Future Chevrolet Camaro

fine69

Let Mustang keep the women....If the new Camaro is going to be everything I've read then it will sell itself! Women and true muscle heads alike! If you recall, the '68 covertable(yellow/black) was a big eye cather for the women. I do agree Chevy will have to produce several models and trim levels but, I don't see any problem with sales. Mustang will be old hat....The Dodge Challenger is
what GM will have to keep an eye on.

navigator89

Camaro

jonniedee

The new Holdon news is sad - these are the same Aussies that ruined the GTO

mitcam2

Same old thing. Another GM attempt at a Mustang wanna be. The reasons are simple. The mustang leaves the factory as a great starting point. Beautiful, reasonably fast, better handling. A little tweaking and all the competition will ever see is tailights. Buy the most beautiful PonyCar (the original) Mustang. Open up the Airbox, bolt on an X-pipe, flash the computer and go hunting for the poor guys in the wanna be, poser, competition. Been doing it for years. Simple, inexpensive and loads of fun. Pushrod, backward, GM stone age engineering just can't compete with OHC technology. But hey, buy what you like. We need all American car companies to be healthy and competitive if we are to stay healthy and keep kicking German and Japanese butt. The new Mustang won the first race of the season in Grand-Am cup @ Daytona, was instantly restricted in the airflow department and forced to run taller gears than the competiton and sill won the Championship 1st year out of the box. Nuff Said.

mitcam2

Ported P.I. Heads, P-51 intake, long tube headers, and a 75mm TB. 423 RWHP. Dno sheet to prove it.
No problems with relibility ot driveabilty @ 40k miles so far.

exalteddragon1

I think i said it b4, but this sounds reasonable to me, for 2008 at the earliest or so...

Model Engine Min Output Base Price
-----------------------------------------------------
Base V6 OHV VVT DoD 3.5L 224hp (20K)
Z28 V8 OHV VVT DoD 5.3L 350hp (25K)
SS V8 OHV VVT DoD 6.0L 475hp (30K)

remember that 400 hp is already out of date, when the current GTO has this much, and an SS at 30K will have to beat Mustangs 475hp.
To accomplish this power increase, meybe GM will FINNALLY IMPLEMENT THE 3 VALVE DESIGN on the OHV's. That would be very nice.
I think the VVT and DoD will be on all GM engines before long. GM needs to make fancy engine covers to car mags can droole all over them, only this way would the public finally know just how much GM is showing up the competition.

Will we see a 6-speed manumatic? GM put that sucker with any base engine to increase fuel economy, it would be great to hear a camaro V6 smashing 30 mpg!

rorr

Actually, I'd expect hp ratings closer to 320 for the 5.3l and closer to 425 for the LS2.

"...and an SS at 30K will have to beat Mustangs 475hp."

:confuse:

Oh, you're comparing the SS to the Cobra GT500. Why would it be necessary for a $30k SS Camaro to out-hp a $40k Mustang?

"meybe GM will FINNALLY IMPLEMENT THE 3 VALVE DESIGN on the OHV's. That would be very nice."

That would be nice....and very interesting. Does anyone in the world, anywhere, offer multivalve heads on pushrod motors? Serious question becuase I can't think of any.

exalteddragon1

a first and meybe finnaly shut people up about OHV bieng old school. Of crouse, that would only happen if toyota used OHV.

GM needs to find other ways of improving business effeciancy, that do not include hurting the product.

A 5.3L at 320hp would be allot weaker by 2008 or 10, with 263hp altimas and 268hp avalons... By then the 300hp lexus v6 wil probably see duty in toyotas. A very bad proposition for our automakers.

rorr

...a first and meybe finnaly shut people up about OHV bieng old school."

I guess my question regarding variable valve timing and pushrod engines wasn't framed well. Let's try again:

CAN pushrod motors utilize multi-valve heads with VVT?

exalteddragon1

Im no engineer, but i know tha GM has allot of equity in OHV engines and if anyone is going to make it happen it would be GM.

rorr

That may be, but consider: GM IS beginning to make VVT available on a lot of their engines.....their OHC engines. Yet they are not making it available on their OHV engines.

As I understand VVT, there are different sets of lobes with different timing characteristics. With an OHC engine, there is a seperate cam for each bank (for DOHC engines, a cam for the intake side and a separate cam for the exhaust side). Physically, there is ROOM for multiple cam lobes.

