[arpad_m]

It would be nice if rear seat access was easier, the seatbelts are smack dab in the middle, making ingress and egress less than ideal. IMO these design change would definitely be necessary for a theoretical 7th gen Camaro to succeed:

1. Better trunk access (easy-peasy, just split the taillights the way Dodge and BMW do it)
2. Better rear seat access (easy-peasy, lengthen wheelbase by 2", adding all that space to the rear legroom, and route the seatbelts properly so rear seat passengers' legs don't get jumbled in them)
3. Lower belt line / taller windshields and windows (easy-peasy, raise the roof by 1" and lower the beltline by 1", leading to more than enough headroom and "improved visibility" for prospects that complained about the 6th gen)
4. A bit narrower C pillar (a slightly larger rear window along with the beltline/roof change would help defuse visibility complaints further)

Beyond these, a few other things could also be useful to improve customer perception:

1. Upgraded electronics (easy-peasy, GM already has an array of clusters, infotainment, giant wireless charging slots/pads and other features to port)
2. Better interior ergonomics (easy-peasy, move the window switches, improve leg bolsters, design a center console that is more usable and spacious; all this is available in other GM vehicles)
3. Improved interior quality (easy-peasy, get rid of the hard plastics and pack some Cadillac-y stuff in here)
4. Finally, stop the ridiculous penny-pinching on trims other than the absolute max trim spec (footwell lighting LEDs, passenger seat memory, no dimming or heating with the passenger side mirror, halogen bulbs, frikken concrete hard plastic knee bolsters, petty and artificial software constraints like disabling shift lights on the non-1LE HUD etc.)

Of course this isn't an exhaustive list, just the "big ticket" sales blockers with the 6th gen. People will obviously want a hot new powertrain, world class suspension etc.

Not holding much hope about any of it, though, because
a) the concept of a new Camaro is currently a very difficult proposition in light of 5th and 6th gen sales and the general low volume demand for true sports cars,
b) almost every one of these changes could easily have been done in the 2019 refresh or afterwards, but GM didn't give a crap past 2018 and the release of the ZL1 1LE, and
c) these crazy new C8 Corvettes are taking up all sports car resources at GM, a trend likely to continue at least until the Zora is released.

That said, where there is a will, there is a way, so we'll see, but my beautiful 2018 2SS is not in danger of being traded for anything.

[JT6Speed]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

I do not understand the rear seating issue that keeps getting brought up.

The second gen Camaro had the same amount of rear seating as the 6th gen. (nothing to speak of), yet the '79 was the biggest volume year of the lineage.

I could see price, complexity to repair/modify, perceived poor quality, *maybe visibility*, and changing demographics all be causes of its lack of popularity.

I agree, but we're in different times. Coupes were much more common as a daily driver back then, and so people dealt with it more. I can only speak for a 4th gen specifically, but I can easily fit in the back. It's no Toyota Camry, but compared to the 6th gen, my head hits the roof big time and forget about any leg room.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by JT6Speed

Lot of good points made so far. I'm going to say it comes down to more than one thing as well. The price was very competitive in the later years of production, early on I can't speak for, because I was still in my previous gen Mustang. When I was building and pricing out, my Camaro build was equal to, if not cheaper, than a base R/T Challenger (yes, with the 5.7). A Scat was easily an extra 5-7 grand, and that was for a "stripper" model. Ideally I would have gone for a widebody or shaker, so add ten thousand easily.

I'm not sure how much marketing would matter either. I think ultimately this was an "if you know, you know" kind of car. We enthusiasts know what this car is all about and its true purpose. Not everyone shopping for a sports car will necessarily see it that way though. They may not be willing to sacrifice a small trunk opening, or high belt line, among other things for performance.

At the end of the day, the V8 coupe is pretty much extinct. Not to mention manuals are an endangered species.

You'll never get V8+coupe+RWD+manual=Camaro ever again, that I'm confident in. At least some part of that equation will change, whether it be a sedan, or mid-engine, or still a coupe but not a V8, I have no idea.

No doubt that there are several factors. Price just happens to be the first "walk away" point for most buyers. Especially for the target demographic for expressive design, high performance vehicles.

