View Single Post
Old 01-22-2013, 08:52 PM   #5
The_Blur
Moderator
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 2018 Harley-Davidson Street Bob
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,769
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham View Post
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.
It is my hope and prayer that GM continues this genius moving forward. I am confident that GM will do it. It is always my fear that those complaints get taken too seriously. You and I talked about the concept of fuel economy and how everyone complains that they want better fuel economy when the truth is that they want range. GM needs to decide whether the perception of crappy paint is more important than the head-turning those hips do. The Camaro has to be bold. There's a reason Camaro5 has enthusiasts in Britain, Japan, Kuwait, Israel, and everywhere else in the world. It isn't for subtle European lines. It is for the bold, sharp lines of an American classic. It isn't for the sleek, stylish interior. It is for the unconventional wrapped console with retro-style gauges. It is the starkly contrasting features and designs that make the Camaro stand out. How many people have said the Challenger looks like a classic but "I'd rather drive a Camaro;" or the Mustang is pretty cool but "I'd rather drive a Camaro." The Camaro is bold. A tame Camaro that fits a million markets will not master any of them. Did Hyundai make their cars more "American" to sell here? Did Honda or Toyota make a real effort to make a car more "American," or did they just peddle their Japanese cars in our hometowns? Let's bring our unique brand of awesomeness to their shores and call it a Camaro.
__________________
RDP Motorsport//GEN5DIY//Cultrag Performance//JPSS//Rodgets Chevrolet//
Operation Demon//Buy at Invoice//RACECARWEAR
RESPECT ALL CARS. LOVE YOUR OWN.
warn 145:159 ban
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote