CAMARO6

CAMARO6 (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/index.php)
-   2016+ Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=155)
-   -   6th gen Camaro concept car when? (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=272563)

v6sonoma 01-22-2013 03:05 PM

6th gen Camaro concept car when?
 
We have decent speculation on when a new Camaro might be coming and on what platform it might be on but anyone have any thoughts on when we might see an actual concept car? Not necessarily a production intent concept but something like the Corvettes Stingray concept. Do you think they will or do you feel they will just pop out with a 6th gen and say "Here it is!"

:popcorn:

Mr. Wyndham 01-22-2013 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by v6sonoma (Post 6068730)
We have decent speculation on when a new Camaro might be coming and on what platform it might be on but anyone have any thoughts on when we might see an actual concept car? Not necessarily a production intent concept but something like the Corvettes Stingray concept. Do you think they will or do you feel they will just pop out with a 6th gen and say "Here it is!"

:popcorn:

Well...I think they'll do what they did with this current Corvette Stingray you see everyone talking about...

Hint....hint....launch mini-website.....hint some more.....release a few details....."SURPRISE!!!" 6-months before-hand.

They won't show a concept three-years early like in 2006, that's for sure. Doing that got everyone excited, yes...but it also forced them to build a car that was not optimized for performance as much as it could have been, because they were so focused on keeping the design the same like everyone loved.

Not showing a concept lets them do it right, without being held hostage by people's expectations.

Captain Awesome 01-22-2013 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham (Post 6069717)
Not showing a concept lets them do it right, without being held hostage by people's expectations.

I really cannot think of any way that the car fell short based on anyone seeing the concept. It is not like the concept was anything other than big 3D model of some styling ideas that people liked.

The performance wasn't hampered by the styling, it was that they used a sedan platform to begin with.

Then people got their expectations up because people who were supposed to be in the know were "speaking out of class" with non-specific but very leading wording about specs meant to generate excitement.

Other disappointments were caused by the release of various computer generated images and movies showing interior features that would never be completed or were delayed to future model years.

The styling (which is the ONLY thing anyone expected to carry over from the concept) was extremely failthful, and is very much a reason people love the car. I don't know of any reason people would complain a lot about not hitting that target.

Mr. Wyndham 01-22-2013 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome (Post 6069858)
I really cannot think of any way that the car fell short based on anyone seeing the concept. It is not like the concept was anything other than big 3D model of some styling ideas that people liked.

The performance wasn't hampered by the styling, it was that they used a sedan platform to begin with.

Then people got their expectations up because people who were supposed to be in the know were "speaking out of class" with non-specific but very leading wording about specs meant to generate excitement.

Other disappointments were caused by the release of various computer generated images and movies showing interior features that would never be completed or were delayed to future model years.

The styling (which is the ONLY thing anyone expected to carry over from the concept) was extremely failthful, and is very much a reason people love the car. I don't know of any reason people would complain a lot about not hitting that target.

Oh, don't get me wrong. Before I continue - let me say that I LOVE the 5th gen. Everything from the interior to the performance. Got it? Good...;)

There were several things than a non-engineer such as myself could identify as compromises in favor of design over performance strictly because enthusiasts (and Bob Lutz) demanded that the production car matched the concept design as closely as possible. I'm sure there are others that I cannot see/think of.

1) Those gargantuan wheels. Tall, wide, and thick-spoked. The concept featured 21s and 22s...engineering and design settled on 20s for cost and performance, I would imagine...but 20s are still pretty large, all for the look of the concept.

2) Wide-body...the production car is, perhaps, a little wider than it needs to be, but it is: to match the concept.

3) The chopped, low roofline and thick C-pillars that make the exterior look great contribute to what many seem to feel is "poor visibility" and "huge blind spots". It also makes a sunroof...difficult because the headliner is already so low.

4) The designers attempted to remain true to the interior of the concept, as well. Minus all the billet aluminum and 60s neon-orange light piping...Some critics, many initially...condemned this design. (Ironically, it won a global award the next year.)