But on a OHV engine, a single cam is providing the timing for intake and exhaust for both banks. Is there physically ROOM for multiple sets of cam lobes on the same cam for an OHV engine? And how do you switch the pushrods from one cam lobe to another?

Maybe GM can make a big push towards a solenoid valvetrain, completely eliminating cams entirely and offering virtually unlimited computer control of each valve independantly....now THAT would be cool.

mikesright

Expect the new Chevy Camaro to have/be:

*At or under 3500 lbs
*To have the LS2 V8 with VVT and DOD with 425 hp
*Six-speed automatic or new six speed manual using the same planetary gears and modular design of the auto
*Get better than 30 mpg
*New Zeta suspension with IRS

Why? GM has press releases on each of the transmissions, and plans to use them in place of four-speeds from now on, one of Lutz's goals is to have the Camaro be one of the best handling sport coupes...ever, and the Zeta platform has IRS, and they've sent people to Austrailia to modify the platform for cost and weight issues. The new small-block has been rumored for some time, and will include the new features being implemented across the line for pushrod engines (VVT and DOD). Remember, it isn't really a stretch for GM to put in a 400 hp engine because the pushrod engines are cheap and fuel-efficient, and the GTO was $33K even while it was a loaded car from the factory. Quite simply, GM is able to make 425 hp at the cost of Ford's 300 hp modular V8, all the while being simply and easily modified (did I mention cheaper to modify?) for high performance. That's why it's still around here 50 years later, it's still a superior design.

rorr

"...and the Zeta platform has IRS, and they've sent people to Austrailia to modify the platform for cost and weight issues."

Well, something to consider: the LS platform (which was the basis for the '05 Mustang) also had IRS. And then the development team went to work on IT for cost and weight issues. Result? Solid rear-end.

Don't assume that just because the Zeta platform has IRS that a new Camaro will as well. PARTICULARLY if they admit to modifying the platform for 'cost and weight issues'.

"...the new features being implemented across the line for pushrod engines (VVT and DOD)."

COOL! So, which pushrod engines have VVT?

rorr

"COOL! So, which pushrod engines have VVT?"

Answering my own question.....

GM introduced the LZE and LZ4 V6 engines with VVT in '05 and introduced the Vortec 6200 with VVT this year.

Now, I'm gonna look to see just how GM did it.....

edit:

Here we go. Looks like they used something called "cam phasing"...

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_tech/100_news/pop_mechanics_award_093005- .html

seriousblack

Check out July 2006 issue of GM High-Tech Perfomance Magazine; page 6 -Facts and unconfirmed 411 on 2009 production version Camaro

camaross

Remember GM's hieracarhy - Camaros cannot be more powerful or faster than a Corvette. Base Corvettes will probably be in the 425 HP range by that time, so there's your ceiling for an SS. The one loophole would be if the Z06 was the ceiling..........

froggersjc

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but is anyone else the slightest bit annoyed that the "great American muscle car" is being built in Canada. This just reassures me that GM does not know its audience. I guess as long as they don't market it that way, then it won't matter as much to me.

rorr

So?

The last generation (or two?) of F-bodies were built in Canada as well. A large portion of the Chevy/GMC trucks are built in Canada.

"This just reassures me that GM does not know its audience."

And this just reassures me that GM's audience needs to progress past 1976.

froggersjc

If you'd rather support the Canadian workforce over the US, so be it. As I see it the US economy more impacts my life than the Canadian one. I'll take a Toyota built in Indiana over a Ford built in Mexico...but that's just me. Just don't call the Camaro an "American Revolution."

drtklodrebel

This was a limiting facter in the late 80's to early 90's, but it certainly propelled the Corvette engineers into action. Corvette continues to be the testing platform for most of GM's performance developments. So while the Corvette continues to get the attention of Porsche and Farrari, The Camaro's challange will be to break on of the toughest nut in the automotive world. Breaking the loyalty of Mustang owners. True Mustang fans buy Mustang's because of the name, while new buyers have no other choice for an American sports car. The Camaro has always shown that it can out-perform the Mustang. Now it must also appeal to the current needs of consumers. The winning nitch is going to come down to both Mileage and performance.
Can they do it? YES!

drtklodrebel

It is unfortunate that this car isn't being manufactured in the US. However, it doesn't change the essence of the Camaro Or is historical resonance on our culture. If manufactured with precision and marketed correctly, There will actually be a choice in American performance vehicles for the general public.
I'm assuming the my Avalanche was manufactured in Ontario since this is where GM trucks are assembled. It doesn't change the fact that the vehicles versatily and usabiltiy is unparalleled

tommy2006

Is it true that the new rear wheel drive Camaro will replace the Monte Carlo? I've heard they will keep both, and that GM will discontinue the monte. The monte carlo has been a great car, but sales have been declining. Anyone know any news???

