Guess what? Motortrend favors the Camaro again

[thehunterooo]

The Camaro looks good though :shrug:

Sponsored

 

[2018OFPP1?2]

Here’s a place where I can add some REAL information because I was there, in the room while these decisions were made. I’ve had this discussion on Camaro6 a few times. The 1997 - 2002 Camaros were awesome vehicles for their time, yet there was no 2003 - 2009. Why? Main reason is a combination of new fuel economy regulations and NHTSA crash regulations plus a general lack of cash within the company. It was time for a major update on Camaro. The F-Body platform was not capable of passing the upcoming crash requirements without a ridiculous amount of investment. So we in Product Planning started looking for existing RWD platforms that could take the Camaro and Firebird. The most obvious was the Sigma platform that launched the then new CTS. Two problems...too expensive to make a reasonably priced Camaro / Firebird and plans for upcoming vehicles off Sigma (STS, SRX, two other vehicles that eventually never happened) meant there wasn’t enough volume left to add Camaro / Firebird. So even though Sigma was everybody’s favorite for a new Camaro / Firebird, there was no way it was going to displace a Cadillac model for volume and adding a second production module made zero economic sense.

So, next option was to look down under. The Zeta platform in Australia that produced the Holden’s Monaro. One HUGE problem. Because of some import laws which I still to this day don’t really understand, import volume was capped at either 30k or 60k per year. I honestly can’t remember which. Eventually, we did import Pontiac GTO which was just a badge job on the Monaro (plus putting the steering wheel where it belonged). When Pontiac got chopped, that car became the Chevrolet SS. It was capped for volume, but that was fine for those cars. Eventually, after the Camaro Concept car was shown, the decision was made to install a duplicate module of the Zeta platform in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada and the 5th Gen was revived for 2010.

That, my friends is the Readers Digest version of the hole in Camaro’s history. It pretty much boiled down to finding the right architecture to build a reasonably priced car that could meet all the new regulations.

Kinda glossed over the not having enough cash to invest in an updated platform aspect. If the line sold well, and was profitable, it would just be silly to not invest in it's continuance. GM obviously decided whatever cash they did have wasn't going to get the return they wanted/needed from the Camaro at that time, and axed it.

With a "little" cash injection from the US taxpayer, GM and the Camaro live on.

Camaros are cool, just not the most popular choice, and I don't think catering to a very small percentage of the population is helping them any.

 

[Hack]

This is a poor analogy though. The Mustang and the Camaro have similar power. I know what you're saying but that just isn't the case here.

I've had 3 400+ HP cars that I've tracked. All GT type coupes. Each has been successively faster due to better technology and setup. Guess which one is the most fun? The fastest one, which is the current 1LE. It is more planted, has better grip, rotates better, and brakes better. That means deeper corners, faster straights, and better times. And yes, it is very noticeable. My first time out with rhe new car i turned about 10 laps in the first session and was shocked by how fast it felt. When I looked at the times I wasn't surprised to see a couple seconds shaved off because it felt like it. And yes, that means more fun to me. Maybe to a newbie that doesn't mean anything, but as people get deeper into tracking the goal is to shave time. Sometimes that is just more seat time and other times that's a new car or mods. Usually both.

Let me see whether in practice you are trying to improve your lap times every bit you can.

If you bought racing slicks for your car and/or wider tires, your car would be faster around the track. Are you running racing slicks? Why not?

I am not planning on buying the GT350R Cup 2 tires for my car. Why? My goal isn't to go around the track as fast as possible. My goal is to have fun. When I'm at the track I am trying to get around the track as quickly as I can, but I also don't plan on going to the same track over and over to get every possible tenth of a second of time that I can. I plan to visit various different tracks, because I think that will be more enjoyable for me. I will probably never be a complete expert at any one track or lap it as fast as I possibly can, but I will have a good time.

More analogies and thoughts that explain why a couple seconds in lap time doesn't make a car terrific or absolute garbage. Is the SS 1LE a little faster than the Mustang GT PP? Yup. Is it a big deal? Nope.