5) The deep-dish steering wheel of 2010/11 was very large...and contributed to the car "feeling" heavier or less responsive than it really was. That was why it was changed very shortly into the generation.

6) The wide "hips" created an impact zone for road-debris. Leading to the impression that the paint sucks (when, in fact, it's used on multiple other vehicles within the plant without much issue). That feature was incorporated because the concept had it.


I could go on for a little bit longer, but I'm starting to sound as though I'm bashing the car. And I don't want to...at all. Actually - I can't imagine the car any other way, I love each of those features! I'm identifying common points of complaint that can be sourced back to the concept car that everyone fell in love with. There was no other choice: Either build to the concept in every possible way, or don't build it at all.

My point is this:

True "concept cars" are design studies...exercises in creative thinking. Most are never intended to function, let alone be produceable. Such was the case of the Camaro...the fact that it WAS able to be produced was the result of the genius of Al Oppenheiser's engineering team, Tom Peter's design gurus, and the fact that the Camaro's very existence since 1967 was: to function and perform. Even in concept form 40 years later, that couldn't be suppressed. :)

However...there were many features and aspects of the concept Camaro in 2006 that did not lend themselves to maximum performance potential. By not showing people a radical concept of the 6th-generation car...there is nothing for people to fall in love with...and subsequently...both the engineering and design teams will not be "shackled" to a conceptual, non-production-intent design.

For the 6th-generation...not only do the engineers get to start with a flexible sedan/coupe-friendly chassis...but they also get to work truly together with the designers to produce a car with no compromises. They get to build a Camaro that couldn't be built in 2009 (for various reasons).

Because of all of this, I expect the new car to have a similar impact as the new Vette has had. Maybe a bit less, because there's more love for the 5th-gen Camaro than there was for the C6, but still very impressive and awe-inspiring. I've had the pleasure of talking to these guys about the 5th-gen...and if ANYONE knows what a 6th-gen should look like...or how it should perform: It's these people. We (enthusiasts) are in good hands. :thumbup:

The_Blur 01-22-2013 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham (Post 6070029)
Oh, don't get me wrong. Before I continue - let me say that I LOVE the 5th gen. Everything from the interior to the performance. Got it? Good...;)

There were several things than a non-engineer such as myself could identify as compromises in favor of design over performance strictly because enthusiasts (and Bob Lutz) demanded that the production car matched the concept design as closely as possible. I'm sure there are others that I cannot see/think of.

1) Those gargantuan wheels. Tall, wide, and thick-spoked. The concept featured 21s and 22s...engineering and design settled on 20s for cost and performance, I would imagine...but 20s are still pretty large, all for the look of the concept.

2) Wide-body...the production car is, perhaps, a little wider than it needs to be, but it is: to match the concept.

3) The chopped, low roofline and thick C-pillars that make the exterior look great contribute to what many seem to feel is "poor visibility" and "huge blind spots". It also makes a sunroof...difficult because the headliner is already so low.

4) The designers attempted to remain true to the interior of the concept, as well. Minus all the billet aluminum and 60s neon-orange light piping...Some critics, many initially...condemned this design. (Ironically, it won a global award the next year.)

5) The deep-dish steering wheel of 2010/11 was very large...and contributed to the car "feeling" heavier or less responsive than it really was. That was why it was changed very shortly into the generation.

6) The wide "hips" created an impact zone for road-debris. Leading to the impression that the paint sucks (when, in fact, it's used on multiple other vehicles within the plant without much issue). That feature was incorporated because the concept had it.


I could go on for a little bit longer, but I'm starting to sound as though I'm bashing the car. And I don't want to...at all. Actually - I can't imagine the car any other way, I love each of those features! I'm identifying common points of complaint that can be sourced back to the concept car that everyone fell in love with. There was no other choice: Either build to the concept in every possible way, or don't build it at all.

