Preproduction Rear Photo Indicates Complete Redesign?

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by sbg

Alright, so there is agreement that the design of the back was modified, including the tail lights. Some might like it, although most seem to like the concept version better.

I not only like the back end of the concept better, but also the small side marker lights. I do, though, understand why those were changed, to meet standards. That makes some sense. To add the outset portion to the back end and to modify other things like the size of the rear lights doesn't make sense. Some have speculated it's because they had to meet crash standards, blah, blah...have you seen an Audi TT? That back end has NO outset. It can be done and should be done with this car.

And that starts at 50% more than the base Camaro should come in at. Never forget the role of cost when it comes to design.

To Dragoneye:

You said:
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.

My response:
Are you clairvoyant? Since you have this mind reading power, how about telling me why my subconscious would want to see that?

Im sure he meant no offense, but the situation that he is describing happens quite frequently. We tend to see what we want rather than the truth, as much as we want to deny that this occurs. Therefore, if you are expecting/wanting to see radical changes then you will see them. You don't need to be able to read minds to know these things and spot when they might be happening

You said:
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'.

My response:
I guess those clairvoyant powers have affected your vision. If you compare the two photos provided, imagine taking a small ruler and measuring from the surface of the red, plastic light covers outward to the edge of the bumper. Do that in your mind with both pictures, and you'll then notice a setback of the lights on the white photo, hence proving my observation that the white car's lights have been recessed more.

Your suggestion that the lights are temporary has nothing to do with the amount of recess and width and length.

I don't notice a change in recess. Perhaps it would be easier to notice differances if they were both taken from the same angle since that particular angle of the prototype has the effect of making things seem taller and narrower. I guess I just take that into consideration.

What, do you own millions in GM stock? You guys act like this was your mom I was talking about.

You are right, they've stuck very close to the concept, and good for them! You are arguing my point though, that all carmakers can stick close to the concept but make hair brain ideas for who knows what reason.

The changes are due to safety and cost. Engineers are not magicians who can make a million dollar car for 25 grand. The 1st rule of engineering is Safety. The second rule is normaly some variation of "Of functionality, ___, and cost, pick two!" with the blank representing either speed, reliability, aestetics, or whatever. So, what would you rather have since you cannot have it all:
1) a bumper that looks like the concept but adds $1000 to the price
2) a fattened back end so it all juts out an extra couple inches, destroying the profile we fell in love with but keeping the smooth back end
3) an extra little bit just at bumper level.

I think the change of this rear end is one of those hair brain ideas. You could choose to admit that and still like the car. Heck, I may still buy one, but I'm amazed at how some of you can't even admit things you don't like about the changes. Seems it's an all or nothin' with you folks.

No engineer ever makes an arbitray design change. That means an awful lot more calculations and paperwork that they don't want to do. Plus it adds cost. It will never be changed arbitrarily. Because the bumper is not a mere styling element but actually serves a purpose, we know it was changed by engineers. Same thing with the reflectors and the trunk and other things too.

I know much of what I was talking about because I am completing my degree in engineering this spring and alot of that stuff has been drilled into our heads for the last 3.5 years.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Pencil.Fight

.......

Originally Posted by DGthe3

.......

Thank you, both. That's all it was.

I particularly like these two points, as they sum up my feelings pretty darn well:
"Im sure he meant no offense, but the situation that he is describing happens quite frequently. We tend to see what we want rather than the truth, as much as we want to deny that this occurs. Therefore, if you are expecting/wanting to see radical changes then you will see them. You don't need to be able to read minds to know these things and spot when they might be happening"

"He was merely speaking from a psychological standpoint where the powers of one's subconscious often trick us into seeing or believing things we otherwise would not have. I did not read this as a slight to you in the least."

I am no Froyd, nor did I ever claim to be clairvoiant, or to posses ESP(N) - I do hope that that is cleared up. But a trait like that (being able to recognize certain situations, mostly from doing it myslelf many times) certainly comes in handy very often.

I did NOT anticipate such a large........"reaction."

[SilverTurtle]

Originally Posted by sbg

Alright, so there is agreement that the design of the back was modified, including the tail lights. Some might like it, although most seem to like the concept version better.

