[COmaro]

Originally Posted by MotownBoy

Anyone run into the oil usage issue mentioned?

I'm not checking my oil when gassing up.

Every time I read something like this I just don't know what to say. How long does it take to pop the hood and pull the dipstick?

Every few weeks there is a post from someone who has their oil light come on because they let their oil go almost completely empty. There seem to be a lot of people who think the oil light comes on when you are down a little bit of oil. By the time the oil light comes on your engine is probably toast, because you have no oil pressure at all. THERE IS NO OIL LEVEL LIGHT on a Camaro or almost any other vehicle. I just don't get it.

At the very least you should be checking your oil religiously immediately after every oil change and AT LEAST every 1000 miles or so after that. I have had the dealer short me twice on oil during an oil change, once by two quarts. If you are like me, I then check every vehicle I own almost every time I get gas. I have had vehicles go from using no oil at all to using a quart in 1000 miles because of a plugged PCV system. If you try to go the entire interval without checking, and something like that happens, you *will* regret it. $$$$

I grew up the days when cars routinely used a lot of oil, so I am used to checking it, but I guess people today just don't think about it until it is too late.

[00 Trans Ram]

I simply don't get the "visibility" issue. Look at the visualization below. On the left is what you might see out of a normal "family sedan" windshield. On the right is what you really need to see. The Camaro is somewhere in-between.



In fact, I was looking the other day, and wishing that I could black-out the top 6" of my windshield. Frankly, I don't need to be able to see tree tops or clouds. I need to see the following:

Windshield: redlights, cars, street signs, street
Side: cars
Rear: cars

So, given that those are the things I need to see, why do I want panoramic windows?

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

So, given that those are the things I need to see, why do I want panoramic windows?

It's all psychosomatic. Otherwise every one of us would be having accidents every other day if the hyperbole about the camaro was accurate - or mattered.

They can't label it a redneck beater anymore, so this is the new scapegoat.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

I simply don't get the "visibility" issue. Look at the visualization below. On the left is what you might see out of a normal "family sedan" windshield. On the right is what you really need to see. The Camaro is somewhere in-between.



In fact, I was looking the other day, and wishing that I could black-out the top 6" of my windshield. Frankly, I don't need to be able to see tree tops or clouds. I need to see the following:

Windshield: redlights, cars, street signs, street
Side: cars
Rear: cars

So, given that those are the things I need to see, why do I want panoramic windows?

Excellent analogy that is exactly right. It's truncated vertically so it's apparted immediately it you're not accustomed to it. It in no way inhibits your ability to see the road.

Regardless, comments about visibility will be pre baked into every review until Chevy changes it.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Excellent analogy that is exactly right. It's truncated vertically so it's apparted immediately it you're not accustomed to it. It in no way inhibits your ability to see the road.

Regardless, comments about visibility will be pre baked into every review until Chevy changes it.

And there are only two ways I can think of to change it (others may have more)

1. Change the styling to a less aggressive contour of the hood and roofline. That would suck and would change the design language of the car.
2. Go to a panoramic roof design where the windshield blends into a solid hard tempered glass roof panel, making the top a huge sunroof. Some luxury cars have this, and I've seen concepts for more affordable cars with this setup, so it could be possible for cars at a Camaro price point. I've driven a couple cars that have this. Gives it a convertible feel without the wind. Some of the ones I've seen allow the top to "auto-tint", getting dark if the driver doesn't want to bake in the sun.

The rear view is an easier fix. Use the video mirror like the one in the Cadillac CT6, Chevrolet Bolt, and Jaguar I-Pace.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Excellent analogy that is exactly right. It's truncated vertically so it's apparted immediately it you're not accustomed to it. It in no way inhibits your ability to see the road.

Regardless, comments about visibility will be pre baked into every review until Chevy changes it.

My comment is a cross post from the bunker syndrome thread, but I think it's still apt. When people talk about bad visibility, this what they are really articulating:

I think the problems with visibility have nothing to do with rear or blind spot visibility. In fact, I found the mirrors were better sized/positioned than my ATS and BRZ. That plus the blind spot monitor makes lane changes a breeze.

The biggest issues with visibility are:

1. The tiny side windows give you very little side to ground visibility. This is important for not hitting curbs or road debris parallel to you.

2. The binnacle design over the instrument cluster obstructs some of your forward visibility and visibility of the front-right fender, which is important for placing the car in tight areas.

Essentially, there *is* worse visibility than most cars for when you need to place the car in tight places. Other than that, I think the visibility issues are overblown.

Edit: Regarding the car's short comings, I find the interior packaging and lack of storage space is a far greater issue than visibility. On the test drive I legitimately struggled on figuring out where to put my keys, wallet, phone and glasses case while still having the ability to use the cup holders.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by SSDan

The mag writers have to have something negative for every car

This ↑↑↑

Otherwise they'd be seen as shills for the industry or the mfr even more than may already be the case.


Norm

[Lukemo]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

to me, you get a camaro because you already know you want one. You're not talked into it, or happen to stumble upon one at a dealership. You research it, you know tons about it and you buy it because you've already determined that it's better than anything available you can afford. It's how i buy computer parts and electronics and it's how I buy my cars.

The camaro i dont think has ever really been in the market of the kind of person who doesn't know what they want and isn't willing to adapt. You only get these kind of repetitive negatives when attempting to market the car outside of it's demographic. Sort of like complaining that a sports car has a stiff suspension and gives a rough ride. Nobody buying a sports car cares. They knew that before they ever sat down in one and consider it cost of admission.