My point is this:

True "concept cars" are design studies...exercises in creative thinking. Most are never intended to function, let alone be produceable. Such was the case of the Camaro...the fact that it WAS able to be produced was the result of the genius of Al Oppenheiser's engineering team, Tom Peter's design gurus, and the fact that the Camaro's very existence since 1967 was: to function and perform. Even in concept form 40 years later, that couldn't be suppressed. :)

However...there were many features and aspects of the concept Camaro in 2006 that did not lend themselves to maximum performance potential. By not showing people a radical concept of the 6th-generation car...there is nothing for people to fall in love with...and subsequently...both the engineering and design teams will not be "shackled" to a conceptual, non-production-intent design.

For the 6th-generation...not only do the engineers get to start with a flexible sedan/coupe-friendly chassis...but they also get to work truly together with the designers to produce a car with no compromises. They get to build a Camaro that couldn't be built in 2009 (for various reasons).

Because of all of this, I expect the new car to have a similar impact as the new Vette has had. Maybe a bit less, because there's more love for the 5th-gen Camaro than there was for the C6, but still very impressive and awe-inspiring. I've had the pleasure of talking to these guys about the 5th-gen...and if ANYONE knows what a 6th-gen should look like...or how it should perform: It's these people. We (enthusiasts) are in good hands. :thumbup:

It is my hope and prayer that GM continues this genius moving forward. I am confident that GM will do it. It is always my fear that those complaints get taken too seriously. You and I talked about the concept of fuel economy and how everyone complains that they want better fuel economy when the truth is that they want range. GM needs to decide whether the perception of crappy paint is more important than the head-turning those hips do. The Camaro has to be bold. There's a reason Camaro5 has enthusiasts in Britain, Japan, Kuwait, Israel, and everywhere else in the world. It isn't for subtle European lines. It is for the bold, sharp lines of an American classic. It isn't for the sleek, stylish interior. It is for the unconventional wrapped console with retro-style gauges. It is the starkly contrasting features and designs that make the Camaro stand out. How many people have said the Challenger looks like a classic but "I'd rather drive a Camaro;" or the Mustang is pretty cool but "I'd rather drive a Camaro." The Camaro is bold. A tame Camaro that fits a million markets will not master any of them. Did Hyundai make their cars more "American" to sell here? Did Honda or Toyota make a real effort to make a car more "American," or did they just peddle their Japanese cars in our hometowns? Let's bring our unique brand of awesomeness to their shores and call it a Camaro.

KMPrenger 01-22-2013 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Blur (Post 6070240)
It is my hope and prayer that GM continues this genius moving forward. I am confident that GM will do it. It is always my fear that those complaints get taken too seriously. You and I talked about the concept of fuel economy and how everyone complains that they want better fuel economy when the truth is that they want range. GM needs to decide whether the perception of crappy paint is more important than the head-turning those hips do. The Camaro has to be bold. There's a reason Camaro5 has enthusiasts in Britain, Japan, Kuwait, Israel, and everywhere else in the world. It isn't for subtle European lines. It is for the bold, sharp lines of an American classic. It isn't for the sleek, stylish interior. It is for the unconventional wrapped console with retro-style gauges. It is the starkly contrasting features and designs that make the Camaro stand out. How many people have said the Challenger looks like a classic but "I'd rather drive a Camaro;" or the Mustang is pretty cool but "I'd rather drive a Camaro." The Camaro is bold. A tame Camaro that fits a million markets will not master any of them. Did Hyundai make their cars more "American" to sell here? Did Honda or Toyota make a real effort to make a car more "American," or did they just peddle their Japanese cars in our hometowns? Let's bring our unique brand of awesomeness to their shores and call it a Camaro.

AMEN

Captain Awesome 01-22-2013 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham (Post 6070029)
Oh, don't get me wrong. Before I continue - let me say that I LOVE the 5th gen. Everything from the interior to the performance. Got it? Good...;)

Your initial comment spoke directly to loss of performance, due to the design keeping with the concept. You're talking about cosmetic things.

