Homepage Garage Wiki Register Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-11-2013, 12:03 AM   #169
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Golden age of econo boxes doesn't have the same ring...
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 08:00 AM   #170
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
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?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
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.


Quote:
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
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
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 08:00 AM   #171
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '16 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
Now that we have figured out how to get the oil out of tar sands and out of shale, it can't be that hard to extract it from the red-tape. Once we do that, there will be plenty for everyone and gas will be cheap.

Also, the economy will right itself, and we will have a big public works project to build oil powered earth cooling fans to placate the climatist preists.
You must be reading different articles and journals.

Tar sands requires extra processing steps to get oil and is for that reason more expensive.

Shale requires even more processing and has yet to be done in a true commercial process and has the extra step of getting the environmentalists to ok strip mining the Rocky Mountains increasing cost even more.

And lastly it is a commodity. Simply because we have it doesn't make it cheaper. It will be subject to global pricing and as Chinese demand goes up so will the price regardless of where it is made. It would be like saying gold mined in the US could be purchased at a lower price.

But I hope your optimism works out for is. Global econics suggest otherwise.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley Link to Every Camaro photo I've taken in Hi-Resolution
Number 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 11:00 AM   #172
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 11,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post

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.
The "first three things" you mention, Norm, are what made this car a success and is what buyer's wanted in the Camaro model line, and why other makes were not even considered ...All of a sudden this is just no longer acceptable?

What you call a compromise, I would say gives the car it's sales appeal, popularity, repeat customer loyalty, and "image"...

...As far as the stereo-types you describe that now buy the car, ignoring their reasons or ability to purchase a car that others may not see as "practicle", is the reason the car should not include a I-4....Build a car that is "practicle"...compete for market with every other "practical" car with the Camaro, and those damn elitist, v-8, SS owners with some money in their pocket, just might not consider a Camaro in the future...

...That would really be GM and Camaro shooting themselves in the foot...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 12:58 PM   #173
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
The "first three things" you mention, Norm, are what made this car a success and is what buyer's wanted in the Camaro model line, and why other makes were not even considered ...All of a sudden this is just no longer acceptable?

What you call a compromise, I would say gives the car it's sales appeal, popularity, repeat customer loyalty, and "image"...
Did you happen to catch the first part of that
Quote:
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.
As in, I am not disagreeing with performance being the car's primary focus or that it should stay that way.

The catch comes with what constituted an adequate level of performance, and I'm sure that you and I differ substantially on how much attention is paid to each of the various measures of that performance. Let alone what's OK to somebody less hardcore than either of us.


As far as the stereo-types you describe that now buy the car, ignoring their reasons or ability to purchase a car that others may not see as "practicle", is the reason the car should not include a I-4....Build a car that is "practicle"...compete for market with every other "practical" car with the Camaro, and those damn elitist, v-8, SS owners with some money in their pocket, just might not consider a Camaro in the future...[/QUOTE]
Coupes in general aren't as "practical" as 4-door sedans and such, and I don't expect them to ever be that practical. Certainly not to the extent that performance absolutely must be bred out of them in order to get there. What's your point here?

And I still don't get why you or anybody else would refuse to buy a V8 SS Camaro solely because of the existence of an I4-T version. Talk about shots fired and feet . . . . neither you nor I would have to buy such a version, and it's highly unlikely that either of us ever would.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 03:08 PM   #174
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 11,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Did you happen to catch the first part of that

As in, I am not disagreeing with performance being the car's primary focus or that it should stay that way.

The catch comes with what constituted an adequate level of performance, and I'm sure that you and I differ substantially on how much attention is paid to each of the various measures of that performance. Let alone what's OK to somebody less hardcore than either of us.


As far as the stereo-types you describe that now buy the car, ignoring their reasons or ability to purchase a car that others may not see as "practicle", is the reason the car should not include a I-4....Build a car that is "practicle"...compete for market with every other "practical" car with the Camaro, and those damn elitist, v-8, SS owners with some money in their pocket, just might not consider a Camaro in the future...
Coupes in general aren't as "practical" as 4-door sedans and such, and I don't expect them to ever be that practical. Certainly not to the extent that performance absolutely must be bred out of them in order to get there. What's your point here?

And I still don't get why you or anybody else would refuse to buy a V8 SS Camaro solely because of the existence of an I4-T version. Talk about shots fired and feet . . . . neither you nor I would have to buy such a version, and it's highly unlikely that either of us ever would.


