Death of the Camaro? (Again?)

[MrObsessive]

Just ran across this story on Cheers and Gears. Hope this isn't true but with the trend towards trucks and CUV's (don't get me started on that), this wouldn't surprise me at all.

[Deuces]

I used to be a huge Camaro fan.... But I lost interest when the '82s first came out.... And it went down hill ever since.... ?

[MeatMan]

I hate to see cars die, but I can't afford any of the new ones anyway.

My wife has an SUV and I still have a 2011 sedan.  I don't know what I'll do when it dies because like you said Bill, the market wants tall vehicles.

Personally Guido, I love the latest gen Camaros. Other than the 69, my favs.

[MrObsessive]

IMO, the Camaro is one of those cars that looks nice on the outside, but once inside, it's all downhill from there. Way too claustrophobic for my tastes with those pinched windows and high beltline. Add to this the particular car I sat in sat 'low', but that may have been due to the seat itself. A pillars are way too thick and it's just a car that I did not feel comfortable in at all.

Could this be the problem with lagging sales? Ford seems to be doing well with the Mustang and Dodge doesn't seem to be having trouble selling the Challenger. Both of which are outselling the Camaro at this point.

Don't get me wrong, I don't totally despise trucks and SUV/CUV's....I'm just a bit tired of looking at all that's new coming out and all I see are way too many "two box" designs.

I hate to be cynical about this, but it seems to be that the car makers have dumbed down cars on purpose knowing the net effect would be that people would get tired of them, so then they could sell them the much more expensive vehicles which are trucks and SUV's.

Anyway, just my 2¢ worth..........

[vairnut]

Sales have been going downhill and the facelifts haven't helped. The "small block V8" is history as the next gen v8 ( outsource design) will be 4 valve overhead cam and be configured for the mid engine corvette. Intake ports on the outside of the heads and exhaust in the valley so hard to package in a front engine platform. No more lots of low end torque to move the  beast. Not a big fan of the later Camaros myself- really felt just to way too big and heavy and I also didn't like the lack of visibility. Stuck great when pushed but just not so hot in everyday use.  The Camaro also is a shared platform with the Caddy CTS which is gone. Beside, doesn't fit into the Queens electric self driving direction.

Edited July 1, 2019 by vairnut

[Rusty92]

4 minutes ago, vairnut said:

Sales have been going downhill and the facelifts haven't helped. The "small block V8" is history as the next gen v8 ( outsource design) will be 4 valve overhead cam and be configured for the mid engine corvette. Intake ports on the outside of the heads and exhaust in the valley so hard to package in a front engine platform. The Camaro also is a shared platform with the Caddy CTS which is gone. Beside, doesn't fit into the Queens electric self driving direction.

I think the regular 6.2 will stick around. Too dumb to just throw it away. It will be a while still before GM ditches pushrods and goes to DOHC. 

[Jim N]

They will need a car for NASCAR.  With Ford using the Mustang and Toyota perhaps going to the Supra, a sedan will look out of place, but the company has to make its business decisions.

[Motor City]

9 hours ago, MrObsessive said:

IMO, the Camaro is one of those cars that looks nice on the outside, but once inside, it's all downhill from there. Way too claustrophobic for my tastes with those pinched windows and high beltline. Add to this the particular car I sat in sat 'low', but that may have been due to the seat itself. A pillars are way too thick and it's just a car that I did not feel comfortable in at all.

Could this be the problem with lagging sales? Ford seems to be doing well with the Mustang and Dodge doesn't seem to be having trouble selling the Challenger. Both of which are outselling the Camaro at this point.

Don't get me wrong, I don't totally despise trucks and SUV/CUV's....I'm just a bit tired of looking at all that's new coming out and all I see are way too many "two box" designs.

I hate to be cynical about this, but it seems to be that the car makers have dumbed down cars on purpose knowing the net effect would be that people would get tired of them, so then they could sell them the much more expensive vehicles which are trucks and SUV's.

Anyway, just my 2¢ worth..........