I'll give you the hips are wide, but the paint sucks on every part of the car, not just the hips. Once upon a time, cars and trucks had painted metal right on flat forward facing areas on the nose, and the paint didn't chip off like it does now. The paint sucks. It does not adhere well due to it being illegal to use petroleum based paints, and it's too thin in an effort to save weight due to CAFE regs.

I don't have a problem with the rims, which pretty much were expected. If the car had 18's or something no matter what style it had the wheels would have been ridiculed.

The interior so peripherally pays homage to the concept that anything wrong with it would have been addressed. In the case of poor visibility we know of ONE area where doing it DIFFERENT than the concept made the car WORSE. The concept had no B pillars. Had they done that the visibility would jave been better AND the care would look even more like the beloved concept.

Also, the "new" steering wheel sucks compared to the 2010 wheel. Should have stayed with that design.

PAUL SS 01-22-2013 09:34 PM

There won't be a concept car, It will be done like the C7 Corvette. But I am anxious to see what they come up with!

Mr. Wyndham 01-22-2013 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome (Post 6070280)
Your initial comment spoke directly to loss of performance, due to the design keeping with the concept. You're talking about cosmetic things.

I'll give you the hips are wide, but the paint sucks on every part of the car, not just the hips. Once upon a time, cars and trucks had painted metal right on flat forward facing areas on the nose, and the paint didn't chip off like it does now. The paint sucks. It does not adhere well due to it being illegal to use petroleum based paints, and it's too thin in an effort to save weight due to CAFE regs.

I don't have a problem with the rims, which pretty much were expected. If the car had 18's or something no matter what style it had the wheels would have been ridiculed.

The interior so peripherally pays homage to the concept that anything wrong with it would have been addressed. In the case of poor visibility we know of ONE area where doing it DIFFERENT than the concept made the car WORSE. The concept had no B pillars. Had they done that the visibility would jave been better AND the care would look even more like the beloved concept.

Also, the "new" steering wheel sucks compared to the 2010 wheel. Should have stayed with that design.


:mad0259:
I swear....I love talking to you, but sometimes it's like you only read the first and last lines of my posts....

Yes, an earlier statement referred to performance, specifically...but the sentence you quoted was in general about doing things "right" in all things, versus yielding to the publics expectations. One could make the argument that the car was and continues to be a success, so by any measure they did things right...but that's for another thread, I think.

The heavy wheels are unsprung weight, also contributing to overall mass. The wide-body contributed to mass....The car is not a bad performer, as I've always maintained, but it could have been better were it not for the concept's rule over all things.

General commentary has indicated that people believe the CAMARO's paint sucks, on its own merit. That was the complaint I spoke to, which is a false perception due to what you stated...all cars use similar, water-based paint today, and the other vehicles within Oshawa use the very same paint! That is the primary reason why it chips. The other large reason is the car's design, a chiseled-flat front end and protruding rear fenders, derived directly from the concept. Those features contribute to the higher-than-average accumulation of paint-chips versus other cars. But not for the design...the paint would be of average/good quality among GM cars.

The comparably very wide rims on the 2010-12 SS were a direct result of the concept. So were the enormous wheel-wells to accommodate them. They effect performance negatively, as evidenced by people's desire to replace them with lighter pieces...even GM's own work on the ZL1 addressed that. I like them - but they're not optimal, because they were drawn straight from the concept.

Put the two interiors side-by-side...I challenge you to seriously contend that the production interior is only "peripherally" inspired. All the features that were ridiculed as "bulbous, cartoony, ugly, weird" when it first came out, such as the gauge bezels, and HVAC knobs, were direct adaptations from features in the concept interior.

The new steering wheel changes the "feel" of the car's responsiveness significantly for the better. Your comment lends credence to my statements: You say is sucks, I assume because it looks like a generic Chevrolet wheel. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Yet, the performance attributes of the original wheel were inferior to this new wheel that "sucks", and that's why it was swapped in 2012, even though the original looked better. The 2010/11 wheel was inferior, because it was pulled expressly from the concept for the sake of staying true to the deep-dish wheel design that everyone loved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Blur (Post 6070240)
It is my hope and prayer that GM continues this genius moving forward. I am confident that GM will do it.

