Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro forum, news, rumors, discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-10-2013, 09:10 AM   #126
LIV4VETTES
 
Drives: 69 Camaro RS convertible
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lindenhurst, NY
Posts: 84
4 cyl

i guess when the 6.2 liter 4 cylinder is available i will have to take a look at it...
LIV4VETTES is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 09:56 AM   #127
camaro-dreamer
 
camaro-dreamer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 Maxima/ 2011 Mustang GT
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick1 View Post
the way i see it, it's better to have a choice than not.
it would be fine if they offered a 4 cyl. camaro and let the people buy the camaro with the engine type that they like
More choice almost always comes in at a greater expense. Unless you want to pay more for the v6 or the v8, you probably wouldn't like a turbo I4. That is my only opposition.
camaro-dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:01 AM   #128
GMTool

 
GMTool's Avatar
 
Drives: AGM 2012 Camaro 2SS/RS L99
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Southwest Illinois
Posts: 1,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larz29 View Post
Why would anyone want a 4 cyl camaro?? Sounds a bit lame.
I don't know, and I don't want to know. Correct, it's lame.
__________________
CAI Cold Air Kit. Dynatech Headers. High Flow Cats. Corsa Catback. JRE Tune. OEM Strut Tower Brace
GMTool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:20 AM   #129
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post

I don't see that at all. What I do see is a few V8 cheerleaders expressing fear that any new 4-cylinder variant will be not the least bit better than models with the low-tech 4's of the fairly distant past, and that somehow the V8 versions will be adversely affected as a direct result. Kind of a glass-is-half-empty train of thought.


Norm
I'm sure you are correct about the new 4's being far better than the old ones...but no matter what, I don't think it can be denied that there is a definite "stigma" and mind-set about them that will cause GM to lose Camaro customers...that is, those who see the brand as a way to get away and be different from all the existing 4-banger, rice-rocket, econo-cars that are in vast supply in other models...

...Just because the I-4 technically can work in the new Camaro platform, doesn't mean it "has to" go in it...Get your 4 in a GM Cruze, Sonic, or Spark...Step up to the Camaro if you want more than that...
90503 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 10:27 AM   #130
Mick1
 
Drives: 2013 2SS LS3
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro-dreamer View Post
More choice almost always comes in at a greater expense. Unless you want to pay more for the v6 or the v8, you probably wouldn't like a turbo I4. That is my only opposition.
I like to drive a manual and most people prefer the automatic. If GM took away the transmission choices and built only automatic camaros because it's more cost effective to build only one kind of transmission, most likely, I would have bought another car. That's why I am for more choices, be it transmission types or engine choices
Mick1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:08 AM   #131
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: 2,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
I don't think it can be denied that there is a definite "stigma" and mind-set about them that will cause GM to lose Camaro customers...that is, those who see the brand as a way to get away and be different from all the existing 4-banger, rice-rocket, econo-cars that are in vast supply in other models...
I'm trying really hard to avoid coming to the wrong conclusions here, but I just can't see why if you can make the choice you want that the existence of any other option matters. What I can see is that all three engine configurations (4, 6, 8) probably can't be accommodated in the same relatively low-volume platform

I've been at this sort of decision point before, several times.

In 1979 when we had a Malibu 2-door coupe built to order, it was the top-available engine for low altitude (with a 4M tranny, HD cooling and alternator). Since we never considered anything but a V8/MT coupe, it's as if all other variants were being sold on another planet.

Same thing with the Mustang, except that I wasn't interested in the GT500 beyond wanting two sets of its front tire and wheel package fitted to my car on its build. That other versions exist still doesn't matter, so it really doesn't matter to me how they were equipped; none of them are in my driveway.

Even the last time was a similar decision point, only it was H4 turbo vs either H4 NA (about 1/3 less power) or H6 NA (with similar power). While I know intellectually that the other versions exist (and are in fact more popular), it's not something I'd ever dwell on. If I wanted to think about it at all, it'd be really easy to come to the conclusion that I'd picked the best of the bunch while other buyers simply chose differently. I'm OK with that.


