[genxer]

Doc, thank you for this thread and the work done and ongoing. The more dismissive posters are missing the point. This has to be looked at with imagination. It's a search for inspiration.

The one who said you can't listen to everyone is mostly right. A design by committee would be guaranteed to be compromised. There's at least 3 branches to explore here, without re-reading every post.

I disagree with the 6th gen being more of the same. They pushed and sold people on the idea of it being a sports car. Most sports cars anymore are refined and athletic. Well, athletic yeah, but it shouldn't be a sports car. The one mentioning the word "brutal" is on the ball. Even the base models should gain a vibe of casual brutality. Though, part of that is powertrain.

The grill on the renderings made the Caddy ATS lineup pop into mind. For whatever reason, I think the sedan looks better. The quad-coupe mention was for extra access suicide doors. If a Saturn can get it, they can't cost too much. I can't imagine a full 4-door would ever look right.

I could go on, but this is enough rambling.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by genxer

Doc, thank you for this thread and the work done and ongoing. The more dismissive posters are missing the point. This has to be looked at with imagination. It's a search for inspiration.

The one who said you can't listen to everyone is mostly right. A design by committee would be guaranteed to be compromised. There's at least 3 branches to explore here, without re-reading every post.

I disagree with the 6th gen being more of the same. They pushed and sold people on the idea of it being a sports car. Most sports cars anymore are refined and athletic. Well, athletic yeah, but it shouldn't be a sports car. The one mentioning the word "brutal" is on the ball. Even the base models should gain a vibe of casual brutality. Though, part of that is powertrain.

The grill on the renderings made the Caddy ATS lineup pop into mind. For whatever reason, I think the sedan looks better. The quad-coupe mention was for extra access suicide doors. If a Saturn can get it, they can't cost too much. I can't imagine a full 4-door would ever look right.

I could go on, but this is enough rambling.

And thank you for the thoughtful and civil post. My original thought was to reinvent the original pony car concept, which was a sporty but friendly style. The word Camaro I believe means "friend". The cars were originally marketed as a fun, family-friendly alternative to the (at the time) standard, basically-boring sedans. The pony cars were a huge hit and sold like crazy.

After reading your post and all the others, a consistent theme has begun to emerge which is almost the opposite of the original pony car philosophy. I'm getting the message that people don't want friendly anymore; they want to see and drive a weapon. Words like "brutal", "menacing", "S.W.A.T. (Special Weapons And Tactics)" are being used, but I was thinking something clean, sleek, aerodynamic and elegant; something that was sporty but family-friendly. Looks like times have changed.

Here's where I was going:





All the work I was doing was on the back; the 'new' front view was just the result of pulling in the width of the car to be more in line with the 5th Gen dimensions. I was going to rework the front to be more like the back in style.

Now that I have a better idea of what people are looking for, I'll have to look at it from a mobile weapon standpoint. Although my feeling is that that look won't necessarily appeal to the mass market which was the demographic I was reaching for. Maybe I'll do both; continue on the pony car concept, and develop a mobile weapon concept as an alternate.

So now my question is, to those who want a mobile weapon; what kind of weapon/menace look are you interested in? Knife, cutting edge? Bulk (think Hulk) muscles? Military, no nonsense, form-follows-function combat look? Area 51 stealth (think SR-71 or F-35) speed look?

SR-71


F-35 A


Those 4 are all threatening looks, but different types of threat. Keep in mind it has to comply with the requirements of being a street-legal car. Do you want to stick with 2 doors, or are the means of entry/exit acceptible to change? I do believe it should stay as a 4-seater, otherwise you might as well get a Vette.

This should be interesting to see what the general consensus is, or if there actually is one.

[rburke76]

The mustang went retro 2005-2014, the challenger is retro 2009-present, I love the 5th and 6th generation camaro, I own a 6th generation camaro, but man I would love the 7th generation camaro to look like the 1970-1973 models!...Six different trims, LT, LS, RS, SS, Z28,ZL1, etc...use 4 cylinder, V6, V8, go crazy! Have up to 20 different color combinations including Orange, Gold, maroon, Green, Brown, copper metallic, black cherry, etc...go crazy!..I love the camaro, let's do retro! Yeah!