Norm[/QUOTE]

Not sure if I ever really have a point...lol....Just that if there is a "trend" of any kind going on here, the addition of an I-4 is more than "just another option" that you don't have to buy if you don't have to...It points to a direction of "let's be like Honda", or "let's build the Camaro more practical" to appeal to the masses...smaller and just enough is perhaps the way to increase sales of the Camaro....Not very appealing to me, even if the car still has a v-8 option...

I always thought all Camaro's were in the same family...but don't think we need to "adopt" an I-4...lol
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 03:16 PM   #175
DRKS1D3


 
DRKS1D3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 Camaro SS Convertible LS3
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,578
Entire thread:
Attached Images
 
__________________
MY RIDE: 2011 TRIPLE BLACK SS CONVERTIBLE (BOUGHT NEW 4-2011)--6 SPEED, K&N TYPHOON INTAKE, FLOWMASTER FORCE II MUFFLERS, HYPERTECH MAX ENERGY 93 OCTANE TUNE, HOTCHKIS SUSPENSION, BLACKED OUT BOWTIES, GLOSS BLACK 20x9 STYLE 41 WHEELS, JBA HIGH-FLOW CATS, BBK HEADERS

DAD'S RIDE: 2012 ZL1 #1866 (BOUGHT NEW 6-2012)--BLACK, 6 SPEED, EXPOSED CF HOOD, POLISHED WHEELS, SUNROOF, ROTO-FAB INTAKE

"Silly Americans, taking from the rich and giving to the poor only works in fairy tales. Success is earned here!".
DRKS1D3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 06:25 PM   #176
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Shale requires even more processing and has yet to be done in a true commercial process and has the extra step of getting the environmentalists to ok strip mining the Rocky Mountains increasing cost even more.
I don't think we will have much trouble convincing them of anything...

This weekend a CNN news anchor tried to get Bill Nye the "Science Guy" (with only a mechanical engineering degree, which makes him an expert on climatology) to tie Winter Storm Nemo to "Climate Change". Hilarious stuff! But it gets better...

Later in the interview when the topic switched to the near miss of the Earth by asteroid 2012 DA14, the anchor attempted to get him to blame close encounters with near Earth asteroids on global warming.

These luddites will believe anything. We can tell them that the population in china is growing so rapidly that we need to stip mine the rockies to counter balance the mass of all the population on the opposite side of the Earth, otherwise the Earth will be in danger of tipping over.

The green lemmings will flood the rockies with pick axes and bare hands, to help strip-mine the oil and minerals, believing that they are saving the planet from capsizing.

If we play it right we can get them to put all the oil and ore into our trains and we can haul it off and sell it and get richer than Al Gorzeera. The irony will be delicious!
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 06:40 PM   #177
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,941
For the record, I wouldn't want to see a normally aspirated I4 Camaro either. Now that would be an ill-advised Honda wanna-be move.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 06:50 PM   #178
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 11,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
For the record, I wouldn't want to see a normally aspirated I4 Camaro either. Now that would be an ill-advised Honda wanna-be move.


Norm
lol...and for the record...I hope the best for Camaro's future...Perhaps some of us got spoiled with this Gen5/modern "muscle-car" thing....and are hoping against hope that it doesn't end...I think it's a miracle these days that anything close to the old days of muscle cars ever even happened in the first place...

....All good...Just hoping GM and Camaro doesn't screw up this car and its reputation in pursuit of a few more dollars and potential customers...etc., etc.,....
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 08:26 PM   #179
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Ok, I'll post it again. The Chinese auto market is expected to triple by early next decade. Do you think the Chinese market going from 12 million per year to 30 million per year in the next 8 to 10 years won't impact the price of gas in the upward direction?

Our market and population is not growing, but China and India are. The number of people reaching the income level to buy cars in both countries is growing and fast. They will need gas.

The only hope you have is if in the near term EVs take over and no one wants gas.

So yes, I'd bet the farm, mine, my families and my friends that gas will hit 5 or 6 per gallon in the not too distant future.
You're wrong.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 08:36 PM   #180
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
It's not a moot point because a little lower on the absolute power scale would then become more acceptable. Maybe only marginally so, but that's still acceptable to many.
And a little lower on the power scale becomes unacceptable to many. See the Challenger.

