[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

In my case, the performance, lower weight and interior quality leap motivated me to trade my 13 ZL1 for a 16 2SS. Complete new model with better ergonomics and performance that equaled the supercharged gen5 with a naturally aspirated engine.

I sold my grey 16 A8 in order to get a 18 manual because I lost faith in the A8. Failure GM. ...but they kept me because Camaro was the best performance-bang-per-dollar. I looked at an Audi A5, BMW M2 and Kia Stinger. The M6 Camaro was the best performance and value

A 25 hp increase and new digital gauge cluster wouldn't have moved me.

That's right you switched to a manual because you lost faith in the A8.

I wonder how many people have upgraded from A8 to A10 now that that is available. All I am saying is updates and tweaks aren't bad. And they aren't always going to be as drastic as the 18 Mustang. For the most part, it was only the GTpp1* that really upped the ante, and that is mostly due to how superior the A10 is to the A6 it replaced.

[BRMike]

Originally Posted by shaffe

And they aren't always going to be as drastic as the 18 Mustang.

The worst case of this in my recent memory was the 2010 Mustang GT. The 2010 got a refreshed exterior, but it was a year later when it got a significant power boost (introduction of the Coyote). If I remember correctly, the base car in 2011 (3.7-liter V6) was nearly as powerful as the 2010 GT.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BRMike

The worst case of this in my recent memory was the 2010 Mustang GT. The 2010 got a refreshed exterior, but it was a year later when it got a significant power boost (introduction of the Coyote). If I remember correctly, the base car in 2011 (3.7-liter V6) was nearly as powerful as the 2010 GT.

Yeah I will have to admit that was a bad one. They should have just waited on the sheetmetal refresh until the 5.0 and 3.7 were ready.

[LESS1]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I almost went to that track day, it was a SeatTime program if I remember right. I ended up going in the fall instead. Much nicer weather, and there weren't many folks running that day so they combined the two groups into one, and we had an open track all day. I like Shenandoah, but I like Main better. I may go the first week of March.

Correct it was ST and they combined both groups due to really low attendance. Very hot but I was able to get over 3.5 hours of track time which was great. I just wish the gas prices at the track were a little better. Ended up spending almost as much for gas as I did on the entry fee. Most people tend to stay away from Shenandoah, possibly because it's very technical and there isn't a 2500'+ front straight? I'm going to ST Friday 06 March on Main, let me know if you sign up. At this point, it looks like there are currently 23 folks attending. I emailed Amanda and she indicated they would run as open track if headcount stays around 25 to 30 total. MR URL below if you're interested.

https://www.motorsportreg.com/events...ircuit-479362#

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by LESS1

Correct it was ST and they combined both groups due to really low attendance. Very hot but I was able to get over 3.5 hours of track time which was great. I just wish the gas prices at the track were a little better. Ended up spending almost as much for gas as I did on the entry fee. Most people tend to stay away from Shenandoah, possibly because it's very technical and there isn't a 2500'+ front straight? I'm going to ST Friday 06 March on Main, let me know if you sign up. At this point, it looks like there are currently 23 folks attending. I emailed Amanda and she indicated they would run as open track if headcount stays around 25 to 30 total. MR URL below if you're interested.

https://www.motorsportreg.com/events...ircuit-479362#

I will probably make a last minute decision on the March 6th event. Not sure if I want to put my summer tires on just yet, as winter has not yet passed (although it has been a mild one here for sure). My SS is a daily driver, and I have winter tires on right now (Pirelli Sotozero's). They are getting a bit low in the tread for a snow tire, so perhaps I should just leave them on and burn the rest of the tread off at Shenandoah.

I have a love/hate relationship with Shenandoah. I love how technical it is, but with the size/weight/power of our cars, it seems a bit small. If they just took a shrink ray, put it in reverese, and made everthing a bit bigger, I feel like I can stretch the legs of the car a bit more. Main feels really the right size for our cars. But, there are less turns, less challenges too. Other than turn 4 of course.

I am going to try to get to VIR this spring with a group of BMW guys. The TarHeel Chapter of the BMW club is doing an event in April, and some SeatTime would be a nice warmup. Maybe I will sign up for half a day, and come for just the afternoon.

[BlaqWhole]

Maybe GM built the 6th Gen Camaro too well.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Maybe GM built the 6th Gen Camaro too well.

They did their homework on it for sure.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

They did their homework on it for sure.

They did. But where did it get them? Look at it like this, GM put a lot of features and extras into the Camaro. We criticize Ford for being cheap with the Mustang. And initially the Camaro sold really well. But then Ford was able to cut pricing on the Mustang which lured a lot of buyers in. GM dealerships could not lower Camaro pricing as drastically tho who pushed people away. At some point GTs were going for dirt cheap and the EBs even cheaper. Despite the fact that the Camaro was a great bargain for what you get and a great deal, a great deal means nothing if nobody can afford it. And that is what happened with the Camaro. When you think about it, the ZL1 is the best value on the planet. But how many people can afford a $60K car? For those who can, how many are gonna look elsewhere? And how many does that leave? Not many. So my statement about GM making the car too good was more to say that if they had skimped a little then they could have kept the pricing decent for most and comparable to the Mustang. I mean, most people just want a V8. They don't care or even know about Brembos, coolers, specific tires, eLSD, etc. Most of them are not going to drive the car in any way that they would need any of that anyway. So maybe GM built the Camaros too well for what was needed and that ultimately drove the price up and that is what turned people off. I mean, when looking at the ZL1 and how well it was made, I and those who did buy one certainly benefited. But perhaps it might have been better to build a lower level SS from the start and then let people decide if they want to spring for the 1SS or 2SS or SLE. And then the ZL1 could retain all the features but maybe GM could have done better f they didn't build as many.

