Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome
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.