[indyz]

Love the thought that went into it, loving the discussions too. I'm the non creative type, nothing to contribute, but Thanks

[genxer]

Doc, yeah times have changed. The original cars were in the midst of the big roar of a culture that loved cars. Nowadays, the people that hate cars are the catered to market. And the cars are better, utilitarian, but very forgettable.

To clarify, I intended 'casually brutal' to not take itself too seriously and include the original pony car idea as a base model foundation. (We are writing about Bitchin' Camaros here. I ran over my neighbor!). The '67 is friendlier looking than a '69. Any new gen trims should bridge the two.

A loose analog to my interpretation of brutal is the small vicious animal. Think of ferrets, raccoons, badgers. The Camaros I like more have distinctive visual framing of the headlights, whether it's the whole grill or recesses.

An idea here is for people that support cues from a particular generation to critique a design feature that'll have to change to fit something new. There's the new 2nd gen retro theme thread with hints of that. Maybe a moderator will merge the threads.

[x55cam]

Originally Posted by classicrockr

I still say this is what they should go for....

I think so - it alludes to the 3rd gen, my favorite, even though I owned 3 '69's. These drawings have sleekness and style without being too overdone in the front and rear. The height of the cowl is the key - it would make everything else flow very easily and aerodynamically.

[samurai]

I think the mx5 frontend with comical Vampire-teeth in the grille would look horrible with real car proportions outside of this rendering. Also it has a way too small grille for cooling

[x55cam]

Originally Posted by Doc

Okay, taking into consideration everyone's feedback, I've started reworking pretty much everything. I've done a lot of work on the roofline (basically it's a version of the 1967 roofline), and a considerable amount of work on the back of the car.

I still want to go with the sleek angular look as much as possible, but here's the latest progress (and to head off the inevitable peanut gallery comments: No it does not look like a DeLorean, a Dodge, or a Honda-whatever).

I really appreciate the honest feedback!

Attachment 942816
Attachment 942817
Attachment 942818

Maybe the appearance of it looking like it has that 'wide track' Pontiac look that seems to throw everyone off, including myself. The wheelbase needs to be narrowed.

[x55cam]

I took Doc's rendition and tweaked it a bit with dual round-ish headlamps and a more aggressive grill....sorry about the quality as I don't have an adequate graphics tool.

[Cgocifer]

To the folks commenting that they hope the Camaro appeals to the mainstream... I say, fk that, hope not! That's what they're trying to do now by jumping on the bandwagon of the spaceship grilles. It should appeal to enthusiasts who appreciate muscularity, class, and beauty concurrently in car design.

A 2 or 2+2 sports car/sports coupe will never be a mainstream car for most people. That class of cars isn't practical for most soccer moms and dads. Those cars are for people who dont need a practical SUV or 4 door sedan. More often then not, they are a second, fun car. Chevy knows that and I'm sure have factored that into their sales targets. They know that no matter what, they'll never sell as many camaros as they sell Tahos or Equinox's. Many of us enjoy not driving in a jam packed world of Camaros. Even with the low sales volume, they make a profit. It's a halo car like the Corvette. GMs bread and butter are the SUVs, trucks, and econo boxes. As long as the company as a whole is doing well, they won't need to cut the Camaro.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Cgocifer

To the folks commenting that they hope the Camaro appeals to the mainstream... I say, fk that, hope not! That's what they're trying to do now by jumping on the bandwagon of the spaceship grilles. It should appeal to enthusiasts who appreciate muscularity, class, and beauty concurrently in car design.

A 2 or 2+2 sports car/sports coupe will never be a mainstream car for most people. That class of cars isn't practical for most soccer moms and dads. Those cars are for people who dont need a practical SUV or 4 door sedan. More often then not, they are a second, fun car. Chevy knows that and I'm sure have factored that into their sales targets. They know that no matter what, they'll never sell as many camaros as they sell Tahos or Equinox's. Many of us enjoy not driving in a jam packed world of Camaros. Even with the low sales volume, they make a profit. It's a halo car like the Corvette. GMs bread and butter are the SUVs, trucks, and econo boxes. As long as the company as a whole is doing well, they won't need to cut the Camaro.

