[Bassment]

I feel like a lot of these posters would be better suited to buy a minivan.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Bassment

I feel like a lot of these posters would be better suited to buy a minivan.

Is that an insult or just simply that you'll accept whatever compromise they put the Camaro badge on?

I happen to know what is possible and what trade offs are made. Decisions were made to put form over function. If they came out and said, "hey to make it look like a Camaro like you all asked for we had to limit the intake and exhaust so the LT1 in the Camaro puts out exactly what the LS3 did", you'd have a S%^t fit wouldn't you?

[Bassment]

They increased front visiblity by 1" on each pillar and lowered the dash. What else do you want them to do, make it a hatch back and raise the roof 8 inches? The rear visiblity is fine, there's side view mirrors and a STANDARD back up camera.

[IOMike]

I had read the pillars are nearly an inch smaller on one side and a 1/2 inch smaller on the other. So almost 1.5" smaller. Not sure how the 5th gen A pillars compare to my G8 but those pillars are alarmingly thick and do create problems.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Bassment

They increased front visiblity by 1" on each pillar and lowered the dash. What else do you want them to do, make it a hatch back and raise the roof 8 inches? The rear visiblity is fine, there's side view mirrors and a STANDARD back up camera.

Seriously? Yes, I wanted better rearward visibility and a hatchback doesn't even address that. Look at the C7.

8 inches? Where do you get that from. It doesn't take 8 inches to provide better visibility.

A backup camera? You think that is a valid excuse for having poor rearward visibility? I don't. They get dirty easily and often don't have a good view. Yes, combined with back up sensors technology can keep you from hitting things, but I expect more than that.

GM styling does this to almost every car. Raise the belt line, slam the roof.

You are far too accepting of the story they are telling you. It could have been done and is often done by other OEMs.

Like I've said, I'm reserving judgment until I can drive one. But from what we've seen and heard GM has once again put form over function. And when I drive one I may find that an acceptable trade off. But the current car sucks and my fear is they lowered the cowl and the roof and to make that work they lowered the seat.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by Number 3

...
Like I've said, I'm reserving judgment until I can drive one. But from what we've seen and heard GM has once again put form over function. And when I drive one I may find that an acceptable trade off. But the current car sucks and my fear is they lowered the cowl and the roof and to make that work they lowered the seat.

Is visibility not as good as the average sedan? No.

Can it be driven without constantly sideswiping, curbing, and making lane changes on a prayer??? YES

Adjust the mirrors properly = lane change no problem. Backing into a spot...not difficult once again if you use your mirrors.

The only difficulty I find in my 5th gen is navigating parking lot spots and getting in between the lines evenly if I don't have a good distance of them to work with....you can't see them for nothing lol.

Other than that...no issues. Sorry, but I feel you are being too harsh, and I feel like b/c your wife told you she can't drive it, you are on the offensive on this. My wife drives my car and hasn't wrecked it yet...so what gives?

Yes, there is some form over function here, but there has to be an acceptable amount of that, or you end up with an econo box. There is one area I was expecting a change that didn't happen, that I think could have been nice and this is my rough drawing of what I think could have been done:

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Is visibility not as good as the average sedan? No.

Can it be driven without constantly sideswiping, curbing, and making lane changes on a prayer??? YES

Adjust the mirrors properly = lane change no problem. Backing into a spot...not difficult once again if you use your mirrors.

The only difficulty I find in my 5th gen is navigating parking lot spots and getting in between the lines evenly if I don't have a good distance of them to work with....you can't see them for nothing lol.

Other than that...no issues. Sorry, but I feel you are being too harsh, and I feel like b/c your wife told you she can't drive it, you are on the offensive on this. My wife drives my car and hasn't wrecked it yet...so what gives?

Yes, there is some form over function here, but there has to be an acceptable amount of that, or you end up with an econo box. There is one area I was expecting a change that didn't happen, that I think could have been nice and this is my rough drawing of what I think could have been done:

Your picture made this pop into my mind.

[CmeltoN91]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

Your picture made this pop into my mind.

Maybe they can bring the Riviera nameplate back?? Buick Needs a coupe in their lineup lol

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Is visibility not as good as the average sedan? No.

Can it be driven without constantly sideswiping, curbing, and making lane changes on a prayer??? YES

Adjust the mirrors properly = lane change no problem. Backing into a spot...not difficult once again if you use your mirrors.

The only difficulty I find in my 5th gen is navigating parking lot spots and getting in between the lines evenly if I don't have a good distance of them to work with....you can't see them for nothing lol.

Other than that...no issues. Sorry, but I feel you are being too harsh, and I feel like b/c your wife told you she can't drive it, you are on the offensive on this. My wife drives my car and hasn't wrecked it yet...so what gives?

