[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Why does it have to be a Camaro then? Much like that electric "Mustang" SUV, it'd be a cynical exploitation of the heritage/brand/goodwill, you name it.

GM should just call it Panther.

You could almost say the same thing about continuing the Camaro name from the mid-70's gen 2 through the 80's gen 3. With few exceptions, the performance from those years was an embarrassment. Iron Duke 90 hp? 145 hp Z/28?

[AZCamaroFan]

yeah it's not comparable to a 'mustang' suv, because it would still look like a camaro.

i think. possibly.

not sure after the last 2 years.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

You could almost say the same thing about continuing the Camaro name from the mid-70's gen 2 through the 80's gen 3. With few exceptions, the performance from those years was an embarrassment. Iron Duke 90 hp? 145 hp Z/28?

Well, the early 80s iron duke with the 3 speed automatic as the base engine wasn’t much slower than the 250 straight 6 with a 2 speed power glide that was standard in ‘67. The difference was that the 250 was indestructible and the iron Duke was definitely destructible lol.... And it wasn’t like the Camaro the only car affected by early emission control laws with no computer controls to improve performance. The entire car industry sucked from about 1973-1985. Even Ferraris and Corvettes were hurt. It’s called the Malaise era, and it was awful for everyone.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Well, the early 80s iron duke with the 3 speed automatic as the base engine wasn’t much slower than the 250 straight 6 with a 2 speed power glide that was standard in ‘67. The difference was that the 250 was indestructible and the iron Duke was definitely destructible lol.... And it wasn’t like the Camaro the only car affected by early emission control laws with no computer controls to improve performance. The entire car industry sucked from about 1973-1985. Even Ferraris and Corvettes were hurt. It’s called the Malaise era, and it was awful for everyone.

145 HP V8 Yikes those were definitely the bad days.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

So why choose the tech with no future?

I'll give you that ICE technology is into the realm of diminishing returns . . . probably well into it.

The problem I have with EV technology is that it takes more away from driving - as an overall experience - than it gives back in return. The one performance benefit is that EVs are better at straight line acceleration . . . and for about the hundredth time that particular side of car performance just isn't that important to me. I really would choose to drive the nearly 20 year old Maxima in my driveway over an EV that could zero to 60 in the two's. Every time but once, just to see what the fuss was all about. I really do know myself that well.

The past you're trying to hold on to isn't tied to ICE though.

Perhaps not fully. But there are things about ICE operation that are completely missing in EV operation. Not the least being your involvement and awareness of your part in the whole business of driving, which can be as big or as little a part of anybody’s driving as they care to make it. For me, this has to be a big part; driving is (and has always been) more than just getting from here to there.

It's tied to lower costs, less regulation due to less congestion and less concern for the harm they were doing and weaker safety standards and policing, less corporate control over the electronics and the greater statement of personality due to both variety and cultural importance they offered back in the day.

I'm on more or less fixed income these days. Lower cost takes on greater importance than it did during my peak earning years. Never mind the people who need lower cost even during their peak earning years.

We're certainly better off environmentally now than we used to be, even with many more cars on the road. And that's without EVs providing significant contribution.

I really don't want this discussion to go down the usual safety-nanny rabbit hole, so I'll assume you're aware of my position on such matters.


Norm

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 90503

What bothers me about this "Would you buy an all electric Camaro", or buy an all electric whatever, is how the whole premise is taken for granted that electric is actually what buyers want. All the "yes" for electric seems to occur only if there is nothing else available to choose from.

I've yet to hear any groundswell of demand for all electric similar to how there is a desire and anticipation of more horsepower and performance from ICE, like turbo power or cubic inches, or super-charging.

Has anyone seen a thread where the majority of posts say they will not buy a Camaro until they are all made electric? Noticeably absent is a desire for all electric pick up trucks. Why is that? I think it is because they just haven't declared that EVs are the inevitable future for them. Put out that in a few years trucks will not have ICE, and I think you will really see where the demand for EV is...basically, non-existent.

I still say EV popularity is a façade that only exists because the "choice" is only predicated on ICE being unnecessarily discontinued. EV popularity depends on having no alternative, not because it is a better way to go.

There isn't a ground swell because most people don't care. Their car is an appliance. As long as it's safe and affordable as well as reliable, they don't care much.

Up until GM's announcement on reaching the Holy Grail of parity and I'm still skeptical of that, choosing a hybrid or an EV added significant cost. So you had to either have a business case to justify the purchase price or driven by external factors, e.g. green.

Now what could hurt the transition is if people reject EVs. Right now that doesn't appear to be the case. But if Cadillac goes 100% EVs by 2030 and no one wants EVs, GM has a problem.