advequityguy

great american muscle car? that would be the mustang. the camaro is smoke and mirrors. 2009 first year production? you guys know gm will cancel the project at least 2 or 3 more times between now and then. in the meantime, stare in awe of my 3.5" tailpipes as i blow past your impala, malibu, monte carlo, cobalt, hhr, h3, h2, tahoe, or whatever pile of cheap generic gm garbage you're driving.

442

All cars have components that are made in different countries.Tahoe's made in Mexico.Nissans made in Mississippi
Mercedes built in Alabama.It's a global economy,like it or not.
442

froggersjc

Yes, but those other companies don't claim to be "an American Revolution"

vigla

Last I checked, Canada is in North AMERICA. This is the United States... If GM says it's part of an American Revolution they won't be lying about it.

Besides, they had to build it in Canada because when they shut down the St. Therese plant in Quebec in 2002 they had a contract saying if they ever built another Camaro it would be built in Canada.

vigla

I don't think so... As soon as Challenger and Camaro come out you will see Mustang sales plummet. 2009 is the year of reckoning for Mustang.

rorr

"2009 is the year of reckoning for Mustang."

Quite possibly. GM/DCX certainly should not only appeal to the diehard GM/Mopar fans but also attract those buyers who're just sick of all the Mustangs running around.

Of course, given a 4-yr product cycle time, the Mustang should be due for a major freshening in '09. Might be a terrific time to be in the market for a Pony car. I love competition....

casull

In reference to : Yes, but those other companies don't claim to be "an American Revolution"

I don't mean to offend, but that is a pretty weak argument. Were you also aware that the lead designer of the Camaro, Sangyup Lee, is from Korea? What does that mean for the Camaro? Does that mean it is even less of an American car? Why does it matter where this car is assembled? We should be thanking GM for assembling the Camaro in Canada as this plant was awarded the highest initial quality of any plant in North America. You need to come out of whatever cave you have been in for the last 20 years and realize that we are no longer in the 70's. The economy has become a global economy. If this topic is really that big of an issue than you should point your finger at the UAW, not GM.

casull

So the word is out that the top V-8 in the 2009 Camaro will feature the same 6.2L engine that will be used in the 2009 Vette. It will be capable of 450HP but likely rated 20-25 HP below the vette around 425-430. I would say that the Mustang is dead in the water. In addition, if they can keep the weight of the new Camaro around 3500lbs, then it will have the same weight to power ratio as the Mustang GT500! Good luck Ford....

dialm4speed

With GM circling the drain I don't see any need for what will be perceived as just another gas guzzler but that's a different argument. What is the point of making Camaro with a detuned Vette engine? Why not just get the Vette then? :confuse:

casull

First off, in regard to the Camaro being a "gas guzzler" I have read reports that the 6.2L they intend to use will likely get at or over 30mpg. I can only assume that the V-6 version will get even better mileage. I don't think that people who will be in the market for a Camaro are buying it because of its fuel rating anyway.

In regard to your statement about the Camaro v the Vette, the base price on a Vette is just under $45K. I don't know about you, but I don't have the extra $15k to "just get the Vette". Not to mention the Camaro will be a better daily driver seeing as it has a back seat and descent trunk space. The point of making a Camaro is to compete against the Mustang and soon to be released Challanger - not the Corvette. There is a lot more to consider about a car than just its engine.

m1miata

Before they build the actual car, I do hope they put it on a diet. Lose some three to five inches in width, as much weight as possible, rid the car of the too high belt line, and lower the door window sills. In other words, a better looking, more balanced car like the '69. The Pony need not look as large as an Expedition SUV. The 3.6 V6 engine would be great. Price it around $22K. And for those in need of more bragging power, or that wonderful sound, a V8 model for say $28K. With an upgrade option for both at $3K. Keep the list simple.
-Loren

casull

I agree for the most part. I really hope they can keep the car around the 3600 lb mark. GM has already said that they will have to reduce the width drastically, so I am fairly certain that will happen. The roof line was the other issue they said they will address, but I would prefer that it stay as close to the concept as possible. I don't want a car that looks like the '69, I would much rather have a car with subtle, but noticable, cues from the past but still modern looking.