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Practicality is the issue. Otherwise, the 6th gen was a well-rounded car for the money. The fact that it's more difficult to see out of and almost non-useable back seat make it less attractive for those that can only afford 1 car. Hence why you see so many Chargers and Challengers running around. The masses don't compare lap times or 0-60. They see big comfy ride with lots of HP and it has their attention. GM already has the Corvette for a 2 seat option, and the Cadillac is out of reach for many. They need to bring back an affordable big 2 door or 4 door car like Pontiac G8 GT. Give it a 6.2 with Awd and watch it sell like hot cakes. It's going to take something like this to draw buyers in since most want a SUV or Crossover to daily. The problem is it likely won't met Cafe standards or whatever. Hence why everything is now trending to a 4cylinder turbo.

If price is #1, practicality is #2. Especially for Camaro target demographic which by and large is a demographic who would prefer to have it as an only car. We've all heard (or lived?) the story of the cool guy who owned a Camaro, met the girl, had the kid, and had to get rid of the Camaro because the car seat won't fit in the back.

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

That actually isn’t the case with the gen6 Camaro. There is a thread here that contains all the details for ALL the Camaro’s built from 2020-2024. Believe it or not more V8’s were made than i4’s and V6’s combined. It is still very close to a 50/50 split but I was surprised to see a slight edge given to the V8.

I’d be willing to bet this isn’t the case with the Mustang and more i4’s are built than V8’s. If that’s the case I’d say the Camaro attracts a very different kind of buyer which unfortunately for GM is the minority.

You are right. It most certainly is not the case for Mustang. Four cylinders outsell V8 by about 4:1. That is the primary reason Mustang has consistently outsold Camaro. Mustang even eliminated the V6 years ago and went with EcoBoost 4-cylinder / V8 lineup. Say what you want about the EcoBoost, but it was very competitive with Camaro, Charger, and Challenger V6s and it outsold Mustang V8 by about 4:1. Why? Price. The fact that it was and still is a more practical car also keeps it afloat. You CAN get baby seats in the back. Barely.

Originally Posted by genxer

The 5th to 6th downsize failed because it's still to big. It needs to be able to beat autoX modded RX-8s (more useable interior) and BRZs, without resorting to turbo 4s. Base cars can't just be cruiser soft, enthusiast has to stop being a dirty word inside gm.

....

BRZ, Miata and the like are no where near the target competitive set for Camaro. Not even on the radar. I say this as the person who led GM Competitor Intelligence during the development of the Camaro 6 program as well as C8 (and every new vehicle product in the pipeline at the time). The proper competitor for BZR, Miata, et cetera was in the pipeline but died a business plan death. It needed to be shorter, narrower, much much lighter and nimble than Camaro. Think of an improved Solstice. Or a shrink wrapped Corvette

As far as enthusiast being a dirty word at GM, you'd be surprised how many key leaders are track rats. Several of them own garages at M1 Concourse and have some serious track cars. The ones that I'm aware of are much better track drivers than I am. Myself, I autocross two of my cars. The Camaro and a '91 MR2 Turbo. The MR2 Turbo is by far the better autocross car. Size and mass are super important in autocross. That's why Miata, BRZ, and WRX dominate. Camaro is fun, and there are classes that position like vs like, but overall, the small, slow cars driven fast run circles around the big, heavy, fast cars driven slow.

[FlukeSS]

Originally Posted by JT6Speed

I agree, but we're in different times. Coupes were much more common as a daily driver back then, and so people dealt with it more. I can only speak for a 4th gen specifically, but I can easily fit in the back. It's no Toyota Camry, but compared to the 6th gen, my head hits the roof big time and forget about any leg room.

There's an old expression: They don't make cars like they used to.

I understand 95 Imp's confusion, but this isn't 1979 anymore. Now the only real problem vs now is Quality Assurance is far less controlled but then again newer cars have a boatload of more in them than vehicles in 1979. If you look at the evolution of car manufacturing history. There's drastic changes not just from the camaro, but also every car.

Built cheaper, sold for the highest price is the name of the game. More inclusion of Technology adds more weight among other things like EPA regulation etc...

Technological advances changed how the cars were made but in most cases without sacrificing durability for example. It is also why you see an increase in engine power as time moves on because of that added weight.

