[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

So height is the new requirement?

It seemed the simplest way to separate the general appearance that Camaros have always had from the general appearance of current 4-door sedans, crossovers, SUVs and odd little boxes. I contend that the buyers who would be likely to shop Camaros/Mustangs/Challengers are somewhat different with different priorities than those looking at vehicles in the other group. How many potential Camaro buyers would actually cross-shop it against an Impala, Equinox, or Traverse?

Originally Posted by Number 3

Again and again. You guys think that people that buy V6 Camaros aren't just looking for a great coupe? Do you think all V6 buyers are posers that wish they could buy an SS?

This ↑↑↑ .

All some folks want is a little excitement in their transportation and somewhat better than base or "average" performance. My wife fits into this category at least on the performance point. 4-cyl NA was and still is an absolute deal-breaker to her, but 4cyl-T was entirely acceptable following a test drive demonstrating that it wasn't just another gutless wonder. I KNOW she gets into the throttle more than lots of people do, at least once in a while.

Let me be clear. I hope for the day when the Camaro is such a great coupe that not only do Mustang buyers and Challenger buyers think about it but Accord, Altima and Genesis buyers, and all the others thinking of buying the best coupe would look to the Camaro as the ultimate sporty coupe to buy.

Even as Mustang owner (and still very happy with that car) I'd rather see the folks who currently shop only at the import stores for their coupes at least cross-shop the Camaro.

Originally Posted by revychevy

Here's why: because we don't believe one car can be everything to everyone. When you try to make a pony/muscle car/sports car/grocery getter/ econo car you end up making everything mediocre. That's why econo cars and family sedans and grocery getter coupes are all in different categories at different price points and marketed differently.

You don't have to target the car directly to be great or just merely good at all of those things. Build the car to have primary emphasis on the first three but with enough utility to be able to function as somebody's only car.

When you want to compromise away all of the utility in the effort to push the first three further hardcore, you're basically limiting the car's potential sales to singles, empty-nesters, and those fortunate enough to be able to maintain at least two vehicles. At some point along this path, you've just shot yourself in the foot.

Originally Posted by revychevy

This thread is about 4 cylinder Camaros not sixes. We have no problem with them, they are tradition. The question is do you want anyone considering an econo box 4 banger to consider the Camaro. GM makes more than one car, they don't have to fill every price point with Camaro.

Save the NA econo versions for the econo cars, absolutely. Let's neither assume nor suggest that the Camaro would get that version as well.

FWIW, one of the "equivalence factors" used for turbocharging is 1.4. Applying that to a 2.5L engine gives you 3.5L equivalent as NA. Close enough to the various 3.6L and 3.7L displacement engines to not matter at all.

Cylinder count was left out intentionally, but I suppose instead of sticking a 2.5T badge on its rump you could give it a 3.5E tag if it would make you feel any better.


Norm