[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by fastball

If you looked at my previous post, you'd have seen I explained that all manufacturers have met and agreed to make pre-collision breaking and radar cruise STANDARD on 85% of their cars by 2020. This took place last year.

I've driven cars with it already, and I can say that you can adjust the sensitivity (distance to the car in front of you before it reduces speed) but you can't turn it off completely.

The alternative is to buy a manual transmission. Radar cruise and braking won't work on a manual because the car is mechanically locked into whichever gear you are in at the time and will stall without driver engagement when the ground speed becomes too slow for the gear ratio to keep the engine speed up.

I did miss that, my mistake.

I'm fine with radar cruise. Actually, I think it's kind of cool...but the collision braking thing, I just can't wrap my head around. And the manufacturers like Kia advertising it as though it's ok to not pay attention while driving just infuriates me...

[RenegadeXR]

A completely different rear tail lamp configuration. If they could change quad lamps on the 5th gen to dual lamps, they can change dual lamps on the 6th gen back to quad.

Put the snarky Toyota Camry comments to rest. Make the rear as aggressive as the front.

[00 Trans Ram]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

A completely different rear tail lamp configuration. If they could change quad lamps on the 5th gen to dual lamps, they can change dual lamps on the 6th gen back to quad.

Put the snarky Toyota Camry comments to rest. Make the rear as aggressive as the front.

Like this?

[ron scubadiver]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

A completely different rear tail lamp configuration. If they could change quad lamps on the 5th gen to dual lamps, they can change dual lamps on the 6th gen back to quad.

Put the snarky Toyota Camry comments to rest. Make the rear as aggressive as the front.

They could make the tail lights look more like a C7 Vette, a single unit with a divider between the lights.

Anything is possible. The C7 Vette is in its 4th year without a refresh but with a stream of variants. We are seeing that pattern with the Gen 6 Camaro. ZL1 and SS 1LE in year two. ZL1 1LE in year 3. Perhaps Z/28 in year 4.

GM is very good at keeping secrets.

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

Like this?

I'm sorry, no. Nice car overall, but I think one of the reason the blacked out lamps are so popular is that it more or less hides the bulkiness of the design.

Originally Posted by ron scubadiver

They could make the tail lights look more like a C7 Vette, a single unit with a divider between the lights.

Even if they did something that minor, I think it would be an improvement. Just create an indentation and a body colored segment in the middle or something. While the inner lights of the lamp make it look quad in a way, the housing is what I take issue with. It's too big and monolithic with a generic shape.

[00 Trans Ram]

Here's the problem with "collision avoidance". My wife's 2015 Traverse has this system. Luckily, it only sounds an alarm and flashes red lights on the windshield if it detects an "imminent collision". I could tell you about the numerous "false alarms" it gives off because of parked cars or (sometimes) nothing at all. But, I want to focus on another area.

Take the situation below. I'm driving and Car A suddenly stops. I can stomp the brakes to do an emergency stop. Because I was following at a proper distance, I know I can stop. But, there is a car behind me, Car C, that is pretty close. They may not be able to stop. I notice that Car B is slightly behind me, and that the road is clear in front of Car B.



So, I have my choice. Brake in my lane and hope that Car C doesn't hit me? Or, swap lanes, hit the gas, and avoid the situation altogether? I'm choosing the second option. Years of being a driving instructor and road racer have taught me to make these split-second decisions based upon multiple, moving factors.

When I do this in my wife's Traverse, the car thinks I'm going to hit Car A, and sounds the alarm. I ignore it, and continue on my merry way.

Now, what happens when my car not only has this alarm, but also has a system where it's going to apply the brakes? Well, one of 2 things will happen.

1) I'll hit the gas to change lanes, and the car will decide to cancel my request for acceleration and instead begin hard braking. Since I've decided to switch lanes, this means that I'm probably going to pull in front of Car B and cause a wreck by making him hit my rear bumper.

2) I'll let the car do it's thing, and will probably get rear-ended by Car C.

So, either way, I get into a wreck. One is my fault, the other isn't. But, my car is still FUBAR and I and my kids are possibly injured.

