[bballr4567]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

You could say that about every comment on this thread basically, so what's the point here?

Unless you've done your own market research or were part of the team at GM that did or the design team, you're just making opinions and assumptions.

Welcome to forums. It makes up about 90% of the posts and usually the actual main purpose of a forum.

GM brought in the Camaro disciples to see the 5th gen early on and got the green light from them that it looked like a Camaro. Then, they repeated the process with the 6th generation.

Look, at the end of the day you have to make sure that you do not piss off the Camaro faithful and they didnt with the 6th generation. However, they certainly kept a very controversial styling element. Good thing or bad thing?



I love the styling of the car. It really does look awesome but I can also criticize it and understand the criticisms from those that havent bought it. It is a very legitimate concern that GM basically gave up on to please customers it already had in the fold. That, to me, is a bad thing.

[Indydriver]

Wow! I'm amazed that this is still an issue. Do people ever test drive cars before they buy anymore?!? I bought a convertible after test driving a coupe. Never was outward visibility part of that decision-making process. But, my top is now down and will not go up until November. My visibility is superb.

[Number 3]

Have to weigh in on this as most will automatically know that I have been the biggest complainer about the visibility on this car. It was bad on the Gen5 and except for over the hood, it got worse on the Gen6. That my good Camaro friends is fact not opinion and it's why it's mentioned in almost every review of the car.

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with it not bothering you. If you expected the visibility the car delivers and you are satisfied that's AWESOME. If you are so in love with the performance of the car that you are willing to give up on visibility that too is absolutely GREAT.

But regardless of what your opinion is, the slammed roof, high belt, high decklid does not provide anything close to good visibility. The quarter window is a complete joke. It may be good enough for you, but please do not fall into the internet trap of "it's awesome for me so how on earth could anyone complain about it". It's a syndrome that exists on every car forum. Just because it's ok for you, and even ok for others (as pointed out by this contentious topic and it's passionate responses) doesn't mean it wasn't a trade off intentionally made by GM.

GM could have made a truly outstanding coupe and actually improved the visibility over the Gen5. That was my fervent hope. Why? Because I worked there, I know the people that work there, I know what those people are capable of doing and they could have done it.

But please stop saying it isn't a problem just because it isn't for you.

Please stop trying to say the countless magazines don't know what they are talking about either unless you are willing to discount that each one of those magazines has pretty much also picked the Camaro as the better performance car. You can't pick and choose your win here. Either they are right and it's a great car (which it is) with poor visibility or you can discount all the wins too because some of that was based on subjective evaluations as well.

And btw, my undergraduate thesis was on occupant packaging so I know of what I speak.

Again, I am so good with that fact that people don't care about it, or over look it or don't find it to be a problem. Great for you. But it is a real issue and if you took the industry standard tools for measuring these things it would be pretty obvious. Me, I just know what those tools are and how to use them.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Have to weigh in on this as most will automatically know that I have been the biggest complainer about the visibility on this car. It was bad on the Gen5 and except for over the hood, it got worse on the Gen6. That my good Camaro friends is fact not opinion and it's why it's mentioned in almost every review of the car.

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with it not bothering you. If you expected the visibility the car delivers and you are satisfied that's AWESOME. If you are so in love with the performance of the car that you are willing to give up on visibility that too is absolutely GREAT.

But regardless of what your opinion is, the slammed roof, high belt, high decklid does not provide anything close to good visibility. The quarter window is a complete joke. It may be good enough for you, but please do not fall into the internet trap of "it's awesome for me so how on earth could anyone complain about it". It's a syndrome that exists on every car forum. Just because it's ok for you, and even ok for others (as pointed out by this contentious topic and it's passionate responses) doesn't mean it wasn't a trade off intentionally made by GM.

GM could have made a truly outstanding coupe and actually improved the visibility over the Gen5. That was my fervent hope. Why? Because I worked there, I know the people that work there, I know what those people are capable of doing and they could have done it.

But please stop saying it isn't a problem just because it isn't for you.

Please stop trying to say the countless magazines don't know what they are talking about either unless you are willing to discount that each one of those magazines has pretty much also picked the Camaro as the better performance car. You can't pick and choose your win here. Either they are right and it's a great car (which it is) with poor visibility or you can discount all the wins too because some of that was based on subjective evaluations as well.

