[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by 90503

The "fighting" over a visibility point only comes from some who want to throw grenades at a ship that has already sailed.

Their big ideas for the 6thGen went unheeded so now all they have left are pointless arguments requiring that what they thought best must be acknowledged by current and potential buyers, that the Camaro is not a great car, they have bought a compromised, inferior design.

Anyone who is ok with the design, visibility, etc., is dismissed as being either unenlightened or outright lying about their preferences and lack of admission that the car and the visiblilty isn't as good as they would have built it.

No design or prototype has ever been seen of a 6thGen that satisfies the all-knowing's features that would have made it a "great car"....

And it's not just their opinion on what makes a "great car", it's that no-one acknowledges their un-used delicate genius as superior to their's.

You are not listening. All that is being said is that the car could have improved visibiliy. Hopefully they do next time. If you think this is the end all and be all of cars then so be it, but to those who are honest with themselves the 2016 Camaro isn't the greatest car to ever grace the roads with its presence. Their is always room for realistic improvements.

[90503]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

You are not listening. All that is being said is that the car could have improved visibiliy. Hopefully they do next time. If you think this is the end all and be all of cars then so be it, but to those who are honest with themselves the 2016 Camaro isn't the greatest car to ever grace the roads with its presence. Their is always room for realistic improvements.

You haven't read the whole thread. "Improvements" for the next gen?...sure.Maybe.
They didn't get put into this Gen, and some just can't wait until then. Again, what may be an improvement is not up for debate with some. It's their way only.

[Bongos2U]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

You are not listening. All that is being said is that the car could have improved visibiliy. Hopefully they do next time. If you think this is the end all and be all of cars then so be it, but to those who are honest with themselves the 2016 Camaro isn't the greatest car to ever grace the roads with its presence. Their is always room for realistic improvements.

I absolutely think that the Camaro could have been designed with better visibility without compromising it's aggressive looks.

The fact that Chevy used current 5th gen. owners as their main focus group was probably a mistake.

I've said this before, I wonder how many sales have been / will be lost due to the visibility issue ?

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 90503

The "fighting" over a visibility point only comes from some who want to throw grenades at a ship that has already sailed.

Their big ideas for the 6thGen went unheeded so now all they have left are pointless arguments requiring that what they thought best must be acknowledged by current and potential buyers, that the Camaro is not a great car, they have bought a compromised, inferior design.

Anyone who is ok with the design, visibility, etc., is dismissed as being either unenlightened, a "fan-boy" or outright lying about their preferences and lack of admission that the car and the visiblilty isn't as good as they would have built it.

No design or prototype has ever been seen of a 6thGen that satisfies the all-knowing's features that would have made it a "great car"....

And it's not just their opinion on what makes a "great car", it's that no-one acknowledges their un-used delicate genius as superior to their's.

Not how I see it and unthinking started it.

The complaint started when another member started a complaint about the CR review criticizing visibility. Went in to call anyone that thought visibility was important were whiners, I believe was the term.

My point was for everyone to stop trying to say every magazine is wrong and everyone on here is wrong to even suggest the Gen6 has bad visibility.

It does.

It doesn't matter that you can get used to it or adjust your mirrors or use technology. Outward, particularly rear, visibility was degraded from bad to worse.

And of course it's too late.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by 90503

The "fighting" over a visibility point only comes from some who want to throw grenades at a ship that has already sailed.

Their big ideas for the 6thGen went unheeded so now all they have left are pointless arguments requiring that what they thought best must be acknowledged by current and potential buyers, that the Camaro is not a great car, they have bought a compromised, inferior design. ...

Ironically...90% of the commentary on this very website (well, Camaro5.com) for the past 5-6 years has been incorporated into the new car. Spend any significant time in one, and an experienced Camaro driver can't help but see this is true.

They even improved on the "visibility issue" compared to the last generation. But the designers and engineers are far wiser than some posting in this thread - because they know better than to compromise the design of the car for the sake of percieved outward visibility that nobody apparently cared enough about to buy a competing car: It's been the best-selling sporty coupe for the past 5 years. That is, until everyone started waiting for the new one.

Originally Posted by Number 3

Outward, particularly rear, visibility was degraded from bad to worse.

I can agree with the above statement so long as I point out the specified direction of "rear". That tiny-ass rear window got tinier...and skinnier...I'm not entirely sure why.

I haven't actually driven a Stingray...but I wonder for a silly comparison's sake, if it's any better to see out the back than the 6th gen.

The rest of directions, front, and side-to-side: it has improved. I don't own a '16...yet...but I'm 1000 miles confident in my statement.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

Ironically...90% of the commentary on this very website (well, Camaro5.com) for the past 5-6 years has been incorporated into the new car. Spend any significant time in one, and an experienced Camaro driver can't help but see this is true.

They even improved on the "visibility issue" compared to the last generation. But the designers and engineers are far wiser than some posting in this thread - because they know better than to compromise the design of the car for the sake of percieved outward visibility that nobody apparently cared enough about to buy a competing car: It's been the best-selling sporty coupe for the past 5 years. That is, until everyone started waiting for the new one.



