[Crushin_LT1]

Originally Posted by ember1205

I agree that there is and needs to be a "line" as described. However... The manufacturer should not be the one that gets to move that line. The Camaro was always capable of carrying passengers in the back seat. That quality has been changed by GM and SOME buyers accepted it and bought the car anyway. But, they've also lost customers because they changed a fundamental aspect of the car.

I don't want a family car that's sporty - I had that with my TL. And, while I personally do not need a sports/muscle car that can be used as a family car, I can see where providing usable rear seats (like always) opens the market up for GM and increases sales. The Camaro is not the Corvette and doesn't have the same market. But, the way that it's designed, it also no longer has its original market.

The interior design, the bunker-like, low-to-no windows, the hilarious trunk and backseat have absolutely affected sales.


GM seems to really not care about that and plenty here defend it.


I like the car regardless, but it does seem the Camaro is meant mainly for track and not daily. Yes the Challenger and mustang aren't great on visibility, but the 6th Gen is significantly worse than Mustang/Challenger for daily.


I am willing to get over it, but how many people are not? The Sales numbers show.

[Hops]

Originally Posted by SirJangle

^^^THIS

The bottom line, to me, is that the more you make the Camaro like a "family" car the more it becomes something other than a Camaro. Look, I get all of the opinions/arguments of wanting more or wanting the Camaro to satisfy your needs. But, that's not how life works. If the Camaro doesn't work for you, then you'll have to find something that does..

A coupe is not a "family car" to begin with, whatever that is. Very few are saying the next Camaro shouldn't be a coupe. I feel the all or nothing thinking about the car isn't helping it's future. FWIW, my Camaro is my daily driver, (non-covid), i use it to drop off my kids and wife in the morning. And it works! But if i was a few inches taller, it really would NOT.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by SirJangle

^^^THIS

The bottom line, to me, is that the more you make the Camaro like a "family" car the more it becomes something other than a Camaro. Look, I get all of the opinions/arguments of wanting more or wanting the Camaro to satisfy your needs. But, that's not how life works. If the Camaro doesn't work for you, then you'll have to find something that does. And, I understand the point of then the Camaro might not exist going forward. That's the chance any manufacturer takes when making such a unique, limited audience product. But again, if the Camaro wasn't what it is, I wouldn't have one. I drove many different cars when shopping for my Camaro SS: Audi, BMW, Mercedes, and the Mustang GT. I've had a Lexus RC350 F-Sport and an Infiniti Q60 Sports Coupe. None of them put a smile on my face or made me feel like my Camaro SS does. Making it more like other more practical vehicles defeats the purpose of making it in the first place.

For example, years ago I drove trucks. I absolutely loved the looks/stance of regular cab/short bed trucks. But, I couldn't have one because I had two sons to cart around. So, I always had to get the extended cab trucks. It's the same thing here. If you can't make the Camaro work for you/your situation, then find something that does work. That's just the way it is. Everything can't be everything to everyone.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by Crushin_LT1

The interior design, the bunker-like, low-to-no windows, the hilarious trunk and backseat have absolutely affected sales.


GM seems to really not care about that and plenty here defend it.


I like the car regardless, but it does seem the Camaro is meant mainly for track and not daily. Yes the Challenger and mustang aren't great on visibility, but the 6th Gen is significantly worse than Mustang/Challenger for daily.


I am willing to get over it, but how many people are not? The Sales numbers show.

I agree with the Mustang being more daily friendly than a Camaro. I'm sorry, the Challenger may be a "muscle car" but it certainly is not comparable to the Mustang or the Camaro, which are more of a muscle/sport... the Camaro being the heaviest towards the sport side. So to me, there is no discussing what the Challenger does or doesn't do in comparison with the others.

