[Mighty Mouce]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

That argument is only valid with current gen lithium ion batteries. A part of electric cars that is rapidly improving finally. I believe toyota is going to market soon with a battery that doubles the energy density of current gen lithium ion batteries and tesla has already begun producing but not yet using their new battery that will function over the course of a million miles worth of use - eliminating the need to replace a battery pack over the lifetime of the vehicle.

Basing a lifelong view of an entire powertrain for vehicles because of a temporary current aspect of it is like someone stating in 1992 they'll never drive a gas powered car because of the type of fuel injection system.

Toyota......LOL

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by Lazerbrainz2k3

Someone's butt is hurt...

Every time a post comes up knocking the electric future you're all in favor of (and more consequentially, all in favor of dragging the rest of us into - whether WE want it or not), it's a wonder that you haven't sold your 1LT in favor of a nice Tesla. With them, the future you want is now, they're selling what you're buying, and once you're posting in their forums instead you can join the other futurists sneering at the old-fashioned Neanderthals who dare to LIKE their true-to-the-heritage pony cars with the V8 in front and drive wheels in the back.

true to the heritage? You're driving a 40-60k sports car if you are driving a 6th gen camaro. Not a blue collar cheap car with an overpowered engine thrown in it. It's only heritage is that it shares the same name as a pony car.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

true to the heritage? You're driving a 40-60k sports car if you are driving a 6th gen camaro. Not a blue collar cheap car with an overpowered engine thrown in it. It's only heritage is that it shares the same name as a pony car.

I'm not some old dude who hates change but if that's the case then no car or anything really has any heritage to what preceded it.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

I'm not some old dude who hates change but if that's the case then no car or anything really has any heritage to what preceded it.

plenty of cars go for decades with much of the vehicle being tiny incremental improvements on the last. The F-body chassis that the camaro had for what, 20+ years for instance. Porsche 911 being basically the same car for the last 50 years. Plenty of cars manage to progress and keep their heritage.

And then there are other cars that keep the brand name but switch out the entire car underneath it because that's a better business decision and the only real thing connecting the new car to the old is the product positioning and name. That's the current camaro. It's not a bad thing necessarily...but it is a marketing tool meant to do exactly what it's doing. Retain this idea that the new product has all of the character and emotional connection that the old product had even though it's basically a brand new vehicle that should start from scratch.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

That argument is only valid with current gen lithium ion batteries. A part of electric cars that is rapidly improving finally. I believe toyota is going to market soon with a battery that doubles the energy density of current gen lithium ion batteries and tesla has already begun producing but not yet using their new battery that will function over the course of a million miles worth of use - eliminating the need to replace a battery pack over the lifetime of the vehicle.

This is really cool! Too bad it takes 4 hours to charge up these new batteries too....

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

true to the heritage? You're driving a 40-60k sports car if you are driving a 6th gen camaro. Not a blue collar cheap car with an overpowered engine thrown in it. It's only heritage is that it shares the same name as a pony car.

Where do you get your facts?

Figure a bare bones 1969 Camaro SS with a L89 and 3 speed manual was $3207 ($22177.40 in 2019). Option it out with all the trick stuff available + mandatory government BS (air bags, side impact bars, crash tests, certification, etc.) + union labor demands + insurance increases (for sue happy idiots who want to blame GM), and they are pretty close to the same cost. The Camaro has always been a "sports car" since day 1. Why do you think it was raced in the SCCA in 1967 on?


If, you want an electron powered car, cool. I do not. Period. When you can fill up an electric car as fast as you can a ICE powered car, we'll talk....

[Lazerbrainz2k3]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

true to the heritage? You're driving a 40-60k sports car if you are driving a 6th gen camaro. Not a blue collar cheap car with an overpowered engine thrown in it. It's only heritage is that it shares the same name as a pony car.

Bull. Especially as you're a 1LT buyer.

Again, if you want an EV, go buy an EV. Just don't force it on every other pony car buyer if you want an EV in the pony car style, ignoring the other classic parts of what makes up a pony car other than style.