 

[martinjlm]

Kinda glossed over the not having enough cash to invest in an updated platform aspect. If the line sold well, and was profitable, it would just be silly to not invest in it's continuance. GM obviously decided whatever cash they did have wasn't going to get the return they wanted/needed from the Camaro at that time, and axed it.

With a "little" cash injection from the US taxpayer, GM and the Camaro live on.

Camaros are cool, just not the most popular choice, and I don't think catering to a very small percentage of the population is helping them any.

I said it was the Readers Digest version ;). I also said that Sigma was fully subscribed because of CTS, STS, SRX, and two vehicles that at the end of the day never got produced. Well, part of the planning process is to look at the business case for every program that wants to built on an architecture. The other two vehicles had better business cases. That’s all I can responsibly say at this point.

You don’t just “do” a new architecture. A new architecture can require more than $1 billion in investment. And that does not include designing, contenting, and validating each of the vehicles that come off the architecture. With the exception of vehicles like Corvette and Ford GT, you do not create an architecture for just one vehicle. That is why for Camaro it was Sigma, Zeta, pump a ton of $$ into the F-body to bring it up to the new reg’s, or stand down. The “worth it to spend cash on it” decisions are made more on a portfolio basis than individual product basis. First the vehicle has to show ability to meet the targets assigned to it, then that gets measured against other vehicle programs in the portfolio. It’s not like profits made on Camaro are shoveled back into next gen Camaro development. They go to the corp for corp portfolio development.

 

[Arthonon]

Let me see whether in practice you are trying to improve your lap times every bit you can.

If you bought racing slicks for your car and/or wider tires, your car would be faster around the track. Are you running racing slicks? Why not?

I've mentioned something like this in other threads too, like, why not take out the A/C, carpeting, etc., to get even better track times if speed is the primary deciding factor? And if it's not important enough to do all that, then maybe it's not the performance that is really making the difference.

I'd also say it's easier to make changes to the Mustang to overcome the performance advantages the stock Camaro has than it would be to make changes to the Camaro to overcome the interior/visibility advantages the Mustang has over it.

 

[martinjlm]

This is a poor analogy though. The Mustang and the Camaro have similar power. I know what you're saying but that just isn't the case here.

I've had 3 400+ HP cars that I've tracked. All GT type coupes. Each has been successively faster due to better technology and setup. Guess which one is the most fun? The fastest one, which is the current 1LE. It is more planted, has better grip, rotates better, and brakes better. That means deeper corners, faster straights, and better times. And yes, it is very noticeable. My first time out with rhe new car i turned about 10 laps in the first session and was shocked by how fast it felt. When I looked at the times I wasn't surprised to see a couple seconds shaved off because it felt like it. And yes, that means more fun to me. Maybe to a newbie that doesn't mean anything, but as people get deeper into tracking the goal is to shave time. Sometimes that is just more seat time and other times that's a new car or mods. Usually both.

Let me see whether in practice you are trying to improve your lap times every bit you can.

If you bought racing slicks for your car and/or wider tires, your car would be faster around the track. Are you running racing slicks? Why not?

I am not planning on buying the GT350R Cup 2 tires for my car. Why? My goal isn't to go around the track as fast as possible. My goal is to have fun. When I'm at the track I am trying to get around the track as quickly as I can, but I also don't plan on going to the same track over and over to get every possible tenth of a second of time that I can. I plan to visit various different tracks, because I think that will be more enjoyable for me. I will probably never be a complete expert at any one track or lap it as fast as I possibly can, but I will have a good time.

More analogies and thoughts that explain why a couple seconds in lap time doesn't make a car terrific or absolute garbage. Is the SS 1LE a little faster than the Mustang GT PP? Yup. Is it a big deal? Nope.

This is interesting. As different as your points of view are, I pretty much agree with both of you. Let me ‘splain....