Bill,

I agree 100% with you.  The car is claustrophobic and the blind spots make it hazardous to drive, so I refuse to buy one to replace my rusted out Monte Carlo SS.  GM choked big time on this and the previous generation.  Sure, they have powerful engines and great handling, but if you can't safely see out of it, how can you enjoy owning one?  Pretty much the whole industry has terrible designers now.  They create huge blind spots and then want to sell you expensive side and rear blind zone alert packages.  Unless you get the leather interior, the upholstery is mediocre, too.  They make bland, mostly off-black interiors.  GM also refuses to make SUVs without massive blind spots.  I'll continue to drive my old cars that are fun and I feel safe driving.

 

[espo]

While I have always been a big Camaro fan (had a '69 for 14 years and a new '77 for a couple of years and lost it in the big D) The newer body style looks good on the outside, at least to me, but not that impressed with the inside. I have never driven on though. Thought about getting one in '05 but got a new GTO instead. LOVED IT. With all of the manufactures putting all of their development dollars in SUV's and pick-ups I can see where the passenger car as we have known it is about to go the way of the Dodo Bird. 

[Joe Handley]

A friend of mine used to work at a Chevy dealer as a mechanic and had coworkers accuse him of not being loyal to GM because of his dislike of the Camaro and new trucks. He points out that the basic Mustang GT is cheaper than the base 1SS Camaro (looked, found the base Challenger R/T is cheaper too). Looked up the way I would order similar stripped down 392 Scat Pack Widebody with the auto. Can't get the Performance Pack 2 Mustang and 2SS 1LE Camaro with the auto, but the Camaro is more expensive than both  with the cheaper manual trans!

[espo]

51 minutes ago, Joe Handley said:

A friend of mine used to work at a Chevy dealer as a mechanic and had coworkers accuse him of not being loyal to GM because of his dislike of the Camaro and new trucks. He points out that the basic Mustang GT is cheaper than the base 1SS Camaro (looked, found the base Challenger R/T is cheaper too). Looked up the way I would order similar stripped down 392 Scat Pack Widebody with the auto. Can't get the Performance Pack 2 Mustang and 2SS 1LE Camaro with the auto, but the Camaro is more expensive than both  with the cheaper manual trans!

While the Charger might not be considered to be in the same sales segment as the Camaro or the Mustang, They are a hoot to drive when no one is looking. We're on our second Charger and we never even considered anything else when we replaced our '10 RT with AWD. 

[iamsuperdan]

I would be surprised to see GM cancel the Camaro. Much like Ford and Chrysler, GM needs a halo car or two. And not just the Corvette. They need a car that is within reach of most people. Something cool and fun, but relatively affordable.

The Mustang does it for Ford, the Charger/Challenger/300 for FCA, and the Camaro for GM.

As for pricing, I had a play with our builder at work. Using the most basic V8 powered trim level available, and adding manual transmission, summer tires, performance exhaust, and a big stereo...the Challenger and Mustang can be had for around $38-40k CDN, and the Camaro is around $41-42k. So it's slightly more, but not a lot. Especially for those looking at making payments or leasing.

 

Personally, I'd go for the Challenger. oh wait...i did!

Sold it, but I did.

 

 

[youpey]

This is disappointing. I haven't owned one but always wanted to.  I used to own a 2016 mustang gt, and I truly believe it would not have had the 400+hp if it wasn't for the Camaro.

 

[iamsuperdan]

1 hour ago, youpey said:

This is disappointing. I haven't owned one but always wanted to.  I used to own a 2016 mustang gt, and I truly believe it would not have had the 400+hp if it wasn't for the Camaro.

 

A little competition improves everyone! Horsepower wars are a great thing.

 

[Richard Bartrop]

I could never get into the first gen Camaros.  They aren't ugly, just kind of nondescript.  The next generation is when they really started to shine. 

[Craig Irwin]

As long as I have my 69 I'm good. It's been downhill since 73, althoe the 4'th gen was the bottom.

[Quick GMC]

My dad has a 2016 2SS. He offered to let me use it to drive to Vegas and back, which is an 8 hour round trip. I'd rather rent a Kia Soul. It's his car and he loves it, but at 6'3", 270lbs, it is absolutely claustrophobic. The rear view mirror is a massive blind spot for me

[Joe Handley]

1 hour ago, Quick GMC said:

My dad has a 2016 2SS. He offered to let me use it to drive to Vegas and back, which is an 8 hour round trip. I'd rather rent a Kia Soul. It's his car and he loves it, but at 6'3", 270lbs, it is absolutely claustrophobic. The rear view mirror is a massive blind spot for me

That was my friend's other complaint about the car, compared to the Mustang and Challenger, you couldn't see out of it.