The inconvenience is part of the ambience of owning a unique sport vehicle. That also helps with it not being every other car that you see on the road. The ability to daily drive something varies so much from person to person and what is expected. I daily drove Nissan Z's for several years. That is a two seater coupe, with NO back at all, and a shallow hatch area for a trunk. Wide hips and low profile rear window design create quite effective blind spots. ~I didn't care~. Those cars are relatively rare, total eye catcher for most, and can absolutely drive circles around many cars on the road. SPORTS CAR

[FarmerFran]

"In 1961, Lee Iacocca, vice president and general manager of Ford Division, had a vision. His vision was a car that would seat four people, have bucket seats, a floor mounted shifter, be no more than 180 inches long, weigh less than 2500 pounds, and sell for less than $2500.00. Out of this vision, the Ford Mustang was born. After many months of meetings, discussions and market surveys, funding was finally approved for the Mustang in September of 1962. On March 9, 1964 the first Mustang rolled off of the assembly line.

Only 18 months had elapsed since the Mustang had been approved for production. In order to keep production costs down, many of the Mustang's components were borrowed from the Falcon, including most of the drivetrain. With a multitude of different interior, exterior, and drivetrain options, the Mustang would be able to be ordered as plain, or as fancy, as economical, or as fast, as the buyer wanted. In general, the Mustang was designed for everyone and was advertised as "the car to be designed by you".

The Ford Mustang was heavily advertised during the latter part of it's development. On April 16, 1964, the day before it's release, Ford ran simultaneous commercials at 9:30pm on all three major television networks, ABC, NBC, and CBS. The following day, April 17, 1964, people "attacked" the Ford showrooms. Everyone was in a frenzy to be one of the first to own the Mustang. Ford sold over 22,000 Mustangs the first day. By the end of the year, Ford had sold 263,434. By the end of the Mustang's first anniversary, April 17, 1965, Ford had sold 418,812 Mustangs. The Mustang had made a name for itself, and it was here to stay" - https://www.classicponycars.com/history.html

Why did they make the Camaro?
"The Chevrolet Camaro is a mid-size[1][2] American automobile manufactured by Chevrolet, classified as a pony car[3][4] and some versions also as a muscle car.[5][6] It went on sale on September 29, 1966, for the 1967 model year and was designed as a competing model to the Ford Mustang. " - Wiki

A lot has changed since 1962(4.5) 1967...

Heck look at pickup trucks, you would be hard pressed to find one that is not 4 doors.

People are getting bigger (in all directions), and technology is dictating how we see the future.

[Hops]

Originally Posted by Crushin_LT1

I like the car regardless, but it does seem the Camaro is meant mainly for track and not daily. Yes the Challenger and mustang aren't great on visibility, but the 6th Gen is significantly worse than Mustang/Challenger for daily.

I really don't think this issues people are complaining about are the result of it's ability to be taken to the track, except for maybe the higher price of the SS (pre LT1 v8).

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by Crushin_LT1

The interior design, the bunker-like, low-to-no windows, the hilarious trunk and backseat have absolutely affected sales.


GM seems to really not care about that and plenty here defend it.


I like the car regardless, but it does seem the Camaro is meant mainly for track and not daily. Yes the Challenger and mustang aren't great on visibility, but the 6th Gen is significantly worse than Mustang/Challenger for daily.


I am willing to get over it, but how many people are not? The Sales numbers show.

Those of us that own these cars are clearly "ok" with what GM did or we wouldn't be owners. The Camaro's current design does not include what it always did - GM changed the formula. While it still works for me, I will not defend their decisions that made this a less viable vehicle for their original market segment. And I agree that the sales numbers show that GM made mistakes with this car. The common gripe is that there's no marketing behind it, but I say it's simply because their target audience simply isn't big enough.

What was GM's intention with the design of the Gen5 and Gen6 cars? Was it to bring the performance segment down in price to attract more than just the Corvette buyer? It seems that way to me... But, it didn't pan out. Hence, V8's are not a majority of sales, they had to introduce the LT1 trim to put more V8 cars on the streets (percentage-wise), sales numbers are poor overall, Z/28 trim didn't return for Gen6 (almost certainly because of low volumes, related to high cost), etc. Hell, they aren't making any effort to address an issue with BRAKE PADS so they can sell the V8 cars in CA and WA!