Yes, there is some form over function here, but there has to be an acceptable amount of that, or you end up with an econo box. There is one area I was expecting a change that didn't happen, that I think could have been nice and this is my rough drawing of what I think could have been done:

No, not being overly harsh. I know from our earlier discussions you know I've been consistent on this from the beginning. I wanted a car with few compromises in hopes that GM would have a truly great car the would lure new fans to the Camaro, not just a car that made the loyalists happy. Frankly one could argue that was a much easier and safer path.

Keep in mind, this is a site full of those loyalists. I don't even own a Camaro and I consider myself one of those. It's why I'm here. It's a part of who I am and goes from my first car memories to today. It's a big part of my story and as many as I've driven, still haven't owned one.

GM said it themselves. They asked the owners (notice not potential owners) if they wanted style or visibility. They have clearly told us "we" picked style. Another GM engineer was quoted as saying, "hey rear seat in Consumer Reports is still a 1 rating in a coupe and making any better or worse is still a 1. So again, another rationalized trade off.

I was part of many of those styling vs. engineering discussions and I know how GM convinces itself this is ok.

I sat in an ATS mockup once. It was a 3 Series with the ATS interior features put in. Dropped roof line, belt high. Ruined what is great in the 3 Series for the sake of styling. That's what GM does. It has convinced itself the only reason people buy their cars is bold styling. They have traditionally ignored why people DON'T buy their cars and it shows.

Sit in the back seat of an ATS. There is a pocket in the headliner for taller folks. I hit my on it if I lean forward just a bit. A sedan with this much compromise in the rear seat is just silly. And I know people that have complained about the visibility in that car. My wife loves hers by the way

I use my wife as an example, not as my singular reference. She has driven Corvettes for years and has been through performance driving school and has been on some of the greatest race tracks we know today. She just happens to be 5' 2". For merely a moment can we stop and imagine a broader audience for this car? That would mean people that just want a stylish coupe they can enjoy driving. As I've said you could have no back window and some on this site would be happy to have a Camaro with a V8.

And what I am probably the most sensitive to is the Gen 4 history of the car. It was frankly a decent V8 with aggressive styling. It just made a crappy V6 coupe. Poor ergo, poor visibility and a hatchback to boot. The V8s sold well enough in the end. The base coupe did not and the car died........for too long.

I was hoping for a car that would make every coupe buyer from every make think twice. Maybe we have that, but we are months away from seeing sales. There are people on this site that get pretty worked up if you suggest that perhaps conquest sales of the Scion/Subaru twins of a Hyundai Genesis is a horrid travesty. 370Z? Infiniti Q60? I don't think it is. I want all of those sales too, not just Mustang or Challenger converts.

And again I openly admit I'm being critical without experience. I'm just going by GM's own comments and translating that into what that means having been there.

[Bassment]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Seriously? Yes, I wanted better rearward visibility and a hatchback doesn't even address that. Look at the C7.

8 inches? Where do you get that from. It doesn't take 8 inches to provide better visibility.

A backup camera? You think that is a valid excuse for having poor rearward visibility? I don't. They get dirty easily and often don't have a good view. Yes, combined with back up sensors technology can keep you from hitting things, but I expect more than that.

GM styling does this to almost every car. Raise the belt line, slam the roof.

You are far too accepting of the story they are telling you. It could have been done and is often done by other OEMs.

Like I've said, I'm reserving judgment until I can drive one. But from what we've seen and heard GM has once again put form over function. And when I drive one I may find that an acceptable trade off. But the current car sucks and my fear is they lowered the cowl and the roof and to make that work they lowered the seat.

I mean hatchback like a 5-door, like a golf gti or fiesta st.

They increased the visibility a couple inches, 8 inches is just an example, like HOW much more visibility do you want?

I have no problem with the visiblity I could drive it with no camera and no rear windshield.

I'd be willing to sacrifice a lot more function for even better form.

[High Magnitude]

the production team said they made the a pillars smaller to make visibility better though? sounds like someone just doesnt like the car

[AZCamaroFan]

i agree with Number 3. GM has gotten high-beltline happy in recent years. Look at other cars. There's some great looking ones without a super high beltline. Go look at videos of new Ferrari's, they don't have the bottom of the window above the shoulder.
i mean the rear window should be usable.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by High Magnitude

the production team said they made the a pillars smaller to make visibility better though? sounds like someone just doesnt like the car

Making the A-pillars thinner does nothing to make it easier to see over your shoulder.

[KarFan]

There seemed to be 3 areas of improvement over the 5th Gen. where the 6th Gen needed to achieve for the betterment of the car and its competitiveness in the marketplace. Smaller footprint, lighter curb weight and better outward visibility. It would seem that they achieved on the footprint and curb weight but not on the visibility.

What's interesting is that during the unveiling Tom Peters states that the Camaro owners wanted the tight canopy look and not to mess with it. So maybe this was an objective the designers thought about but were overruled by feedback.