[Bucky]

From my own point of view, if Chevrolet had truly designed it as a 'retro' car, much like the Mustang and Challenger, it may have sold better. Mustang has enough styling cues to be recognized as a spinoff of earlier year models, and Challenger is nearly a dead ringer, even though it is a larger car, based on the Charger/300 platform. When the 'new' Camaro came out, to me it didn't resemble any Camaro from the past. I owned a '71 SS Camaro, no power steering, with a 350. Not an easy car to drive, and I wasn't crazy about the visibilty out the windows back then, either. I owned a couple Camaro cousins, ('67 Firebird convertible, and '79 T/A 6.6, both used cars), and they turned out to not be that pleasant, either. To be fair, they were well used when I got them. LOL

[DumpyDan]

13 hours ago, Richard Bartrop said:

I could never get into the first gen Camaros.  They aren't ugly, just kind of nondescript.  The next generation is when they really started to shine. 

AGREED!

[MeatMan]

23 hours ago, iamsuperdan said:

I would be surprised to see GM cancel the Camaro. Much like Ford and Chrysler, GM needs a halo car or two. And not just the Corvette. They need a car that is within reach of most people. Something cool and fun, but relatively affordable.

The Mustang does it for Ford, the Charger/Challenger/300 for FCA, and the Camaro for GM.

As for pricing, I had a play with our builder at work. Using the most basic V8 powered trim level available, and adding manual transmission, summer tires, performance exhaust, and a big stereo...the Challenger and Mustang can be had for around $38-40k CDN, and the Camaro is around $41-42k. So it's slightly more, but not a lot. Especially for those looking at making payments or leasing.

With the way GM is focusing on self-drivers and EV's, I see a possible pivot away from racing anyway except for supporting the Vette, Indy cars, and their logo on funny cars. Just my opinion.

[iamsuperdan]

13 hours ago, Craig Irwin said:

As long as I have my 69 I'm good. It's been downhill since 73, althoe the 4'th gen was the bottom.

If it was a manual, I would have kept mine. I really enjoyed this car. Actually enjoyed it more than the Challenger I had.

 

 

[Nitrobarry]

All of those cars are WAY to Expensive period! When I walk into a showroom and look at the sticker price on a new pickup and wince at the $75-80,000.00 price tag the salesman just shrugs his shoulders and says "that`s the way it is now", I just shake my head. I bought a 2000 F-150 for $25,000.00 brand new, lowered it, put on wheels and tires. air intake etc, and still came in under $30,000.00. Still have it though it`s never winter driven. Try that today!

[peteski]

10 hours ago, Nitrobarry said:

All of those cars are WAY to Expensive period! When I walk into a showroom and look at the sticker price on a new pickup and wince at the $75-80,000.00 price tag the salesman just shrugs his shoulders and says "that`s the way it is now", I just shake my head. I bought a 2000 F-150 for $25,000.00 brand new, lowered it, put on wheels and tires. air intake etc, and still came in under $30,000.00. Still have it though it`s never winter driven. Try that today!

Partly to blame are all the modern computerized doo-dads that are included in the vehicles.  I could make a long list, but I don't feel like typing. Many are not needed, and some actually crate distractions.

[jeffdeoranut]

On 7/1/2019 at 7:57 AM, MrObsessive said:

IMO, the Camaro is one of those cars that looks nice on the outside, but once inside, it's all downhill from there. Way too claustrophobic for my tastes with those pinched windows and high beltline. Add to this the particular car I sat in sat 'low', but that may have been due to the seat itself. A pillars are way too thick and it's just a car that I did not feel comfortable in at all.

Could this be the problem with lagging sales? Ford seems to be doing well with the Mustang and Dodge doesn't seem to be having trouble selling the Challenger. Both of which are outselling the Camaro at this point.

Don't get me wrong, I don't totally despise trucks and SUV/CUV's....I'm just a bit tired of looking at all that's new coming out and all I see are way too many "two box" designs.

I hate to be cynical about this, but it seems to be that the car makers have dumbed down cars on purpose knowing the net effect would be that people would get tired of them, so then they could sell them the much more expensive vehicles which are trucks and SUV's.

Anyway, just my 2¢ worth..........

i agree i test drove a new camaro and it just felt weird