Rumorpile: Next Camaro To Take On Evolutionary Design Path

Who did not think this was going to be evolutionary?

I can see engines being revolutionary. I would totally expect a 4 banger Turbo engine in base models.

I'm a bit disappointed only because I was hoping for a departure from retro, I was even hoping the Mustang would be revolutionary for that same reason. Regardless, I'm definitely excited to see how the car will evolve!

I'm a bit disappointed to hear this. I was hoping GM would take a chance and create a modern interpretation of a muscle car, instead of the modern reskinning of an old one. Ford's playing things too safe and this could've been a good opportunity for GM to really stand out.

The current Camaro is a nice car but its size and weight are slowly making it a rolling anachronism. But I guess the people who find it most appealing wouldn't want much of a change.

The current Camaro is a beautiful car, but it needs to lose about 800 pounds at least...the next generation will be just as hot I am sure. Will start getting excited when the spy shots start coming out & the REVEAL gets closer!!

Was disappointed with the new mustang, looks like the same car (pretty much)

I DO like those renderings out there that are based on the 2nd generation, one of them is red. Always had a fondness for the 2nd gens. as I came of age to drive then, and drove a lot of different ones. Had a lot of fun & good times in those 2nd gen Camaro models. The view looking over the hood was awesome - loved the heat & air controls on the left side of the driver (so no one could mess with them!) Driving to the dunes & concerts & cruising the main town strip. lots of history in these personal cars.

They could loose the 800lbs if they took off all the Nanny devices and protection crude they require on auto's now. Just think, if you want a real modern muscle car with the lightness of the old original muscle cars, just drop all the junk they have been forced to add rolling back to the basic auto of the late 60's early 70's and you would have a New Rocket.

stood next to the new 15 Mustang at the auto show last weekend. Evolved retro, to be honest it did not do much for me although I think it is retro enough to sell like hot cakes. Just not exciting.

As long as Chevy makes it sexy.

Can anyone post links to the renderings? I'm too lazy to look for non-truck items on the Internet

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Working on mass and packaging is the way to go IMHO instead of big styling changes. Have to say I'm really partial to the 1970-1973 F-Body designs, though...

Distinction & uniqueness in design is deserving of continuation. Current Camaro looks awesome still, to dump that and go with a generic pod and just glue the 'Camaro' nameplates on it is ridiculously stupid.

In contrast, some cars out there recycle the same old elements for decades and everyone praises the "iconic look". Evolutionary is the way to go with the Camaro.

I agree that weight is a small concern, tho in truth- the '67-69s weren't much lighter. Quoted weight of the '69 V8s was 3050, but my brother has an all-steel '68 Firebird (400), and with zero options and a few components removed he couldn't get his car below 3200 on the scale, and he was pursuing weigh loss for drag racing. And to be frank, I see a strong parallel with some luxury sedans; they perform very well even tho they weigh 4800 lbs or more. Camaro is no slug nor a slushbucket on the track. If we were all told it weighed 3300 and performed like it does, all would be well.

With Alpha, GM can bring the weight to the 3300 - 3400 limits like the ATS. I think that is not bad for a performance oriented RWD, given the Corvette now weighs that much.

what is needed

lower beltline and less claustrophobia. how the hell anyone can drive one of these, I don't know, there is no view out of the thing and it feels like a bunker.

better and more efficient packaging so there is more interior and trunk room for all the volume enclosed by the body.

more rear seat space / actually usable. Some folks might want to put adults back there periodically so it becomes a usable car.

AWD OPTIONAL PLEASE, then we can haz this as a daily driver for winter

Camaro as been outselling Mustang each month its been on the market in spite of its weight and interior disadvantages. Why would Chevy want to change from that when we've already seen that the next Mustang, while attractive, is not a huge deviation from the current formula?

Camaro already spanks mustang in handling feel.... imagine what it will do when it sheds 800lbs.

AWD? No way Jose.

You need 'adult back seat space' - Chevy has an SS for you.

Awd as an option would be good and would give the camaro a distinctive competitive advantage over the mustang, genesis coupe and any Supra that Toyota might offer.