You really think the entry level V-6 will be over $20k? Maybe very nicely equipt, but I think they will price it more competitively with the Mustang starting the V-6 under $20k and again the entry level V-8 at $28k nicely equipt but base around $25.

m1miata

The Mustang doesn't come with side air bags and stability control. I do believe the Camaro in 2009 or is that 2010, will have both standard. Most Mustangs are starting around $22K now. It was but a couple of years ago when the V8 sold for $23K+. And that is what I would look for if buying a Stang. The 2004 GT looked great, less porky in size, and was very simple. Simple will cost less to maintain, if I decide to keep it a long-long time.

I am pretty sure the $22K for a Camaro is too optimistic a price. Especially, if they decide to give it the good 3.6 V6 engine. That said, the next few years are totally un-predicatable. I would imagine a recession cooked into the economy may cool car prices, as will competition from Japan and Korea.

One more thing, please no more than 17" wheels on the stock car. Please, someone end the madness -- now!!! Maybe 18" on the Z28 model.
-Loren

rorr

"You really think the entry level V-6 will be over $20k? Maybe very nicely equipt, but I think they will price it more competitively with the Mustang starting the V-6 under $20k and again the entry level V-8 at $28k nicely equipt but base around $25."

Agreed.

But I don't see GM essentially putting the Corvette drivetrain into the Camaro and then selling the package for $20k under the Corvette. Because then the question CHANGES from "just get the Corvette" to "WHY get the Corvette?". Wouldn't it make more sense to compete with the Mustang with a drivetrain with SIMILAR hp/performance numbers to the Mustang (at least in a the base V8 version) and getting sales based on the the styling (and freshness) of the Camaro without canabalizing Corvette sales?

rayainsw

Using the GTO as a comparison, the weight ran approx, 3700 – vs. approx. 3200 for a C6 ( I drive a 2007 ) and clearly the 3200 would provide superior acceleration, handling and braking – all other aspects being substantially similar.

I am pretty sure the GTO did not cannibalize significant sales from the C6.

I actually could see using the current basic engine & trans. in a Camaro as potentially a Good Thing for the Corvette – possibly allowing amortization of some fixed costs associated with that drivetrain over a substantially larger number of units. Could allow the C6 to continue to contain price increases.

And encourage the aftermarket, with far more potential vehicles powered by LS2s . . .

Just my 0.02 gallons worth.
- Ray
Carpe Vette

m1miata

The transmission is too costly for a Pony car. Sure it works for a better 50/50 weight distribution, but it is only for premium cars, be it the C6, a BMW Z4 or Porsche 944. Repair costs rise too. And personally, I think they should only use the Corvette engine in a Vette.

So do you like the C6? Reliable so far? Any quirks? I really like the C5, and was considering a used one. I guess the C6 cars did not have anything too serious in the way of problems in the first year. Well the fly roofs got some media attention. :surprise:
-Loren

rorr

"Hope you will find it some day because it is so obvious for everybody else."

Yes, I'm sure it didn't either. That's because the style of the GTO was a bit blander than that particular market desired. There needed to be more flash to go with the dash.

The point is that, even with mega-performance (the GTO) you need great styling to be a strong seller. From the initial buzz over the Camaro, the styling will NOT be a problem.

So where is the need to go with mega-performance right out of the box? Why not start with something closer to 300hp, great styling (love it or hate it styling being better, IMO, that just plain blah), and a lower price of entry and then offer the LS2 later to help spur sales in years 3 or 4?

rorr

"The transmission is too costly for a Pony car."

Excellent point. Doesn't the C6 use a transaxle? No way GM would be offering a transaxle in what should be (at least nominally) a 4 seat vehicle.

walterquint

I would love to see the General's new 3.6L as the base engine, with a stick, for $20k or so. More realisitically, and given GM's penchant for mediocrity in base models, it will likely be the 3.9L from the Impala. (I think it's 211 hp.) That's a fine mill, but still a pushrod design........IMO, GM is still subject to the whims of unions and bean-counters, who often dictate what engine will be in vehicles.........trouble is, when the Camaro appears, the Mustang will have its own 24valve 3.5L as its base engine, 250hp. Power gap? Sure will be.

m1miata

By the time the Camaro arrives, we will likely be driving, or should I say flying, in a Jetsons machine of some sort. GM roll outs come at the speed of Microsoft releases.