The "mid-size pickup" segment was largely created as a way to get around CAFE standards. The smaller trucks got better overall MPG than the larger ones and helped to increase the overall average of the "trucks" that were produced to satisfy requirements. Does the Camaro somehow help GM in some other area that we aren't even thinking about in a similar fashion?

I love my car and am happy with my choice. But I'm also able to understand why it has very little appeal in the overall market.

[GearheadSS]

-LT2 as the base V8.

-Usable back seat and trunk space without compromising front seat room. Personally, I think the car is too small now. I know it will get heavier but the car is too small for a lot of people, especially those that are tall and have kids.

-More exterior/interior color choices.

-Keep offering a manual transmission.

-Get away from the current styling and introduce something to get people excited about the car again. Even though I love it, it's time to get away from the 1st gen styling cues.

-Rebrand the naming of the packages
4cyl(V6 is probably dead):
--LT-get rid of 1LT,2LT and 3LT. Just make it LT and have option packages available for order instead of forcing everything on each model.
V8:
--Z/28-base V8 Camaro. Similar to current LT1 but lose the 245 tires as those are ridiculous on a V8 car. Also make heavy duty cooling package and 1LE an option on this model.
--SS-mid level V8 trim available in current 2SS trim only. Give it a hp boost over Z/28. Lose the 1SS trim level. This is the high end non supercharged Camaro. If people want a lower option Camaro, they can get a Z/28. It's time for the SS name to be a little more special. It has been watered down for far too long.
--ZL1-make this available with a wider variety of options. Different interior color choices. Offer Recaros in something other than black. Offer optional wheels on ZL1 as well.

[zaimer]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Was it to bring the performance segment down in price to attract more than just the Corvette buyer?

The Corvette and the Camaro should not be competitor (aka cross-shopped); I would think that the intentions wouldn't have been to attract the Corvette buyers. Stealing your customers from another segment (that is also yours) is not gaining anything. You want/need entirely new buyers from the market.

The question that should be asked, at least before when the pricing was more similar (the Corvette C8 is way out of the Camaro ballpark now). With all of the impartialities/complaints of the Camaro that are listed - look at the Corvette that really offered no solution. Why do people buy the Corvette?

[ModernCamaroZ28Fan]

Nice discussion. If it were for me, I'd say:

1. A more practical coupe/better ergonomics. Having a more usable back seat, bigger windows, bigger trunk "opening", maybe fix the visibility
2. Still has the same performance that it has now, but better. (Great handling, most torque just by pressing the accelerator, road hugger, etc.)
3. If the Camaro SS goes the EV route, make it have a decent fake engine noise (Better than the crappy Mach E) and over 500 HP, if not then use the LT2.
4. SS/Budget SS trims weigh less than 4000 LBS regardless of it being an EV or not. Not sure if this could be made possible
5. Better customization. GM seems to get lazy with the way they want their cars optioned.
6. Design cues taken from the 3rd generation (Which could make sense if they go full-out electric), or 1st generation.
7. Less bland interior for base models, but that's just me. Better infotainment, maybe taking notes from the 2021 C8.

[Crushin_LT1]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Those of us that own these cars are clearly "ok" with what GM did or we wouldn't be owners. The Camaro's current design does not include what it always did - GM changed the formula. While it still works for me, I will not defend their decisions that made this a less viable vehicle for their original market segment. And I agree that the sales numbers show that GM made mistakes with this car. The common gripe is that there's no marketing behind it, but I say it's simply because their target audience simply isn't big enough.

What was GM's intention with the design of the Gen5 and Gen6 cars? Was it to bring the performance segment down in price to attract more than just the Corvette buyer? It seems that way to me... But, it didn't pan out. Hence, V8's are not a majority of sales, they had to introduce the LT1 trim to put more V8 cars on the streets (percentage-wise), sales numbers are poor overall, Z/28 trim didn't return for Gen6 (almost certainly because of low volumes, related to high cost), etc. Hell, they aren't making any effort to address an issue with BRAKE PADS so they can sell the V8 cars in CA and WA!