And btw, my undergraduate thesis was on occupant packaging so I know of what I speak.

Again, I am so good with that fact that people don't care about it, or over look it or don't find it to be a problem. Great for you. But it is a real issue and if you took the industry standard tools for measuring these things it would be pretty obvious. Me, I just know what those tools are and how to use them.

I completely agree with this post. What I don't get is how does someone buy a car and then complain about something that can be observed in a test drive? Especially for the folks that are sensitive to the issues? Maybe too many people spend that test drive playing with the features of the car and let their excitement keep them from paying attention to the things that really matter I guess ?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by bballr4567

At the end of the day visibility is compromised by the design. You literally cant deny that. That doesnt mean that you cant see out of the car or that its a fail but that GM made a conscious decision to alienate potential buyers by targeting customers it already had. Pretending its not an issue to brand new customers is taking an head in the sand approach.

I can't deny it, and won't. Because you're right.

I just happen to fall of the side of the fence that agrees with the decision they made to prioritize the style of the car over the glass area. It could be better...but then the style WOULD be sacrificed. No way around it. Would it look good? Yes. Stunning? Probably not. And they opted to prioritize design (based, again, on input from customers across the spectrum).

Once more, I'll remind you that visibility was an "issue" last generation. They chose not to change it in the redesign, therefore I have to assume they felt it was important enough for the car's character not to. That's a bet they'll have to live with and watch it play out over the next several years. Nothing will be done before a new generation.

But back in the present: I don't think it's hurting sales. And I don't think the Mustang's extra glass is helping their sales, any. It didn't impact last generation's sales, and there's no reason to support that it's affecting this generation either. So I do not agree with your argument that they could get more sales if they changed the design and add more glass. Which makes the entire discussion kind of moot.

[meb91]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Have to weigh in on this as most will automatically know that I have been the biggest complainer about the visibility on this car. It was bad on the Gen5 and except for over the hood, it got worse on the Gen6. That my good Camaro friends is fact not opinion and it's why it's mentioned in almost every review of the car.

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with it not bothering you. If you expected the visibility the car delivers and you are satisfied that's AWESOME. If you are so in love with the performance of the car that you are willing to give up on visibility that too is absolutely GREAT.

But regardless of what your opinion is, the slammed roof, high belt, high decklid does not provide anything close to good visibility. The quarter window is a complete joke. It may be good enough for you, but please do not fall into the internet trap of "it's awesome for me so how on earth could anyone complain about it". It's a syndrome that exists on every car forum. Just because it's ok for you, and even ok for others (as pointed out by this contentious topic and it's passionate responses) doesn't mean it wasn't a trade off intentionally made by GM.

GM could have made a truly outstanding coupe and actually improved the visibility over the Gen5. That was my fervent hope. Why? Because I worked there, I know the people that work there, I know what those people are capable of doing and they could have done it.

But please stop saying it isn't a problem just because it isn't for you.

Please stop trying to say the countless magazines don't know what they are talking about either unless you are willing to discount that each one of those magazines has pretty much also picked the Camaro as the better performance car. You can't pick and choose your win here. Either they are right and it's a great car (which it is) with poor visibility or you can discount all the wins too because some of that was based on subjective evaluations as well.

And btw, my undergraduate thesis was on occupant packaging so I know of what I speak.

Again, I am so good with that fact that people don't care about it, or over look it or don't find it to be a problem. Great for you. But it is a real issue and if you took the industry standard tools for measuring these things it would be pretty obvious. Me, I just know what those tools are and how to use them.

The problem is some people may read the reviews and think the visibility is so bad that it's unsafe to drive, which is not true. I understand that some may not like the feeling of driving a car with smaller windows/a higher beltline, etc. but that's mainly a personal preference, not a safety issue - you can still see everything you need to see to drive the car safely.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Have to weigh in on this as most will automatically know that I have been the biggest complainer about the visibility on this car. It was bad on the Gen5 and except for over the hood, it got worse on the Gen6. That my good Camaro friends is fact not opinion and it's why it's mentioned in almost every review of the car.

