[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by tortilla-flats

Sometimes its not about the dollars but about the brand. Chevy as long been synonymous with working man performance. With Corvette splitting off as its own brand, whats left?

Corvette has always been an arms length from Chevrolet. Try to find a Chevrolet emblem on a Corvette. They're there, but 95% of people wouldn't even know where to look for them. Meanwhile, Chevrolet remains a strong brand.

There will probably be a Corvette sub-brand. Pretty much like Bronco is a sub-brand for Ford. Camaro may or may not be a part of it.

[DaveC113]

https://www.carscoops.com/2025/07/ch...corvette-bolt/

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

It would be cool if someone would leak the 7th Gen renderings, I'd love to see what they were thinking. I can't imagine it would be much different, both in style and drivetrain, but who knows.

The new Mustang might not be selling well bc of the price, I'd rather just buy a slightly used S550. Could be a challenge for a new Camaro too, but selling it under Corvette as a new brand could be compelling and help it compete with cars like the BMW M2. Also, I can't believe there isn't a Corvette SUV, like a sporty version of the Escalade. I think it would be very successful, while I can't understand the appeal of high-$ high-performance SUVs they are very popular.

The lack of Corvette branded cars and the axing the 7th Gen Camaro bc they plan on going all-in on EVs is incomprehensible to me. The lack of foresight on EVs is especially troubling, especially when Toyota and Honda got it so right. Did they not even consider their position on EVs? IMO, EVs are the future but not with today's tech and infrastructure. Teslas were a trend for rich folks to keep them from feeling guilty about buying expensive cars and virtue signaling, exactly like the South Park episode.

GM's attitude towards performance cars is also often incomprehensible. Again, the Japanese realized that the lack of performance cars in their lineup is an issue. Not every car needs to be equally profitable, having performance cars helps sell their other cars. Many people didn't even know a 6th Gen Camaro existed or was anything different from the 5th gen cars. At the same time Dodge's marketing of the Challenger was a smash hit.

Of course hindsight is 20/20 but I hope GM can do a better job predicting trends and seeing things for what they are... Axing the Camaro was a bad decision and it seems like they're going to continue making the bad decision not to resurrect it, either as a Camaro or a Corvette. Not everyone can afford a Corvette, and the Alpha chassis production continues for Caddies which makes the lack of Camaro all the more perplexing.

Ok, I have to clarify one point. Dodge "advertising" was a "smash hit" because you and a few other enthusiasts actually liked the commercials. It did not, however, lead to anything close to sales leadership for the 10 year old car. If you look at what Dodge had at the time, it was a 10 year old Journey SUV (now gone), a 10 year old Durango that is still selling because you can get a V8 (only sold 31,000 last year) and a mini van. They've since added the Hornet which is one of the worst selling vehicles on the market. Advertising a V8 Challenger and Charger was all they had to advertise. And the hilarious part is it was a commercial touting "American Muscle" for a car built in Canada by a French company.

And I'll remind everyone that GM purposely with forethought designed and engineered the Camaro for existing Camaro owners. So, it there was no need to advertise (allthough it was well marketed) as the people it was designed for knew about it. Advertising a car that had known limitations would have been pointless and GM knew this. The failure was simply not asking Mustang owners (still in production and outsold the Camaro in every year of Gen6) what it would have taken to get them to buy a Camaro. That answer likely involved better visibility, a more usable back seat and a ressonable trunk with lower lift over. GM knew what it did, why they did it, and they knew advertising a left handed baseball glove to right handers was likely only going to excite the people the car was already designed to please.

Annnnnnd I liked the Vin Diesel commercials too, other than Stellantis playing on American heritage with a Canadian built car from a French company.

[Devstrike]

Honestly at this point they just should not make a new Camaro. People will hate it even if they improve on it. That is what I get from some of the people in this thread.

[Alan47717]

Originally Posted by DeuceCam

Lack of marketing didn't help. I think the poor visibility and practicality (trunk opening size, back seat room, etc.) were equal factors. (The visibility is so bad that it could be a meme; pretty much every car review bluntly pointed that out; but you'll still see people here defending their purchases saying the visibility isn't poor.)

I don't say that the visibility is great, or that the trunk opening is huge or that the back seat accessibility is good. I DO say if you really want those things then you don't want a sports car. The visibility in my car is no worse than it was in my C3 or in any of the C4's I drove as company cars.