When I am tracking my car, whether it is on the track or on the strip, I am focused more on how much I can get out of my car and trying to make each outing better than the last one. I am pushing for what it takes for me to improve as a driver. A faster lap....a faster quarter. My point of view is, my car is what it is, and it has more capability than I know how to use, so I’m focused on expanding my envelope. That’s where I agree with JohnnyUtah.

Could I put drag radials on it or FI or a tune? Sure. But that wouldn’t be me improving, that would be the car having even more capability.

At the same time, does the fact that most of the SS Coupes and Mustang Coupes that are on the strip when I run quarters run 3 - 5 tenths faster than me mean my car sucks? No. It just means my baseline would be 3 - 5 tenths better, but I would still need to work on my own driving skills. Does the fact that I came in 4th out of 4 when our “Small Block Mafia” tracked M1 Concourse mean my car sucks? No. The other three were a C7 Grand Sport, a 2017 ZL1, and a heavily modded C6 Grand Sport. They should be concerned if I beat them. But when all is said and done, it’s not a big deal. Four very nice cars, all driven hard for the fun of it all. I had a blast doing it in my Camaro convertible and I would have had just about as much fun in a GT350 or a Miata. That’s where I agree with Hack. It’s all ice cream. We’re arguing over Moose Tracks and Rocky Road.

 

[jsaylor]

I've done some time in the automotive industry myself, and it is certainly true that programs like Alpha or CD6 are looked upon as a whole, but individual programs to develop specific vehicles under the umbrella of CD6 are absolutely scrutinized on their own merits as well.

In my experience, given what we have seen, it is virtually impossible to think that Alpha as w whole isn't looked upon as a failure within the halls of the RenCen. Sales expectations for every successive model based upon the Alpha platform were unquestionably higher than actual sales because every single vehicle on that platform was overproduced relative to long term demand immediately upon release. Occasionally an auto manufacturer will significantly overproduce on purpose, but that is almost never the case immediately after a new model debuts.

Does Alpha make a profit? Officially that is a question almost nobody here can answer, but it seems unlikely. Are the Cadillac models based upon Alpha profitable? Not unless Alpha is, which seems highly unlikely, and possibly not even then. Is Camaro profitable? That's going to be a tangled web, but my guess says no here as well, at least in part because the significan overproduction of this model upon debut suggests that GM expected to need to meet a market demand that never fully materialized. Undoubtedly, that volume was intended to bring materials and production costs down for the platform as whole since Camaro would easily be the highest volume model riding on Alpha. That didn't happen, and that means that everything is more expensive to produce, and in the face of sunk costs that can't be addressed at all and relatively inflexible overhead that can only be addressed to a degree, that is a very bad thing.


Just my two cents.

 

[6String]

That’s where I agree with Hack. It’s all ice cream. We’re arguing over Moose Tracks and Rocky Road.

Truth be told...

 

[J_Maher_AMG]

:headbonk:

I don't think you are here on these forums in earnest, like Martin is. You are here to troll. Others, along with myself have already rebutted your comments several times over.


1) Yes, the Camaro is ugly enough I would never buy one, or even drive one (if given to me). That is my opinion and sorry that it unsettles you so much. I am not the only one who feels the Camaro's design is off and awkward to the eye. Just live with it and stop bleeding all over the forums trying to defend the looks of you car...


2) The 1LE is significantly faster than a GTPP..? In who's hands..? And of course you are talking about a base 1LE, not any with options. And again, you are not comparing it to a GTPP w/magneride.. or for $810 more, the GTPP2.

There are option if you need that level of performance, but most don't because streets. You are just talking about how much cheaper it is to get a 1LE, than a Mustang at this point, not actual performance deltas.

Though it is HILARIOUS that you are trying to question performance between the two, when you couldn't run lap times yourself, consistently in your own car if you tried. You are not a professional. (Hence 1%).


3) Talking about me personally, is your attempt to try and change the topic of discussion. But I am not a fragile snowflake, so I have no issues talking about the cars I have owned.

