[90503]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

Unfortunately, with the current Camaro sales trend numbers, even without the Covid19 influence, I can't imagine there ever being both available at the same time.

That's sort of my point. You can say the first cars were better than the horse. You could still choose one or the other.

With only Camaro EVs available and no other ICE choice, it doesn't make them better, and creates an artificial appearing demand.

[mikeman]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

You could almost say the same thing about continuing the Camaro name from the mid-70's gen 2 through the 80's gen 3. With few exceptions, the performance from those years was an embarrassment. Iron Duke 90 hp? 145 hp Z/28?

From what perspective are you judging this from? Today? That's not really a fair comparision. Back then, the powertrain engineers at the automotive companies were thinking V8 engines would be completely dead by the early to mid '80's.

The Iron Duke was a stop gap effort to raise CAFE for GM. There weren't too many Iron Dukes on the Chevy lot back then. Most people got the V6 or one of the regular 145 hp LG4 V8's. The LG4 was actually the base engine for the Z28. The optional Cross-Fire Injection had 165 hp and then 175 hp for '83 so it wasn't that bad.

Performance was not an embarrassment compared to the competition at the time. In fact, if we go back to the mid '70's, the 6.6L T/A in the Firebird Trans Am was clicking off solid mid 6 sec 0-60's and high 14's to low 15's in the 1/4 mile. If you go look at what the performance times of regular muscle cars were in the late '60's and early '70's, most were around 14's to 15's in the 1/4 mile with a mid 6 sec to low 7 sec 0-60.

The magazines and muscle car fans will always like to point out the performance times of LS6's, 429's and Hemi 426's. However, those models were rather rare and limited in production. Most muscle cars back then were not in the 12''s or even 13's bone stock.

Performance didn't get much better until the LS1 series came out in the 4th gen. That was the beginning of the modern V8 performance era and it got better with each generation.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by mikeman

From what perspective are you judging this from? Today? That's not really a fair comparision. Back then, the powertrain engineers at the automotive companies were thinking V8 engines would be completely dead by the early to mid '80's.

The Iron Duke was a stop gap effort to raise CAFE for GM. There weren't too many Iron Dukes on the Chevy lot back then. Most people got the V6 or one of the regular 145 hp LG4 V8's. The LG4 was actually the base engine for the Z28. The optional Cross-Fire Injection had 165 hp and then 175 hp for '83 so it wasn't that bad.

Performance was not an embarrassment compared to the competition at the time. In fact, if we go back to the mid '70's, the 6.6L T/A in the Firebird Trans Am was clicking off solid mid 6 sec 0-60's and high 14's to low 15's in the 1/4 mile. If you go look at what the performance times of regular muscle cars were in the late '60's and early '70's, most were around 14's to 15's in the 1/4 mile with a mid 6 sec to low 7 sec 0-60.

The magazines and muscle car fans will always like to point out the performance times of LS6's, 429's and Hemi 426's. However, those models were rather rare and limited in production. Most muscle cars back then were not in the 12''s or even 13's bone stock.

Performance didn't get much better until the LS1 series came out in the 4th gen. That was the beginning of the modern V8 performance era and it got better with each generation.

Let me try to clarify.

Imagine the uproar on this forum if government regulations again forced the car manufacturers to de-tune engines again down below 150 HP as the ony way to meet the new standards within the next 3 years.

Yeah, it would effect all manufacturers equally, but if GM still manufactured Camaros with a similar layout and body style but with economy box commuter engines only, I could imagine some would say it doesn't deserve to be called a Camaro anymore because it is an insult to the heritage of the name, regardless of how it might compare to other manufacturer's offerings.

Not saying that will happen again, but it most certainly happened around 1972 or so. Regardless of the even playing field, what is the present day the 'heritage' of that name worth from that period when 165 HP was the high performance engine? Didn't matter, that's all that was available. The heritage the previous poster referenced was created in the late 60's and died for a while. Is the name really that important? I don't know.

Things change.

[Martinjlm]

I’m not going to buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m not going to not buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m going to buy whatever checks my boxes. If it looks good, drives fast and corners like it’s on rails, then it will be in my consideration set. ICE, BEV, or something in between, I’m good.

Concern over charge time and range are way overplayed. Most EVs coming to market these days can handle a week’s worth of most people’s driving on one single charge. In essence, most take ZERO time to charge because the charging is done at a time when the vehicle wouldn’t be in use anyway, so the driver is never waiting for the car to finish charging. That’s been our experience since 2012 when we got our first Chevrolet Volt.

At this point fast charging, which should only be used on the occasional long trip that exceeds the full range of the vehicle, has improved to the point where vehicles can charge up to 80% of capacity in 30 minutes. Most times I take trips over 300 miles if I stop for gas, the stop usually takes 20 - 30 minutes since I’m also buying coffee or snacks and maybe even a quick meal. If my car is charging while I do that, fine.

[mikeman]

Originally Posted by 17rsvert

Let me try to clarify.

Imagine the uproar on this forum if government regulations again forced the car manufacturers to de-tune engines again down below 150 HP as the ony way to meet the new standards within the next 3 years.

Yeah, it would effect all manufacturers equally, but if GM still manufactured Camaros with a similar layout and body style but with economy box commuter engines only, I could imagine some would say it doesn't deserve to be called a Camaro anymore because it is an insult to the heritage of the name, regardless of how it might compare to other manufacturer's offerings.

Not saying that will happen again, but it most certainly happened around 1972 or so. Regardless of the even playing field, what is the present day the 'heritage' of that name worth from that period when 165 HP was the high performance engine? Didn't matter, that's all that was available. The heritage the previous poster referenced was created in the late 60's and died for a while. Is the name really that important? I don't know.