I can agree with the above statement so long as I point out the specified direction of "rear". That tiny-ass rear window got tinier...and skinnier...I'm not entirely sure why.

I haven't actually driven a Stingray...but I wonder for a silly comparison's sake, if it's any better to see out the back than the 6th gen.

The rest of directions, front, and side-to-side: it has improved. I don't own a '16...yet...but I'm 1000 miles confident in my statement.

My friend forward is only better if you only consider forward over the hood (a key measure for improvement in Forward visibility of C5 vs C6 Corvette was the ground line viewed over the hood) and a narrower A-pillar. Side view upward and downward remains heavily compromised due to GM's love affair with high belt lines and slammed roofs. Look out the right window while driving and you can see less. The smaller door glass should be an indicator of that alone.

Of any I think you understand my concern. Folks in this thread are ignoring a flaw in the car. It's been noted by EVERY magazine review and every time it is mentioned people jump on those concerned as whiners.

Take a car that puts form over function in 3 main areas, visibility, trunk space and rear seat accommodations CAN result in a car with a very passionate but restricted market. Soooooo passionate that will argue ANY and ALL perceived slights of their car. And if that is what GM hoped for, a car with slightly less appeal but with a far more pationate buyer willing to pay a higher premium for the performance thus resulting in more profit, then they may have done exactly that.

But please folks, recognize that poor visibility is a flaw. Just because you don't notice it or don't care about it or are just happy the Camaro kicks the crap out of the Mustang doesn't mean it isn't true. It is. It could have been better and IMHO should have.

But at least I can understand everyone's opinion.

[Mr. Wyndham]

I've got to agree to disagree with you on this, 3. Not on all points, mind you....

If you're a tall person...there are no rear seats. And the rear window is smaller.

I just don't think anything else about the car is terribly unappealing. I think they make the car special. I understand that not everyone thinks the same. Especially those not on this site...But I'm not going to continue to beat this dead horse...so we shall see.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Toxicgoober

Because it has been endlessly, incessantly, beaten to death since the first review months ago. It's a sports car for one, and for two, there already exists a Mustang, with different styling and different pros/cons. You hardly ever hear anyone griping about the extra body roll from the Mustang because it's understood it's a GT car, and probably will have some extra body roll as a by product of making it a better cruising machine. This is the exact same thing as it being understandable the Camaro has restricted visibility because it is, was, and hopefully always will be a highly stylized/fun/more sports car oriented alternative to the Mustang. We don't need clones of the same thing from two manufacturers. The Camaro sold perfectly well just as is in the 5th gen. I do t understand why hardly anyone gets that you are going to have some sacrifices with any car, regardless of price range. It's impossible to retain these exact looks AND have improved visibility. Again, everyone who has that big of an issue can absolutely purchase a Mustang/Challenger. It doesn't exactly keep me up at night; I'm just extremely tired of hearing the same BS by almost everyone in almost every review.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First it's not BS. It exists and why can't anyone at least agree it's an issue when every magazine makes note of it? I don't want a Ford or a Fiat. I am apparently alone in the greatness I expected from GM.

Second it's a matter of what sacrifices you are willing to trade off. Many here prefer the BA styling over daily usability as an automobile. Me? I know what it takes and I know the trade offs that can be made. I had hoped for more. You guys are simply accepting less. And hopefullly that is sufficient to at least maintain the old cars sales, which were decent but never great.

[meb91]

The way I see it, unless the visibility is causing accidents, it's not a big deal. If you can successfully drive the car without hitting anything, what's the problem? Yes some people may prefer something with larger windows, but that's a personal preference not a safety issue. After driving one I don't think it's enough of an issue to dissuade someone who wants the car otherwise. If it wasn't enough to hinder 5th gen sales, it shouldn't be a problem for the 6th.

[DrkPhx]

That Car and Driver review was harsh, especially the part about the 6th gen being responsible for mandatory blind spot systems. I still think a wrap around rear glass would have helped with the rear visibility and they could have still retained the design elements imo.

[pete1077]

Originally Posted by Number 3

My friend forward is only better if you only consider forward over the hood (a key measure for improvement in Forward visibility of C5 vs C6 Corvette was the ground line viewed over the hood) and a narrower A-pillar. Side view upward and downward remains heavily compromised due to GM's love affair with high belt lines and slammed roofs. Look out the right window while driving and you can see less. The smaller door glass should be an indicator of that alone.

Of any I think you understand my concern. Folks in this thread are ignoring a flaw in the car. It's been noted by EVERY magazine review and every time it is mentioned people jump on those concerned as whiners.

Take a car that puts form over function in 3 main areas, visibility, trunk space and rear seat accommodations CAN result in a car with a very passionate but restricted market. Soooooo passionate that will argue ANY and ALL perceived slights of their car. And if that is what GM hoped for, a car with slightly less appeal but with a far more pationate buyer willing to pay a higher premium for the performance thus resulting in more profit, then they may have done exactly that.