But if the infrastructure exists (only for Tesla today) and you can get 400 miles range (GM says they have that) and cost is the same (my guess is GM is still using the lower maintenance costs etc. associated with an EV) then why not? You are down to emotion at that point. Which is the reason this site exists anyway

And the ICE is not really being discontinued unnecessarily. It will be where it isn't needed and an EV is a better choice. But the ICE will be around for a long, long time, short of a technological breakthrough.

And regardless of where you stand on Global Warming/Climate Change, at some point we have to simply stop polluting as much as we do now. There is a tipping point for that somewhere down the road. Some would even argue we've crossed it.

But if there is a market for a V8 powered RWD, affordable performance car that can be sold profitably, you'll still see one. The question at hand is, with the EV being faster and potentially better with the exception of the missing emotional connection, will there be enough buyers to keep that V8 RWD performance car affordable?

[90503]

Thanks for the reply.

I remember on this forum that building a 4-cyl Camaro would bring about the end of civilization as we know it...lol...It was to help expand Camaro sales, not depend on another Camaro power plant being discontinued, and had a corresponding sales price to justify it.

Hopefully an EV Camaro will be in that same spirit. Offer something uniquely desirable, but also not be artificially promoted with tax-breaks, subsidies, commuter perks, and penalties or disincentives for non EVs....

Put an EV Camaro alongside of ICE Camaros with a level playing field, and let the buyer choose.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Ok so why mention you...without making a very CLEAR caveat that you only... Most people I know... To me that’s the norm. I believe I did mention that at some point. If you’d have clarified... I wouldn’t have bit your head off. I apologize. Just be clear when making your points.

Thank you for proving the point HDRDTD, Number 3 and myself were trying to make. You make it sound like you are the only one who is right because you say you base your arguments on fact, but a lot of the points you make, while valid to you, are just opinions and conjecture.

Saying NO ONE will show up to an electric drag race? You speak for the entire human race? Saying electric drag racing is immature, but fuel powered isn't? Says who? I'm sure that there are plenty of people who would say BOTH are immature and a waste of time. You imply the only thing interesting or requiring skill in NASCAR is the pit crews adding fuel and fixing engine problems? So changing to electric motors will all of a sudden remove all the skill required by drivers and their crews? You belittle the engineers working on electric tech by implying that brilliant engineers would only work on gas engine technology. You call Number 3 a fanboy of electric based on the a few statements you disagree with. You assume I have an opinion one way or another about the sound of digital vs analog music.

None of the stuff I just mentioned is based in fact, it is all just your opinions, which is fine. But when you say you only base the things you post on facts, and call others liars, you may come across as a know-it-all.

OF COURSE you want everyone to hang on every word in in your posts and read every word carefully, but you read other's as blah blah blah. At least you apologized Number 3

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Number 3

But most people buying a cars don't give a rats back side about what's under the hood.

They don't because until quite recently there was ICE . . . and crickets.

Another way of saying that is that it simply hasn't been "natural" for car shoppers to think of cars as being anything other than ICE-powered. Sure, in many cases you could choose how many cylinders that ICE had, but they were still all ICEs. You went to buy a car, you expected to have to stop at a gas station to put gas in it from time to time. You never thought about whether you had to do that, or why you had to, it was just another part of car ownership.

Me? I'd rather see an EV Camaro than no Camaro. But that's an opinion.

The furthest I could go here would be an EV Camaro alongside an ICE Camaro. With the EV Camaro not being yet another SUV/CUV with the wrong name.

For the Camaro to lose all of its ICEs would be to spite everything it's been.


Norm

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Number 3

But if there is a market for a V8 powered RWD, affordable performance car that can be sold profitably, you'll still see one. The question at hand is, with the EV being faster and potentially better with the exception of the missing emotional connection, will there be enough buyers to keep that V8 RWD performance car affordable?

I know you know what Barrett-Jackson is. I’m 42. I go every year. One day in the next 10-15 years I’ll be a registered bidder and start a collection.

The market on collector cars goes up and down, everyone knows that. But do you know why these cars hold their value baselines even in the down market times?

Because you can no longer find cars that came with carburetors and no emission controls.

I’m 42. I’m part of the new, younger generation buying these cars from the people who originally lusted and drooled over them. They’re getting up there and now it’s our turn. The cars are still selling for collector level dollars. They’re having no probkem finding buyers even as the original intended market gets well into retirement age and above.

We - my generation, Gen X - are buying them now because we love them as much as as our Dads and Grandparents did when they were young kids and cars like a 1962 Corvette were brand new.

We don’t care about emissions and pollution. Frankly if cars were still built the way they were then today, the prices would not be near as high on them. 6+ figures for a 1967 Corvette 427 Stingray when a 2020 Stingray blows it out of the water in every imaginable measurable and non-measurable facet for about $80k.