[Mighty Mouce]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

true to the heritage? You're driving a 40-60k sports car if you are driving a 6th gen camaro. Not a blue collar cheap car with an overpowered engine thrown in it. It's only heritage is that it shares the same name as a pony car.

Its a $40-60k car today because of inflation. The US got off the Gold standard in 1970, thus the rise of inflation. Today a candy cost you over $1.50. Go back to 1920-1970, hardly no inflation at all because we were on the gold standard. Car prices, housing and food, etc fluctuated but the prices never got ridiculously high. All this was cause by taking us off the gold standard.

[Joe Remi]

Geez, what a bunch of whiners. Nobody cares if you don't like electric cars, don't buy one. I drive gas cars and rides electric bicycles, both work.

[gpskinzhut]

Get me another 200 miles of range and the performance I'd expect (track, don't care for drag) and I'd be interested in an EV or Hybrid V8 Camaro. Why not.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

Originally Posted by Mighty Mouce

Its a $40-60k car today because of inflation. The US got off the Gold standard in 1970, thus the rise of inflation. Today a candy cost you over $1.50. Go back to 1920-1970, hardly no inflation at all because we were on the gold standard. Car prices, housing and food, etc fluctuated but the prices never got ridiculously high. All this was cause by taking us off the gold standard.

https://www.candywrapperarchive.com/...ver-the-years/

Prices go up as salaries increase and technology advancements. Todays cars have a lot more tech. which causes price increase. But inflation and being taken off the Gold standard by Tricky Dick was a big factor in rising costs.

[mrgoodbytes]

If someone would actually make an electric drivers car.... an affordable one.
It is like all electric cars on the market are made for people who don’t enjoy driving. Definitely not a fan of Tesla, Tesla owners or Elon Musk for that sake. Not a fan, that’s probably the nicest way I can put it.

I like the idea of an electric powertrain for its simplicity. But there are some challenges, especially when it comes to charging. Even with new and better battery tech it is still going to take forever to charge.

[Paintslinger16]

This also has a problem in its not a factory car, it’s misleading stating it’s one of one.
Not that there is another one at this point, but one could be replicated, and it still would not be able to be called only two.
Not to mention, you could built 5 cars in the 9’s for half million

[Lazerbrainz2k3]

Originally Posted by Joe Remi

Geez, what a bunch of whiners. Nobody cares if you don't like electric cars, don't buy one. I drive gas cars and rides electric bicycles, both work.

Electric cars are being forced upon us via tax breaks to manufacturers to artificially create a market for a disinterested car buying public, tax refunds to the few people who do buy them, and regulations which increasingly make for tax penalties to manufacturers who don't produce enough of them regardless of what those manufacturers' buyers actually demonstrate that they want.

If it was as simple as "if you don't like electric cars don't buy one," that would be very different, but in that case the electric car market would be too small to be profitable except as what Tesla was early on. Instead, regulators, loudmouthed and disproportionately influential environmental activists (particularly from your California) and image-conscious manufacturers' shareholders don't care that you don't like EVs, but they're trying very hard to not give you the choice to buy anything but.

So when people come on a forum for a pony car, a car whose appeal comes in large part from big gas engines roaring away under the hood, and like that Andrew Yang nut running for president tell the overwhelming majority of owners to stop "whining" and getting in the way of this great big beautiful artificially-created electric revolution, expect lots of pushback.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

plenty of cars go for decades with much of the vehicle being tiny incremental improvements on the last. The F-body chassis that the camaro had for what, 20+ years for instance. Porsche 911 being basically the same car for the last 50 years. Plenty of cars manage to progress and keep their heritage.

And then there are other cars that keep the brand name but switch out the entire car underneath it because that's a better business decision and the only real thing connecting the new car to the old is the product positioning and name. That's the current camaro. It's not a bad thing necessarily...but it is a marketing tool meant to do exactly what it's doing. Retain this idea that the new product has all of the character and emotional connection that the old product had even though it's basically a brand new vehicle that should start from scratch.

Hasn’t changed a bit...