Before you build it GM, Dont make the same mistake twice...

[The_Blur]

If this isn't old school, I don't know what is.

[jeepguy_1980]

I didn't even know the New Camaro was public knowledge in 2006.

[shank0668]

Um my 78 corvette has IRS. It is an advancement, you will have to deal with it, or buy a mustang.

[Alfieboy]

Originally Posted by Berean

The OP has a point here. I'd love to see GM go back to the old days when you could actually order what you want.

I would have ordered an LS with a 6.2 if that were an option.

thats not financially feasible I think......

[Alfieboy]

Dont think 302 Wild Mouse is running wild anymore..???????????????????

Thinks he got caught in a trap...

[mikel441]

You guys realize this thread is almost 4 years old....Right?

[zebra]

Originally Posted by mikel441

You guys realize this thread is almost 4 years old....Right?

i believe that when you add a whole 'nother page of commentary, it's a current thread.

[Ravirn]

Originally Posted by Rockhead

I guess he didn't buy one.

[2010 Bumblebee]

Originally Posted by Ravirn

Cool !

Originally Posted by mikel441

You guys realize this thread is almost 4 years old....Right?

Yup, there's a movement to revive old threads out there.

Originally Posted by zebra

i believe that when you add a whole 'nother page of commentary, it's a current thread.

I guess it's current now !

[hollywoodGU]

Originally Posted by wylde1

Yes, you keep saying that. But it ISN"T the same. it may be close, but it's NOT the same. As far as the law and certification processes are concerned.

and on the assembly line.

different interior components, brakes, wheels... all those "option deletes" so neatly encompassed into one phrase result in a custom car. Which an assembly plant can not afford to put out in todays market.

It's not so much an "attitude" that they can't please everyone, as it is a business necessity.

Yes they used to do that stuff... and look where it got them. Right smack dab in the middle of bailouts. and don't kid yourself, that was not a result of a couple years of bad production. It was a cumulative effect of decades of mismanagement.

OMG ok, listen and read this SSSSSLLLLOOOOWWWW so you can understand. He doesn't actually want an "LS" with a V8. He wants an LS type model for the V8s....meaning a stripped down V8. Im pretty sure that not having a power seat, no fog lights, and different wheels doesnt require additional crash testing...jesus its like ppl read half a post and then are like, "OMFG I read something I dont agree with on the internet, I HAVE TO REPLY" lol finish reading the whole post and you might figure it out

[Blizzard]

I think it is sad that there more posts here after the reviving then started in 06

[fbodfather]

Originally Posted by 302 Wild Mouse

If you build us another Camaro, I will not buy the car if you dont offer a solid rear axle .

Currently own a 2004 GTO and I will never buy another "muscle car" with independent rear suspension. Bad wheel hop, and NO whole shot!! Radically stiff rear shocks on the GTO are lousy for driving. The poor independent suspension makes the car ride like a go-cart in the rear. The stiff shocks were obviously the attempt to reduce the bad wheel hop - but it doesnt work. It only rides hard.

MY 69 Z was THE car. We all buy these cars to do a little "DragRacing" and at the track the Goat wont hook-up.

Go back to the old style of building a car. Let us choose what options we want so all the cars have their "special" look or options.

When I "ordered" my 69. It was was one of a few that had "deleted" options. I ordered the car with the "front air dam" deleted and the "rear spoiler" deleted. Ordered 410 gears, Vinyl Roof, upgraded interior, delete guages. I never seen another one like it.

If GM is planning on only building 100,000 of these they better make it so we can order one that is as special now, as it was then. IN 69 I recall there were almost 480,000 built. Then they killed the car by running a new ugly body style, and called it a 70 and a half! It was the EDSEL of the 70's.

Build two versions. One with a performance package "solid axle rear end differential" and the other junk independent rear suspension. Otherwise I'll be one of the first generation Z owners, that won't buy the new model.

I leased the GTO with the intention of buying it, if I liked it. I don't, so I will turn it in next year in Oct 2007.

I Will BUY a new Z IF the suspension is right. But if its the same as the GTO. Not interested!!!

Learn from your mistakes GM. Don't take this YOUNG generation for granted by building a car that can't be drag-raced on weekends! Otherwise you will end up with every one you build with poor resale value, just like the overpriced GTO's! AND the Camaro will die again!

GIVE us who know better - what we want! We dont buy cars in AMERICA with big horsepower to ride to church! On SUNDAYS were on our way to the TRACK!

Get it?

Well -- first of all - I'm sorry you're not happy with your GTO -but we hope you'll go take a test drive in the new Camaro - you might be pleasantly surprised.

Now - I must correct a few things in your note to set the record straight.

In 1969, we built just over 220,000 Camaros.....and it's important to keep in mind that this was the 5th or 6th most popular year (I'm in an airport and don't have all the figures in front of me....) AND.......it took 17 months do build that many. It was not a 'resounding' success back then - just as the 1957 Chevrolet was not -- (Ford easily outsold Chevy in 1957 -- )

Second - the Camaro of the 70s was most certainly not the "Edsel" of the 70s -- rather, it has been the most popular of the 4 past generations.

(...most popular year for Camaro? 1979 with over 282,000 of them sold - 2nd gen cars - -not great performance, but people loved the look.......)

We COULD individuallyu build 100,000 Camaros a year and 'customize' them in terms of options for each person - BUT -- the sad fact is that the price of the car would go up by at least $10K - -- trust me - I know of what I speak...

Example: If we were to offer "manual" (crank) windows, we would have to engineer two different lift mechanisms - then we would have to produce different door trim panels - -all of which adds cost.....a lot of cost. And how many people do you suppose would want a crank driver's window?

Secondly - I'm not so sure that everyone would be willing to pay that additional premium - -and because those who have to make the decision to do so put their careers on the line - simply isn't going to happen. (No manufacturer of regular production cars offers hundreds of thousands of build combinations - there's a reason: you lose a huge amount of money or you have to inflate the price to unacceptable levels.)

I'm not so sure that most would agree that the Camaro has a 'junk' rear suspension - but I'll let the others on this site chime in.

And lastly - you can be assured that we DO NOT ".....take this young generation for granted......"

I will tell you that the new Camaro has had more owner input than any other car in the past 50 years. (Just ask any one of the "12 Disciples of which there are 15)


Again - I do invite you to stop by your Chevy dealer and test drive a new SS - I think you will be pleasantly surprised!

[Frank in MD]

/thread

[fbodfather]

Originally Posted by hollywoodGU

OMG ok, listen and read this SSSSSLLLLOOOOWWWW so you can understand. He doesn't actually want an "LS" with a V8. He wants an LS type model for the V8s....meaning a stripped down V8. Im pretty sure that not having a power seat, no fog lights, and different wheels doesnt require additional crash testing...jesus its like ppl read half a post and then are like, "OMFG I read something I dont agree with on the internet, I HAVE TO REPLY" lol finish reading the whole post and you might figure it out

...didn't read into the second page before replying - and still haven't -- but saw this post.

You are correct in that we do not have to crash test for every option......

However - let's take Fog lamps, shall we? If we make it free-flow, it changes the number of wiring harnesses -- (remember, the V8 will have a different set of wiring harnesses separate from the V6.....) That adds a lot of cost (they don't develop and validate themselves) plus each iteration of a harness adds cost.

As I said in the post above - there is a reason why no manufacturer offers a laundry list of options as we did in the 60s - -it's because it would add huge costs to each vehicle line.

Simple as that.

(.....for what it's worth - -I very fondly remember the 60s in my family's Chevy dealership - I WISH we could go back to those days - but the world changed and so did every manufacturer - )