[speedyink1]

Originally Posted by cthulhucaller

I daily drive my '22 SS, about 10k miles per year. There is once in a while when it's annoying that I can't get something in the trunk, but can usually wedge stuff in the passenger seat for the ride home. Visibility stopped being a worry on day two of driving it, once I had all my mirrors figured out. Considering the first time I ever drove a 6th gen, it was from Detroit to Atlanta (actually the first start, straight from Joe's dealership to the interstate headed south) I got used to it quicker than most. What is funny, is that if my drive my wife's civic somewhere, it's like sitting in a movie theater with that huge screen in front of me. She is afraid to drive my car, and never has done.

Having had a mess of Camaros and Corvettes in the past, I can say that this has been hands down my favorite daily driver yet. I also fully understand why most people don't want one. The area I live in is covered up with pickups, all the makes of CUV type cars, and a ridiculous amount of Teslas. Most people in my area can afford cars they like, and those are the types of cars they appear to like. It is what it is.

When I say best daily driver, I'm going with the whole experience. For me, it's never really a matter of having to drive, but getting to. I actually enjoy the driving, and one of the side benefits is that I get where I need to be. Most of the time, I don't take the shortest path, or the fastest, but I would rather take the more enjoyable routes. The right car keeps it that way.

Yes, this! I thoroughly enjoy "getting" to drive everywhere (whenever the weather is decent)

[Mark20242SS]

Originally Posted by cthulhucaller

I daily drive my '22 SS, about 10k miles per year. There is once in a while when it's annoying that I can't get something in the trunk, but can usually wedge stuff in the passenger seat for the ride home. Visibility stopped being a worry on day two of driving it, once I had all my mirrors figured out. Considering the first time I ever drove a 6th gen, it was from Detroit to Atlanta (actually the first start, straight from Joe's dealership to the interstate headed south) I got used to it quicker than most. What is funny, is that if my drive my wife's civic somewhere, it's like sitting in a movie theater with that huge screen in front of me. She is afraid to drive my car, and never has done.

Having had a mess of Camaros and Corvettes in the past, I can say that this has been hands down my favorite daily driver yet. I also fully understand why most people don't want one. The area I live in is covered up with pickups, all the makes of CUV type cars, and a ridiculous amount of Teslas. Most people in my area can afford cars they like, and those are the types of cars they appear to like. It is what it is.

When I say best daily driver, I'm going with the whole experience. For me, it's never really a matter of having to drive, but getting to. I actually enjoy the driving, and one of the side benefits is that I get where I need to be. Most of the time, I don't take the shortest path, or the fastest, but I would rather take the more enjoyable routes. The right car keeps it that way.

How would you compare the Camaro to the Corvette daily driving?
I have only sat in a C8, not driven one. did have a C4 Corvette for a while and it was ok, remember it was super low to get in and out of, had a big foot well hump where the door was and avoiding driveway dips and such to not hit front splitter and bumper. had to back into some driveways lol.
the C8 i sat in was also super low to sit in, took some effort to get back out of lol.
was pricing C8's on chevy website yesterday and a 2LT is around 80K now without hardly any options. getting kinda pricey. they did offer a yellow color.
have to almost go with 2LT to get the heated cooled seats, heated steering wheel, HUD, more speakers, etc.
i am holding out hope Chevy wll bring the camaro back someday.

[cthulhucaller]

The corvettes that I spent the most daily driver time in were an early C4, a late C4 with the LT4, and a C5. The C5 was the best daily driver of the bunch, but I did more stupid fun stuff in the later C4 as I supercharged it, which made it a pretty bad daily driver once it got too far into the modified category.

I've only done short trips in a C7, and it was nice. Could possibly be as good as a 6th gen Camaro, but I haven't had enough time in one to really judge. The C5 can feel a bit cramped on long trips even though you're technically very comfortable in the seat, there's not a lot of arm stretching/back twisting room, and feels very small if you have annoyed your copilot for a bit.

