Who feels GM screwed up?

[OverAnxious]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

The only mistake they made is not letting Pontiac get one. Other than that, the Camaro is perfect—no regrets when it comes out.

That and leaving T-Tops out were two of the best decisions

[Warghost]

Originally Posted by Troycamaro

I saw the pictures of the styling. Big disappointment, compared to the new Mustang which looks like the 69/70 model year. Why didnt GM follow the same recipe??

Personally, I think the 2005+ Mustang looks lame. I love the looks of the new Camaro though. I think the amount of popularity the new Camaro has garnered is enough to prove that most people like the new redesign. I think GM was trying to keep the "spirit" of the original Camaro design, without making a replica of it.

[munkee drummer]

Originally Posted by Warghost

Personally, I think the 2005+ Mustang looks lame. I love the looks of the new Camaro though. I think the amount of popularity the new Camaro has garnered is enough to prove that most people like the new redesign. I think GM was trying to keep the "spirit" of the original Camaro design, without making a replica of it.

I agree with dat!! The camaro has some retro styling but still has alot of new age features including the angles that come from the YF-22 Raptor. The Mustang imo has too much retro and not enough new stuff. Looks kinda basic and plain not at all like a concept.

[2001ragtop]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

The only mistake they made is not letting Pontiac get one. Other than that, the Camaro is perfect—no regrets when it comes out.

I owned a 1969 Firebird, 400, factory 4-speed. Factory hood tac. 400 hood. It was a GM Pale yellow color, with black deluxe interior, factory bench seat, but still had hurst 4 speed lever with small shift boot.

When I see the 2010 Camaro interior, I am reminded of the interior/speedometer/steering wheel I had in the firebird.

The reason people crave PONTIACs is because in the day, the styling was allowed to be excessive, and/or outrageous.

BUT G.M. WILL GO UNDER and have to fire lots of people if they don't just focus on only ONE musclecar. SO it is best for everyone not to complain.

Thank you John Delorean for creating an option package to place a large V8 into a mid-size car BEFORE the GM heads knew about it and it was too late for them to do anything about it !! MMMmwwwahahahahaaha he was so smart !

Despite a GM corporate policy that prohibited the use of engines larger than 330 in³ in intermediate-sized cars, such as the Tempest/LeMans, De Lorean got around the rules by specifically offering the 389 in³ V8 as an option package. The rules were vague at GM as "new models" required corporate approval but "option packages" did not. When the 14th Floor (GM's executive row) caught on to the existence of the GTO, it was too late to pull it out of production and Pontiac responded that no more than 5,000 GTOs would be built in 1964; with that the corporate brass was appeased.

Shortly thereafter, Car & Driver magazine in its March 1964 issue featured a road test of a 1964 GTO with the optional Tri Power (three two-barrel carburetor) version of the 389 V8 and four-speed transmission to be tested against a Ferrari GTO, but the Ferrari didn't make it to the party so the magazine ended up testing the "Pontiac" alone and recorded a then unheard of 0-60 mph time (for a stock production car as opposed to an exotic sports car) of 4.6 seconds and a standing quarter-mile of 115 mph (185 km/h) in 13.1 seconds.

The publication of that road test substantially increased demand for GTOs as Pontiac dealers often found themselves swamped with more potential buyers than cars to sell. Pontiac responded by dramatically increasing GTO production to meet the demand. By the end of the 1964 model year, approximately 32,000 GTOs had been assembled, well above the initial projections of 5,000 units.

[radz28]

In my eyes, there isn't anything I could really think to make better. I've never really liked GM's wheels, except for only a few instances, so I'm not considering that, but understanding everything that has to go into engineering a vehicle to consider drag, fuel economy, crash protection, etc., I don't think they could've done any better at this point. All-be-it, we don't know too much about the car, but the photos, so far, are promising. Any information that has leaked out won't be confirmed/denied for some time, so I'm keeping my faith that this car will appeal to enthusiasts as much as ever and that we can be proud to drive a car with as much heritage as Camaro has.

And yes; stone the originator

[Silverado]

There's only two real mistakes I think GM/Chevy has made with the Camaro....

1. As has been stated...waiting so long to put it out....I understand the testing/engineering/design issues, and I know why they have taken so long, but it just seems to me that they could have gotten them out at least a year earlier than they will (meaning about now they should be on the roads, you know to shut down Challenger sales....)

2. T-tops. They should at least be an option. It would be one more thing that Chevy/Camaro would have over the competition. And, it's not just me...I know a lot of people would would rather have t-tops than a convertible.

Now, to counter that...one of the best decisions they made.....not bringing back a Firebird to chew up sales and hurt the showing in the market (look at the trucks....GM almost always outsells Ford, but because the sales are split between Silverado and Sierra, the F150 gets to claim #1 selling truck in America....only because GM can't get out of it's own way.)

