[JT6Speed]

Originally Posted by olrocker

The real question then is like is it the chicken or the egg……. Is the poor sales of the Camaro due to general lack of interest in cars by younger people so GM never promoted it, or is the lack of promotion the reason no one (other than enthusiasts) got interested in it?

I think it's a combination of a lot of things. That said, I think the Camaro appeals more to people who really put performance first, and are willing to overcome the "issues" like visibility, small trunk opening, small interior, etc. A lot of automotive journalists/outlets really knocked the car for those reasons, and it I think it turned people off.

[genxer]

It's a mortal sin, that if GM had to miss with part of the alphas - it wasn't the Cadillacs missing, with commitment to getting it right going to the Camaro.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by genxer

It's a mortal sin, that if GM had to miss with part of the alphas - it wasn't the Cadillacs missing, with commitment to getting it right going to the Camaro.

Not quite sure what you are saying here.

Alpha was an is Cadillacs architecture. It’s awesome and world class and expensive.

Camaro had its chance to live or die as an add on to that architecture. But alpha isn’t dying because of Camaro, it’s dying because the Cadillacs will be going EV (at least one will, not sure Cadillac will want 2 EV sedans). Camaro, if it were a sales triumph might have been enough to keep alpha going on its own. Sadly that isn’t the case.

[Alan47717]

Originally Posted by JT6Speed

I think it's a combination of a lot of things. That said, I think the Camaro appeals more to people who really put performance first, and are willing to overcome the "issues" like visibility, small trunk opening, small interior, etc. A lot of automotive journalists/outlets really knocked the car for those reasons, and it I think it turned people off.

I just don't get the "journalists" complaining about those "issues". Gee, a sports car with poor visibility, a small trunk, cramped interior, etc.? What on earth could they have been thinking? They took the fifth gen, made it better in every way important to being a better sports car and compromises in typical "stuff" you live with in a purpose built car is what's killing it? Baloney.

GM let this car car die for reasons we'll probably never know. And it's not the first time they've turned the engineers loose to design something great and then decided it didn't fit their "plan" when they got what they asked for and then either let it die due to neglect or deliberate sabotage.

And if you wonder why a company would do such stupid things you are not alone.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I just don't get the "journalists" complaining about those "issues". Gee, a sports car with poor visibility, a small trunk, cramped interior, etc.? What on earth could they have been thinking? They took the fifth gen, made it better in every way important to being a better sports car and compromises in typical "stuff" you live with in a purpose built car is what's killing it? Baloney.

GM let this car car die for reasons we'll probably never know. And it's not the first time they've turned the engineers loose to design something great and then decided it didn't fit their "plan" when they got what they asked for and then either let it die due to neglect or deliberate sabotage

A certain John Z. DeLorean is in the back of the room jumping up and down waving his hands very quietly to that.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I just don't get the "journalists" complaining about those "issues". Gee, a sports car with poor visibility, a small trunk, cramped interior, etc.? What on earth could they have been thinking? They took the fifth gen, made it better in every way important to being a better sports car and compromises in typical "stuff" you live with in a purpose built car is what's killing it? Baloney.

GM let this car car die for reasons we'll probably never know. And it's not the first time they've turned the engineers loose to design something great and then decided it didn't fit their "plan" when they got what they asked for and then either let it die due to neglect or deliberate sabotage.

And if you wonder why a company would do such stupid things you are not alone.

The only way they will ever change their ways is if people hurt them in the pocket. As long as everyone keeps buying those $60-80K Silverados, Tahoes, Suburbans and especially those $150K Escalades, GM will keep laughing all the way to the bank and back.

Actually, their plan may be to just focus on the China business more every year, but that's pretty risky, the commies are unpredictable, always have been.

[LT14EVA]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I just don't get the "journalists" complaining about those "issues". Gee, a sports car with poor visibility, a small trunk, cramped interior, etc.? What on earth could they have been thinking? They took the fifth gen, made it better in every way important to being a better sports car and compromises in typical "stuff" you live with in a purpose built car is what's killing it? Baloney.

GM let this car car die for reasons we'll probably never know. And it's not the first time they've turned the engineers loose to design something great and then decided it didn't fit their "plan" when they got what they asked for and then either let it die due to neglect or deliberate sabotage.

And if you wonder why a company would do such stupid things you are not alone.

Not just journalists but buyers also. Challengers and 5.0s didn’t have these issues.
Don't forget three years of embarrassing A8 shudder. What a joke.

As far as the rest, we’ll all good thing come to an end. Happens all the time.

[JT6Speed]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I just don't get the "journalists" complaining about those "issues". Gee, a sports car with poor visibility, a small trunk, cramped interior, etc.? What on earth could they have been thinking? They took the fifth gen, made it better in every way important to being a better sports car and compromises in typical "stuff" you live with in a purpose built car is what's killing it? Baloney.

GM let this car car die for reasons we'll probably never know. And it's not the first time they've turned the engineers loose to design something great and then decided it didn't fit their "plan" when they got what they asked for and then either let it die due to neglect or deliberate sabotage.

And if you wonder why a company would do such stupid things you are not alone.

Because you have to realize, not everyone who looks at the Challenger/Mustang/Camaro want to compromise these things just to get a legitimate sports car. There are a lot of buyers who don't necessarily enter the market and make a purchase based on which car has the best chassis, or which one can pull the most lateral g's. Clearly, if they did, the Camaro would be number 1.