Things change.

Well, you could argue things the other way too. Is an EV with the self-driving feature still a Camaro? Or, is it just another EV self-driving pod like all the others? You know that will be the next development of the car, taking the control of driving out of people's hands. Heck, they even have that now, in limited fashion, on some EV models like the Tesla.

You seem to be stuck on the HP argument, but that's not what the Camaro is all about. The Camaro was GM's response to compete in the highly successful Ford Mustang sporty compact pony car market. It gave GM buyers a sporty, stylish 2 dr coupe with relatively good performance depending on engine option. Even if you didn't check the box for the big V8, you still got a nice sporty stylish car for the times.

As for heritage, the Camaro was never known as the fastest thing alive. Except for the top tier big blocks, the Camaro was middle of the pack when it came to performance. The much respected '69 Z28 (which everybody and their brother loves today) only did the 1/4 in the 15's and 0-60 was in the mid 7's. 11 years later, the "175hp" 1981 Camaro Z28 achieved similar times so performance stayed pretty consistent. Yeah, the 1982 Camaro Z28 was a little slower, but once the L69 H.O arrived mid year '83, things were back to being low 15's in the 1/4 and low 7's from 0-60.

The thing that's selling EV's right now is the perception of being cleaner for the environment, less reliance on big oil and ultra high performance especially when it comes to 0-60. They ratcheted up the performance capability because they know that will sell the cars more than just the environmental impact perception or better fuel economy would. Someday, when everything is EV and clicking off 0-60 in the 2's, they will have to come up with something new to make buyers want one vehicle over the other. Something like a flying feature perhaps? I don't know.

[17rsvert]

Originally Posted by mikeman

You seem to be stuck on the HP argument, but that's not what the Camaro is all about.

I wouldn't say stuck on it, I was using that as an example of how things change over the years, both for the better and the worse sometimes. And I'm not the one who brought up concerns about 'heritage' I was just making a counterpoint that things change/evolve so is the continuation of a name really that important? If GM does do a ICE redesign in 3 or 4 years and (maybe because of gen 6 declining sales) decides to call it a Panther instead of Camaro, enthusiasts will decide to purchase or not because of looks and performance. The name won't matter. I know, that is a very unlikely example about the name change. Same thing if it's a EV, (look at Martinjlm's post) with obviously some exceptions.

Looks like the Camaro may not continue on it's present path. That's something none us has any control over anyway, so I'll keep an open mind.

[Craig]

Nobody here is trying to stop GM from building an electric sports car, just give it its own name and it’s own styling. The Camaro brand belongs to the era of gas engines.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Craig

Nobody here is trying to stop GM from building an electric sports car, just give it its own name and it’s own styling. The Camaro brand belongs to the era of gas engines.

Sums it up perfectly. Thank you!

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m not going to buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m not going to not buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m going to buy whatever checks my boxes. If it looks good, drives fast and corners like it’s on rails, then it will be in my consideration set. ICE, BEV, or something in between, I’m good.

Concern over charge time and range are way overplayed. Most EVs coming to market these days can handle a week’s worth of most people’s driving on one single charge. In essence, most take ZERO time to charge because the charging is done at a time when the vehicle wouldn’t be in use anyway, so the driver is never waiting for the car to finish charging. That’s been our experience since 2012 when we got our first Chevrolet Volt.

At this point fast charging, which should only be used on the occasional long trip that exceeds the full range of the vehicle, has improved to the point where vehicles can charge up to 80% of capacity in 30 minutes. Most times I take trips over 300 miles if I stop for gas, the stop usually takes 20 - 30 minutes since I’m also buying coffee or snacks and maybe even a quick meal. If my car is charging while I do that, fine.

Oh you! Quit being all smart and open minded.

[mikeman]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I’m not going to buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m not going to not buy a car just because it’s electric.

I’m going to buy whatever checks my boxes. If it looks good, drives fast and corners like it’s on rails, then it will be in my consideration set. ICE, BEV, or something in between, I’m good.

Most electrics already do that (drive fast and corner like they're on rails) with only styling being subjective. So, the only thing left is the price which has to come down for the masses to adopt them.

Look at the new C8 for example. No manual transmission offered just automatic, but the dual clutch can click off sub 3 sec 0-60's. That's all everyone cares about. Same thing with the EV's. As long as the performance is sports car-like rocket fast, people will consider them over all other factors.

[IOMike]

Originally Posted by Craig

Nobody here is trying to stop GM from building an electric sports car, just give it its own name and it’s own styling.The Camaro brand belongs to the era of gas engines.

Why?

[DC5]

Originally Posted by IOMike

Why?

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by IOMike

Why?

Originally Posted by DC5

Because it’s history and heritage is all about some of the best gasoline engines ever made. Every great car in history has cemented its place there with gasoline engines. So it will be very hard for the general public to accept them with electric motors.

Again, I don’t think anyone here is saying don’t build electric cars. Just don’t put the Camaro nameplate on them.

I will be curious as to just exactly what Ford does with their “Mustang” SUV after a couple years. I know the hate mail is flowing in as we speak.

[Joe Remi]

Originally Posted by 90503

That's sort of my point. You can say the first cars were better than the horse. You could still choose one or the other.

With only Camaro EVs available and no other ICE choice, it doesn't make them better, and creates an artificial appearing demand.

The problem with all direct ICE to EV comparisons for cars called Camaro is the hypothetical EV won't be otherwise the same car, the whole package should be a significant improvement on the current one. I think an updated - and massively ergonomically improved - car that looks like a Camaro and goes fast with an electric motor would save the nameplate from extinction.