[jp23rockstar]

Hey guys, I'm new here to this forum. I was just wondering what Chevy should add or change for the next gen camaro. Design wise should it be retro or should it be modern like the upcoming mustang will be. Interior materials should be better and layout of controls. Engine configurations I-4 or v6 or v8. I heard it's going to be on alpha so could it be rwd or awd. The biggest issue on the current camaro is the weight, if they can get the weight down to 3400 like the ats then it would be a success.

What are your thoughts?

[nester7929]

Weight will be coming down due to the alpha platform, but I highly doubt they'll make the Camaro AWD. I would like to have better visibility as well, but that's really about it. I can't remember if the Camaro ended up getting something like Sync, but it needs it if it doesn't have it.

[Sarah]

i need it to transform and beat up anyone who door dings my car.

[_Nick_]

I'd like the proportions of the 1st-3rd generation. A time when massive wheels and low rooflines weren't required to look good.

[BigMatt]

take out all unnecessary weight. Then its perfect

[TaylorRyanSS]

Less weight, similar look just maybe even edgier (if thats possible). I like the look of the interior, but I would like a little more plush materials.

And keep the roofline, if this car had big windows it would look goofy. I have no problem with the visibility. The Camaro looks so much sleeker than the Mustang, its proportions are the main reason why.

[_Nick_]

Originally Posted by TaylorRyanSS

And keep the roofline, if this car had big windows it would look goofy. I have no problem with the visibility. The Camaro looks so much sleeker than the Mustang, its proportions are the main reason why.

Hah! The last thing I would call a 5th gen is sleek. It is blocky and oddly proportioned. The third gens have excellent visibility, and IROCs certainly don't look goofy. Even the later second gens look sleek, and they don't have big wheels and a low roofline. Same goes for the fourth gen.

The car has to be designed with proper proportions in mind, and that will never happen as long as this 20"+ wheels trend continues.

[TaylorRyanSS]

Originally Posted by _Nick_

Hah! The last thing I would call a 5th gen is sleek. It is blocky and oddly proportioned. The third gens have excellent visibility, and IROCs certainly don't look goofy. Even the later second gens look sleek, and they don't have big wheels and a low roofline. Same goes for the fourth gen.

The car has to be designed with proper proportions in mind, and that will never happen as long as this 20"+ wheels trend continues.

I am sorry but the third Gen is the ugliest camaro to date IMO. Followed by the fourth Gen. Sharp lines and a low roofline is sleek to me. Better get used to the big wheels, they are only gonna get bigger. I think the 5th gens proportions look perfect.

[antimatr]

Hmm...

Design wise should it be retro or should it be modern like the upcoming mustang will be?

With regards to a 6th-gen Camaro, styling-wise, I would not mind a continuation of the current, 1969-inspired theme, with some refinements, like a better proportioned and less chunky body, along with ditching several 1969-inspired elements such as the taillights and the side gills. I never liked them on the '69 Camaro (not really a fan of the '69 overall, much prefer the cleaner lines of the '67-'68s) and I don't like them now. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the current-gen Camaro is ugly, but it could've been better executed IMO.

Ideally, for me anyway, would be a Gen 6 with styling based from the early 2nd-gen ('70-'73) Camaro (especially the split-bumper RS). In my opinion, the best-looking and best-proportioned of all Camaros.

But, if they decide to go with a completely new design language, I don't know...guess I'll just have to wait and see.

Interior materials should be better and layout of controls.

Absolutely. I don't want to be reminded of my '95 Z28 with swathes of cheap-feeling plastic, distinct lack of headroom, and less-than-adequate all around visibility (again, IMO) like I was when I drove a 2010 2SS 2 years ago (although it was otherwise lightyears ahead of my '95).

I'd also like to have a gauge cluster that's actually oriented for you know...the DRIVER? In my opinion both the Mustang and Camaro are in dire need of instument panels that actually befit a modern-day performance car, not some throwback to 1960s kitsch. Also, ditch the auxiliary gauges located in front of the shifter on the 2SS, or at the very least put them somewhere where the driver doesn't have to completely take his/her eyes off the road to read them. Also, a HVAC/stereo cluster that isn't seemingly designed by gray aliens would be appreciated.