Basically my point is that as good as the Camaro is, that might be the very reason it isn't selling. It is too good.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

They did. But where did it get them? Look at it like this, GM put a lot of features and extras into the Camaro. We criticize Ford for being cheap with the Mustang. And initially the Camaro sold really well. But then Ford was able to cut pricing on the Mustang which lured a lot of buyers in. GM dealerships could not lower Camaro pricing as drastically tho who pushed people away. At some point GTs were going for dirt cheap and the EBs even cheaper. Despite the fact that the Camaro was a great bargain for what you get and a great deal, a great deal means nothing if nobody can afford it. And that is what happened with the Camaro. When you think about it, the ZL1 is the best value on the planet. But how many people can afford a $60K car? For those who can, how many are gonna look elsewhere? And how many does that leave? Not many. So my statement about GM making the car too good was more to say that if they had skimped a little then they could have kept the pricing decent for most and comparable to the Mustang. I mean, most people just want a V8. They don't care or even know about Brembos, coolers, specific tires, eLSD, etc. Most of them are not going to drive the car in any way that they would need any of that anyway. So maybe GM built the Camaros too well for what was needed and that ultimately drove the price up and that is what turned people off. I mean, when looking at the ZL1 and how well it was made, I and those who did buy one certainly benefited. But perhaps it might have been better to build a lower level SS from the start and then let people decide if they want to spring for the 1SS or 2SS or SLE. And then the ZL1 could retain all the features but maybe GM could have done better f they didn't build as many.

Basically my point is that as good as the Camaro is, that might be the very reason it isn't selling. It is too good.

or ...maybe they should have offered a 1LT from the start.

After a life time of buying cars that immediately needed their weaknesses shored up, I’m enjoying a car that needs nothing.

Every press review slams the visibility and the low roof is noticeable when you first sit in one. It may not be an actual factor when driving but it never gets on people’s list.

Mustang price is also high now and sales are down across the segment.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

They did. But where did it get them? Look at it like this, GM put a lot of features and extras into the Camaro. We criticize Ford for being cheap with the Mustang. And initially the Camaro sold really well. But then Ford was able to cut pricing on the Mustang which lured a lot of buyers in. GM dealerships could not lower Camaro pricing as drastically tho who pushed people away. At some point GTs were going for dirt cheap and the EBs even cheaper. Despite the fact that the Camaro was a great bargain for what you get and a great deal, a great deal means nothing if nobody can afford it. And that is what happened with the Camaro. When you think about it, the ZL1 is the best value on the planet. But how many people can afford a $60K car? For those who can, how many are gonna look elsewhere? And how many does that leave? Not many. So my statement about GM making the car too good was more to say that if they had skimped a little then they could have kept the pricing decent for most and comparable to the Mustang. I mean, most people just want a V8. They don't care or even know about Brembos, coolers, specific tires, eLSD, etc. Most of them are not going to drive the car in any way that they would need any of that anyway. So maybe GM built the Camaros too well for what was needed and that ultimately drove the price up and that is what turned people off. I mean, when looking at the ZL1 and how well it was made, I and those who did buy one certainly benefited. But perhaps it might have been better to build a lower level SS from the start and then let people decide if they want to spring for the 1SS or 2SS or SLE. And then the ZL1 could retain all the features but maybe GM could have done better f they didn't build as many.

Basically my point is that as good as the Camaro is, that might be the very reason it isn't selling. It is too good.

Some very valid points. One of the things ford gets bashed on the most is it's option packages, but it could be a smart play in the long run. I agree with what hotlap says below, they should have offered the 1LT from the start. Hell now dealers are advertising pretty big bucks off of the Camaro. last I looked, they were advertising some 3-5K of SS models and some Zl1 and ZLEs were seeing 7-10K off.

Also, just my opinion they put to much effort into performance and styling over stuff like ergonomics and practicality. Yes these are not practical cars. but the bulk of the sales of these cars are from the base models where buyers may/probably care more about that stuff, because they don't say the performance or driving dynamics make up for it. Did this lead to the best performing Camaro ever and one of the best performance cars. Absolutely.

Originally Posted by hotlap

or ...maybe they should have offered a 1LT from the start.

After a life time of buying cars that immediately needed their weaknesses shored up, I’m enjoying a car that needs nothing.

Every press review slams the visibility and the low roof is noticeable when you first sit in one. It may not be an actual factor when driving but it never gets on people’s list.

Mustang price is also high now and sales are down across the segment.