The "mid-size pickup" segment was largely created as a way to get around CAFE standards. The smaller trucks got better overall MPG than the larger ones and helped to increase the overall average of the "trucks" that were produced to satisfy requirements. Does the Camaro somehow help GM in some other area that we aren't even thinking about in a similar fashion?

I love my car and am happy with my choice. But I'm also able to understand why it has very little appeal in the overall market.

That was my point, I'm satisfied otherwise I wouldn't have plunked down a good portion of a house on the car. GM narrowed the segment way down when they produced the Camaro. The complaints from the 5th Gen - usability, visibility especially got worse. performance increased.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

-LT2 as the base V8.

-Usable back seat and trunk space without compromising front seat room. Personally, I think the car is too small now. I know it will get heavier but the car is too small for a lot of people, especially those that are tall and have kids.

-More exterior/interior color choices.

-Keep offering a manual transmission.

-Get away from the current styling and introduce something to get people excited about the car again. Even though I love it, it's time to get away from the 1st gen styling cues.

-Rebrand the naming of the packages
4cyl(V6 is probably dead):
--LT-get rid of 1LT,2LT and 3LT. Just make it LT and have option packages available for order instead of forcing everything on each model.
V8:
--Z/28-base V8 Camaro. Similar to current LT1 but lose the 245 tires as those are ridiculous on a V8 car. Also make heavy duty cooling package and 1LE an option on this model.
--SS-mid level V8 trim available in current 2SS trim only. Give it a hp boost over Z/28. Lose the 1SS trim level. This is the high end non supercharged Camaro. If people want a lower option Camaro, they can get a Z/28. It's time for the SS name to be a little more special. It has been watered down for far too long.
--ZL1-make this available with a wider variety of options. Different interior color choices. Offer Recaros in something other than black. Offer optional wheels on ZL1 as well.

The only thing in this list that is not feasible is getting away from the xLT trim names. GM never should have introduced the LT1 trim name in the first place. GM has commonly put the trim level NUMBER in front of the NAME (1LT, 2LT, 3LT, 1LS, 1SS, etc.) as it breaks with their existing convention. It should have either been something entirely different, they should have changed the SS trims to include a 3SS (today's 2SS), or they should have introduced it as something like a 2LT w/ SS package or something.

Originally Posted by zaimer

The Corvette and the Camaro should not be competitor (aka cross-shopped); I would think that the intentions wouldn't have been to attract the Corvette buyers. Stealing your customers from another segment (that is also yours) is not gaining anything. You want/need entirely new buyers from the market.

The question that should be asked, at least before when the pricing was more similar (the Corvette C8 is way out of the Camaro ballpark now). With all of the impartialities/complaints of the Camaro that are listed - look at the Corvette that really offered no solution. Why do people buy the Corvette?

No, they shouldn't be. But, with the drop in starting price for the C8, they now are.

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeROC

I'm good with that except using the Z/28 as the base V8. That should be reserved for a more road course focused version or not at all, IMHO.

I get it but the Z/28 has been a non road course car for far longer than it was available with that use in mind. In all honesty, the Z/28 as a road course focused package isn't needed when you have a 1LE package available on different trims.

Enthusiasts recognize Z/28 as what it was intended for when it was introduced in 1967 but the general public just knows the nameplate and that it's a performance Camaro. That's why Z/28 as the entry level V8 would make much more sense for GM from a name recognition and advertising standpoint. Simplifying the naming of the cars needs to happen if the Camaro continues on. It's way too confusing for the general public right now.

[shoe5163]

1. All electric version under $50000.
2. Better paint (no orange peel) and more colors.
3. Better designed dash with more storage, infotainment screen that doesn't look like it was a stuck on as an after thought. Magnetic phone mount. More customizable gauge cluster and lighting.

4. Bigger sun roof.
5. More backseat room or backseat deleted.
6. Better designed front and rear ends.
7. More of a modern design over retro design.