A few words on the Camaro...interior-wise...

[themossman]

I would agree on most points...I've been pleased with the quality of the interior.

The only thing I would disagree with is your comments re: visibility. It takes some getting used to, that is for sure...and I've already started noticing some 'adjustments' I'm making while driving.

For instance...if you like to sit perfectly still when you drive..this car is not for you...you will eventually run into something. Another member complained about and adjusted his mirror due to visibility....so this isn't just a 'minor' difference. I have to lean forward and look up to see streetlights...at intersections where I never had to do that before in any car I've owned. I'm leaning over and side to side to see around the C pillar...I never had to do that before. Don't get me wrong...it's not a 'complaint' as much as it is an observation. Clearly there were trade offs in this car, as fbodfather has mentioned many times...and visibility is a case where form won over function. And I, for one, am certainly glad it did.

[The_Blur]

The one point that really struck me, Dragoneye, is your perspective on visibility. I have yet to test drive one, but I've been taking for granted the visibility issue. I'm not concerned about it because I plan on getting used to the car. I find it interesting that you had no problems. The only reasons I can think that someone would have been posting in reviews that visibility is bad is that they drove a car equipped with the mirror OnStar buttons or that they have a bias after reading your post. This is very good news for Camaro drivers, but it also suggests that even the most credible car reviewers are heavily biased and lack the professional discipline to treat each car equally.

[DDustiNN]

Nice comparison, it's good to hear the positive comments about both sides.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by bobby35ny

OK!!

It's CHEAP,and it's not a ridiculous allegation! I bought the car, I would have probably bought the car even if it had a metal dashboard from the 60's, LOL

It may feel cheap to you, and I don't want to discredit you at all, but I just don't understand this attack. I've sat, now, in the 900-series trucks, the most recent Impala, The Malibu....and though those vehicles employed "cushy" surfaces...the plastics in the Camaro are equal to or of higher quality than all those vehicles...so "cheap" is definitely not the first word that comes to my mind.

Originally Posted by bobby35ny

Design is cool, no doubt about that. My gripe is that they should have used soft touch, not hard plastic. They cut costs for sure in there. I know the the response, HEY, the car has IRS, we spent the money there. It's not like they took the IRS from the CTS made by ZF, they used a cheaper American Axle corp IRS.

You assume a lot about money allocation for this car's development...I'm no 'insider', but I'd bet your a little off the mark here.

Originally Posted by stovt001

I do prefer the Mustang's "leather", fake though it may be, on the doors to the Camaro's cubicle-fabric or acrylic. If I get the Camaro, I'll be replacing that trim with something aftermarket as quickly as possible. The Mustang's aluminum trim is very attractive.

I liked that fake leather on the door, too. It was a nice touch and did wonders for the interior as a whole. The Aluminum dash piece was brushed...so the fact it was aluminum didn't dawn on me for a little while.

Originally Posted by bobby35ny

Perception is the word of the day!!

Like it or not, it is what it is. BUYERS perceive soft touch surfaces with quailty. Stand back at dealership or car show, first thing people do is touch the steering wheel and then the dashboard. Chevy could ignore that fact all they want but when the sold numbers aren't there they will know why.

Again with the assumptions...29,000+ sold orders in just over 3 months mean nothing to you? I don't think they ignored the 'fact' you stated at all. But the typical Camaro owner, which isn't everyone is not buying this car for the purposes of luxury vehicle. They want a performance car...and the Camaro delivers in spades. What do you think might happen if they had skimped on the powertrain, but delivered an almost-Cadillac type interior?

If we were talking about the Malibu...this would be entirely different, but we're not.

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

The only issue i had was with the EXTREMELY cheap looking tach and speedo and the needles that go along with them. They are both pretty much rendered useless for any accuracy during performance driving.

This was something I forgot to mention. The speedo and tach did not look as good in person as they do in pictures. They were....odd. With the back lighting on I thought they looked much better...but they weren't my favorite part of the interior, lets put it that way.

