Will GM learn from this forum

[fastball]

People forget to look at things in the way of the personal computer......

In 1990, the Tandy 1000 was a 386/33mhz processor, 800 KB of memory, had a 20MB hard drive, and cost $7500 new!

Today's PCs have infinitely more speed and storage capacity and cost $500.00

There was a day when power steering and brakes were considered new fangled technology and you had to pay big bucks to get them.

Moore's law can be used to describe this theory - you might need to research it but as it applies to computer processors and the transistor, so too can it be applied to almost anything in the modern age.

[cam2fst4u]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

of course we listen -HOWEVER -- not everyone wants to hear the answer....proof? I can't get 10 people on this site alone to agree on anything other than: RWD and MORE HORSEPOWER!

*grin*


Let's address each of your points briefly, shall we?

I'm not sure what you mean by "body did not come out as planned" -- sure it did! We took a Holden Monaro and re-engineered it to meet U.S. Standards. (23M to relocate fuel system to meet U.S. Standards!!!) -- This was simply a case of 'we have a RWD performance coupe that we make in Australia -- we've stopped building the Camaro and Firebird -- we can offer U.S. Consumers a performance coupe -- in limited numbers.' -- should it have been called GTO? In my opinion, no. BUT -- hindsight is always 20/20.

I'm not sure everyone would agree with you on your interior assessment -- but then again, it's important to understand that we were building the Monaro for some time -- it wasn't like we had just designed it.......so the interior design was a few years old........

AS to dealers 'raping' the public -- I've discussed this issue at least a hundred times. Briefly: it is against federal law for any person from General Motors or any other manufacturer to tell a dealer what he or she can sell a car for -- it's called "Anti-trust" -- and people have gone to jail for breaking that law. If the dealer has a car that has an MSRP (we establish MSRP only) -- of $30,000 -- he or she is free to charge one penny -- or $100,000K -- you as the customer are entitled to 'just say no!' Don't like the law?
Call Nancy Pelosi...........

Hidden headlights? I loved 'em!

BUT:

>they add weight
>they DO fail (and that is a customer dissatisfier)
>show me ONE 1st gen Camaro where the headlight doors align properly to the grille and fenders!

....remember-- hideaways came out when we only could use sealed beam headlamps -- the lighting laws have changed and allow us to do other things - and we chose the 'halos' for the 5th gen........


Again - we DO listen to consumers -- the company that doesn't won't be in business very long..........but we also have to be prudent.

I happened to get a link to another site (sent to me by a friend....) -- and evidently the people on that site think that the people on this site lick my boots. (hmmmmm.....kinky......) -- and one fellow was berating me because I don't "understand what the public wants!" -- and he felt that we should offer a new Camaro without Air Conditioning or power windows or power locks.......

OK --

How many Camaros do you suppose we'd sell that way? (show me data in BLACK AND WHITE, please....)

Here's what people don't understand -- to do what that fellow is asking would add a LOT of cost to the car -- for instance: we'd have to engineer FOUR interior door mechanisms rather than two (left and right) -- we'd have to offer at least 6 to 8 different wiring harnesses -- for cars with power windows, but no door locks -- for cars WITH door locks but no windows......

..........and that's just for starters.

The reality is that we'd probably sell a couple hundred cars without windows/locks/air -- and it would cause the base price of the car to significantly rise -- (we have to charge all of those expenses somewhere!) So - would it have been appropriate to add several hundred dollars -- and I mean SEVERAL -- to the base price of a Camaro so that a couple of people could say "Look at my window crank!!!"...........

I don't think so and the people we talked to in depth don't think so either......and evidently Ford and Chrysler see it the same way -- cuz you can't get the Mustang or the Challenger without Air or power stuff either..........


(things that make you go: "hhhhmmmmmmmm")

So - -we do listen -- we just don't always give the answer that everyone wants to hear.

[FxsX24]

while things like manual windows/locks, no ac, hideaway option, hell a trans am option and all the other little things we could want would be nice to have a option.

toyota recently changed there options on a car, went from 1000 variations of the same car to something like 100, made it much cheaper to sell the car, since there not wasting 50000 unused window cranks that nobody will ever buy (unless they got the option)

like fbodfather said, designing, testing, patenting, and producing a window crank lever would cost thousands. now design the linkages and what not, and the new door panel, redesign the inside of the door to except the new setup. there has to be 50k in costs there

now do the same for manual locks, w power windows, then without, thats gotta be close to 200k in development costs.

now redesign all those new door panels for manual mirrors

i could go on forever with this, but i think (hope) you get the point now

[Crowley]

Originally Posted by FirstLSK

They already have and they do. There have been many changes to the Camaro as a result of GM polling the enthusiast forums.

They are listening daily, however there are many other elements that go into the decisions as well.