I actually think the AWD option on a Camero would be very popular and allow a ton of growth of more powerful engines with better power to the pavement performance.

It's already been stated that weight is an issue. And AWD is not part of the formula in this class of car.

Moving to the Alpha platform will allow the camaro to drop a lot of weight.... more than would be added by awd.

And " no one else is doing it" isn't a good enough reason to not offer it.

Moving to the Alpha platform will allow the camaro to drop a lot of weight.... more than would be added by awd.

And " no one else is doing it" isn't a good enough reason to not offer it.

I agree with Drew that no one else is doing this is not good enough plus someone already does do this.

STI / WRX - Yes I realize they are 4 door compared to Camero 2 door.

An AWD Camero would allow GM to pull from the folks that want Performance with AWD for a more versatile ride.

I think GM could really take this segment if they went to Alpha and added AWD.

I think AWD is a great idea for this car. Some additional sales for additional profit.

Remember GM should be a leader not a follower.

I would have no issue with AWD being offered, but I wonder if it will see any considerable take rate.

In the north east and midwest... after this winter.... ?

I simply cannot buy a non-AWD/4WD vehicle again... that automatically removes the Camaro from my shopping list and I would expect the same for many people in my area who would otherwise like a Camaro.

To put things in perspective, the Cadillac ATS 3.6 AWD, which is a 4-door is 3629. That would be an acceptable weight for an AWD Camaro.

A 2.0T RWD ATS is 3373... which would be a very good weight for a new RWD Camaro....

The Camaro 3.6 Automatic 2LT is 3754, the SS is 3972

I know of many friends in the NE that are looking at AWD to replace FWD and RWD auto's as they woud rather give up a little fuel economy for the added traction for the winters.

I think GM could lead and would have a solid rate take for an AWD Camero.

This past winter is likely to convert a number of consumers, yes; the same way a number dumped SUVs when gas shot up. The trend passes pretty quickly, tho.
I don't think NY/PA/NJ/DE would see a lot of AWD Camaro takers. Farther north, I wonder how well the Camaro or any other same-segment performance coupe sells as is.

That said, like I said; it's a good idea for the option to be available.

I dunno that the AWD trend is going to go away anytime soon. Just look at Subaru's sales growth over VW (roughly the same target market) for proof.

Go Drew. Making all the right points, obviously!

I think some of us in life want a car we can use all the time, especially if you can only afford one car. One car has to nearly do it all. If I want a sexy car like a Camaro because I like the look, but can't use the car because I can't haul people or get around in winter, then I can't buy the car.

-daily driver

-get around well in winter

-ability to have passengers, front and back

-ability to haul cargo of some kind.

Mitsubishi Eclipses of yore used to have AWD, so did 300GT / Stealth and such.

Even if just the base Camaro 2.0t was available with AWD, then it becomes a car you can use vs. a car you have to park half the time. 3.6 already has AWD also.

Think of the route GM could go with performance options and AWD. Break new ground in the market. Be a great competitor for someone who wants a FUGLY WRX sti or Evo.

Even if GM only had 20% take rate on the AWD, its worth it.

I don't think they would need to mate the v8's to AWD.

I guess thE camaro, RE tire width and power level, would be notably worse in the snow, because I got around fine for 12 years in a RWD pickup with no snow tires or TC. At least I assume it must be, or people just like to complain. Not sure which.

Related to that, i certainly would not care to see the mission of a car like the Camaro ruined via compromise. Here, I'm talking about the rear seat. Need to transport 4 people regularly? Sorry, the Camaro is not the car for you. Otherwise, next up is a 4-dr Corvette for the same complaint.

I know this is only anectodal evidence but I see quite a few people on Camaro5.com saying how well their current generation Camaro (mainly the V6) does in the snow with winter tires. I don't think it's as bad as you all make it out to be.

I know this is only anectodal evidence but I see quite a few people on Camaro5.com saying how well their current generation Camaro (mainly the V6) does in the snow with winter tires. I don't think it's as bad as you all make it out to be.