I think the same is true for this incessant crap about visibility. You're either prepared to work around it and adapt so it's not a hindrance at all or you dont want to. The car doesn't owe those people anything. To me it's about staying in your target demographic, knowing them and marketing to them and not attempting to extend out where you can't. The camaro is not a car for everyone, it never has been and it never should be because cars that the masses like to buy tend to suck.

This is probably the most perceptive, articulate post I've ever read on this forum. I agree with you on all points and you are my new favorite person.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by unhappymeal

Essentially, there *is* worse visibility than most cars for when you need to place the car in tight places. Other than that, I think the visibility issues are overblown.

The Challenger is far worse in tight places, for one it is substantially larger in all dimensions. Two, it's hood is much longer and there is more car in front of the front wheels (making it that much harder to fit in a parking space, especially when adjacent cars did not park between the lines).

But none of these reviews come from quantified observations in parking/tight maneuvering situations. They are just blanket statements based on impression. And that comes from the low sightlines and reduced amount of light from the aft and rear quarters. Not saying at all that the Camaro is easy to park, but it is easier to park than a Challenger. But these same reviewers frequently do not mention anything about driving/parking the Challenger in a tight, crowded urban environment. And the only time they mention it's size is as plus for space or a negative for performance driving.

[unhappymeal]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

The Challenger is far worse in tight places, for one it is substantially larger in all dimensions. Two, it's hood is much longer and there is more car in front of the front wheels (making it that much harder to fit in a parking space, especially when adjacent cars did not park between the lines).

But none of these reviews come from quantified observations in parking/tight maneuvering situations. They are just blanket statements based on impression. And that comes from the low sightlines and reduced amount of light from the aft and rear quarters. Not saying at all that the Camaro is easy to park, but it is easier to park than a Challenger. But these same reviewers frequently do not mention anything about driving/parking the Challenger in a tight, crowded urban environment. And the only time they mention it's size is as plus for space or a negative for performance driving.

Yep, that's absolutely fair. I think the Challenger gets a pass because even though it's harder to maneuver in tight places, you can more easily see objects parallel and to the front-right of you.

I do agree that criticisms of the Camaro are part psychological (I am not used to this little light in the cabin!) and part practical (it's tough to place this car in in tight places). Having said that, the shock factor does legitimately dissuade some people from buying the car, which I am sure GM does not want.

[00 Trans Ram]

Perhaps I'm unusual in this respect. But, I hardly ever have to "see" my car to know if/when it'll fit into tight spaces.

The first thing that I do when I get a new car is to have someone stand at each corner of the car. That way, I know where the corners are. The last car that I could absolutely see EVERY corner of the car from the driver's seat was my . . . '66 Mustang. Since then (95 Camaro, 00 Trans Am, 08 G8), I've been unable to see the corners. I just had to know where they were.

But, how do I know exactly where to put the car? Mirrors. I adjust my mirrors so that I can see the sides of the car when I'm parking (not when driving - which is when they are looking at my blind spots).

In fact, I have a 2-car garage. My wife parks on the left side and pulls straight in. Because I have shelves on both walls of the garage, I have to pull in backwards (so that we can both open our doors). I pull in so far to the side (passenger up against the left side shelves) that the car is within 4-6" of the shelves. I've parked it this way for 3 months now, every day. And I'm always within 2-3" of the same spot. Just by using mirrors.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by 00 Trans Ram

Perhaps I'm unusual in this respect. But, I hardly ever have to "see" my car to know if/when it'll fit into tight spaces.

The first thing that I do when I get a new car is to have someone stand at each corner of the car. That way, I know where the corners are. The last car that I could absolutely see EVERY corner of the car from the driver's seat was my . . . '66 Mustang. Since then (95 Camaro, 00 Trans Am, 08 G8), I've been unable to see the corners. I just had to know where they were.

But, how do I know exactly where to put the car? Mirrors. I adjust my mirrors so that I can see the sides of the car when I'm parking (not when driving - which is when they are looking at my blind spots).

In fact, I have a 2-car garage. My wife parks on the left side and pulls straight in. Because I have shelves on both walls of the garage, I have to pull in backwards (so that we can both open our doors). I pull in so far to the side (passenger up against the left side shelves) that the car is within 4-6" of the shelves. I've parked it this way for 3 months now, every day. And I'm always within 2-3" of the same spot. Just by using mirrors.

Backing in isn't an issue, it is ridiculously easy with the backup camera and its guidelines. But you can't back into a drive-thru or a narrow entrance with a car waiting to pull out. You can't back into a parking spot that has one way traffic with angled parking spots, or the parking lot is so busy that no one will let you back in. These are the areas the visibility actually does impact for the Camaro. You get used to it over time as you learn the car of course, but it will always be a problem area where you have to take extra care. I know most of us don't put faith in other people not to hit our cars parked, so like many....I park as far away from others as possible. Which always makes parking easier.

I don't believe the Mustang really has that much better visibility in these areas and the Challenger is far worse. It's just one of those things you have to accept buying a sports car. But it should tell you how useless statements about visibility from the media are if they don't actually test some situations to quantify their opinions. It's essentially the same as calling one car beautiful and another ugly, neither are quantifiable.

[Marty McFlew]

Coming up on 4000mi. So far no oil consumption like in this review. Anyone consuming oil? And is it from blowby or burning it? And if so did it occur after racking up miles or from the get go?