[Chutzpah]

Originally Posted by Devstrike

I have learned to take most Auto Journalists stories with a grain of salt. I think my best example of why I do this is when a year or so ago an article was posted about a 3500 dually pickup truck. The guy bashed on it for its "lack of good ride quality" and did not recommend it for its "lack of good ride quality." It was built for one thing Hauling and towing and not your everyday drive to work and back type of vehicle or be a limousine. Many Journalists today fail to see the reasons for things being built.



Now the Camaro isn't really as drastic from what I read about it from journalists as what I said above. In my mind the Camaro was built for the enthusiast that wants performance over practicality. Which is what I was looking for in a performance vehicle and its why I bought mine and Chevy delivered. I also understand that there are people that do want a little more practicality which is an issue that the Challenger for example does fill but at the cost of track performance and the Mustang is the middle ground. I also tend not to read articles that depict a vehicle because of sales because if sales dictated everything we would all be driving Pickup trucks right now.

Yep, 100% agree.

[frostys]

Originally Posted by Devstrike

I have learned to take most Auto Journalists stories with a grain of salt. I think my best example of why I do this is when a year or so ago an article was posted about a 3500 dually pickup truck. The guy bashed on it for its "lack of good ride quality" and did not recommend it for its "lack of good ride quality." It was built for one thing Hauling and towing and not your everyday drive to work and back type of vehicle or be a limousine. Many Journalists today fail to see the reasons for things being built.



Now the Camaro isn't really as drastic from what I read about it from journalists as what I said above. In my mind the Camaro was built for the enthusiast that wants performance over practicality. Which is what I was looking for in a performance vehicle and its why I bought mine and Chevy delivered. I also understand that there are people that do want a little more practicality which is an issue that the Challenger for example does fill but at the cost of track performance and the Mustang is the middle ground. I also tend not to read articles that depict a vehicle because of sales because if sales dictated everything we would all be driving Pickup trucks right now.

It still has to sustain itself in sales which is where the added practicality of the challenger helps. The camaro might be a little bit too niche.

[Hops]

Originally Posted by Devstrike

Now the Camaro isn't really as drastic from what I read about it from journalists as what I said above. In my mind the Camaro was built for the enthusiast that wants performance over practicality. Which is what I was looking for in a performance vehicle and its why I bought mine and Chevy delivered. I also understand that there are people that do want a little more practicality which is an issue that the Challenger for example does fill but at the cost of track performance and the Mustang is the middle ground. I also tend not to read articles that depict a vehicle because of sales because if sales dictated everything we would all be driving Pickup trucks right now.

Well said! Paying too much attention to journalists kept the Camaro off my radar for a couple years. On the practicality side, i think the media has just gone overboard on it's shortcomings. After years of paying too much attention to automotive media, i've learned if a car seems interesting enough to buy, go take it for a test drive!

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Devstrike

In my mind the Camaro was built for the enthusiast that wants performance over practicality. Which is what I was looking for in a performance vehicle and its why I bought mine and Chevy delivered.

That is exactly what they did. they just focused a bit to much on it IMO

Originally Posted by frostys

It still has to sustain itself in sales which is where the added practicality of the challenger helps. The camaro might be a little bit too niche.

Bingo. The life blood of these cars is the lower trims. They allow the high performance variants to exist. the low end trims can't use the performance as an excuse to overlook shortcomings.

[Paintslinger16]

Originally Posted by Xaxas

A Camaro Sedan... So... The SS?

GM would have did themselves a favor and brought back the Chevelle Name for this car, when I first heard of it years ago, all I could think of SS what?
Chevelle would fit coupe or sedan, even station wagon.

[gtfoxy]

Originally Posted by frostys

It still has to sustain itself in sales which is where the added practicality of the challenger helps. The camaro might be a little bit too niche.

I sat in a guys Hell Cat and he sat in mine & he admitted the differences in visibility & rear leg room is way over blown.

People can argue that marketing doesn’t matter, but Dodge markets the hell out of those cars.

Now to address dipshit YouTube car reviewers, well, they’re dipshits, so….

[frostys]

Originally Posted by gtfoxy

I sat in a guys Hell Cat and he sat in mine & he admitted the differences in visibility & rear leg room is way over blown.

People can argue that marketing doesn’t matter, but Dodge markets the hell out of those cars.

Now to address dipshit YouTube car reviewers, well, they’re dipshits, so….

Even if it's way overblown, it's still there and it will have an impact on sales volumes especially in the base trims where the added performance gained by those sacrifice become 100% useless. Losing some line of sight or backseat space for performance is a trade-off people will do but losing the same line of sight and backseat space if you are not looking for the extra performance means losing it for nothing.

As for marketing, none of them are marketed where I live and the challengers and mustangs outsell camaros.