I am kind of interested in trying a C7 Z06, but I'm close to 60 and don't want to put up with New Balance memes. I am not a particularly refined fellow, so the whole Camaro thing suits me better anyway. No interest in driver aids, lane keeping things, HUD's, or more sound system stuff. Also, I do all my own maintenance/mod/repair work, and have always found the Camaros to be much more forgiving than the vettes in that aspect.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

Op, a lot of people are talking about car sales right now but I believe your question has to do with why the 6th gen didn’t sell better during its entire life (not just the end where no one is buying sports cars anymore).

I know I’m going to get a lot of hate for this on this board but as someone who’s bought 2 and uses them for their intended purpose (tracking) I think the Camaro fails greatly at being an actual CAR and doing car stuff.

While most of us on this board have accepted the visibility issues I think they are unacceptable and first impressions matter. Yes you get used to it but a car buyer who’s not an enthusiast (ie 90% of buyers of sports cars) are not going to accept the poor visibility. And before anyone says the Mustang is just as bad, it’s not and it’s not even close. The amount of extra visibility in them is insane when you realize it’s the same type of car.

The lack of storage space in the car is insane. How can such a big car have such small door pockets? The doors are huge! There’s no where really to put your phone. The back seat is useless. Now the Mustangs isn’t great either but it can at least fit adults in a pinch. Anyone over 5’5 cannot fit in the back of a Camaro because their head will be hitting the ceiling.

The trunk opening. This is the dumbest of them all. I’ve heard it’s due to making the car more rigid but I would bet 99% of people do not care about the car being slightly more rigid. This is corrected on the Cadillacs and should have been the same on the Camaro. I know folks were surveyed about this but I don’t believe Chevy did a good enough job explaining the performance benefit and showing them how crappy the trunk opening actually is. I’d gladly sacrifice some structural rigidity so I don’t have to play legos every track weekend and would love to be able to get more than 1 wheel in the trunk.

I’m sure my post will get a lot of hate but it’s the truth. They just did not make a car that appeals to the masses that well. It’s bad at being a car. It’s great at being a sports car but the market that actually cares about that and prioritizes that (me and most others on this board) is a tiny market. Most folks buying a sports car just want something stylish with decent power that can be used everyday. This is why the Mustang sells so many more 4 bangers than the Camaro sold 4 bangers and V6’s. It appealed to non enthusiasts which is a way bigger market (please don’t take that as me saying everyone who doesn’t get a V8 isn’t an enthusiast ).

If I wasn’t fortunate enough to have 2 vehicles what probably would have happened for me is I would have bought my first Camaro due to wanting the superior performance but would eventually have moved to a Mustang after getting frustrated with its compromises as a car.

If GM brings back the Camaro as an ICE coupe, I am hoping it is more livable so that it doesn’t go extinct again. Move away from the chopped roof and high belt line.

This ^

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Well stated @m6-lt1! I will certainly not be mad at you. 6th Gen Camaro is definitely a better enthusiast's car than Mustangs compared model year to model year. But Mustang is a better everyday car.

This ^ The 6th gen Camaro was a great Camaro but bad at being a car, especially compared to it's direct competitors.

Originally Posted by Number 3

Ok some people love Brussels sprouts. When I was a kid I had to burry it in ketchup to tolerate it.

You’ve fallen into ice trap of “it works just fine for me so it should be fine for everybody else”

Remember Bob Lutz said “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”. Same thing again.

I would have had one of the first Camaros in the Chicagoland area if they at least designed it to get two sets of golf clubs in the trunk. 2 sets fit just fine in the Gen5 and two sets fir easily in the other Alpha coupe. But for the Gen6 they made choices. So for anyone else like me? Lost sales.

As I’ve said, the Gen6 was designed for Camaro owners. It was never intended to have broad appeal.

But you are wrong about just adjusting your seat. Lol, I’m intimately knowledgeable on the SAE tools used for visibility. I even created some of those packaging tools for heavy trucks.

As MartinJim points out, you can see what you need to see. The problem with the Camaro is the “ perception” a new customer will feel when they just sit in the car in a showroom. The Welborn high belt/slammed roof results in a smaller side glass.