BTW -- we are blessed to have several GM employees that visit this forum on a regular basis.


Other than small detail changes, I think GM will have a difficult time improving upon the 2010 Camaro design. They knocked it out of the park with this car.

[VenomZ302]

Originally Posted by fbodfather

of course we listen -HOWEVER -- not everyone wants to hear the answer....proof? I can't get 10 people on this site alone to agree on anything other than: RWD and MORE HORSEPOWER!
...
So - -we do listen -- we just don't always give the answer that everyone wants to hear.

I think a big part of this is that, generally speaking, a) individuals don't know/care about what will be financially viable and b) individuals only care about their car in the long run.

That said, I think GM's done a FANTASTIC job with the new Camaro appealing to enthusiasts and regular buyers, alike.

[MontyCarlo]

No crank windows? No powerless locks? Next thing you know, fbodfather's going to tell us we don't have to grow mullets either. Sheesh.

[Rodrunner]

Great....Fantastic....a site where the people are even more ignorant than here....I Love It. Gotta make you appreciate us at least a little more, huh, Scott?
But hold on....fanboys maybe....boot lickers - NO WAY!!!

[blaSSt]

For those that want manual windows, no AC, etc. There is a body in white option....

[John VS]

Those are people who might be trying to decide between a Mustang, Challenger or even a Nissan- not all true blue Chevy fans. That is the consumer that needs to be targeted IMO.

That's me you're talking about. Started looking at the Mustang then looked at the Genesis, looked at Nissan...

Fbodfather, you sound justifiably tired. But at the end of the day you guys have done what I think you set out to. I'm not a GM loyalist, but I ordered my Camaro this week -- my first GM ever and first American car in 20 years -- because you guys did a hell of a job on it.

I was just reading some forum pages last night about iPod connectivity and how that works with bluetooth and at this point I've already ordered the car but still I thought...Wow, they really nailed it. There's just no downside to this car: Performance, fuel efficiency, aesthetics, state of the art electronics, and of course a great price...It's the total package!

I'm just one of a whole wave of non-loyalists buyers you're going to be seeing soon. Well done.

[UCF w00t]

To anyone that thinks the Camaro should have hideaway lights... have you seen a picture of the car?!??!?!??! Where the hell would you put them? On the hood? Coming out the side of the fascia? I'm out of ideas... Without completely redesigning the front end, there's just nowhere to put hideaways, other issues notwithstanding.

[AGM76]

I have the feeling GM has listened to the enthusiasts a little too much in this case. This is not the most versatile car. Yes we have great styling, but at the cost of compromised visibility; headroom and a dubiously usable trunk? Add to this a somewhat cheap interior with some semi functional elements (cheap shot). How is this going to appeal to a larger market? There is a lot of competition out there right now, some really great cars, and i'm just kind of worried looks alone aren't going to do it. This car is not really THAT great a value.

Maybe all my fears will disappear when I get behind the wheel, and I eagerly await my chance. We only got the bumblebee concept (based on the old GTO I believe) in Sacramento, and the old convertible concept at the SF show. Thanks for hooking us up there. Neither show real dimensions or could be touched.

[UCF w00t]

Originally Posted by AGM76

I have the feeling GM has listened to the enthusiasts a little too much in this case. This is not the most versatile car. Yes we have great styling, but at the cost of compromised visibility; headroom and a dubiously usable trunk? Add to this a somewhat cheap interior with some semi functional elements (cheap shot). How is this going to appeal to a larger market? There is a lot of competition out there right now, some really great cars, and i'm just kind of worried looks alone aren't going to do it. This car is not really THAT great a value.

"I was surprised at how good outward visibility was"
6'8" man has headroom to spare in Camaro. How many sports coupes can say that much?
The trunk is much more than dubiously usable. Yea, the opening is small but stuff like golf clubs, suitcases, etc all fit just fine.
Pretty much every single review noted this car's value of all things.

[Silver Streak]

Originally Posted by AGM76

I have the feeling GM has listened to the enthusiasts a little too much in this case. This is not the most versatile car. Yes we have great styling, but at the cost of compromised visibility; headroom and a dubiously usable trunk? Add to this a somewhat cheap interior with some semi functional elements (cheap shot). How is this going to appeal to a larger market? There is a lot of competition out there right now, some really great cars, and i'm just kind of worried looks alone aren't going to do it. This car is not really THAT great a value.

Maybe all my fears will disappear when I get behind the wheel, and I eagerly await my chance. We only got the bumblebee concept (based on the old GTO I believe) in Sacramento, and the old convertible concept at the SF show. Thanks for hooking us up there. Neither show real dimensions or could be touched.

:troll:[

[Nexus6]

I say we all chip in and buy Scott a weekend at a fancy spa/retreat when the car show season is over.He totaly deserves it ,Who is with me ?