The thing that puzzles me is the lack of understanding of what makes this car what it is. A reviewer spends hundreds of words raving about performance, handling, chassis stiffness, etc. then whines about poor "yada, yada, yada" issues without realizing those compromises help make all that good stuff possible.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I don't say that the visibility is great, or that the trunk opening is huge or that the back seat accessibility is good. I DO say if you really want those things then you don't want a sports car. The visibility in my car is no worse than it was in my C3 or in any of the C4's I drove as company cars.

The thing that puzzles me is the lack of understanding of what makes this car what it is. A reviewer spends hundreds of words raving about performance, handling, chassis stiffness, etc. then whines about poor "yada, yada, yada" issues without realizing those compromises help make all that good stuff possible.

What you're saying is true, and I find no real fault with this car even after all this time (took delivery in March 2018).

At the same time, GM didn't give two s***ts about early feedback and never even attempted to address these criticisms during the 6th gen's entire 9-year run.

Take the trunk opening, for example: how difficult would it have been to just split the taillights in the middle and vastly increase the size of the opening for the 2019 refresh? Dodge could do it, BMW can do it, why not GM? No way chassis stiffness would be compromised, I mean, BMW are doing it in their top tier M cars even today. GM managed to mess up the front and even completely change out the rear bumper and taillight design, yet never tried to address the trunk concern. Heck, they could've eked out the missing inch for the "I can't fit my ****ing driver in this ****ing trunk" golf crew, too.

Rear legroom/headroom is more difficult, but IMO increasing the overall height by 1" and lowering the beltline by 1" would've been enough to alleviate it, along with the visibility complaints. Car would practically look the same and ride the same. That said, this would've been a chassis redesign, so granted, probably not worth it, nobody who is serious about buying a sports coupe wants to use the rear seat for adults after all. It worked very well for my kids, never an issue, by the way.

The infotainment screen angle brought up by many reviewers also would've been a trivial fix, just angle it back to vertical by redesigning 2-3 plastic parts, done.

The one thing they did do is adding the rear camera mirror, so let's give them that, but that part isn't Camaro specific, adding it required absolutely minimal effort, and they still managed to eliminate the useful Homelink garage door opener in the process (another dealbreaker for me, I sure won't tippy-tap phone apps while trying to make a left turn into my driveway, and letting an app open my garage doors remotely from anywhere in the world is a security concern in itself).

The sad part isn't that the 6th gen had criticisms raised about it but the fact that after releasing the ZL1 1LE in 2018, GM stopped caring and let the car slowly fade with minimal updates.

[Devstrike]

Originally Posted by Alan47717

I don't say that the visibility is great, or that the trunk opening is huge or that the back seat accessibility is good. I DO say if you really want those things then you don't want a sports car. The visibility in my car is no worse than it was in my C3 or in any of the C4's I drove as company cars.

The thing that puzzles me is the lack of understanding of what makes this car what it is. A reviewer spends hundreds of words raving about performance, handling, chassis stiffness, etc. then whines about poor "yada, yada, yada" issues without realizing those compromises help make all that good stuff possible.

This 100% right here. Also Arpad_m also has a great point GM did stop caring.

[tortilla-flats]

What's wrong with the infotainment screen?

[nothing_but_troub1le]

Originally Posted by tortilla-flats

What's wrong with the infotainment screen?

A lot of reviewers don't like how the screen is tilted forward, I've never noticed but its a thing people don't like.

[tortilla-flats]

Interesting. That is a key feature I find extremely beneficial. I noticed it right away as I had a C5 I put a new head unit in with a tilt screen and even with all the tilt angles available, I never could find an angle that didin't have a ton of glare.

When I got the Camaro, I noticed this immediately and the benefit.

Here's my old C5

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

What you're saying is true, and I find no real fault with this car even after all this time (took delivery in March 2018).

At the same time, GM didn't give two s***ts about early feedback and never even attempted to address these criticisms during the 6th gen's entire 9-year run.

Take the trunk opening, for example: how difficult would it have been to just split the taillights in the middle and vastly increase the size of the opening for the 2019 refresh? Dodge could do it, BMW can do it, why not GM? No way chassis stiffness would be compromised, I mean, BMW are doing it in their top tier M cars even today. GM managed to mess up the front and even completely change out the rear bumper and taillight design, yet never tried to address the trunk concern. Heck, they could've eked out the missing inch for the "I can't fit my ****ing driver in this ****ing trunk" golf crew, too.