I did okay with my 2004 CTS and snow tires but my steep driveway and certain roads could become impassible rather quickly in a winter like we are having this year. Yet our CR-V and Encore both scamper up a snow covered driveway with no drama.

AAS has it. Camaro drivers... can drive.

AAS has it. Camaro drivers... can drive.

Are you suggesting that I can't? It is much easier to get around in a snow storm with winter tires if you never have hills to climb... but in an area like mine, snow tires will only help so much.

AAS has it. Camaro drivers... can drive.

Are you suggesting that I can't? It is much easier to get around in a snow storm with winter tires if you never have hills to climb... but in an area like mine, snow tires will only help so much.

I find Ocn comment funny as I hear this all the time from people and they seem to only see their flat little world as what the rest of the world is like.

I consider myself to be a very good driver, but I will admit that FWD or RWD on a light snow covered 45 degree hill will have a much harder time getting up than AWD.

Here in Seattle we have hills that go way beyond 45 degrees and as the funny you tube videos show, does not matter what you have a little slick snow and you will slide. Yet even then you can get up the hill if you are slow careful and drive properly for the conditions.

I know that Camero drivers even with snow tires cannot get up hills here in Seattle. Seen way to many of them and mustangs that have been crashed due to the lack of traction that only comes with AWD or a 4x4.

Not flat where I live.

Sorry to be so literal, dfelt, but there isn't a public paved road in the U.S. anywhere near a 45-deg incline.

See this...

...that's Talledega Speedway, and those are 33-deg banked turns.

Steepest public street in the U.S. is claimed by Canton St in Pittsburgh, at 20-degrees.
But I would think aside from living on one of these, there is always another route one could take.

I just don't think it's realistic to expect zero hardships, having a RWD Camaro, in a northern clime, in a hilly locale. Sometimes; you can't have it all.

Sorry to be so literal, dfelt, but there isn't a public paved road in the U.S. anywhere near a 45-deg incline.

See this...

...that's Talledega Speedway, and those are 33-deg banked turns.

Steepest public street in the U.S. is claimed by Canton St in Pittsburgh, at 20-degrees.

But I would think aside from living on one of these, there is always another route one could take.

I just don't think it's realistic to expect zero hardships, having a RWD Camaro, in a northern clime, in a hilly locale. Sometimes; you can't have it all.

Very cool posted Picture, Thanks never looked at the speedways this way.

In regards to the streets, I would have to challange Canton. I know that some of the streets in San Francisco are darn near 45 or so based on even the trolly's do not go up them. I will also have to next time I am out walking around Seattle take a few pictures of some of the streets that connect the main roads as they sure seem to be around the 45 degree area as they to me look steeper than the race track.

Regular trains -and I'm sure DD can back this up- usually keep grades below 3-deg. Makes sense- not much traction with steel-on-steel. Only other railed vehicles that exceed this are inclined trains, which are pulled by cables. I see online one in TN runs a 72-deg plane.

I have considered this before driving some steep roads; on some hills you would swear the incline is 45 deg or thereabouts, but that's extremely steep to navigate. Again with the Talledega pic: looks like they have redundant equipment to hold the paver at 33-deg, this for something with a very low CoG & that often has tracks. But other than daredevils, no one would want to attempt going either up or down 45-deg with their car. But check out your suspects.

Sorry to be so literal, dfelt, but there isn't a public paved road in the U.S. anywhere near a 45-deg incline.

See this...

...that's Talledega Speedway, and those are 33-deg banked turns.

Steepest public street in the U.S. is claimed by Canton St in Pittsburgh, at 20-degrees.

But I would think aside from living on one of these, there is always another route one could take.

I just don't think it's realistic to expect zero hardships, having a RWD Camaro, in a northern clime, in a hilly locale. Sometimes; you can't have it all.

I should measure the incline of my driveway (and seek out Canton Street when I get back home someday)

But I can tell you this. When I needed to load something heavy into my Avalanche, I didn't need a ramp. I would roll whatever it was up my drive way, leave it there, back the Avalanche up to the driveway to where the rear tires were exactly at the change of angle, lower the tailgate, and then I could roll whatever it was into the bed of the truck with no step.