Originally Posted by The_Blur

The one point that really struck me, Dragoneye, is your perspective on visibility. I have yet to test drive one, but I've been taking for granted the visibility issue. I'm not concerned about it because I plan on getting used to the car. I find it interesting that you had no problems. The only reasons I can think that someone would have been posting in reviews that visibility is bad is that they drove a car equipped with the mirror OnStar buttons or that they have a bias after reading your post.

Visibility was the #1 reason for this test drive. I got worried myself from all the negative comments about it. If the Mustang's visibility is a 7/10, then the Camaro's is a 6/10. There is a difference between the two cars, but I feel it's extremely over-played, and someone somewhere chose this attribute to try and demonize the car with. It's not bad. Just different.

I can, however, understand what people are talking about when they rant on the visibility. The windows are skinny things...that is, not very tall. But they're still door-length, and car-length (depending on which you're talking about). So they don't hamper your ability to see cars, but they create an enclosed, tight atmosphere--not closterphobic, though...It's just something you get used to.

Originally Posted by The_Blur

This is very good news for Camaro drivers, but it also suggests that even the most credible car reviewers are heavily biased and lack the professional discipline to treat each car equally.

I don't mean to discredit anybody's opinion...but in order to write an entertaining article...you've got to "elaborate"...and most of the time they do so at a vehicles expense.

[sabrescamaro]

Nice review, I agree with the whole thing... Just out of curiosity, what dealership is this at? I never realized that you are a Buffalonian...

[sparkles]

"ArmorAll original" makes the dash Snazzy!!

[optical]

Great review! Thanks for all of your honest insight in the interior. I have only sat in one 2010 camaro right now (2LT) but I absolutely LOVE it. Yea it would be "nice" to have a soft touch to some areas but then thats cracking down the road. I wold much rather have what the Camaro has in it right now. Hey thats whats great about the Camaro that if you dont liike it youi can always customize it it to your liking. Thats dragon for your honest review and I agree with you on all points except that i have not sat in a '10 stang before and really have no desire to. So i will just take your opinion on its interior. Chevy Camaro all the way for me!

[jr_hoyt]

Great review, I agree 100%!

[AMERICANMADE]

I see it this way. I had a new 01 BMW 330i. Yes, it was an extremely nice looking interior, tight fit, very little hard plastic, high quality leather; BUT, when it came to comfort, I just as well have set on a plastic milk crate, and I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to take a very hard hit in it - my perception is it would have been like bouncing around in a concrete box. Perception IS the key word. IMO, High dollar perception doesn't mean squat! Drive it, if it feels good, done deal.

[Speedfreak]

I have been inside a new mustang, but not Camaro. They stepped up the interior over the last one quite a bit alhtough the door panels still are a little cheap..

The things I didn't like in the Stang were

1. Like in the Camaro the tach is on the wrong side. The guages are pretty deep to, not that easy to read.
2. Steering wheel is to close to the dash and did not appear to telescope like many others using the foriegn sterring columns
3. The rear end of the car could not have been made to look any worse.
4. Lame ass washer nozzles on the hood.
5. Weak POS 4.6 under the hood.

I am going to try and track down a Camaro this weekend to check it out, but right now almost impossibe to find one on a dealer lot

[MontyCarlo]

No matter how nice the interior is, I still want to upgrade to one of those DSV Customs all-leather interiors some day.

["prima"Donna]

Great review....thanks for sharing your views with the rest of us!!

[Adam]

I agree with most of it. I had worried about the interior, but after I got in it, I realized it was actually quite nice.

However, I disagree with visibility, not that the mustang is any better, but that visibility is REALLY bad. Most the time it's workable, but the rearview mirror is constantly in my way, the pillars are in my way, and the back window is so tiny that it does really restrict what I can see. Most cars you can swing your head around and not worry about your mirrors, not with the camaro. If you don't use those mirrors you will eventually collide with something.

[themossman]

Originally Posted by themossman

For instance...if you like to sit perfectly still when you drive..this car is not for you...you will eventually run into something.

Originally Posted by Adam

If you don't use those mirrors you will eventually collide with something.

Great minds think alike....