That being said, there is NOTHING wrong with it not bothering you. If you expected the visibility the car delivers and you are satisfied that's AWESOME. If you are so in love with the performance of the car that you are willing to give up on visibility that too is absolutely GREAT.

But regardless of what your opinion is, the slammed roof, high belt, high decklid does not provide anything close to good visibility. The quarter window is a complete joke. It may be good enough for you, but please do not fall into the internet trap of "it's awesome for me so how on earth could anyone complain about it". It's a syndrome that exists on every car forum. Just because it's ok for you, and even ok for others (as pointed out by this contentious topic and it's passionate responses) doesn't mean it wasn't a trade off intentionally made by GM.

GM could have made a truly outstanding coupe and actually improved the visibility over the Gen5. That was my fervent hope. Why? Because I worked there, I know the people that work there, I know what those people are capable of doing and they could have done it.

But please stop saying it isn't a problem just because it isn't for you.

Please stop trying to say the countless magazines don't know what they are talking about either unless you are willing to discount that each one of those magazines has pretty much also picked the Camaro as the better performance car. You can't pick and choose your win here. Either they are right and it's a great car (which it is) with poor visibility or you can discount all the wins too because some of that was based on subjective evaluations as well.

And btw, my undergraduate thesis was on occupant packaging so I know of what I speak.

Again, I am so good with that fact that people don't care about it, or over look it or don't find it to be a problem. Great for you. But it is a real issue and if you took the industry standard tools for measuring these things it would be pretty obvious. Me, I just know what those tools are and how to use them.

You may be surprised to hear me say that I don't disagree with you.

The only two things I'll contend is your comment about "great", and 5th vs 6th.

I found the visibility (except for rear) wasn't made worse in the 6th generation car. I drive a 5th every day, and I've got several thousand miles in the 6th, on and off the track, so I don't think that's my fanboy kicking in...

I guess we have different definitions of what makes the car great.

We can agree (I think), that the visibility is reduced compared to other coupes because of their desire for a striking exterior design. The chopped roof and high belt line help give the car a look that sets it apart from every other car on the road. I think that's what makes the car great, actually. The best analogy I could think of was designer clothing. Some of the styles just look...GOOD. I'm sure they're outrageously uncomfortable, expensive, and don't clean easy...but they're great clothes that many aspire to wear.

I know that should be the role of the Corvette...and it is...but the Camaro is beginning, only beginning, to share some of that "idol status"...

Originally Posted by meb91

The problem is some people may read the reviews and think the visibility is so bad that it's unsafe to drive, which is not true. I understand that some may not like the feeling of driving a car with smaller windows/a higher beltline, etc. but that's mainly a personal preference, not a safety issue - you can still see everything you need to see to drive the car safely.

This is a real good point, as well.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by meb91

The problem is some people may read the reviews and think the visibility is so bad that it's unsafe to drive, which is not true. I understand that some may not like the feeling of driving a car with smaller windows/a higher beltline, etc. but that's mainly a personal preference, not a safety issue - you can still see everything you need to see to drive the car safely.

I would hope no one is taking it to that extreme. None of the reviews I've read have come close to suggesting it's even close to a safety issue.

For people of slight stature, the high belt line is a concern. For folks that sit taller in the saddle, the slammed roof can be a problem. If you sit in average position, you may not feel any of those concerns for sight lines. For example, I have a 95%ile seated height. In a Gen6, I have to bend down to see the stop light when I'm the first car at the light. First time I mentioned this I was challenged for my driving ability or questioned whether I choose to stop under the light. LOL.

There are industry accepted tools to measure these things. But what we are discussing here is not the objective measure of visibility, but the subjective opinion on whether or not an objective measure matters to a few hundred people in the is thread today. Those are 2 different things.

And yes, it is legal AND safe to drive a full size panel van with no windows other than the two front doors and a windshield.

[meb91]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I would hope no one is taking it to that extreme. None of the reviews I've read have come close to suggesting it's even close to a safety issue.

For people of slight stature, the high belt line is a concern. For folks that sit taller in the saddle, the slammed roof can be a problem. If you sit in average position, you may not feel any of those concerns for sight lines. For example, I have a 95%ile seated height. In a Gen6, I have to bend down to see the stop light when I'm the first car at the light. First time I mentioned this I was challenged for my driving ability or questioned whether I choose to stop under the light. LOL.

