted by Z/28orSs

just a wild guess BUT i think the SS will move to the top dog and the z28 will repalce its shoes !!!

I highly doubt that, but good guess.

[garfin]

Just FWIW, GM has recently announced plans to invest heavily in the development and production of V8 engines.
The Glendale Ave. engine plant in St. Catharines, ON. is to receive a $235 million investment tied to V-8 engine production, starting in 2013, and the River Road facility in Tonawanda, NY is to get a $400 million investment related to a “Generation V” V-8 engine (as well as a $425 million investment tied to a next-generation, four-cylinder Ecotec engine).
http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/06/0...atharines.html
Can't be sure what all this might mean as related to a future 6th Gen, but it is obvious that GM ain't giving up on V8 engines any time soon!

Best regardSS,

Elie

[Maddog78]

I've never met him but I like this Karl Stracke guy.
Just the kind of guy GM needs.

[mondain]

If it makes you feel better I'll say $43k MSRP, which is what I just priced the Camaro I want on chevy.com (not including tax+title+delivery/prep etc). Considering many dealers were at one point selling Camaros for $5000 over MSRP around here, someone spending $45k on a 2010 Camaro is not unheard of.

But I digress. My point on the interior is that nearly every professional review of the car stated its interior was cheap, plastic-y, etc. And that the cheaper Mustang had a much more refined interior.

I never said the Camaro interior was "not a muscle car interior" or that I wanted it to be plush like a Caddilac. I said that engineering today can produce a quality interior higher than that of the current Camaro for less money than before (as evident by the cheaper Mustang with arguably better interior, or the $40k 385hp Hyundai Genesis). Thus I stated that there's no reason to accept a less-quality interior these days when it's been proven for less $ we can have a better one.

I'm not saying raise the price of the Camaro so it has a better interior; I'm saying we should be able to have a better interior without the price ever going up because other car companies can do it for less, why not Chevy.

Relax everyone

[Z/28orSs]

Originally Posted by mondain

If it makes you feel better I'll say $43k MSRP, which is what I just priced the Camaro I want on chevy.com (not including tax+title+delivery/prep etc). Considering many dealers were at one point selling Camaros for $5000 over MSRP around here, someone spending $45k on a 2010 Camaro is not unheard of.

But I digress. My point on the interior is that nearly every professional review of the car stated its interior was cheap, plastic-y, etc. And that the cheaper Mustang had a much more refined interior.

I never said the Camaro interior was "not a muscle car interior" or that I wanted it to be plush like a Caddilac. I said that engineering today can produce a quality interior higher than that of the current Camaro for less money than before (as evident by the cheaper Mustang with arguably better interior, or the $40k 385hp Hyundai Genesis). Thus I stated that there's no reason to accept a less-quality interior these days when it's been proven for less $ we can have a better one.I'm not saying raise the price of the Camaro so it has a better interior; I'm saying we should be able to have a better interior without the price ever going up because other car companies can do it for less, why not Chevy.

Relax everyone

what you dont understand is that we asked GM to NOT water down the concept,
Simply buy touching the interior or looking at you cant call it cheap nor under par, try living with an older 325 (2005) i have, the DASH has wrinkels in it from UV RAYS i would called that ****ing cheap some of you need to live with a crapy interior as supposed to fuc*&* one and at auto show or dealership

[Shurenuff]

Originally Posted by Z/28orSs

what you dont understand is that we asked GM to NOT water down the concept,
Simply buy touching the interior or looking at you cant call it cheap nor under par, try living with an older 325 (2005) i have, the DASH has wrinkels in it from UV RAYS i would called that ****ing cheap some of you need to live with a crapy interior as supposed to fuc*&* one and at auto show or dealership

The concept had real aluminum trim, not faux aluminum painted plastic. If the friggin Mustang can offer these materials, so should the Camaro.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Shurenuff

The concept had real aluminum trim, not faux aluminum painted plastic. If the friggin Mustang can offer these materials, so should the Camaro.

I'm sure it comes down to cost, but you have a point

[mondain]

Originally Posted by Z/28orSs

what you dont understand is that we asked GM to NOT water down the concept

And that's fine. And then the Mustang came along with a nicer interior, and nearly every magazine review came out saying "the Camaro is great, but the Mustang has a way better interior" for a whole year.

And now finally GM is doing something about it.

I don't understand why you think I'm the bad guy for supporting this, but whatever

[Z/28orSs]

Originally Posted by mondain

And that's fine. And then the Mustang came along with a nicer interior, and nearly every magazine review came out saying "the Camaro is great, but the Mustang has a way better interior" for a whole year.

And now finally GM is doing something about it.

I don't understand why you think I'm the bad guy for supporting this, but whatever

im not saying your a bad guy. if i come off as an ass im sorry. there was no vast change to the stang interior its basically the same. adding some trim does not make one WAY better than the other
2005


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
2010


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[mondain]

Originally Posted by Z/28orSs

im not saying your a bad guy. if i come off as an ass im sorry. there was no vast change to the stang interior its basically the same. adding some trim does not make one WAY better than the other

No worries, it's all good

I don't believe the Camaro interior is bad, but I did agree with most reviewers that it felt, I dunno, "cheap"-ish -- and that the Mustang interior simply didn't.

Now, I have no idea what GM plans to do that gets rid of cheap-ish, but hey they're attacking the one blemish area that keeps coming up, so kudos to them. I'm not expecting burled walnut lol, but I assume they have some ideas and I'm sure I'll love them when I pick up my 2112 Z28

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Shurenuff

The concept had real aluminum trim, not faux aluminum painted plastic. If the friggin Mustang can offer these materials, so should the Camaro.

The Camaro had BILLET aluminum trim all over, including the shift knob. That was a $2,000,000 dollar car.......the Mustang has paper-thin aluminum accenting...there's a difference, but point taken...

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

The Camaro had BILLET aluminum trim all over, including the shift knob. That was a $2,000,000 dollar car.......the Mustang has paper-thin aluminum accenting...there's a difference, but point taken...

Billet.... Paper thin aluminum accenting... Mehh its all the same!

[Shurenuff]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

The Camaro had BILLET aluminum trim all over, including the shift knob. That was a $2,000,000 dollar car.......the Mustang has paper-thin aluminum accenting...there's a difference, but point taken...

No doubt, same type of situation with the uber expensive bumblebee paint job that many clamor for. Just not going to happen with this type of car.

But I'll take the paper thin aluminum trim any day of the week over silver painted plastic trying to imitate the real thing. Subtle differences like this have a lot to do with perceived material quality and interior design IMO, and that was the point I was trying to make.