Quote:
...Just because the I-4 technically can work in the new Camaro platform, doesn't mean it "has to" go in it...Get your 4 in a GM Cruze, Sonic, or Spark.
Make that a normally aspirated 4 in all of those platforms and I'd probably agree wholeheartedly (I haven't really been considering a NA 4-powered Camaro other than as a V8 AFM condition). 1250 lbs/liter (NA) is not very exciting.


Norm
Norm Peterson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:24 AM   #132
camaro-dreamer
 
camaro-dreamer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 Maxima/ 2011 Mustang GT
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick1 View Post
I like to drive a manual and most people prefer the automatic. If GM took away the transmission choices and built only automatic camaros because it's more cost effective to build only one kind of transmission, most likely, I would have bought another car. That's why I am for more choices, be it transmission types or engine choices
Yes, you have the option of two different transmissions in your Camaro. The manual transmission is the standard. The automatic transmission can be purchased at an additional cost. If an automatic transmission did not exist, I submit that, most likely, your car would have been less expensive. More choices require more logistical decisions. Those decisions almost always come with additional costs. Since I do not work for GM and do not make their logistical decisions, I cannot tell you whether or not GM entirely recovers all costs for an automatic Camaro in the automatic transmission option. I would guess that the costs are borne through the entire Camaro lineup. If someone would like to prove otherwise for me, then I would be happy to see this information. However, I would be willing to guess that those documents are not widely available to the public.
camaro-dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 11:48 AM   #133
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 261
No one seems to be willing to answer the simple question "If no additional choices effect the
Essence or prestige of the Camaro, does the same apply to the Corvette?" Why not a 4 cylinder econo Vette? That won't hurt it's image will it?
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 12:53 PM   #134
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
If the weight also comes down a step, actual acceleration performance might not be enough different to notice without a stopwatch. Other measures (not just fuel usage) could actually improve.
If the weight comes down, the fuel economy & performance improves for all engine types. That's not an argument for the 4 cylinder, it's a moot point because it applies to everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Never mind that people buying in at the lower power levels tend not to be all that interested in brutal acceleration anyway. The current V6 is more than many will ever use as it is. These people are the "some's good" in "some's good, more's better, and too much is just enough", and there really are a lot of them. Just not people like either you or me.
So what? There's plenty of sporty economical cars around, GM should sell them one of those.

The Camaro has a market that it earned, and it wasn't for fuel efficiency. Trying to "convince" their customers that GM knows what they "really" want is going to lose them their customer base.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:13 PM   #135
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM LT/RS, 06 Chevy Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 9,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
No one seems to be willing to answer the simple question "If no additional choices effect the
Essence or prestige of the Camaro, does the same apply to the Corvette?" Why not a 4 cylinder econo Vette? That won't hurt it's image will it?
I'll take a shot lol.

Vette is a $50K starting performance car....period. It definitely stands to have its image tarnished much more than a Camaro would, with a turbo 4 cylinder engine going into it.

Camaro starts in the low to mid 20s, which is a very resonable number for someone that may want a sporty looking car, something fun to cruise around or be seen in, but can't afford a top end model, like the Vette.

But that has always been the case for Camaro and Mustang....you either get great looks at an affordable price, or great looks and performance for a little more.

Vette on the other hand, has stood as a performance car for a very long time. With the Corvette, you get looks and great peformance at the starting price, and if you pay more, you get even better looks and AMAZING performance. Vette is not meant to be something every average Joe can afford to buy.

Because of this, I don't think comparing the Camaro and the Corvette is fair.
__________________
IPF Tune, Custom Magnaflow Exhaust, Vararam intake, MACE Ported Manifold, RX Ported TB, "Black Ice" manifold insulator, Elite Catch Can, ZL1 repro wheels, ZL1 Springs, DRL Harness, Front GM GFX, Heritage grill, Street Scene lower grill, NLP Spoiler, ZL1 rockers and much more!
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:22 PM   #136
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,253
Sort of agree about the 'Vette not being the "same" as the Camaro...on the other hand, the Camaro need not become an "economy" option more that it already is...as you say 20K for entry now, means we need another less expensive entry model?...