There are industry accepted tools to measure these things. But what we are discussing here is not the objective measure of visibility, but the subjective opinion on whether or not an objective measure matters to a few hundred people in the is thread today. Those are 2 different things.

And yes, it is legal AND safe to drive a full size panel van with no windows other than the two front doors and a windshield.

Agreed, though it's not so much that I've seen any articles suggesting it's flat out dangerous, just that they don't always clearly make the same distinction you and I just did (objective measure vs subjective opinion) so I've seen readers jumping to that conclusion the minute visibility is mentioned.

[laynlo15]

Don't ****ing drive it then buy it and complain about the visibility. Really? I'm just fine with it, when your passing every asshole on the highway, so does it really matter anyway? It is getting really ridiculous. Don't buy it, buy a ****ing mustang or challenger and get your ass kicked all day long. Better yet, buy a 4 door sedan and have all visibility you want and you'll still get your ass kicked all day long. Get over it.

[DougCBJ]

Only other car I've ever had was a 2001 S-10. I bought my Camaro before ever riding or driving in one, literally a dumb move. I was so afraid of the "tank" views, I must say that this thing has pretty good visibility as long as the mirrors are set correctly for blind spots. I've already adjusted to the views in no time.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by meb91

Agreed, though it's not so much that I've seen any articles suggesting it's flat out dangerous, just that they don't always clearly make the same distinction you and I just did (objective measure vs subjective opinion) so I've seen readers jumping to that conclusion the minute visibility is mentioned.

Believe me GM is quite in tune with how opinion can impact sales. For all those in this discussion, including some who seem just a teeny bit angry, the visibility, although measurable is primarily a subjective opinion just like the styling of the car. To be clear not everyone thinks the Camaro is the best looking thing on the road either. That doesn't make you wrong because you do.

For that reason we need to understand people have opinions. Some based on knowledge and experience with the tools that define visibility, and some simply because they are sensitive to a clear view.

GM styling is in love with high belt slammed roof look. You may not see it but it is partly why the ATS/CTS are also perceived to not be as good for visibility. GM is making this trade off quite often. The question is, is that ok to style a car for a smaller audience. After all have you ever read a car review that said, "one of our only complaints about the car is there is too much visibility"?

Again having worked at 3 OEMs I understand the role of styling and what they do in the product development process. And the traditional early sketches are of cars with giant wheels and slammed roofs. For years that has set the theme. We are just getting closer to those sketches being the final product. That can result in a very sexy car but one that satisfies fewer people. Me? I wanted a great coupe tha t satisfied a broader audience. I'm not sure yet we have that. What we do have is a tremendous performance car that is generating a HUGE amount of passion.....and apparently even anger.

So now we have THREE rules for a party. Don't discuss religion, politics or visibility in a Camaro

[The_Driver]

Originally Posted by 20171LE

With all due respect, wrong.
Go test a Cadillac ATS and you'll see that the Camaro designer ruined the visibility and utility.

That's just it though. The 6th gen is a sleeker version of the Alpha platform. The body section height is shorter to retain that famous yet beautiful 5th gen greenhouse section.

If you do a search, a member here discussed this issue with one of the designers of the 6th gen. They mentioned that the 2" reduction in wheelbase was taken from the worse possible area, the rear seat passenger H-point to rear axle centerline, and that directly impacted the rear seat legroom. That combined with the lower roof height makes the 6th gen a very cramped place for rear seat passengers.

The 3rd and 4th gen F-body (the 4th gen floorpan was borrowed from the 3rd gen) had a deeper scooped out area for the rear seats. Even though the wheelbase was nearly a foot less and the overall height 3" shorter, there is more room in the back. However, the F-body had its own exclusive platform not shared with anything else. The 6th gen shares the Alpha platform with other models so it is compromised in this way. The compromise is the fuel tank being located under the rear seat on a 2" shorter wheelbase chassis with a lowered roof line.

[mrbug111]

If the problem, as Car and Driver, Automobile, and Road and Track complained, is that the back window is too small, simply apply the loud petal and rest comfortably knowing that whatever is back there you just saw.