Glad you love yours. The question wasn’t why you love yours. The question is why you did sales continue to drop over time. You and the folks that bought and love their Gen6 Camaros was not nearly enough to sustain the car.

This. The first perception is really a thing. Especially when you had almost every review comparison mention the visibility people already go into with a preconceived notion it is going to be bad. The first impression sitting in it with out adjusting anything probably deterred people right then and there. I remember the first time I got to sit in a 6th gen at the auto show. My first impression was holy crap this thing is cramped, and I can't see anything out of this. Also damn it made me feel fatter than I am haha. Now could I adjust everything and probably see what I need and get comfy and all that yeah, but holy hell that was an awful first impression. At that point, I didn't know if I would ever even want to test drive one because the first impression was so bad.

Now having had a chance to get in one again and mess around with seating position and what not, it's no where near as bad as my first impression. HOWEVER to me it wasn't a driving position I would want to spend time daily driving in, especially compared to my previous mustangs. Now if I was in the position of not needing it to be my primary vehicle, I would be able t overlook that stuff in a second because of the performance factor.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by shaffe

This. The first perception is really a thing. Especially when you had almost every review comparison mention the visibility people already go into with a preconceived notion it is going to be bad. The first impression sitting in it with out adjusting anything probably deterred people right then and there. I remember the first time I got to sit in a 6th gen at the auto show. My first impression was holy crap this thing is cramped, and I can't see anything out of this. Also damn it made me feel fatter than I am haha. Now could I adjust everything and probably see what I need and get comfy and all that yeah, but holy hell that was an awful first impression. At that point, I didn't know if I would ever even want to test drive one because the first impression was so bad.

Yeah, okay, so let's say many initial prospects had the same initial impression. This is exactly what marketing and advertising needs to manage, because the reality is nowhere near---arguably, not at all---bad. It's 100% GM's fault that people went to the car with this "oh, let's see how awfully bad the visibility is" perception. As in, GM threw in the towel after a few seconds into the first round.

On the other hand, I'm seriously wondering why or how I didn't have the same negative initial impression about the car. It's all the more peculiar, because I had only experienced 5th gens prior to ordering my car, I didn't even test drive a 6th gen at the dealership. The moment I sat in it was my very first time, and I swear I didn't have any qualms whatsoever. Set up the mirrors and off I went, merrily.

I do understand the power of cognitive dissonance and the urge to rationalize high dollar purchases, but I'm being completely intellectually honest here, I never felt this visibility problem every reviewer loved to harp on, and my vision is not even anywhere near 100%.

Like with every new car, it took about 10-15 minutes to get used to its interior, and that was it. The 1% issue I mentioned earlier, ie taking a 45˚ left turn and checking for traffic from the right came up a few times later, and it's an undeniable issue, yet it's mostly the same with the Mustang or the Challenger or any coupe with a girthy C pillar.

Maybe I am the target audience and most people aren't, I get that, it seems the Camaro is not for everyone Too bad the overall volume couldn't sustain it longer, and GM sure didn't put up much fight to keep it on the roster.

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Yeah, okay, so let's say many initial prospects had the same initial impression. This is exactly what marketing and advertising needs to manage, because the reality is nowhere near---arguably, not at all---bad. It's 100% GM's fault that people went to the car with this "oh, let's see how awfully bad the visibility is" perception. As in, GM threw in the towel after a few seconds into the first round.

On the other hand, I'm seriously wondering why or how I didn't have the same negative initial impression about the car. It's all the more peculiar, because I had only experienced 5th gens prior to ordering my car, I didn't even test drive a 6th gen at the dealership. The moment I sat in it was my very first time, and I swear I didn't have any qualms whatsoever. Set up the mirrors and off I went, merrily.

I do understand the power of cognitive dissonance and the urge to rationalize high dollar purchases, but I'm being completely intellectually honest here, I never felt this visibility problem every reviewer loved to harp on, and my vision is not even anywhere near 100%.