Take a Chevy Suburban for example: 1979 Suburban was significantly lighter weight truck than the current Chevy Silverado Pickup for example. And not by a small margin either.

1979 Chevy Suburban - 4,500-5,000 lbs
2025 Chevy Silverado Pickup - 6,700 to 7,300 lbs

Bottom line Times change. They no longer make the body out of steel like they did in 1979. And in 1979 there was little EPA regulation as it is now today. And obviously far less technological inclusion.

As an exmaple the 383 stroker kit for a lot of these cars among others were what I see the 6th gen being with a stock engine. You should look up the power of those older 5.7's and compare it to the 376 now, then compare a 383 stroker kit from back then and compare it to a stock 376 now. The modern day stroker would be a 400-427. When I say back them I mean like 1990 to 2000ish which I think is what 3rd and 4th gen Camaros?

[Martinjlm]

My thoughts on price versus marketing. Price is king. If your intended buyer can't afford it, then what's the point? Ideally, marketing is intended to attract consumers to something they are not completely aware of to something that they would seemingly enjoy and spend money on. The way I hear marketing described in this forum is as something to confirm for those of us who already have it that it was a great choice. Why spend money doing that?

Most of GM's marketing dollars during the run of Camaro 6 were targeted towards direct contact with owners of Mustangs, Challengers, and Chargers offering great deals to switch to Camaro for their next vehicles. Car companies can buy data that identify who is leasing what vehicles and when those vehicles come off lease. This allows for more direct targeting of consumers who might already have a leaning for that type of vehicle. Much more effective than spending million$ on flashing advertisement targeted towards people who already own the product. Marketing and Advertising are NOT the same thing. Marketing is a very broad area of which advertising is a significant, but not only, part.

[cobra30689]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

It most certainly is not the case for Mustang. Four cylinders outsell V8 by about 4:1. That is the primary reason Mustang has consistently outsold Camaro. Mustang even eliminated the V6 years ago and went with EcoBoost 4-cylinder / V8 lineup. Say what you want about the EcoBoost, but it was very competitive with Camaro, Charger, and Challenger V6s and it outsold Mustang V8 by about 4:1.

In my opinion GM dropped the ball by not offering the LNF 2.0 turbo at the beginning of 5th Gen production. I have a 2009 Saturn Sky Redline with the LNF/5L40E automatic, and that car is NOOO slouch.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

It would be nice if rear seat access was easier, the seatbelts are smack dab in the middle, making ingress and egress less than ideal. IMO these design change would definitely be necessary for a theoretical 7th gen Camaro to succeed:

1. Better trunk access (easy-peasy, just split the taillights the way Dodge and BMW do it)
2. Better rear seat access (easy-peasy, lengthen wheelbase by 2", adding all that space to the rear legroom, and route the seatbelts properly so rear seat passengers' legs don't get jumbled in them)
3. Lower belt line / taller windshields and windows (easy-peasy, raise the roof by 1" and lower the beltline by 1", leading to more than enough headroom and "improved visibility" for prospects that complained about the 6th gen)
4. A bit narrower C pillar (a slightly larger rear window along with the beltline/roof change would help defuse visibility complaints further)

Beyond these, a few other things could also be useful to improve customer perception:

1. Upgraded electronics (easy-peasy, GM already has an array of clusters, infotainment, giant wireless charging slots/pads and other features to port)
2. Better interior ergonomics (easy-peasy, move the window switches, improve leg bolsters, design a center console that is more usable and spacious; all this is available in other GM vehicles)
3. Improved interior quality (easy-peasy, get rid of the hard plastics and pack some Cadillac-y stuff in here)
4. Finally, stop the ridiculous penny-pinching on trims other than the absolute max trim spec (footwell lighting LEDs, passenger seat memory, no dimming or heating with the passenger side mirror, halogen bulbs, frikken concrete hard plastic knee bolsters, petty and artificial software constraints like disabling shift lights on the non-1LE HUD etc.)

Of course this isn't an exhaustive list, just the "big ticket" sales blockers with the 6th gen. People will obviously want a hot new powertrain, world class suspension etc.