I not only like the back end of the concept better, but also the small side marker lights. I do, though, understand why those were changed, to meet standards. That makes some sense. To add the outset portion to the back end and to modify other things like the size of the rear lights doesn't make sense. Some have speculated it's because they had to meet crash standards, blah, blah...have you seen an Audi TT? That back end has NO outset. It can be done and should be done with this car.

I think the change of this rear end is one of those hair brain ideas. You could choose to admit that and still like the car. Heck, I may still buy one, but I'm amazed at how some of you can't even admit things you don't like about the changes. Seems it's an all or nothin' with you folks.

you, sir, have a problem accepting the reality that some things have not changed anywhere but in your mind.

the Audi TT is a MUCH smaller car and is built on a subframe that is MUCH smaller from the outset... the rear bumper of the VW Bug and TT are both almost non existent... and ALL of the cars that are built on this frame have about the same non-existent bumper... so your arguement does not hold water.

The Camaro, and other cars, will be built on this platform... the other cars are almost guaranteed to be bigger than the Camaro... the bigger trunk, the rounded off rear bumper, distance between the tail lights, etc. all are indicators that this subframe is larger than the Concept's piece milled subframe... why you choose not to accept or acknowledge this is beyond me... and probably beyond most of the moderators on this site.

if the prototype and the Concept were sitting in front of you, and you could look at both of them in the same place at the same time, you would probably see that the lights are almost identical... they already appear to be identical in shape, the only possible difference could be their size... and there is no possible way for you to be able to tell that without seeing both of them in person... and I'm betting that you haven't, so please accept that this is a preproduction test mule (by the way, that is a fact, not a possibilty or probability... it IS a prototype, and it IS NOT a finished product) and that you, the moderators on this board and probably even the engineers and designers at GM do not know what the next 6 months hold... things can change... or nothing could change... you'll just have to wait until the 3rd quarter of 2008 to see.

[willisit]

Wouldn't it be easier to just ignore the concept from now on? We know the changes are there (but we don't know what's final) and we could bitch and moan until the cows come home - but we have to accept that concepts are just that, and reality is very different.

Now, go look at the recent show (Detroit?) and look at some of the current crop of concepts and tell me ANY of them will reach the road - and if they did, would they look anything like the metal/fibreglass on display. Simple fact is, GM are doing wonders with the Camaro and I can't shout it loud enough!

[KILLER74Z28]

I would have to see both the concept and the white preproduction Camaro at the same angle, from the same distance, and in the same color to have actual proof of such a drastic hair brain change… I can see that the rear has been changed but in my opinion, not drastically…. They both look good.

:bangdesk: Dam type O...

[zzz28zzz]

I do not post very often, but I am here every day. Usually I can get my questions answered by reading what everyone else is saying. But every once in a while I get an itch....so here goes the scratch.
Quit the fussing. Too often we start acting like a bunch of 5 year olds. This is a beautiful thing we are waiting for. Lets enjoy it.
The thing I am not too happy about on the new pictures is the placement of the backup lights. I know they are absolutely neccessary. I just wish it would have been done a little differently.

[sbg]

To All:

Reason, logic, and good ole' common sense won't amount to anything with you folks. I'm floored by most of the responses in that they're biased.

Pencil.Fight went to great lengths to justify the comments of Dragoneye yet had no reserve in repremanding me. When I point out his bias he goes to great lengths to justify Dragoneye and won't admit his bias.

What's so obvious about Dragoneye's assertion that our subconscious plays tricks on us and that we see what we want to see, is that it applies to you guys, too!! Your presumption is that somehow you are all above that.

Since no amount of rationale will sway you, I ask you...

What is it you guys want?

Did my list of changes make you feel threatened?

Did you feel upset because you didn't see those things?

No more logic, reason, or pictures to gaze at...just tell me what it is you want.

[bigralph]

I think GM made the rounded back bumper for five star crash rating.



[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by sbg

To All:

Reason, logic, and good ole' common sense won't amount to anything with you folks. I'm floored by most of the responses in that they're biased.

Pencil.Fight went to great lengths to justify the comments of Dragoneye yet had no reserve in repremanding me. When I point out his bias he goes to great lengths to justify Dragoneye and won't admit his bias.

What's so obvious about Dragoneye's assertion that our subconscious plays tricks on us and that we see what we want to see, is that it applies to you guys, too!! Your presumption is that somehow you are all above that.

Since no amount of rationale will sway you, I ask you...

What is it you guys want?

Did my list of changes make you feel threatened?

Did you feel upset because you didn't see those things?

No more logic, reason, or pictures to gaze at...just tell me what it is you want.

Firstly, it is hypocritical of you to accuse us of not admitting bias while you dont do it either. Also, with what Dragoneye, Pencil, and myself have said regarding bias implies that we are all prone to this handicap. Thats why words like "one" and "we" were used.

Secondly,we aren't listening to logic? You seem want a design that looks exactly like the concept. We are saying that that is impossible, and explaining why it can't -safety and price. I want something that is as close as possible to the concept while priced competitively with the Mustang. Look at the deal breaker thread, and price comes up the most frequently.

[z28camaro2471]

Originally Posted by sbg

To All:

Reason, logic, and good ole' common sense won't amount to anything with you folks. I'm floored by most of the responses in that they're biased.

Pencil.Fight went to great lengths to justify the comments of Dragoneye yet had no reserve in repremanding me. When I point out his bias he goes to great lengths to justify Dragoneye and won't admit his bias.

What's so obvious about Dragoneye's assertion that our subconscious plays tricks on us and that we see what we want to see, is that it applies to you guys, too!! Your presumption is that somehow you are all above that.

Since no amount of rationale will sway you, I ask you...

What is it you guys want?

Did my list of changes make you feel threatened?

Did you feel upset because you didn't see those things?

No more logic, reason, or pictures to gaze at...just tell me what it is you want.

I want you to say thanks to GM for making this car a reality and for making it as true to the concept as possible while at the same time meeting all of the federal regulations required. Nothing more. Thanks

[Pencil.Fight]

Originally Posted by willisit

Wouldn't it be easier to just ignore the concept from now on? We know the changes are there (but we don't know what's final) and we could bitch and moan until the cows come home - but we have to accept that concepts are just that, and reality is very different.

Now, go look at the recent show (Detroit?) and look at some of the current crop of concepts and tell me ANY of them will reach the road - and if they did, would they look anything like the metal/fibreglass on display. Simple fact is, GM are doing wonders with the Camaro and I can't shout it loud enough!

I agree. Imagine that you hadn't seen the original Camaro Concept before seeing images of the pre-production Camaro. It would still be a breathtakingly beautiful car.

willisit is right, we have to stop comparing this car to the Concept. That's like comparing reality to a dream.

[SoFlaZ]

Originally Posted by zzz28zzz

I do not post very often, but I am here every day. Usually I can get my questions answered by reading what everyone else is saying. But every once in a while I get an itch....so here goes the scratch.
Quit the fussing. Too often we start acting like a bunch of 5 year olds. This is a beautiful thing we are waiting for. Lets enjoy it.

I dont care how much the production model changes I will still end up getting one, center bumper reverse lights or not, I'll have one. And the concept is off a STS frame and not CTS, not that it really matters anyway.

[GothamCamaro]

Originally Posted by willisit

Wouldn't it be easier to just ignore the concept from now on?
Simple fact is, GM are doing wonders with the Camaro and I can't shout it loud enough!

Yup, I'm mentally removing the Concept Camaro from my mind as the preproduction is what matters now. Good point!

GC

[SilverTurtle]

Originally Posted by sbg

To All:

Reason, logic, and good ole' common sense won't amount to anything with you folks. I'm floored by most of the responses in that they're biased.

Pencil.Fight went to great lengths to justify the comments of Dragoneye yet had no reserve in repremanding me. When I point out his bias he goes to great lengths to justify Dragoneye and won't admit his bias.

What's so obvious about Dragoneye's assertion that our subconscious plays tricks on us and that we see what we want to see, is that it applies to you guys, too!! Your presumption is that somehow you are all above that.

Since no amount of rationale will sway you, I ask you...

What is it you guys want?

Did my list of changes make you feel threatened?

Did you feel upset because you didn't see those things?

No more logic, reason, or pictures to gaze at...just tell me what it is you want.

your ignorant and hypocritical ramblings are annoying the rest of us... get over the fact that the Concept and production car will not be identical and move along... you're wasting bandwidth.