The problem is less appeal equals less sales. That simply results in a much higher price for a Camaro.

Less practical? Well with a lower volume, higher price and less practicality some will simply choose a Corvette, the true sports car in GM's stable. And what does that mean? No room for a Camaro.

It used to take two plants to build Camaro/Firebird. Now it'sonly a portion of a low volume plant.

MOHR of the same, the battle cry for the Gen6 may not work for a Gen7.

[Cgocifer]

Originally Posted by Number 3

The problem is less appeal equals less sales. That simply results in a much higher price for a Camaro.

Less practical? Well with a lower volume, higher price and less practicality some will simply choose a Corvette, the true sports car in GM's stable. And what does that mean? No room for a Camaro.

It used to take two plants to build Camaro/Firebird. Now it'sonly a portion of a low volume plant.

MOHR of the same, the battle cry for the Gen6 may not work for a Gen7.

Camaro is cheaper than a Mustang or Challenger when similarly equipped.

I dont think the 7th gen should be more of the same, I think it should be totally unique instead of conforming to the design trend of the day. However, it should be recognizable as a Camaro, exude power, aggressiveness, and beauty at the same time.

Example: Porsche 911. The overall shape and character has stayed the same for decades without looking dated while staying modern and cutting edge. One glance and you know exactly what it is. Its sleek, aggressive, and rarely conforms to whatever the popular design trend of the day is.

Compare that to Camaro. People complained that the 6th gen looked to similar to the 5th gen... I haven't heard too many people complain that the current 911 looks too much like its previous 10 generations...

[Doc]

Originally Posted by rburke76

The mustang went retro 2005-2014, the challenger is retro 2009-present, I love the 5th and 6th generation camaro, I own a 6th generation camaro, but man I would love the 7th generation camaro to look like the 1970-1973 models!...Six different trims, LT, LS, RS, SS, Z28,ZL1, etc...use 4 cylinder, V6, V8, go crazy! Have up to 20 different color combinations including Orange, Gold, maroon, Green, Brown, copper metallic, black cherry, etc...go crazy!..I love the camaro, let's do retro! Yeah!

As nice as that style was (which by the way was VERY controversial when it came out), I just don't see anything even remotely like that being able to be done today, due to crash and safety standards. It was also a big car; especially compared to the 1967 model.

Originally Posted by indyz

Love the thought that went into it, loving the discussions too. I'm the non creative type, nothing to contribute, but Thanks

You're welcome, and thank you for participating in the thread.

Originally Posted by genxer

Doc, yeah times have changed. The original cars were in the midst of the big roar of a culture that loved cars. Nowadays, the people that hate cars are the catered to market. And the cars are better, utilitarian, but very forgettable.

To clarify, I intended 'casually brutal' to not take itself too seriously and include the original pony car idea as a base model foundation. (We are writing about Bitchin' Camaros here. I ran over my neighbor!). The '67 is friendlier looking than a '69. Any new gen trims should bridge the two.

A loose analog to my interpretation of brutal is the small vicious animal. Think of ferrets, raccoons, badgers. The Camaros I like more have distinctive visual framing of the headlights, whether it's the whole grill or recesses.

An idea here is for people that support cues from a particular generation to critique a design feature that'll have to change to fit something new. There's the new 2nd gen retro theme thread with hints of that. Maybe a moderator will merge the threads.

Not a bad idea. I always liked the 67 the best. To me, it was the purest example of what a pony car was at the time; even better than the Mustang which invented the segment. Reinventing the pony car with the 67 in mind is the direction I'm leaning in.

Originally Posted by x55cam

Maybe the appearance of it looking like it has that 'wide track' Pontiac look that seems to throw everyone off, including myself. The wheelbase needs to be narrowed.