Not holding much hope about any of it, though, because
a) the concept of a new Camaro is currently a very difficult proposition in light of 5th and 6th gen sales and the general low volume demand for true sports cars,
b) almost every one of these changes could easily have been done in the 2019 refresh or afterwards, but GM didn't give a crap past 2018 and the release of the ZL1 1LE, and
c) these crazy new C8 Corvettes are taking up all sports car resources at GM, a trend likely to continue at least until the Zora is released.

That said, where there is a will, there is a way, so we'll see, but my beautiful 2018 2SS is not in danger of being traded for anything.

Pretty much what I’ve been saying for years. Make it a car with more broad appeal.

Bob Lutz is often quoted as saying you can sell a young man’s car to an old man but you can’t sell an old man’s car to a young man. Swap that with visibility. You can sell a car with poor visibility to someone it isn’t important to but you can’t sell a car with poor visibility to someone it is important to.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by cobra30689

In my opinion GM dropped the ball by not offering the LNF 2.0 turbo at the beginning of 5th Gen production. I have a 2009 Saturn Sky Redline with the LNF/5L40E automatic, and that car is NOOO slouch.

I had a 2009 Red Line and wish I had kept it. We had the GM approved and warrantied calibration. With that it was a little beast.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

My thoughts on price versus marketing. Price is king. If your intended buyer can't afford it, then what's the point? Ideally, marketing is intended to attract consumers to something they are not completely aware of to something that they would seemingly enjoy and spend money on. The way I hear marketing described in this forum is as something to confirm for those of us who already have it that it was a great choice. Why spend money doing that?

Most of GM's marketing dollars during the run of Camaro 6 were targeted towards direct contact with owners of Mustangs, Challengers, and Chargers offering great deals to switch to Camaro for their next vehicles. Car companies can buy data that identify who is leasing what vehicles and when those vehicles come off lease. This allows for more direct targeting of consumers who might already have a leaning for that type of vehicle. Much more effective than spending million$ on flashing advertisement targeted towards people who already own the product. Marketing and Advertising are NOT the same thing. Marketing is a very broad area of which advertising is a significant, but not only, part.

I’ve been tryin to explain the difference between advertising and marketing for a while but everyone sees the cool “brotherhood of muscle “ commercials and thinks that is why the Camaro didn’t sell. This are great commercials, btw.

It didn’t sell because it was designed to satisfy Camaro fans. There just weren’t enough of them and they were stuck with a car that didn’t have broad appeal. No marketing or advertising was going to fix that. As I’ve suggested many times, you can make the best LH baseball glove ever made, but the coolest commercial ever produced won’t get you sales to right handers. Did I ever tell the story of going bowling and taking my late grandfathers bowling ball? Took me a while but I did find out he was left handed.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I had a 2009 Red Line and wish I had kept it. We had the GM approved and warrantied calibration. With that it was a little beast.

During the Pontiac / Saturn / Saab sell-offs when those divisions were being folded, I had a deal to buy a Solstice GXP Coupe for $16k out the door. I made one crucial and stupid(?) mistake… I called my wife and asked permission. Got a David Letterman Top Ten list of reasons why I shouldn’t do it. Those cars sell for $30-40k these days.

Learned my lesson, though. The Camaro and the MR2 were both “look what I just bought” discussions. And I survived both.

[genxer]

The Bob Lutz years and since were lousy for regular-joe, younger-ish enthusiasts. The personal luxury coupes the segment changed to, when the car was rebirthed, was always a limited term cash grab. We had a fella at work retire a couple years back and treat himself to a base, then GT S550. Unfortunately he's not around for an S650.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

During the Pontiac / Saturn / Saab sell-offs when those divisions were being folded, I had a deal to buy a Solstice GXP Coupe for $16k out the door. I made one crucial and stupid(?) mistake… I called my wife and asked permission. Got a David Letterman Top Ten list of reasons why I shouldn’t do it. Those cars sell for $30-40k these days.

Learned my lesson, though. The Camaro and the MR2 were both “look what I just bought” discussions. And I survived both.

That would have been a steal. I think our Red Line stickered for $29k (another GM problem) and we got it out the door for about 20 if memory serves.

Another deal was at launch they had built a bunch of base Solstice with major front fascia fit problems. Couldn’t be repaired so sold them to employees with a bra and a big discount.

Never see a Solstice coupe though. Super rare. And if I recall (there’s Tharp again) they built 9 (nine) 2009s.