I didn't own a 135, I owned an ultra rare 135is w/pp2.. It was a tad over $52k. I didn't care about the looks, I bought it for being subtle bomber and stroked nearly every car I came across. It also had superb visibility and something I much desire. It also had the best exhaust I've ever heard in a stock car.

The new M2, came with the same engine and same tune as the 135is. But with the announcement of the M2, Ford also announced the s550 Mustang, and also the rumor of a GT350..

Then I broke my back.

So I was relegated to my daily driver Edge Sport while I recuperated and sold my BMW last year. I am back to rowing gears on my simulator and feel confident enough to put my $56k hat back into the ring. I have test drove BMW M2, Corvette Stingray, Porsche Cayman.


I will be ordering a Mustang GT PP2 later this year for a winter delivery...

You must not be exposed to a lot of sports cars in your area huh?

135is definitely was a great sounding car, but one of the best most certainly not from a general public point of view. GT350, 911/GT4 3.8L, GT3 3.8/4.0, C63, F-Type, Corvette LS7,LT1, all sorts of cars with better sounding exhausts. I know its subjective, but just like this camaro vs mustang debate, majority of people would side with those cars as being the better sounding vehicles in the "attainable" price range. :cheers:

 

[JohnnyUtah]

:headbonk:

I don't think you are here on these forums in earnest, like Martin is. You are here to troll. Others, along with myself have already rebutted your comments several times over.


1) Yes, the Camaro is ugly enough I would never buy one, or even drive one (if given to me). That is my opinion and sorry that it unsettles you so much. I am not the only one who feels the Camaro's design is off and awkward to the eye. Just live with it and stop bleeding all over the forums trying to defend the looks of you car...


2) The 1LE is significantly faster than a GTPP..? In who's hands..? And of course you are talking about a base 1LE, not any with options. And again, you are not comparing it to a GTPP w/magneride.. or for $810 more, the GTPP2.

There are option if you need that level of performance, but most don't because streets. You are just talking about how much cheaper it is to get a 1LE, than a Mustang at this point, not actual performance deltas.

Though it is HILARIOUS that you are trying to question performance between the two, when you couldn't run lap times yourself, consistently in your own car if you tried. You are not a professional. (Hence 1%).


3) Talking about me personally, is your attempt to try and change the topic of discussion. But I am not a fragile snowflake, so I have no issues talking about the cars I have owned.

I didn't own a 135, I owned an ultra rare 135is w/pp2.. It was a tad over $52k. I didn't care about the looks, I bought it for being subtle bomber and stroked nearly every car I came across. It also had superb visibility and something I much desire. It also had the best exhaust I've ever heard in a stock car.

The new M2, came with the same engine and same tune as the 135is. But with the announcement of the M2, Ford also announced the s550 Mustang, and also the rumor of a GT350..

Then I broke my back.

So I was relegated to my daily driver Edge Sport while I recuperated and sold my BMW last year. I am back to rowing gears on my simulator and feel confident enough to put my $56k hat back into the ring. I have test drove BMW M2, Corvette Stingray, Porsche Cayman.


I will be ordering a Mustang GT PP2 later this year for a winter delivery...

It's funny you don't think I'm here in earnest. I'm not a brand whore. Most people on here are. I like the Mustang as much as the Camaro. It just doesn't have the out of the box package I wanted. So that was that. Pretty simple for me. It's fine if you think it's ugly. I like it. I understand why you like the Mustang. You don't understand why anyone would ever choose a Camaro, so I am telling you why.

I'm not sure why you don't think consistent laps are possible. With open track, my laps are generally within a few tenths of each other, with the occasional mistake or traffic adding a second or so. I'm not a pro driver, but I'm not a beginner either. Most drivers will have the same result with some seat time at a familiar track. That is actually very typical.

My reason for calling out your 135 is that it seems you have the same reasons for owning it that your are chastising Camaro owners for having. It is good performance with questionable looks.

Hope you like your pp2 and take it to the track. Save some dough for the PSC2s. They wear fast, but are glue on track.

 

[JohnnyUtah]

Let me see whether in practice you are trying to improve your lap times every bit you can.