This is why I'll NEVER buy a car that has auto braking. Or auto steering. Or auto acceleration. If you want to put in some lights that tell me the car doesn't like what I'm doing, fine. I'll turn them off, or ignore them (there's a whole other "Boy Who Cried Wolf" post dealing with ignoring them, but I'll save it for another day). But, don't give me something that's going to forcefully second-guess my driving!

[00 Trans Ram]

Originally Posted by RenegadeXR

I'm sorry, no. Nice car overall, but I think one of the reason the blacked out lamps are so popular is because it more or less hides the bulkiness of the design.



Even if they did something that minor, I think it would be an improvement. Just create an indentation and a body colored segment in the middle or something. While the inner lights of the lamp make it look quad in a way, the housing is what I take issue with. It's too big and monolithic with a generic shape.

I think I know what you mean.

Most states (all?) don't have a "square acreage" requirement for tail lights. It just has to have something. And, with LEDs, why do we even need "tail light units"?

Why not just some pinholes with LEDs sticking out of them? Or, something like that. Probably not a "Lite Brite" solution, but something.

[2010Camaro1ss]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

I seriously hope that GM is NOT reading this thread. So disappointed!!

I do NOT want some nanny barking at me that there may or may not be a car in front of me that may or may not be slowing down. And, if it even THINKS about trying to hit the brakes for me, I will pull over and beat my own car with a baseball bat.

I have eyes. I have ears. I will decide when, where, and how to apply brakes, steering input, etc. If I wanted someone else to drive my car, I'd get my wife. Not some engineer and computer programmer.

What do I want to see in the next Camaro? Things that make it more fun for ME to drive the car. NOT things that will make it OK for me to be an imbecile and ignore the road around me.

+1

[Bhobbs]

Revised front fascia, hood and extractors. I like the front end, but its too similar to my current car. I hate the toilet seat shaped hood and the nostril extractors.

New rear fascia. The proportions of the rear fascia just don't look right. The tail lights aren't great either.

More power. I would like to see a bump in power because the Mustang is getting one, but this is GM, so I know that's out the window.

A10 on all models. There is no reason for the A10 to not be optional on all Camaro levels.

[RenegadeXR]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

I think I know what you mean.

Most states (all?) don't have a "square acreage" requirement for tail lights. It just has to have something. And, with LEDs, why do we even need "tail light units"?

Why not just some pinholes with LEDs sticking out of them? Or, something like that. Probably not a "Lite Brite" solution, but something.

Most states have strict requirements set by the DOT over the minimum area of illumination, including the minimum area that must be active at any given time during turn signal activation. The latter requirement created an interesting engineering scenario for the Mustang, I heard, since they had to make sure its tri-bar lamps' segments were each wide enough such that they could still legally create a "swipe" animation while still having enough illuminated surface at any moment in time.

But yeah, other than that, I'm not aware of any law saying the housing has *exist* per se. I do, however, think the housing counts toward the overall illuminated area due to the inside reflectors. So at the end of the day, you kind of end up needing them. Ie: A bunch of discrete LEDs in a reflective housing create a larger illuminated service than if they were not housed.

[ron scubadiver]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

Like this?

Is your car Mosaic Black or Nightfall Gray? The lights are a popular mod and look good. They ought to be a build option.

[m666etal]

Get the Zl1 1LE spoiler on the 2SS :P and fix the mechanical issues!!

[00 Trans Ram]

Originally Posted by ron scubadiver

Is your car Mosaic Black or Nightfall Gray? The lights are a popular mod and look good. They ought to be a build option.

It's the mosaic black.

One note - I got the blackout kit for the 3rd brake light and rear reflectors. The rear reflector ones work nice. But, the 3rd brake light one . . . I don't like. It covers most of the light. But, since the light is slightly raised above the metal of the car, there are some areas that it just doesn't cover.

I think I'm going to remove the brake light and paint it with some of that tinting spray. But, I need to look and see if there is a clear-lens replacement first.

[trueraiderfan17]

Originally Posted by FlowForm_Wheels

Surprised nobody has said they want