[s346k]

i think a lot of people lose sight of the fact that a camaro is still a domestic sports car. it's inherent lack of -something- must be present, otherwise it would cost half again as much.

the gen 4 cars had the power plant, gen 5 had...im not sure, new styling, ride quality and comfort, i guess...and gen 6 gets a chassis.

you know which one sold the most.

imho the camaro is the most DRIVERS car for the money, but it lacks a lot of creature comforts and general styling, inside & out. its a camaro. historically they were the poor boy entry to a v8, nothing has changed.

[LT4Greg]

Only the GM management know the future of the Camaro at this point in time. Enjoy them while they are still being built. That’s my feeling!

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by gtfoxy

I sat in a guys Hell Cat and he sat in mine & he admitted the differences in visibility & rear leg room is way over blown.

People can argue that marketing doesn’t matter, but Dodge markets the hell out of those cars.

Now to address dipshit YouTube car reviewers, well, they’re dipshits, so….

I do not really want to do this... BUT it depends on what you mean by over blown? I can literally get 4 adults in my Challenger - and probably and 5th in the rear if he/she is smallish. As for visibility - I go back to what do you mean, my C pillar is GIANT - so are the A but I think that is about every modern car. The windows are bigger and better view and the seating position is much higher.

All this said - it is a sports/muscle/pony/2door/blah blah blah -

Sit in a 911 - I personally think it is worse than the Camaro - BUT IT IS A PORCHE!!! so it does not matter. Same with the BMW and Jaguar F-Type, they are atrocious. But I guess because it is north of 100K - they cannot complain

Never mind the Lambo - that is like sitting in a cave.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by Paintslinger16

GM would have did themselves a favor and brought back the Chevelle Name for this car, when I first heard of it years ago, all I could think of SS what?
Chevelle would fit coupe or sedan, even station wagon.

If they bring the Chevelle SS396 back they need to make it a muscle car, more like the Challenger, big, heavy, but fast in a straight line.

[gtfoxy]

Originally Posted by frostys

Even if it's way overblown, it's still there and it will have an impact on sales volumes especially in the base trims where the added performance gained by those sacrifice become 100% useless. Losing some line of sight or backseat space for performance is a trade-off people will do but losing the same line of sight and backseat space if you are not looking for the extra performance means losing it for nothing.

As for marketing, none of them are marketed where I live and the challengers and mustangs outsell camaros.

It’s still making mountains out of mole hill in an Emperor has no close sort of way. Honestly. Then again most people are borderline retarded when it comes to independent thought. They desire to be spoon fed what they should buy, watch & do. It’s sad really.

While a certain demographic of “old non-tech savvy” purchasers exist, many, & I mean many, can at the least find there way to YouTube. & when they see dumb asses regurgitate the same nonsense & watch Dodge’s hype vids they can easily be persuaded to buy brand D & not even consider a Camaro.

That’s the reality in which we live. Choose to accept it or not, but it’s still the reality of many buyers motivation.

Me personally, as many here, I remember a poem from long ago, “…& I, I took the path less traveled buy, & it has made all the difference.” I try to apply this line of thinking to nearly every facet of my life, so car buying really becomes a no-brainer.

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

If they bring the Chevelle SS396 back they need to make it a muscle car, more like the Challenger, big, heavy, but fast in a straight line.

Original “muscle cars” were light family sedans with lots of power, not heavy with lots of power.

[Heat Magnet]

I wouldn't peg Yahoo as a source for good news.

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by gtfoxy

It’s still making mountains out of mole hill in an Emperor has no close sort of way. Honestly. Then again most people are borderline retarded when it comes to independent thought. They desire to be spoon fed what they should buy, watch & do. It’s sad really.

While a certain demographic of “old non-tech savvy” purchasers exist, many, & I mean many, can at the least find there way to YouTube. & when they see dumb asses regurgitate the same nonsense & watch Dodge’s hype vids they can easily be persuaded to buy brand D & not even consider a Camaro.

That’s the reality in which we live. Choose to accept it or not, but it’s still the reality of many buyers motivation.

Me personally, as many here, I remember a poem from long ago, “…& I, I took the path less traveled buy, & it has made all the difference.” I try to apply this line of thinking to nearly every facet of my life, so car buying really becomes a no-brainer.


Original “muscle cars” were light family sedans with lots of power, not heavy with lots of power.

Regarding tech, what would it be like if the big 3 modern muscle cars didn't have the traction control stuff they do today? I mean if they were brute like a GTO for example where the wheels spin easily and no nannies? Would you see a lot more Mustangs crashing into the curb and spinning out?


My dad bought a 1969 GTO when he got married. Eventually he got rid of it because my mom would hit the gas hard and spin the tires and end up getting tickets at stoplights.