Like with every new car, it took about 10-15 minutes to get used to its interior, and that was it. The 1% issue I mentioned earlier, ie taking a 45˚ left turn and checking for traffic from the right came up a few times later, and it's an undeniable issue, yet it's mostly the same with the Mustang or the Challenger or any coupe with a girthy C pillar.

Maybe I am the target audience and most people aren't, I get that, it seems the Camaro is not for everyone Too bad the overall volume couldn't sustain it longer, and GM sure didn't put up much fight to keep it on the roster.

Not sure if you went into it like I did, but when I went to test drive a 6th gen I desperately wanted the performance and kept telling myself that the visibility can't be THAT bad. During my test drive , I found it wasn't that bad. I can see what I need to just fine. I thought to myself, I don't understand what everyone is talking about. This is a faster car, just buy it and deal with it. I was younger then and didn't realize that performance isn't a priority for the majority, and have now learned that performance per dollar shouldn't be the end all be all for car buying.

After having been in 6th gens for a few years now and test driving other cars, I now understand what everyone was fussing about. I pull my head up to see over the front when navigating parking lots (my seat is all the way up). I pull my head down to see traffic lights when I'm first in line. I do not do those things in other cars. I can understand the standard car buyer who isn't into performance buying a Mustang or whatever else instead in order to avoid having to sit in a tank like vehicle.



9:45 sums it up perfectly.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Yeah, okay, so let's say many initial prospects had the same initial impression. This is exactly what marketing and advertising needs to manage, because the reality is nowhere near---arguably, not at all---bad. It's 100% GM's fault that people went to the car with this "oh, let's see how awfully bad the visibility is" perception. As in, GM threw in the towel after a few seconds into the first round.

On the other hand, I'm seriously wondering why or how I didn't have the same negative initial impression about the car. It's all the more peculiar, because I had only experienced 5th gens prior to ordering my car, I didn't even test drive a 6th gen at the dealership. The moment I sat in it was my very first time, and I swear I didn't have any qualms whatsoever. Set up the mirrors and off I went, merrily.

I do understand the power of cognitive dissonance and the urge to rationalize high dollar purchases, but I'm being completely intellectually honest here, I never felt this visibility problem every reviewer loved to harp on, and my vision is not even anywhere near 100%.

Like with every new car, it took about 10-15 minutes to get used to its interior, and that was it. The 1% issue I mentioned earlier, ie taking a 45˚ left turn and checking for traffic from the right came up a few times later, and it's an undeniable issue, yet it's mostly the same with the Mustang or the Challenger or any coupe with a girthy C pillar.

Maybe I am the target audience and most people aren't, I get that, it seems the Camaro is not for everyone Too bad the overall volume couldn't sustain it longer, and GM sure didn't put up much fight to keep it on the roster.

Just want to preface this with none of this is supposed to sound aggressive lol.

That's great you had no issues. Almost every review of the 6th gen mentions it's visibility isn't great compared to Mustang and Challenger. It's visibility is a thing, if it walks like a duck, acts like a duck sounds like a duck. I'm glad it didn't bother you and you love your 6th gen. I just remember my first time sitting in one, was like holy crap these reviews were no joke. Then add that with the cockpit like feeling(which I am sure is great for performance driving) I just felt so cramped inside it.

I don't know what Gm marketing or advertising could have done to try and spin that. I really don't.

It seems like Ford with the mustang went to make a good coupe first and performance vehicle second. GM went make a great performance car first, and good coupe second and that IMO is what ultimately killed it.


I get getting to used to things to though or disregarding any critiques with cars because we are driving something we love. I love my Bronco, but one of the biggest complaints I see/hear is that the soft top version is so loud with road noise. I used to say no it's not that bad. I can have a conversation on bluetooth at highway speeds, its not that loud that I can't hear anything but road noise. I spent a week driving my wifes car, first time I got back in the bronco...holy crap its loud in here lol.

[DeuceCam]

For added perspective, I'll harp on visibility (apologies as I've probably said what I'm about to say multiple times in other threads).

Basically all car reviews mention the poor visibility/interior. That says a lot to prospective buyers, especially if they're not enthusiasts. The most common review description I hear is "coffin-like."