Overall, very happy with the car that will be sitting in my garage as soon as possible. Just wish it was now and with t-tops.

[2010_5thgen]

Originally Posted by Troycamaro

I own and have owned a 1969 Camaro SS for over 20 years. When I heard GM was resurrecting the F Body I was a giddy as a school girl. Then I saw the pictures of the styling. Big disappointment, compared to the new Mustang which looks like the 69/70 model year. Why didnt GM follow the same recipe?? If you dont know what I am talking about, look at the lower front fascia. If they needed to lower air intakes put them out to the side and put the lower fog/parking lights in the middle like the 69 camaro's are, the 69's dont have the lower air intakes I know. If they would have done this they would not be able to make em fast enough, LIKE the MUSTANG.

:

i think your alone on this one.

[rmyers]

My first car was a 69 Camaro, that a friend's father financed for me and my new wife. Back then I was broke and could not afford to fix all that needed to be done. Now that I have the money to buy a restored one, I have always hesitated becasue I am a tech junky and spoiled by the modern comforts and conveniences. I say all of this because when I saw the concept camaro, I was impressed, and now that I see the pre-production models I am even more impressed. GM has done and outstanding in blending old and new styling.

Bravo!

[2001ragtop]

Originally Posted by Silverado

Just wish it was now and with t-tops.

This is just an observation I have noticed about the T-topped GM cars:

It seems to me like the T-tops looked best on body style used in the movie "Smokey and the bandit".

They also looked good on the Firebird used on the TV show, "Knight Rider".

Because of the specific design of the 1993-2002 camaros, you can see that having T-tops appears to be well planned in advance. They look integrated into the overall design.

The slight problem with putting T-tops on the 2010 camaro is that it just looks like it will interfere with the retro-ish style statement that car makes.

but who knows maybe they still plan to install them later. They should make them huge if they do.

[TAG UR IT]

Originally Posted by 2001ragtop

This is just an observation I have noticed about the T-topped GM cars:

It seems to me like the T-tops looked best on body style used in the movie "Smokey and the bandit".

They also looked good on the Firebird used on the TV show, "Knight Rider".

Because of the specific design of the 1993-2002 camaros, you can see that having T-tops appears to be well planned in advance. They look integrated into the overall design.

The slight problem with putting T-tops on the 2010 camaro is that it just looks like it will interfere with the retro-ish style statement that car makes.

but who knows maybe they still plan to install them later. They should make them huge if they do.

\



T-tops FTW!!! Too bad that, for right now, sounds like a hardtop, vert, and sunroof.

[Silverado]

Tag, I get a little more jealous every time you post that picture....



As far as t-tops in the future, I'm sure it will happen....right after I buy a convertible. That happened with the 3rd door/4th door thing on my old Silverado...."no, there are no plans to put a 4th door on the extended cab version" (says GM and the dealership)...so I buy a '99 Extended Cab (3 door)....the 2000 models come out with all 4 doors.....DOH!

I'm not sure how the tops would look trying to keep the reverse mohawk look (although, if they'd use "body panels" rather than "glass panels", you should be able to keep the lines), but we've all seen that the reverse mohawk option goes away if you want a sunroof. Meaning, there is a flat roof already tooled and set to go. Start from there to put the t-tops in.

Okay, I know, it isn't happening, quit bitchin'....and I will....but, someone has to keep putting the bug in GM's ear if it's ever going to happen. Like I said before, even the lack of t-tops is still not a deal breaker for me.

[radz28]

I agree with everything posted about the T-tops. It too, for me, is not a deal breaker. I could do without them though if I had a sunroof. My problem is that I prefer the Reverse Mohawk (RM). I like the character it adds to the roof and I'm not sure they could mold the tops to match that well, especially since it sounds like the sunroof models will not have the RM lines. I think that I might have to go with the non-sunroof option because I like those lines so much. It will add to the torsional rigidity of the car too, I'm sure, so that'll just mean I won't think as much about buying chassis parts to keep the car creak-free like I had with my 4th Gens.

Who knows though; maybe GM could suprise us with a design that will be as nice as the last one...

[COPO_Chevy]

i love this car and the way its turning out and definitly think GM hit the nail on the head with this car( thanx u GM!)... that being said i also love the 1969 camaro's and as of rit now is my fav. year for the camaro with both looks and power...but there goal with this car wasnt to do a completely retro car...they took elements of the 1969 to creat an awesome new futuristic design ..now, its going to be a difficult decision which generation i like better..first gen. or the 5 gen. :seesaw: either way its an awesome new car and one im going to love for years to come!

[Fbodybuddy]

WTF??????? A crock of S#!t!!!!! Now do you feel better??????
No screw ups here. I just hope I can wait past the dealer scalpings on the IPO before I get one.
Public stonings are prohibited, but we can still get away with torture behind closed doors.