You're absolutely right. When I created the first model, it was strictly by eyeball. I didn't measure anything and it was waaay too wide once I pulled in a 3D model of the 5th Gen for comparison. The new revised models have the correct wheelbase and track comparable to the 5th Gen.

Originally Posted by x55cam

I took Doc's rendition and tweaked it a bit with dual round-ish headlamps and a more aggressive grill....sorry about the quality as I don't have an adequate graphics tool.

They didn't come through on my browser. All I see are ? boxes. Maybe try converting them to .png or .jpg?

Originally Posted by Cgocifer

To the folks commenting that they hope the Camaro appeals to the mainstream... I say, fk that, hope not! That's what they're trying to do now by jumping on the bandwagon of the spaceship grilles. It should appeal to enthusiasts who appreciate muscularity, class, and beauty concurrently in car design.

A 2 or 2+2 sports car/sports coupe will never be a mainstream car for most people. That class of cars isn't practical for most soccer moms and dads. Those cars are for people who dont need a practical SUV or 4 door sedan. More often then not, they are a second, fun car. Chevy knows that and I'm sure have factored that into their sales targets. They know that no matter what, they'll never sell as many camaros as they sell Tahos or Equinox's. Many of us enjoy not driving in a jam packed world of Camaros. Even with the low sales volume, they make a profit. It's a halo car like the Corvette. GMs bread and butter are the SUVs, trucks, and econo boxes. As long as the company as a whole is doing well, they won't need to cut the Camaro.

I beg to differ with you here. They WERE mainstream cars for a long time, and that generated a lot of money. GM needs that again to justify keeping the high development costs of the high performance models. A base model that brings in lots of sales would be a good thing, as it would provide the funds to keep developing leading-edge high performance models. Those models would be in an entirely different class and market. They would look different, sound different, and absolutely perform differently than a base model. You would still get plenty of looks and stares because those models will clearly stand out from the base model.

Here's what I'm currently working on. Based on some of the feedback, I've started a new version and revised just about everything. I finally came up with a body side profile that I really like. As a comparison, here's a side profile of the 2018 Gen6 Camaro, and the new concept profile I came up with:

2018 Camaro


Camaro 7 Concept


One of the things I'm really not a fan of, is the thick, bulky look of the current model. I'd like to see something more streamlined. This new version is based on feedback; think Black Suburban, Area 51, Skunkworks style idea.




Hopefully you guys can tell what the features are in the front with the headlight modules. I also did some semi F-35 styling on the hood. I need to think of an appropriate style rear spoiler.

One of the biggest struggles is trying to come up with a great looking body side style. I was following an aircraft style theme of airflow front to back. The 1967 Camaro had as one of it's distinguishing characteristics, the "coke bottle waist" which was directly influenced by fighter aircraft from the 50's. Following an aircraft inspiration would certainly be fitting to use for reinventing the 67 style for today.

The software I'm using has sky/environment presets you can load, which can give dramatically different looks depending on the setting and the car color. Here's a couple of glamour shots with one version in white, and one in silver.




I appreciate the comments and participation!

[genxer]

I know a lot of guys that like 2nd gens. So, never say never. An eye-drawing central, massive grill lengthens the hood or can hide a bit of overhang. Audi has executed a similar look well for a long time, and the herd followed.

I also couldn't see x55cam's changes. I hope the round lights have a touch of smile. The '67s have a great interplay of circles and horizontal lines.

The 16-18s must already be tough to find on radar. The 6th gen SS stanchion spoiler grew on me. It slightly relieves the rear chunkiness. The '67 greenhouse rear, coke bottle quarter, and trunk slope draw the eye downward. The blade spoiler addded needed height back. I expect that downward slope is a no-go on a modern car. If the quarter panel curve gets added in, it has to be bold or else it looks like a '00 Monte Carlo.

Maybe an SS trim stanchion spoiler could be shaped so the cars' profile leaves a voided negative space of where a blade would've been? Maybe in a similar way, the '69 hidden headlight covers can be evoked by a double-stack of new Blazer style running lights (with actual LED headlights in there) underlined by darkened, voided 16-18 halo lights.

Nice Badger Camaro by the way