So am I. :thumbsup:

Let's not all forget the "12 disciples of which there are 15"...if Camaro Team does something....iffy. These folks will let them know. :thumbsup:

90503 01-22-2013 09:58 PM

So let me see here...A concept of the 5th Gen was made public and became a huge, greater than expected success, but wasn't what the engineers really wanted to build...now, to sell another generation, the Camaro enthusiasts are intentionally left in the dark, (as well as the manufacturer having no know way of knowing if the car buyers will like it's styling)...

So this car will be based on the engineers tastes, and the car buyers are just supposed to be surprised because they don't want any styling input or be bothered again about what it looks like?...lol

Mr. Wyndham 01-22-2013 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6070527)
So let me see here...A concept of the 5th Gen was made public and became a huge, greater than expected success, but wasn't what the engineers really wanted to build...now, to sell another generation, the Camaro enthusiasts are intentionally left in the dark, (as well as the manufacturer having no know way of knowing if the car buyers will like it's styling)...

So this car will be based on the engineers tastes, and the car buyers are just supposed to be surprised because they don't want any styling input or be bothered again about what it looks like?...lol

That's not what I said..........if that's what you're trying to paraphrase...

Styling is very important to Tom Peters and his design team. And you can see in an interview with Al Oppenheiser, replicating the success of this generation is high on their to-do list...it's also going to be very difficult...

Chevy will always know what we want with this car. They watch this site pretty close, after all. Plus, they have 15 enthusiasts from every walk of life providing feedback and input, from all of us and themselves, to the team directly. And if you need more reassurance...every high-ranking Camaro team member, and I'm sure, most of those we don't know if...are hard-core Camaro enthusiasts themselves. :chevy: :thumbsup:

90503 01-22-2013 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham (Post 6069717)

They won't show a concept three-years early like in 2006, that's for sure. Doing that got everyone excited, yes...but it also forced them to build a car that was not optimized for performance as much as it could have been, because they were so focused on keeping the design the same like everyone loved.

Not showing a concept lets them do it right, without being held hostage by people's expectations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham (Post 6070553)
That's not what I said..........if that's what you're trying to paraphrase... :chevy: :thumbsup:

Sort of thought it was what you said..."forced them to build a car....like everyone loved"......"being held hostage by people's expectations"...

Sorry, but I thought building a car everyone loved, wanted and bought was sort of the idea...lol...

....Time for the "little people" to just get out of the way, I guess...(After all, who would want another giant success story on their hands?)...lol...

All good, brother, just poking a little fun...lol...I hope the 6thGen is an awesome success...Peace!...

Mr. Wyndham 01-23-2013 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6070637)
Sort of thought it was what you said..."forced them to build a car....like everyone loved"......"being held hostage by people's expectations"...

Sorry, but I thought building a car everyone loved, wanted and bought was sort of the idea...lol...

I did say that. But I want to clarify - I think they did the RIGHT thing by doing what they did, and listening to (as you called them) "the little people". As I acknowledged earlier: the 5th gen is a HUGE success...and there is nothing wrong with it...I love my car!! :D

My super-long posts boil down to this: There's room for improvement, as with anything. And the 6th-gen Camaro is that opportunity to improve many things...just this time, they get to apply their genius without the influence of a show-stunning concept. :thumbsup:

v6sonoma 01-23-2013 10:21 AM

I feel that circumstances are very different from 06. The Camaro is no longer gone so it's not so much a hope and dream as when they showed the original concept. Today there are so many different ways to judge what people want besides an expensive concept. I know they keep a close eye on sites like C5 and they have the disciples to help guide them and all the passionate engineers, etc. Since they have a great car currently they only need to tweak the formula so to speak. Back in 06 they had nothing. Not even a current car to enhance or guide them. With such a short window and such long lead times I feel if there was a radical concept we would have seen it. (code 130R anyone :iono: ) When they are ready to show it to us it's most likely going to be the car you'll be able to buy in basically CTF form.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.