When I was doing the paperwork at the dealer when buying my Camaro, I overheard a conversation from another customer negotiating deal: The salesman asked if he had considered a Camaro and the client stated he wouldn't consider one because "the visibility is too poor;" the salesman did not offer a rebuttal.

When I told friends I bought a Camaro, one said "how's the visibility?" I said "terrible." He responded, "okay glad you are aware, I drove a few when I was a mechanic and couldn't see ****."

The car felt VERY claustrophobic for me at first. I would always back into parking spaces and never park in a spot that that had cars in directly adjacent spaces; I still aim for this when parking, if possible. It's not just rearward visibility; it's hard to see out of the front with the short windshield, high hoodline and low seat position (I love the seat position!). One has to more mindful of taking mental stock of where curbs are, especially when lowered, compared to most other cars.

Making a left turn at an angled junction:
_
\

^Can't see ****. Same if making a non-intersection left turn and one can't see traffic because of median vegetation; good luck stopping between medians in the middle of the road to look for traffic when merging (can't see ****).

If one is used to driving 2-door sports cars with poor visibility, semi trucks, box trucks, etc., then the Camaro is probably more approachable. However, box trucks and semi's generally have wide angle/fish-eye lenses on the side mirrors to help with the 2 left turn situations I mentioned above.

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by DeuceCam

Making a left turn at an angled junction:
_
\

^Can't see ****.

Nice illustration of what I tried to explain in another post! Not sure if you’ve figured this out or not but when approaching this type of junction turn your car a bit right so that you are stopped at a 90 degree angle towards the road you’re turning on. You’ll see to your right much better. I still don’t like having to do this as it feels unnatural.

[GroundhogSS]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Well said. The bold is what sets people on this site apart from the general populace. We want to experience every aspect of driving, whereas people who want cookie-cutter CUVs want to be able to manage all of their errands and responsibilities when they drive. Then there's the people who buy a vehicle based on whether or not it has "full self driving" so all they have to do is arrive.

And those who drive a vehicle based on the image or status that it projects.

[CHASLT1]

GM don't make jack that i would want. The C8 is out for me so can't count it. The new EV NOX has no real HP.

[arpad_m]

I'm not saying visibility in the Camaro is good in absolute terms. That would be silly, it's obviously worse than in a shorter wheelbase sedan with tall windows and narrow pillars, and much worse than in a large SUV or truck where the driver sits at least a foot higher than the rest of the world (which is why they bought said SUV or truck in the first place).

What I'm saying is it feels normal for this class of vehicle, as in, I find it strange that this minor shortcoming would be a dealbreaker for so many with such a relatively cheap car. (And I'm still sure the beltline could've been lowered an inch or two in the refresh, which then could have been a game changer for those who were turned off to the car for this reason.)

Nobody finds the same fault with the C8 where one physically cannot see absolute jack **** behind the car or rearward to the sides, and were it not for the camera mirror (same as the unit in the Camaro), the only thing people could do is be faster than everyone else so they don't need to see what's behind them (j/k). And the C8 is much more expensive.

The frequency of mentions in reviews doesn't hit as hard in this ultra-connected, memeified world where content creators endlessly parrot each other, hoping their take will not be dismissed ("look, he didn't even mention visbility, what a superficial review"). In other words, reviews are far, far from independent of each other.

Anyway, it is what it is, I can totally understand how "normal" people don't like the cockpit feel; to me it's a selling point, and the discussion is moot, I seriously doubt GM would attempt a new Camaro line, especially one that would stand out and not look almost exactly like something else.

[CHASLT1]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

I'm not saying visibility in the Camaro is good in absolute terms. That would be silly, it's obviously worse than in a shorter wheelbase sedan with tall windows and narrow pillars, and much worse than in a large SUV or truck where the driver sits at least a foot higher than the rest of the world (which is why they bought said SUV or truck in the first place).

What I'm saying is it feels normal for this class of vehicle, as in, I find it strange that this minor shortcoming would be a dealbreaker for so many with such a relatively cheap car. (And I'm still sure the beltline could've been lowered an inch or two in the refresh, which then could have been a game changer for those who were turned off to the car for this reason.)