Rear legroom/headroom is more difficult, but IMO increasing the overall height by 1" and lowering the beltline by 1" would've been enough to alleviate it, along with the visibility complaints. Car would practically look the same and ride the same. That said, this would've been a chassis redesign, so granted, probably not worth it, nobody who is serious about buying a sports coupe wants to use the rear seat for adults after all. It worked very well for my kids, never an issue, by the way.

The infotainment screen angle brought up by many reviewers also would've been a trivial fix, just angle it back to vertical by redesigning 2-3 plastic parts, done.

The one thing they did do is adding the rear camera mirror, so let's give them that, but that part isn't Camaro specific, adding it required absolutely minimal effort, and they still managed to eliminate the useful Homelink garage door opener in the process (another dealbreaker for me, I sure won't tippy-tap phone apps while trying to make a left turn into my driveway, and letting an app open my garage doors remotely from anywhere in the world is a security concern in itself).

The sad part isn't that the 6th gen had criticisms raised about it but the fact that after releasing the ZL1 1LE in 2018, GM stopped caring and let the car slowly fade with minimal updates.

Interesting thing about the trunk opening. I was a Captured Test Fleet driver for ATS Coupe and of course I was fully aware that ATS Coupe was the foundation for Camaro. I spoke with the Chief Engineer for that car about how disappointed I was with the trunk opening. He was very clear that they could do something about it but that nobody would like it, especially Camaro buyers. Even for ATS, the goal was to provide a more rigid chassis than BMW 3 Series with better grip and G-Force. The only way they could hit the targets for structural rigidity (translates into max G-force and handling) was a lot of bracing in the rear of the car and the result was the awkward trunk opening. So the decision was practicality vs performance and it wasn’t even close. So, to Number 3’s point, that decision was made based on a keen understanding of satisfying current Camaro customers’ need for even more performance at the expense of making the car more practical. Camaro buyers were already ok with making that trade-off.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by tortilla-flats

What's wrong with the infotainment screen?

Originally Posted by nothing_but_troub1le

A lot of reviewers don't like how the screen is tilted forward, I've never noticed but its a thing people don't like.

Originally Posted by tortilla-flats

Interesting. That is a key feature I find extremely beneficial. I noticed it right away as I had a C5 I put a new head unit in with a tilt screen and even with all the tilt angles available, I never could find an angle that didin't have a ton of glare.

When I got the Camaro, I noticed this immediately and the benefit.

…

The tilt position was done solely for the purpose of reducing / eliminating glare. As a convertible owner I can say that it is VERY effective and I cannot imagine another position that wouldn’t be totally unlivable in top-down driving than tilting it slightly downward.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

The tilt position was done solely for the purpose of reducing / eliminating glare. As a convertible owner I can say that it is VERY effective and I cannot imagine another position that wouldn’t be totally unlivable in top-down driving than tilting it slightly downward.

Well, the problem with the downward angle is that if you have the white seats or anyone sitting in the passenger seat in light colored clothes or dress, the screen will reflect that and become much less usable.

I have the black interior, so this isn't a problem when driving alone, but when my wife is in the car and she wears something even with a lighter pattern, screen visibility is way worse.

This is understandably one of those engineering tradeoffs where you can only decide which finger to bite, that's why you never heard me even mention it here.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Interesting thing about the trunk opening. I was a Captured Test Fleet driver for ATS Coupe and of course I was fully aware that ATS Coupe was the foundation for Camaro. I spoke with the Chief Engineer for that car about how disappointed I was with the trunk opening. He was very clear that they could do something about it but that nobody would like it, especially Camaro buyers. Even for ATS, the goal was to provide a more rigid chassis than BMW 3 Series with better grip and G-Force. The only way they could hit the targets for structural rigidity (translates into max G-force and handling) was a lot of bracing in the rear of the car and the result was the awkward trunk opening. So the decision was practicality vs performance and it wasn’t even close. So, to Number 3’s point, that decision was made based on a keen understanding of satisfying current Camaro customers’ need for even more performance at the expense of making the car more practical. Camaro buyers were already ok with making that trade-off.

Thanks for the insider info, James, as always . However, next time I pop off the taillight cover, I'll check what kind of bracing would need to be cut or removed for split taillights, I don't recall anything being up there that, if missing or smaller or lowered, would hurt much.

I do understand I'm not an chassis engineer and have no experience here, but what I do see is the total lack of engagement from GM in later model years, so unfortunately them simply being unwilling to work on a "best of both worlds" solution is a reasonable assumption.

All water under the bridge, though, given how the Camaro team was disbanded in 2018 and the chief engineer assigned to the Hummer EV project.