Yes, I agree, the 3.6 V6 at say 255HP is an excellent engine for the Camaro. Cut down the size to lose the fat, the high doors, width, and weight where the V6 would fly and you do not need a V8. By the time the New Camaro is released, gas should be between $4 and $5 per gallon.
-Loren

prentir

I keep reading that GM should produce a cheap V6 200ish Camaro.... I say don't waste your effort. The camaro should be a Muscle car... it deserves 4-500BHP and lightening acceleration.

Now for the 2009... I hate it. I hate the pseudo caddy front end, the plug ugly rear and most of all, the tacky disco retro interior display cluster. I am just hoping that the photos make it look 400% worse that what it really is. For me the 2009 concept lacks class.

As an SS driver I am looking for three things Power, Stability, and more Power. I have no problem with a 22K plastic Camaro-ish car for the wanna-bees... I want a Car that will crush the Shelby GT500....

m1miata

To be a profitable endeavor, the Camaro as a Pony car is the only hope. While a few people will pay top dollar for additional HP, it is best to first build around a concept of balanced performance, and overall build quality first, then add other renditions as specialty cars. The $22K car, give or take a thousand, is a good target. If the car must sell into the $24K range with a good V6, like the 3.6 GM has, then so be it. I would not go too low on quality or HP on the engine, and make it pretty much the engine. A V8 could be an option for around $30K range, with more bells, whistles, and larger wheels for those in need of a macho image. The Solstice Coupe Concept, with a 3.6 V6 would have made an awesome sports car / Camaro. If they could reduce size and weight, the 255HP V6 would have as much speed to it as does the GT Mustang with 300HP. Go independent suspension and it would steal a lot of sales from Ford. I think the current Mustang GT has gotten too expensive for a Pony car with a solid axle. And it is picking up weight and size with every new rendition. The 2004 model was plenty large. Likewise the Camaro should be much - much smaller than the monster as displayed.
-Loren

odie6l

The new Camaro is going to be the Featured Car at this years Philadelphia International Auto Show (Feb 3rd - Feb 11th 2007)

Odie
Odie's Carspace

oilman1

Well Iam quite happy GM is bringing back the Camaro,Ive owned a few of them and had alot of fun with them.Ive always found them to be durable.They take alot of punishment,especially from the younger guys.I think the LS1 should be fine,is a few add on features a guy can do to boost these engines up as well.I think as long as they can keep the prices competative they should do alright.I think price will be the key to this car making it.It has a select market,once its too high then I think most would look to a Vette.

albook

If they do plummet, it will have nothing to do with that comaro! THa thing is so disapointing, especially compared to Challenger! And where's the retro?! Serously if I had coice between Mustang and /comaro, I'd choose Mustang (the only ford product I'd buy right now).

casull

According to their last earnings statement, GM is actually pulling a profit. It will not look that way on paper becasue they had to write off in the neighborhood of like $2 Billion from two quarters ago, but if you adjust for that and ONLY look at what they did last quarter they pulled in a $500 Mill profit. I'd say they are starting back on the upswing. With all of their recent efforts towards revitilizing the brands with a push towards quality and innovation I would say GM is in no threat. Now Ford.... that's another story.

As for the Camaro, I honestly believe they are going to use this car as their flagship product to usher in a new era in American car manufacturing. I would not be suprised to see them offer a powerful V-8 that gets amazing mileage with a new refined interior that plagued GM in the past because they looked so cheap. I can't wait for the car.

albook

Okay-no doubt. But that's got nothing to do with how the mustang looks waaaaaayyyyyy better than this thing. ButIcan believe this is the best they can do. Look at the Impala! it competes with the Charger, yet looks like an Accord! And the GTO! I think it's nice, but it also competes with Mustang, and has no great styling to it! And where's Pontiac Bonnevile (G8 or whatever)in this mix? Like I said, Challenger will probably defeat them all!

casull

Challenger will defeat them all? What exactly do you mean by this? In terms of sales? In terms of power? If you mean in terms of sales you are going to be sadly mistaken. the Challenger is going to be a limited production vehicle and is not being designed for a mass market like the Stang and Camaro. In terms of performance? Probably not, but that is to be determined once we see some numbers. Early estimates have the Challenger weigning in at around 4,000lbs and with the speculated 425HP engine, that is a pretty high LB/HP ratio. If the Camaro weighs in at the 3,800 mark or less with at least 400HP it will chew up ans spit out the Challenger and Stang.

If you mean the styling... well that is personal preference. I really do like the look of the new Challenger. However, IMO it is too retro to survive a long life production.