If you bought racing slicks for your car and/or wider tires, your car would be faster around the track. Are you running racing slicks? Why not?

I am not planning on buying the GT350R Cup 2 tires for my car. Why? My goal isn't to go around the track as fast as possible. My goal is to have fun. When I'm at the track I am trying to get around the track as quickly as I can, but I also don't plan on going to the same track over and over to get every possible tenth of a second of time that I can. I plan to visit various different tracks, because I think that will be more enjoyable for me. I will probably never be a complete expert at any one track or lap it as fast as I possibly can, but I will have a good time.

More analogies and thoughts that explain why a couple seconds in lap time doesn't make a car terrific or absolute garbage. Is the SS 1LE a little faster than the Mustang GT PP? Yup. Is it a big deal? Nope.

No, I don't run slicks because as stated before I want to simply run an arrive and drive car. I don't want to have multiple sets of wheels and tires around anymore. Kids are taking up too much time and room in the house to deal with all that these days. Slicks generally mean a trailer as well unless you fit the set inside the car. I used to do that with my M3, but decided I was tired of the effort and more than anything, the mess.

My goal isn't to be as fast as humanly possible. My goal is to have a car that I can take to the track and beat on without having to mod much other than something like brake fluid, or maybe pads. I want to have fun doing it. For me that means getting faster. That can be done through either improving skill or improving hardware. Or both.

You're right, that going to various tracks is more fun than one, but there are only a finite number of tracks around. I've got 4 near enough to even do weekend events at. Otherwise they turn into 4 day trips with a travel day both ends. Those are few and far between for me these days, so improving at tracks I know means going faster, but not at the expense of daily drivability.

The funny thing is that I think we actually agree on most points here. I don't think the GTPP is garbage. I like the car but wish it was more capable. It seems that most here think the Camaro is garbage, due to visibility or looks.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

The funny thing is that I think we actually agree on most points here. I don't think the GTPP is garbage. I like the car but wish it was more capable. It seems that most here think the Camaro is garbage, due to visibility or looks.

Nope. I think its a cool looking car. But I wish they'd fix the f#$ked up visability. My only gripe with Camaros.

 

[grabber yote]

Bench racing and arguing over stats is meaningless. Performance varies alot depending on driver capability. I see far more S550's handing 5th and 6th gen SS's thier ass than the other way around at the drag strip. I honestly could car less about road racing. Alot more people will roll race and drag race so from my perspective it's more of a benchmark based up my choice in racing.

 

[thehunterooo]

Yes that’s right because there are no negative posts about the Mustang on Camaro6.

 

[w3rkn]

You must not be exposed to a lot of sports cars in your area huh?

135is definitely was a great sounding car, but one of the best most certainly not from a general public point of view. GT350, 911/GT4 3.8L, GT3 3.8/4.0, C63, F-Type, Corvette LS7,LT1, all sorts of cars with better sounding exhausts. I know its subjective, but just like this camaro vs mustang debate, majority of people would side with those cars as being the better sounding vehicles in the "attainable" price range. :cheers:

I smell sarcasm... :clap2:

Dream cruise bro... I was getting 9s & 10s from the crowd and people called it exotic. And yes, It sounded much better than most stock cars and better than ANY Porsche or stock Vette.

I had a manual, but here is a vid of an auto: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...FC20D3890C7D0A5A2897FC20D3890C7D&&FORM=VRDGAR

Not me, but a 135is on Belle Isle Detroit: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...91B59A3B9BBE3AB39BFF91B59A3B9BBE&&FORM=VRDGAR

All my friends own sports cars, they all loved the sound of my exhaust. Just saying... if you haven't heard one in person. I had people come up to me in parking lots all the time asking about the car, or just enamored by the sound.

Subjective, I know....



And correct, once I heard the GT350 years later, it became my new favorite (stock) exhaust note. My fav of all times, is a M5 E60 with meisterschaft exhaust. We called them clown pipes. Because it made everyone around just giggle uncontrollable.


:cheers:

Sponsored