I think Camaro's "image" should at least have some respect over multiple other economy models that are already available...
90503 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:30 PM   #137
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 7,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
If the weight comes down, the fuel economy & performance improves for all engine types. That's not an argument for the 4 cylinder, it's a moot point because it applies to everything.



So what? There's plenty of sporty economical cars around, GM should sell them one of those.

The Camaro has a market that it earned, and it wasn't for fuel efficiency. Trying to "convince" their customers that GM knows what they "really" want is going to lose them their customer base.
Here is the puzzle. If gas prices hit $5, $6 per gallon people will go more and more to those economical cars and abandon Camaro as a potenial choice. I have strong recollections what happened to the Camaro back in 2000 or so when the total Camaro/Firebird sales dropped to very low levels. Took us years (Fbodfather cough, cough) of effort to get one back.

Volume drives the business case plain and simple. So without a viable entry level Camaro, the SS/ZL1 can't exist unless you get it up to Corvette $$. And I'm not sensing a strong desire on this website to have a Camaro starting at $50,000.
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:33 PM   #138
oldfriend


 
oldfriend's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS BLK IO interior
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 32*38' 49N. 16*55'42W
Posts: 6,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 View Post
Because GM has one of the best turbo 4s in the industry.
Really , which one ?
__________________
2010 BLK 2SS RS IO
oldfriend is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 01:33 PM   #139
camaro-dreamer
 
camaro-dreamer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 Maxima/ 2011 Mustang GT
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Sort of agree about the 'Vette not being the "same" as the Camaro...on the other hand, the Camaro need not become an "economy" option more that it already is...as you say 20K for entry now, means we need another less expensive entry model?...

I think Camaro's "image" should at least have some respect over multiple other economy models that are already available...
Why do you think a turbo i4 will cost less than the current v6 cylinder entry level car? I would guess a price creep. The turbo i4 will probably cost as much as the current v6. Then, the others will only increase from there.
camaro-dreamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 02:07 PM   #140
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM LT/RS, 06 Chevy Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 9,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Sort of agree about the 'Vette not being the "same" as the Camaro...on the other hand, the Camaro need not become an "economy" option more that it already is...as you say 20K for entry now, means we need another less expensive entry model?...

I think Camaro's "image" should at least have some respect over multiple other economy models that are already available...
I think it will keep the respect (as far as performance), b/c I fully expect the T4 in the lighter platform to perform close to, or as well as the current V6. Maybe better if they decide to really put a powerful T4 in there with over 300hp/tq.

But I still hope to see a V6 option as well. More the merrier.
__________________
IPF Tune, Custom Magnaflow Exhaust, Vararam intake, MACE Ported Manifold, RX Ported TB, "Black Ice" manifold insulator, Elite Catch Can, ZL1 repro wheels, ZL1 Springs, DRL Harness, Front GM GFX, Heritage grill, Street Scene lower grill, NLP Spoiler, ZL1 rockers and much more!
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 03:11 PM   #141
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
I'll take a shot lol.

Vette is a $50K starting performance car....period. It definitely stands to have its image tarnished much more than a Camaro would, with a turbo 4 cylinder engine going into it.

Camaro starts in the low to mid 20s, which is a very resonable number for someone that may want a sporty looking car, something fun to cruise around or be seen in, but can't afford a top end model, like the Vette.

But that has always been the case for Camaro and Mustang....you either get great looks at an affordable price, or great looks and performance for a little more.

Vette on the other hand, has stood as a performance car for a very long time. With the Corvette, you get looks and great peformance at the starting price, and if you pay more, you get even better looks and AMAZING performance. Vette is not meant to be something every average Joe can afford to buy.

Because of this, I don't think comparing the Camaro and the Corvette is fair.
I appreciate the answer, I see your point as a difference of degree with the Corvette. This was the point I was making. Some cars have a different image than the econo hybrid, and the family coupe (Camry, Accord, Altima) while the Corvette analogy was the extreme end, I was showing that it DOES matter what's in the lineup of a car that is a legendary Pony/Muscle car. If the Camaro gets watered down to a Sonic or even an Accord I feel (you may not, granted) that its base will suffer.

Bad-assery is what has it outselling Mustang and Challengers in its rebirth. Being compared to a Honda Accord is what they sell a 4 cylinder hybrid Malibu to do. Being compared to a smart car is what they make Sonics and Sparks for.
My first Camaro was a V6 entry level 304 HP car that I modded with long tube headers, CAI, short throw shifter and Hids. It had WAY more 'tude than an Accord. Didn't think of cross shopping Hondas.

( I know everyone ain't me) but can you see cross shopping Sparks and Camaros?
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 03:27 PM   #142
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 7,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
I appreciate the answer, I see your point as a difference of degree with the Corvette. This was the point I was making. Some cars have a different image than the econo hybrid, and the family coupe (Camry, Accord, Altima) while the Corvette analogy was the extreme end, I was showing that it DOES matter what's in the lineup of a car that is a legendary Pony/Muscle car. If the Camaro gets watered down to a Sonic or even an Accord I feel (you may not, granted) that its base will suffer.

Bad-assery is what has it outselling Mustang and Challengers in its rebirth. Being compared to a Honda Accord is what they sell a 4 cylinder hybrid Malibu to do. Being compared to a smart car is what they make Sonics and Sparks for.
My first Camaro was a V6 entry level 304 HP car that I modded with long tube headers, CAI, short throw shifter and Hids. It had WAY more 'tude than an Accord. Didn't think of cross shopping Hondas.

( I know everyone ain't me) but can you see cross shopping Sparks and Camaros?
But and a big one the Malibu Hybrid (not sure why you specific about hybrid) does not offer a coupe. Honda does and whether you like it or not the Camaro in V6 trims is a "sporty coupe". Same class the Accord Coupe and Altima Coupe. You can't fall into the trap that for the customer shopping for a sporty coupe you want to include Honda and Nissan. Just my opinion, but if I were still at GM, I would want every single person considering a sporty coupe to want Camaro at the top of their consideration list.

Because you didn't cross a Honda doesn't mean GM shouldn't want the Honda or Altima buyer to cross shop Camaro.

And most people on this website who are inclined to modify their cars don't understand that most people don't. Go look at the % of leases. Do you think anyone leasing a car (Accord or Camaro) is going to mod it like you did?

I'm just trying to say that the next redo of the Camaro sure ought to drop the styling down a notch and get back to making a great coupe. Period.

To get the show car styling (and also use an existing architecture) GM created a styling tour deforce that gave up front and rear visibility, entry egress, trunk space and liftover height and a host of features that are now available in the 3rd and 4th years (height adj. passenger seat, nav, decent steering wheel, hard cheap plastic IP and door trim, etc.).

So what is wrong with GM making a sporty coupe that is sooooooo good that it destroys not just Mustang and Challenger but Accord and Altima too?
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 03:32 PM   #143
leviticus88
Camaro Owner Soon!
 
Drives: Chevrolet Cobalt SS/SC S2 GMPP
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 185
I would much rather have a factory 4cyl Turbo Camaro than a factory V6 N/A Camaro to drive everyday and enjoy and get reasonable mileage.

But a V8 will always belong in the Camaro in some form or another...
leviticus88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 04:12 PM   #144
FenwickHockey65
General Motors Aficionado
 
FenwickHockey65's Avatar
 
Drives: 2003 GMC Envoy SLE/2007 Ford F-150
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,446
Send a message via AIM to FenwickHockey65
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldfriend View Post
Really , which one ?
LTG in the Cadillac ATS and Malibu Turbo.
__________________
FenwickHockey65's GM Thread!

My Cars: 2003 GMC Envoy SLE, 2007 Ford F-150 XL (State-issued)
Extended Family: 2013 GMC Terrain SLE, 1998 GMC Sonoma SLS Extended Cab