But please folks, recognize that poor visibility is a flaw. Just because you don't notice it or don't care about it or are just happy the Camaro kicks the crap out of the Mustang doesn't mean it isn't true. It is. It could have been better and IMHO should have.

But at least I can understand everyone's opinion.

Its funny that you mention the mustang. The 6th gen mustang has very similar lines to the 6th gen Camaro but has better visibility. Like I said in my earlier post, I'm pretty sure you just get used to the camaro's poor visibility and adapt your driving accordingly. It took me a few weeks of driving my 4th gen and then I never really thought about visibility again. I understand why GM designed the car the way they did and put looks/performance over visibility. Do I wish it was easier to see out of? Sure. Will I still buy a 6th gen Camaro despite its visibility issues? Absolutely. I'm sure there are several people who will buy the Mustang instead of the Camaro. The real question is will they buy them because the visibility is better or for other reasons such as a lower price? The 6th gen mustang sales have been hot and the higher pricing of the Camaro doesn't help win more sales. Yes, stock vs stock, its a better performing car but I'm thinking the mustang will still outsell the 6th gen Camaro since the majority of people would prefer to get a car that's almost as fast (435HP is nothing to sneeze at) and can be obtained for several thousand dollars cheaper.

[Techn9cian805]

IDK whats going on in this thread about the visibility issue, but here are my two cents.

is it an issue? yes. should it have been fixed in the gen 6? yes. does it bother me, as a Camaro owner? not anymore. I've just learned to tolerate it. but I'm sure not everyone who is shopping for a pony car will be willing to tolerate it, and its why I think that this visibility problem is going to deter sales for chevy. I have 3 acquaintances that have traded in their gen5s for a mustang because they hoped the gen 6 would have inproved on what they had gotten tired of: the poor visibility.

to me, the issue isn't a big one. all I need to do is lift my lazy hands to adjust the mirrors, but its still annoying that I have to do that every time I need to park. this is for my 2014, I haven't tested the gen 6 yet, but from what I've read, there isn't much of an improvement, which is a shame.

is visibility stopping me from getting a gen 6? no. but I sure wish it wasn't an issue anymore. its really the only thing I can honestly complain about. I've gotten used to it over time and can fit the car into any tight situation with confidence, but the fact that its something I had to learn to tolerate and adapt to was a pain I could have gone without. it is a problem, and I see why people keep bashing it.

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by Techn9cian805

IDK whats going on in this thread about the visibility issue, but here are my two cents.

is it an issue? yes. should it have been fixed in the gen 6? yes. does it bother me, as a Camaro owner? not anymore. I've just learned to tolerate it. but I'm sure not everyone who is shopping for a pony car will be willing to tolerate it, and its why I think that this visibility problem is going to deter sales for chevy. I have 3 acquaintances that have traded in their gen5s for a mustang because they hoped the gen 6 would have inproved on what they had gotten tired of: the poor visibility.

to me, the issue isn't a big one. all I need to do is lift my lazy hands to adjust the mirrors, but its still annoying that I have to do that every time I need to park. this is for my 2014, I haven't tested the gen 6 yet, but from what I've read, there isn't much of an improvement, which is a shame.

is visibility stopping me from getting a gen 6? no. but I sure wish it wasn't an issue anymore. its really the only thing I can honestly complain about. I've gotten used to it over time and can fit the car into any tight situation with confidence, but the fact that its something I had to learn to tolerate and adapt to was a pain I could have gone without. it is a problem, and I see why people keep bashing it.

If all 5th gen owners would have been this realistic about the weak points of the 5th gen design maybe GM would have heard enough to decide to address the visibility. The guys on here crying foul to anyone who criticizes the visibility are the kind of people GM thought was smart to use as the focus group. Hopefully this go around people will be more realistic about the downfalls of the car. I will live with it but I would have loved a little better visibility and rear seat space.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

If all 5th gen owners would have been this realistic about the weak points of the 5th gen design maybe GM would have heard enough to decide to address the visibility. The guys on here crying foul to anyone who criticizes the visibility are the kind of people GM thought was smart to use as the focus group. Hopefully this go around people will be more realistic about the downfalls of the car. I will live with it but I would have loved a little better visibility and rear seat space.

I've spoken to the engineers and designers about this at length. The visibility concern has been a popular criticism since day one. We've seen it on this site, in surveys, in magazines.

I think people were very real about their impressions with the last car. Not sure why you think they weren't. It shows in their execution of the new one. Fact is: As you can see briefly around this thread: reduced visibility (vs other, more mainstream cars) is an issue worth noting, but nearly everyone here has stated in some fashion or another that they're willing to deal with it because something else about the car makes up for it to them. So, the team made a conscious decision to prioritize the design of the car. Meanwhile - they HAVE improved visibility to a degree (except rearward).

Same thing goes with rear seating space. People wanted a lighter car. Lighter means smaller. Smaller means limited rear seat space.

Unfortunately, you cannot please everyone, and some features just aren't possible to engineer or design in together. A "Have your cake and eat it, too" scenario...So it's up to the Camaro team to decide what's most important based on their own expertise and enthusiast/customer input. It's called trade-offs.