There is a vibe and a feel and a completely visceral connection to old, loud, smelly, rattling cars that require constant tuning and maintenance, have lousy handling, some have drum brakes all around and no power steering with recirculating ball steering boxes and long gear throws. They have no air conditioning, some don’t even have heaters. They would get lost in a course race with electric motors, variable rack and pinion steering, Brembo vented discs all around, and 20 inch P-Zeros instead of 14” Firestone bias ply or polyglas.

But we still lust after them. And would rather pay $120,000 for one of those cars than $40,000 for some electric gizmo no matter how fast it is.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

They don't because until quite recently there was ICE . . . and crickets.

Another way of saying that is that it simply hasn't been "natural" for car shoppers to think of cars as being anything other than ICE-powered. Sure, in many cases you could choose how many cylinders that ICE had, but they were still all ICEs. You went to buy a car, you expected to have to stop at a gas station to put gas in it from time to time. You never thought about whether you had to do that, or why you had to, it was just another part of car ownership.



The furthest I could go here would be an EV Camaro alongside an ICE Camaro. With the EV Camaro not being yet another SUV/CUV with the wrong name.

For the Camaro to lose all of its ICEs would be to spite everything it's been.


Norm

I agree, but I just don't see GM investing in an EV architecture and then also investing in a duplicate for an ICE.

If you look at GM's skateboard battery concept, it doesn't lend itself to a conventional powertrain.

And that simply gets to the cost issue. IF GM does what it says and Cadillac is 100% electric by 2030, then where is a RWD architecture to build a Camaro off of? It would have to be an orphan architecture, Alpha, that GM would have to have support 100% of the investment supported by the Camaro, that right now is selling like poopsicles. That simply won't happen. Years ago, there was study to do a 2+2 off the Corvette architecture. That's now gone as well. This is, at least part of, why the Fiat cars remain on the old architecture. It will cost big money to change it and with the coupe market shrinking, there is not much of a return.

So to quote Thanos, "I am inevitable"

Or, "smoke em if you got em"

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by 90503

Thanks for the reply.

I remember on this forum that building a 4-cyl Camaro would bring about the end of civilization as we know it...lol...It was to help expand Camaro sales, not depend on another Camaro power plant being discontinued, and had a corresponding sales price to justify it.

Hopefully an EV Camaro will be in that same spirit. Offer something uniquely desirable, but also not be artificially promoted with tax-breaks, subsidies, commuter perks, and penalties or disincentives for non EVs....

Put an EV Camaro alongside of ICE Camaros with a level playing field, and let the buyer choose.

Remember when the 5th gen came out? You can ask the long time members on the 5th gen forum.....

GM has planned initial production in 2009/2010 for take rates about 60% V6 and 40% V8..... they were caught off guard and ill equipped for the first three months of orders being near 80% V8 SS.

Today for 2016-2019 6th gen the SS combined figures have been around 23,000 and all others V6 and turbo 4 have been around 30,000. Combined. So they’re doing their part but not so dramatically. I don’t think the turbo 4 even made a dent in the expected market for GM - the “Fast and Furious” tuners.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I agree, but I just don't see GM investing in an EV architecture and then also investing in a duplicate for an ICE.

If you look at GM's skateboard battery concept, it doesn't lend itself to a conventional powertrain.

And that simply gets to the cost issue. IF GM does what it says and Cadillac is 100% electric by 2030, then where is a RWD architecture to build a Camaro off of? It would have to be an orphan architecture, Alpha, that GM would have to have support 100% of the investment supported by the Camaro, that right now is selling like poopsicles. That simply won't happen. Years ago, there was study to do a 2+2 off the Corvette architecture. That's now gone as well. This is, at least part of, why the Fiat cars remain on the old architecture. It will cost big money to change it and with the coupe market shrinking, there is not much of a return.

So to quote Thanos, "I am inevitable"

Or, "smoke em if you got em"

So then the Camaro dies. End of story. It happened once it can happen again. I wouldn’t want it to, but I for damn sure wouldn’t want some electric motor running a car with the Camaro nameplate on it either.

At Barrett-Jackson this year was a 1967 Camaro with a highly rare option configuration: RS/SS convertible 4 speed, 350, white with houndstooth interior, full console gauges, power disc brakes, FACTORY air conditioning, tilt wheel, power WINDOWS, AM/FM with two speakers, and passenger door mirror. It was fully restored and showroom condition. It sold for $57k.

I’ll just buy one of those if it comes down to it.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by 90503

Put an EV Camaro alongside of ICE Camaros with a level playing field, and let the buyer choose.

Unfortunately, with the current Camaro sales trend numbers, even without the Covid19 influence, I can't imagine there ever being both available at the same time.