The above are the biggest issues I have with the car itself (though the Chevy dealer network in my area is a far, FAR worse issue overall, and IMO, damages any chance of me purchasing a Camaro, or indeed any GM product in general with their winning combination of arrogance and ineptitude more than any interior with questionable design choices/materials ever could, but that's another story).

Engine configurations I-4 or v6 or v8

I think the current powertrain lineup is just fine , though I think a turbo Ecotec wouldn't be out of line with a smaller, lighter next-gen Camaro.

The biggest issue on the current camaro is the weight

I concur that the current car's weight and size isn't doing it any favors (the same can be said for any of the current pony cars, though; I was quite shocked when I parked my '11 GT next to a '65 Mustang and noticed how gargantuan my car seemed next to it), and hopefully the next generation car will rectify that (without relapses into the dark ages like the Mustang II or Iron Duke-powered Camaros). Although IMO, the issues I mentioned above should be definitely be addressed with the next-gen Camaro, especially to buyers who care about such issues (among others I'm too tired to recollect at the moment) and are less likely to overlook them for arguably more eye-catching exterior styling.

[Fenderaddict2]

Same thing I'd like to see for Mustang. Smaller, lighter, sleeker. Evolutionary design. Form dictated by function. A turbo 4, a straight 6, a twin turbo 6, a high output naturally aspirated V8 and a limited run blown (or twin turbo) V8 in an AWD supercar execution. For the Mustang I'd like to see a return to two rooflines. The Camaro continue with one but perhaps with a folding metal convertible version. Keep the Mustang ragtop but add the long overdue IRS if for no other reason than to stop people harping on about it. Leave the Boss, Mach 1, Z/28 and ZL1 nomiclature in the past and develop a new model and variation designation system.

[garcmol]

Originally Posted by TaylorRyanSS

I am sorry but the third Gen is the ugliest camaro to date IMO....

ah man....:(

Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2

Same thing I'd like to see for Mustang. Smaller, lighter, sleeker. Evolutionary design. Form dictated by function. A turbo 4, a straight 6, a twin turbo 6, a high output naturally aspirated V8 and a limited run blown (or twin turbo) V8 in an AWD supercar execution. For the Mustang I'd like to see a return to two rooflines. The Camaro continue with one but perhaps with a folding metal convertible version. Keep the Mustang ragtop but add the long overdue IRS if for no other reason than to stop people harping on about it. Leave the Boss, Mach 1, Z/28 and ZL1 nomiclature in the past and develop a new model and variation designation system.

Man, I think the hardtop convertible would be hard to pull off without the car getting even longer. But it would be cool

[Fenderaddict2]

Can someone help me identify the Genetations of Camaros. I assume 67-69 is 1st. 70 to whenever is second. And the third is the still the most modern looking to date (and the one I had the pleasure of wheeling around Mosport). it's the forth that confuses me. I always assumed it was the same car with too much over-styled plastic heaped on the chassis in an failed effort to look futuristic. When was that and what was the chassis change?

[garcmol]

'93 began the fourth gen with the 4 seal beam headlights (like the 3rd gen), and in '98 it got the newer front fascia and the LS1 began going into them.

Your right on the 1st gen

Second ran from 70 to 81

Third ran from 82 to 92

In regards to the OP; Each generation had a pretty long run other that the 1st. With that said, you may see some suspension, powertrain, and some body changes over the next few years, but don't know if they will consider it enough to be a generation change. Who knows.

[PalmerGA]

Have to agree w/ TaylorRyanSS regarding Gen 3. Then again, the 80s weren't especially kind to the American auto industry in general. We were getting out asses handed to us by the Japanese imports and Detroit just kept cheapening everything trying to survive.

For a Gen6: I really love the Gen5 look but wouldn't mind a slightly smaller and lighter version. Also (and this is a must) a trunk big enough to hold my golf clubs without taking my driver and 3-wood out of the bag. The trunk itself is plenty big but that oval opening sucks.