View Single Post
Old 09-03-2013, 08:29 PM   #22
garfin
Resident Disciple
 
garfin's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 CTS-V 6MN '98 Camaro SS (Sold)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Roches Point, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
The ATS is an outstanding car. Agree with the comments. That being said, that won't necessarily make it a great Camaro.

Disagree on the size. The ATS is a small car. Keep in mind it is the same size as a Chevy Cruze and for all the people on here going "give us the ATS" as the platform for the NG Camaro, you are also saying, "give me a car the size of the Chevy Cruze".

I may be wrong on this point, but I don't want a small Camaro.

I've made the Comparison of our Audi S4 vs. the ATS. The Audi weighs a good 300 plus pounds more and if I'm picking, I'm picking the Audi. Doesn't mean that's what works for everyone, but for me I'd rather have the 3.0T and full time AWD and a slightly bigger car. Audi has reasonable rear seat accommodations. The ATS is at best a 2+2. Audi has a bigger trunk roomier and front seat space. And a Cruze has better rear seat and trunk space than the ATS. And agree those aren't attributes people are looking for in a Camaro, but GM has notoriously and famously packaged cars big on the outside and small on the inside. Look at the CTS Coupe. No front seat head room and a joke in the rear seat area. The took a reasonably roomy sedan and made it pretty bad if you ever intend more than a 12 year old to sit in the back seats. I love that car but it is a complete compromise to achieve the styling.

Now some will take a lighter Camaro no matter how small it is. That model doesn't work for me.

I want a Camaro off of a mid size platform, not a compact. JMO
Great analysis!
...and I agree wholeheartedly with your comments about the ATS - it is space and room challenged - without a doubt! Transforming it into a coupe would certainly put it into the 2+2 category.
So what if... the 6th Gen was based on the ATS platform and what if... it showed up as a 2+2? I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing. The 6th Gen Camaro will need to come out fighting the new Mustang - which will of course be smaller and lighter than the current model - and given what Ford has shown with respect to the power levels they can achieve through the technology of their smaller, but still powerful (Ecoboost) engines, Camaro needs to come out in fighting trim. Camaro has always been thought of pretty much as a 2+2. Who knows what the new Mustang will weigh in at, but I'm of the opinion that whatever GM can do to bring the 6th Gen to market in as light a form as possible is a very important factor. Fuel economy ratings are looming large because of CAFE.
But wait! GM also has an option to think about (or they've already thought about it). For those who would like a "larger" Camaro, then the car could be based on the "stretched" Alpha (a.k.a. CTS), which is a whole lot roomier than the ATS.
I don't know what the performance/fuel economy penalty might equate to by using the larger Alpha platform for Camaro , but I feel that GM must put their best foot forward and nail it, right out of the gate, in terms of weight reduction which directly impacts fuel economy and performance.
What does it say about weight etc. if the ATS-V ends up with the 420 HP TT 3.6 and the 3rd Gen CTS-V ends up with some form of the LT1 V8?
Decisions, decisions...

Best regards,

Elie
__________________
2010 Cadillac CTS-V 6MN Thunder Gray
1998 Camaro SS # C079 SOLD
garfin is offline   Reply With Quote