Yep. People may go in with a preconceived notion because it is mentioned in every review, people talk about it all the time. Then they get into the car with a preconceived notion the visibility sucks and on a ten minute test drive, likely not going to change that view.

Yeah the whole segment is down.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yep. People may go in with a preconceived notion because it is mentioned in every review, people talk about it all the time. Then they get into the car with a preconceived notion the visibility sucks and on a ten minute test drive, likely not going to change that view.

Yeah the whole segment is down.

Yesterday I took the car out of several months of hibernation and went for a test drive, just to check if things still work, heh. After months of driving an SUV with gigantic windows, I got another "initial" visibility impression, and I swear it's only marginally worse in the Camaro.

I mean, the rear windshield is narrow vertically, but what does one really need to see there? Is a car/truck behind me, either in my lane or my immediate left/right, and if yes, how far, how fast is it approaching and is its driver attentive or not. That's all, I don't need to see square yards of blue sky.

Side mirrors are smaller than the giant truck style ones on the SUV, but again, set correctly I see everything there, except for suckers that cut into my lane right when making a lane change, however, the BSM catches that nicely and it's a potential issue in every car unless it has a glass dome for a cabin.

Finally, front view is widescreen again, but it's no big deal, the useless sky is cut off and all I need to do at stoplights is stop a feet or two ahead of the line. The A pillar is an obstruction, but so is it in every car I've ever had and I'm used to moving my head to compensate, not Camaro specific at all.

My conclusion is that the visibility issue is overblown, it takes a bit of adaptation, but I'd think it's within the realm of normal expectations, every car is slightly different anyway. There definitely is an element of compromise, yet with all the backlash one might think it's unbearable, which is far from the truth. (Oh, and I even have vision problems, yet this is a practical non-issue for me.)

[ZRacerLE]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Yesterday I took the car out of several months of hibernation and went for a test drive, just to check if things still work, heh. After months of driving an SUV with gigantic windows, I got another "initial" visibility impression, and I swear it's only marginally worse in the Camaro.

I mean, the rear windshield is narrow vertically, but what does one really need to see there? Is a car/truck behind me, either in my lane or my immediate left/right, and if yes, how far, how fast is it approaching and is its driver attentive or not. That's all, I don't need to see square yards of blue sky.

Side mirrors are smaller than the giant truck style ones on the SUV, but again, set correctly I see everything there, except for suckers that cut into my lane right when making a lane change, however, the BSM catches that nicely and it's a potential issue in every car unless it has a glass dome for a cabin.

Finally, front view is widescreen again, but it's no big deal, the useless sky is cut off and all I need to do at stoplights is stop a feet or two ahead of the line. The A pillar is an obstruction, but so is it in every car I've ever had and I'm used to moving my head to compensate, not Camaro specific at all.

My conclusion is that the visibility issue is overblown, it takes a bit of adaptation, but I'd think it's within the realm of normal expectations, every car is slightly different anyway. There definitely is an element of compromise, yet with all the backlash one might think it's unbearable, which is far from the truth. (Oh, and I even have vision problems, yet this is a practical non-issue for me.)

Overblown indeed

[oldman]

maybe people should put the cel phone down and drive with some situational awareness. But yah if you going to blab with your bro about the game well then... I do honestly think the side mirrors could be just a tad bigger, my nephew has a mustang and it is a bigger two piece mirror, works much better IMO.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by hotlap

or ...maybe they should have offered a 1LT from the start.

I think that was the best option...to offer the 1LT from the start. But I think GM most likely really didn't want to go that route. It seems like they really wanted to make every version of the car a capable triple threat without cutting corners.

Originally Posted by hotlap

After a life time of buying cars that immediately needed their weaknesses shored up, I’m enjoying a car that needs nothing.

Same here. The longer I have this car and the more I learn the more I realize that I could not have made a better choice. I have plans to mod mine. But seriously this car is soo phenomenal bone stock that I keep asking myself if I really want to do what I would consider wasting money modding it. But then I am sure I'm gonna come across Demons and GT500s in the wild...in Mexico on some nice long strait-away. So I need to be prepared for that eventuality.

But still despite how you and I and others feel, it doesn't matter much when the vast majority of people who buy these cars can't afford the Camaro. I can imagine some kid living in his parent's house going to a Chevy dealership to trade in his tricked out Civic and with $29K in financing, getting laughed at, and ending up driving out of a Ford Dealership with a brand new GT for $29K OTD. A great deal means nothing if nobody can afford it. And the Camaro is the best deal on the planet. But not many can afford what it costs. So it is good that the 1LT is out there to bring some customers back. Because if I had a dime for every story about how a Chevy dealership wouldn't budge on price but the Ford dealership dropped $4K off a brand new GT...

Originally Posted by hotlap

Every press review slams the visibility and the low roof is noticeable when you first sit in one. It may not be an actual factor when driving but it never gets on people’s list.

Mustang price is also high now and sales are down across the segment.

I was disappointed in the visibility of the car when I first sat in one. However all that disappointment disappeared when I got a call that a ZL1 was showing up and asking if I wanted to buy it. LOL!! The magazines focus on certain topics but if you notice they never get into what each car actually features as standard.