Nobody finds the same fault with the C8 where one physically cannot see absolute jack **** behind the car or rearward to the sides, and were it not for the camera mirror (same as the unit in the Camaro), the only thing people could do is be faster than everyone else so they don't need to see what's behind them (j/k). And the C8 is much more expensive.

The frequency of mentions in reviews doesn't hit as hard in this ultra-connected, memeified world where content creators endlessly parrot each other, hoping their take will not be dismissed ("look, he didn't even mention visbility, what a superficial review"). In other words, reviews are far, far from independent of each other.

Anyway, it is what it is, I can totally understand how "normal" people don't like the cockpit feel; to me it's a selling point, and the discussion is moot, I seriously doubt GM would attempt a new Camaro line, especially one that would stand out and not look almost exactly like something else.

It was no diff from my C6's and 7's and neveR even noticed it when i got my 2021 LT1.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

I'm not saying visibility in the Camaro is good in absolute terms. That would be silly, it's obviously worse than in a shorter wheelbase sedan with tall windows and narrow pillars, and much worse than in a large SUV or truck where the driver sits at least a foot higher than the rest of the world (which is why they bought said SUV or truck in the first place).

What I'm saying is it feels normal for this class of vehicle, as in, I find it strange that this minor shortcoming would be a dealbreaker for so many with such a relatively cheap car. (And I'm still sure the beltline could've been lowered an inch or two in the refresh, which then could have been a game changer for those who were turned off to the car for this reason.)

Nobody finds the same fault with the C8 where one physically cannot see absolute jack **** behind the car or rearward to the sides, and were it not for the camera mirror (same as the unit in the Camaro), the only thing people could do is be faster than everyone else so they don't need to see what's behind them (j/k). And the C8 is much more expensive.

The frequency of mentions in reviews doesn't hit as hard in this ultra-connected, memeified world where content creators endlessly parrot each other, hoping their take will not be dismissed ("look, he didn't even mention visbility, what a superficial review"). In other words, reviews are far, far from independent of each other.

Anyway, it is what it is, I can totally understand how "normal" people don't like the cockpit feel; to me it's a selling point, and the discussion is moot, I seriously doubt GM would attempt a new Camaro line, especially one that would stand out and not look almost exactly like something else.

Here's why there is such a difference between the Camaro and the Corvette. Camaro, like Mustang, has to generate sufficient volume to make the program profitable or it doesn't make sense. And it has to do that within a certain price band. In order to fit the car within that price band, it has to sell beyond the performance car enthusiast population. Those are the people that are more likely to be considering it as an only car. If it's an only car, it needs to do car things well. Camaro does those things "less well" than Mustang, Charger, or Challenger. So what we see as "shortcomings" the person who's replacing his Ford Escape or her Chevy Cruze will see those shortcomings as deal breakers.

Corvette is what it is. Performance first. And it is rarely an only car. My first Corvette was an only car. For about 6 months. I was 26, had just bought my first house, and I was single. Then winter hit. Bought a used Buick Skylark T-Type with the quickness Before that, Mustangs and Fieros were my "only cars" and they fit the bill just fine. Camaro needed to do the same in the Chevrolet portfolio, but Corvette never needed to. Volume is less important because Corvette has a lot of room for pricing flexibility. Today prices range from $68,300 to a hiccup below $200k. The fact that it costs about half what its primary competitors cost reinforces GM's ability to price profitably for every option. The person buying a Corvette could care less about back seat room (don't have / don't need) and as long as you can see around the curves at Waterford Hills or VIR or Road America it's all good. Sure there are people who never take their Corvette to the track, but they buy it because it's ability to kill on the track translates into street cred and completely forgives any shortcomings as a daily driver.

Corvette doesn't have to reach beyond the core group of performance car enthusiasts to survive. Camaro (and Mustang and Charger / Challenger) absolutely have to. The compromises made in the 6th Gen Camaro make it very hard for a first time sporty car buyer coming out of a more mainstream vehicle come to love it on first impression.