But the point you ignored was that the I4 is a step down from the current 6 cylinder. There's no benefit for a Camaro buyer to get one with an I4 over a V6. None. Now, if you're talking about a potential smart car buyer, steer them towards a Cruze, Volt or what have you. But don't change the Camaro. It will ruin it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Fine. Find me a 2-door model that's no taller than 56" and available with a manual transmission. Then we can get into the sort of power requirements and what-not that it would take to siphon potential entry-level Camaro sales over into it. Please don't suggest anything that looks like a shrunken SUV, crossover, or odd little box on wheels.
Straw man argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
As long as you can get your version, why does it matter what version GM can sell to somebody who doesn't have the gotta-have-performance gene? GM is not trying to convince you that you must evolve away from yours.
No one asked for a 4 cylinder Camaro. So why are we getting one?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Anybody whose own choice is to walk away from the Camaro line before the V8 becomes completely unavailable just because an I4-T shows up is making that choice all by himself. That's cutting your nose off to spite your face over a perception that's more imagined than real.

If/when the V8 does disappear from the line entirely and no V8 represents an absolute deal-breaker for you, abandoning ship then does become the only option. I know this, because I've already been down a similar road over manual transmission availability in family sedans - more than once. The point is that I do know the difference between me abandoning a car company and them abandoning me. The question is, do you?
If older models are better than the new models, I won't buy a new model. Simple as that.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2013, 09:22 PM   #181
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
You're wrong.
He's also part of the problem. By falling for the propaganda he is actually perpetuating it and spreading it to people on forums and probably in real life.

What ever happened to critical thinking? Are people that brainwashed that they can't see reality anymore?

What everyone SHOULD be doing is pushing back against those who would try and strangle our energy supply, instead of accepting their lies as inevitable truths.

Instead of "So yes, I'd bet the farm, mine, my families and my friends that gas will hit 5 or 6 per gallon in the not too distant future."

You SHOULD be saying: "if gas will ever hits 5 or 6 per gallon, I will do everything in my power to unseat any incumbent who voted to make this happen, regardless of their affiliation. I will also boycott every company that promoted this either directly or via their politburo advertising."
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 07:18 AM   #182
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
And a little lower on the power scale becomes unacceptable to many. See the Challenger.
We're talking about the low end of the power scale to begin with, where people don't care much about exactly power there is. I'm pretty sure that holding the power to weight ratio constant while dropping both power and weight slightly would not bother those folks one bit. They aren't enthusiasts who might actually care about "the numbers".


Quote:
But the point you ignored was that the I4 is a step down from the current 6 cylinder. There's no benefit for a Camaro buyer to get one with an I4 over a V6. None. Now, if you're talking about a potential smart car buyer, steer them towards a Cruze, Volt or what have you. But don't change the Camaro. It will ruin it.
Please acknowledge that there is a significant difference between an I4 and an I4 turbo. I've already said in so many words that I consider a NA I4 to be a non-starter (and been implying as much from the get-go). For the people shopping at the entry 300-ish HP level, how you get that 300-ish HP and 275 or so torque is less important than getting there in the first place.

I am NOT suggesting a 200 HP four of any description, even though it seems people keep misunderstanding that.


Quote:
Straw man argument.
Please feel free to suggest a better way to separate a lower-slung sporty coupe from stand-up-tall vehicles of any other description. My point is that people who strongly favor either one of those aren't likely to be happy owning the other (actually, they'd probably just shop elsewhere).


Quote:
No one asked for a 4 cylinder Camaro. So why are we getting one?
Dunno. Rules that neither you nor I have anything to do with or any real influence over?

But one more time <sigh>, neither you nor I have to buy one, if/when it comes out. Nor do you have to feel that the V8 version you do buy is somehow any less satisfactory because a version that you wouldn't ever want exists. Just let those "lesser sub-models" be "other cars I would never buy" and leave it at that. It isn't that hard.


Quote:
If older models are better than the new models, I won't buy a new model. Simple as that.
I'm not sure where you're going with that, but I might actually agree. I know that if I needed a ~40 mpg commuter car that I would not be shopping new for it. Not in anybody's store.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Tags
2015 camaro, 2015 camaro forum, 2015 camaro forums, 2015 chevrolet camaro, 2015 chevy camaro, 2016 camaro, 2016 camaro forum, 2016 camaro forums, 2016 chevrolet camaro, 2016 chevy camaro, 2017 camaro, 2017 chevy camaro, 6 gen camaro, 6th gen camaro, 6th gen camaro forum, 6th gen camaro forums, 6th gen camaro info, 6th gen camaro news, 6th gen camaro rumors, 6th gen chevrolet camaro, 6th gen chevy camaro, 6th gen chevy camaro forum, 6th generation camaro, 6th generation camaro info, 6th generation camaro news, 6th generation camaro rumors, 6th generation chevy camaro, camaro 6th gen, camaro 6th generation

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.