[Chris Durant]

It's weird some of the things people worry about. I purchased my Camaro just recently and my main reason was looks, Would I like more room and more safety stuff, maybe. But nothing looks as good as the Camaro to me. I can live with the small issues and the fact that it is a ball to drive and has a really cool looking interior makes it even better. And personally, up until the most recent pricing, I think it was a bargain as well. A LT1 for $37,000 last year was amazing.

[genxer]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Not quite sure what you are saying here.

Alpha was an is Cadillacs architecture. It’s awesome and world class and expensive.

Camaro had its chance to live or die as an add on to that architecture. But alpha isn’t dying because of Camaro, it’s dying because the Cadillacs will be going EV (at least one will, not sure Cadillac will want 2 EV sedans). Camaro, if it were a sales triumph might have been enough to keep alpha going on its own. Sadly that isn’t the case.

GM's product planning and marketing need to own the failure. It's as though they want people to cheer on a bankruptcy #2.

It was mission creep. I'd rather see Caddy killed for not-Caddy platform mates. They allowed Dodge to re-define pigs as muscle. And it could still handle better.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by genxer

GM's product planning and marketing need to own the failure. It's as though they want people to cheer on a bankruptcy #2.

It was mission creep. I'd rather see Caddy killed for not-Caddy platform mates. They allowed Dodge to re-define pigs as muscle. And it could still handle better.

Bankruptcy number 2. I’m guessing you think that’s either funny or possible. Well it may be if they give the UAW a preposterous contract.

And another ha ha, Dodge didn’t really DO anything. And if Gam had come out with a 4200 pound Zeta based Camaro they would have got their but kicked.

But historically and to be clear here is what GM did do. They went and talked a well known, select and small(very small) group of Camaro owners to ask what they wanted. The answer was simply more. It wasn’t a car with broad appeal with better visibility or a more usable trunk and rear seat. If GM had gone and asked Mustang buyers or even the general public and asked one simple question, “why don’t you buy or even considering a Camaro”. Fix the answer to those questions and maybe we would have had a sales winner. So if you want to be critical of GM it’s his. They asked asked Camaro buyers (not rejectors) what the pay wanted.

Now the Cadillac is a similar story in a sad regard and a precursor to the Camaro. The alpha architecture and chassis remain absolutely world class bu almost any review. But as Ed Wellburn ran Design Staff, the Cadillacs got slammed roofs, high belt lines and cramped trunks and rear seat accommodations compared to he BMW 3 Series . I still laugh at the BMW we had were they tapped out the windows on the car to replicated the ATS. It was an absolute joke but continued non the less.

When tryin to do the CTS off of the same architecture the rocker and hence step ove height was worse than a 5 Series when you put on the bigger and necessary larger diameter wheels. And further rear seat room was compromised as was head room and trunk space. So all of Alphas great qualities were destroyed by 3 cars that had huge compromises that Design Staff created.

At about the same time Design Staff had a study they taughted that said over half of Cadillac buyers bought for styling, which gave them the power to push forward on styling.

GM’s failure in all 3 cars was simply not finding out what buyers of the competition wanted rather and making a car that did that, rather than letting styling drive the result for big wheels, slammed roofs and high belt lines. All of those look cool but compromise the car for packaging.

[Alan47717]

Originally Posted by JT6Speed

Because you have to realize, not everyone who looks at the Challenger/Mustang/Camaro want to compromise these things just to get a legitimate sports car. There are a lot of buyers who don't necessarily enter the market and make a purchase based on which car has the best chassis, or which one can pull the most lateral g's. Clearly, if they did, the Camaro would be number 1.

The Challenger most definitely is not a sports car and compared to the 6th gen the Mustang isn't a very good one so I don't get your point.

Camaro never had a chance in hell of being #1 for self inflicted reasons that have nothing to do with the car's design. The "everyone who wants one has one" refrain is just an excuse for rolling over and playing dead.

[JT6Speed]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

The Challenger most definitely is not a sports car and compared to the 6th gen the Mustang isn't a very good one so I don't get your point.

Camaro never had a chance in hell of being #1 for self inflicted reasons that have nothing to do with the car's design. The "everyone who wants one has one" refrain is just an excuse for rolling over and playing dead.

I never claimed it was. What I'm saying is that within the American V8 RWD segment, which is a limited market to begin with, not everyone wants to sacrifice certain things in order to get a true sports car. They'll either gravitate towards the Mopar and get 4 doors, or meet halfway in between with the Ford.

In reality, it's not hard to be number 1 in a category that is so niche, providing GM had played their cards right, which they obviously didn't.

[Alan47717]

Originally Posted by JT6Speed

I never claimed it was. What I'm saying is that within the American V8 RWD segment, which is a limited market to begin with, not everyone wants to sacrifice certain things in order to get a true sports car. They'll either gravitate towards the Mopar and get 4 doors, or meet halfway in between with the Ford.

In reality, it's not hard to be number 1 in a category that is so niche, providing GM had played their cards right, which they obviously didn't.

GM didn't play their cards at all is my contention. I can go to a casino and play poker, fold every hand without looking at my cards, wait for the blinds and antes to eat up my money and then go home.

Watch a Mecum or Barrett-Jackson auction. Late model Challengers, Mustangs and Corvette's come across the block with excitement, the commentary is detailed and enthusiastic and then...here comes a Camaro... umm...some generic discussion...umm...Sold!!! Here comes a Mustang. It's a Shelby!

Do you think this is an accident? That it's because these other cars have better packaging? Better visibility? Bigger trunks? Come on, this is marketing and PR (and the lack of it) on display.