Regular trains -and I'm sure DD can back this up- usually keep grades below 3-deg. Makes sense- not much traction with steel-on-steel. Only other railed vehicles that exceed this are inclined trains, which are pulled by cables. I see online one in TN runs a 72-deg plane.

I have considered this before driving some steep roads; on some hills you would swear the incline is 45 deg or thereabouts, but that's extremely steep to navigate. Again with the Talledega pic: looks like they have redundant equipment to hold the paver at 33-deg, this for something with a very low CoG & that often has tracks. But other than daredevils, no one would want to attempt going either up or down 45-deg with their car. But check out your suspects.

Cable cars don't need traction... that is what he was referring to. You are right that trains have to keep it very low. The Horse Shoe Curve in Altoona PA is a 1.8% grade and most loaded freight trains require helpers on the back end. It is considered one of the tougher rail grades in the country.

I know of an unusual rail arrangement in NYState where the freights used to have trouble going uphill, and IIRC that grade was 1.x%, to the point they dug a 1 mile tunnel thru solid rock and ran another ROW to bypass it.

OK, so "3-deg" is way steep for rail. Pretty interesting engineering requirement when you think of cross country lines.

Jalopnik recently had an article concerning the steepest streets... of course, I can't find it right now... but this infographic is similar... http://www.fixr.com/infographics/top-10-US-steepest-streets.html

No Seattle streets... sorry, dfelt. I've been to Seattle a couple times... and several streets are very steep... but when you actually measure them, they are less than 25%.

For freight, yes. Passenger lines have less stringent requirements.

everyone used to bitch that luxury cars did not need AWD, only RWD. Well, that changed. Now BMW, Merc, Lexus, Infiniti, and Caddy all sell AWD in huge numbers.

If anything, the extra sales from AWD would continue to guarantee the success of even being able to justify making the pony cars, especially after all the white male baby boomers with actual money in savings or retirement dough (to blow on a car) die. It might be nice to broaden the market base some.

One the biggest used car magnets i found to be when i sold for awhile were Audi Quattros. Teens and twenty somethings. Turbo, quattro. Couldn't keep em on the lot. Manuals too when possible. I think they could tap the youth market quite well with a modern day coupe that adds the AWD and turbo and possibly manual. Get some young blood. Not the same old bunch that are pushing 65-70. Let the Mustang get those folks. Wouldn't hurt to get some women buyers too...women like practicality.

Thank you for posting a photo of a successful role model for the Chevrolet Camaro, a car that has been around since 1967, and has been loved since then with a fervor exceeding the Eclipse, Talon, Aztek and Ford 500, COMBINED, many times over.

Those that fail to evolve in a changing market, die. The Camaro already died once, want to see it happen again?

The Eclipse died because it gained weight, lost AWD and the excellent 2.0t.

Even a 30% take rate in awd could push camaro sales to over 100k units a year from the 80k they are selling now.

I do not believe that.

If GM does not, Hyundai or someone else will.

Count on it.

Again, Drew's last two points, spot on.

CAFE alone will force Camaro sales down over time. Do we want it to remain a toy car or do we want to give it the best chance to stay for good?

We know GM can make a sexy car, and a performing car. But if for most buyers, it is seen as an impractical toy car, that they cannot justify a payment book for, you are letting it die.

Evolve or die.

Not at all suggesting that Camaro should go Eclipse in design, just that it could broaden if you combine typical sexy Camaro style, along with performance that may attract the younger set.

All of this chafe at the idea of adding an option to the camaro that would broaden its appeal without watering down the core of the car at all. Are you *that* afraid of change?

All of this chafe at the idea of adding an option to the camaro that would broaden its appeal without watering down the core of the car at all. Are you *that* afraid of change?

Cheers & Gears is where rational, pragmatic approaches to the automotive industry go to die.

This place is 90% old people who hate seeing vehicles they can't even afford adapt to modern ideals.