FenwickHockey65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 04:17 PM   #145
nak3dsnake


 
nak3dsnake's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro IBM 2LT/RS M6
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 View Post
Yep. It was pretty terrible but the LTG in the ATS and Malibu is down the corner and around the block from that engine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drew10 View Post
O I know. I had an S-10 in high school that had a 2.5 in it. Over 2K miles on it and it still ran decent. Sounded like a diesel the whole time I owned it though.
Tech IV's were fairly reliable if you didn't drive it like you stole it. Though the early ones with timing gears instead of chains are know for shearing off teeth at high mileages.
__________________
Looks: AAC P13W DRLs, Heritage Grille, RS Embroidered Headrests, GM Door Sill Plates, GM Premium Floor Mats, Body Color Engine Cover, LLT Mobile 1 Oil Cap, ZL1 Sport Pedals, 3M Clear Bra.
Performance: Vararam Ram Air Intake, Hurst Short Throw Shifter w/ Hurst Hard Drive Pistol Grip, IDEALG Clutch Master Cylinder, RX Catch can, GTO clutch fluid reservoir, Brembo Brakes, 1LE Track Pack, GMPP Exhaust Upgrade.
nak3dsnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 05:48 PM   #146
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
But and a big one the Malibu Hybrid (not sure why you specific about hybrid) does not offer a coupe. Honda does and whether you like it or not the Camaro in V6 trims is a "sporty coupe". Same class the Accord Coupe and Altima Coupe. You can't fall into the trap that for the customer shopping for a sporty coupe you want to include Honda and Nissan. Just my opinion, but if I were still at GM, I would want every single person considering a sporty coupe to want Camaro at the top of their consideration list.

Because you didn't cross a Honda doesn't mean GM shouldn't want the Honda or Altima buyer to cross shop Camaro.

And most people on this website who are inclined to modify their cars don't understand that most people don't. Go look at the % of leases. Do you think anyone leasing a car (Accord or Camaro) is going to mod it like you did?

I'm just trying to say that the next redo of the Camaro sure ought to drop the styling down a notch and get back to making a great coupe. Period.

To get the show car styling (and also use an existing architecture) GM created a styling tour deforce that gave up front and rear visibility, entry egress, trunk space and liftover height and a host of features that are now available in the 3rd and 4th years (height adj. passenger seat, nav, decent steering wheel, hard cheap plastic IP and door trim, etc.).

So what is wrong with GM making a sporty coupe that is sooooooo good that it destroys not just Mustang and Challenger but Accord and Altima too?

So what are you saying exactly? It sounds like when you say "drop the styling down..." And put in lower displacement gas economy engines that what you are asking for, and trying to convince Camaro nation of, is that being like a Honda Accord is what we are striving for. I gather you worked for GM, is what you are telling me is the only way to sell. Camaros is to make them Hondas? I would hope not.

The people who want mere transportation and care nothing for cars as we do can buy Camaros but shouldn't control the image of what it is. If they do, I predict the Camaro will be gone in two generations. I know I won't buy a watered down Vanilla version knockoff of a Honda Accord. I think a lot if Camaro drivers agree with me.

Fbodfather said to keep the faith, the way I see it if the Camaro becomes synonymous with Honda accord then Chevy has broken faith with me.
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 06:00 PM   #147
Taintedveins
Shark attack!
 
Taintedveins's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 Camaro LS
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 View Post
LTG in the Cadillac ATS and Malibu Turbo.
270 hp for a stock tune out of a turbo 4 is great, comparing it to 10 years ago the solstice gxp was 260 on a non conservative tune.

If the stock tune is at 5-6psi then 270 is great! If a GM performance tune is released I don't think 320+ would be that hard to achieve in either one of those vehicles.
__________________
Taintedveins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 06:12 PM   #148
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 261
I like Turbo LS7s better than Turbo 4
Attached Images
 
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 06:15 PM   #149
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 261
Here's the competition
Attached Images
 
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2013, 06:37 PM   #150
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Here is the puzzle. If gas prices hit $5, $6 per gallon people will go more and more to those economical cars and abandon Camaro as a potenial choice. I have strong recollections what happened to the Camaro back in 2000 or so when the total Camaro/Firebird sales dropped to very low levels. Took us years (Fbodfather cough, cough) of effort to get one back.

Volume drives the business case plain and simple. So without a viable entry level Camaro, the SS/ZL1 can't exist unless you get it up to Corvette $$. And I'm not sensing a strong desire on this website to have a Camaro starting at $50,000.
It's not a puzzle, though. Chevy has fuel efficient cars already. And I wouldn't bet the farm on gas going to 5 or 6 dollars a gallon.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
 
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 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.