Chevrolet News:2017 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 Produces 650 Horsepower and Pound-Feet

[smk4565]

My 2 cents on these cars is that if you keep pushing the price up you lose the target buyer audience and the car isn't what it was.  The Camaro and Mustang of the 90s were priced like a family sedan almost.  Now $30k is about the start point unless you get these cars in rental spec, and they are ranging up to $60k or more.  Similar with the Corvette, it isn't as affordable as it used to be.

 

For die hard Camaro fans, a 650 hp car will will be awesome, but do Cadillac fans feel upset that their ATS-V is giving up 200 hp to a Chevy?  And I if the Camaro is now costing what a Corvette cost 10 years ago, is it still meeting the mission the Camaro?  Camaro and Mustang don't really appeal to me, but with the cost of these cars, plus insurance, they are pricing out the under 30 demographic.

No. Because the Cadillac fans have a LT4 in the CTSV. Not only that.. The ATS-V is a car in and of itself. For your constant instigating questions I pose this.. f@#kin C63AMG or M3 fans have an issue that the ZL1 will have 200 more Hp than they?

ATS and Camaro are closely related though, and while most ATS-v buyers probably don't care if it had 450 or 650 HP, there is the question of why any Camaro is more expensive than a V-series Cadillac, when Cadillac is GM's fop dog.

They could put 1,000 hp in a Camaro and a BMW driver won't buy it because it says Chevy on it. But that goes back to my original point of Chevy being the value brand, having a value sports car, but they are moving away from that.

The mid-engine Corvette I bet will cost over $125,000. How is that the every man's sports car, it will just turn into an Audi R8 which most Corvette fans think is a ripoff.

I am all for a mid engine supercar at GM but it should wear a wreath and crest (yes bring the wreath back) and not a Chevy badge.

[smk4565]

As I said originally, a 650 HP Camaro is awesome for Camaro and muscle car fans, just like Mopar fans love the Hellcat Charger.

But when you push further and further up in performance you lose the mission of the original car. This is why the Miata doesn't have a V8 and cost $50,000. At that point it wouldn't be a Miata anymore.

I actually think the ZL1 is a good thing for the Camaro brand image as long as they still have the $25-30,000 model that regular people can buy. But every month in the sales thread people question why Camaro sales are down and it is because they are pricing people out of it.

[David]

 

 

My 2 cents on these cars is that if you keep pushing the price up you lose the target buyer audience and the car isn't what it was.  The Camaro and Mustang of the 90s were priced like a family sedan almost.  Now $30k is about the start point unless you get these cars in rental spec, and they are ranging up to $60k or more.  Similar with the Corvette, it isn't as affordable as it used to be.

 

For die hard Camaro fans, a 650 hp car will will be awesome, but do Cadillac fans feel upset that their ATS-V is giving up 200 hp to a Chevy?  And I if the Camaro is now costing what a Corvette cost 10 years ago, is it still meeting the mission the Camaro?  Camaro and Mustang don't really appeal to me, but with the cost of these cars, plus insurance, they are pricing out the under 30 demographic.

No. Because the Cadillac fans have a LT4 in the CTSV. Not only that.. The ATS-V is a car in and of itself. For your constant instigating questions I pose this.. f@#kin C63AMG or M3 fans have an issue that the ZL1 will have 200 more Hp than they?

I am all for a mid engine supercar at GM but it should wear a wreath and crest (yes bring the wreath back) and not a Chevy badge.

 

 

This I totally agree with you on, a Mid engine supercar should be under the Cadillac label not chevy. Leave the corvette where it is as with it's own history and give Cadillac a proper supercar with a mid engine and let it roar. Not a rebadge of a corvette, though I admit I am one of those that did like the XLR, they just did not push the envelope far enough with it to stand out and be special.

As I said originally, a 650 HP Camaro is awesome for Camaro and muscle car fans, just like Mopar fans love the Hellcat Charger.

But when you push further and further up in performance you lose the mission of the original car. This is why the Miata doesn't have a V8 and cost $50,000. At that point it wouldn't be a Miata anymore.

I actually think the ZL1 is a good thing for the Camaro brand image as long as they still have the $25-30,000 model that regular people can buy. But every month in the sales thread people question why Camaro sales are down and it is because they are pricing people out of it.

Agree, have a 300HP Turbo 4 base Camaro at $20,000 and you will get plenty of buyers.

[ccap41]

I completely agree, SMK.

Well put.

They once were considered affordable sports cars(or muscle cars...whatever) and they're slowly becoming less and less affordable as the price of them is rising faster than inflation is.

[El Kabong]

So, to those who post articles saying the ZL1 won't compete against the GT350...

Can we please never bring up the Stingray/Shelby comparo again?

Can't have it both ways... right?

As for the price points: the Camaro, in SS trim, is pushing it. But if bang for the buck is what they're all about then the Hellcat and ZL1 are right on-script.

[surreal1272]

As I said originally, a 650 HP Camaro is awesome for Camaro and muscle car fans, just like Mopar fans love the Hellcat Charger.

But when you push further and further up in performance you lose the mission of the original car. This is why the Miata doesn't have a V8 and cost $50,000. At that point it wouldn't be a Miata anymore.

I actually think the ZL1 is a good thing for the Camaro brand image as long as they still have the $25-30,000 model that regular people can buy. But every month in the sales thread people question why Camaro sales are down and it is because they are pricing people out of it.

The fact that you keep trying to compare this to a Miata, shows that you really don't get it. Two completely different cars and missions.

I completely agree, SMK.

Well put.

They once were considered affordable sports cars(or muscle cars...whatever) and they're slowly becoming less and less affordable as the price of them is rising faster than inflation is.

The same can said about 99% of the cars out there. This is not unique to the Camaro or Mustang. 

[ccap41]

But both missions, at one point, were affordable performance that most anybody can buy. The Camaro is definitely moving further away from that at a quicker rate than the Challenger and Mustang. The Miata still remains a great performance bargain, like the car or not.

Yes, in the grand scheme of things the Camaro is still a hell of a bargain for 100% OEM cars but nearly 40k to touch an SS is pretty rough.

I have said before that the whole auto industry's prices are rising faster than inflation rates and it will create a problem eventually once people just stop buying because they're just too expensive.

2015 Camaro's base price: 25,700

2016 Camaro's base price: 27,705

That's a 7.23% increase in price. Inflation is not that. Inflation is typically in the 2-3% range.

2014 Mustang's base price:22,510

2015 Mustang's base price: 23,800

That's a 5.42% increase in base price. Still above inflation rate(like I said the whole industry is doing that) but much less so. Actually, inflation for the US was 0.7% last year. Shows how fast car prices are rising in relation to everything else.

Edited August 5, 2016 by ccap41

[surreal1272]

But both missions, at one point, were affordable performance that most anybody can buy. The Camaro is definitely moving further away from that at a quicker rate than the Challenger and Mustang. The Miata still remains a great performance bargain, like the car or not.Yes, in the grand scheme of things the Camaro is still a hell of a bargain for 100% OEM cars but nearly 40k to touch an SS is pretty rough.I have said before that the whole auto industry's prices are rising faster than inflation rates and it will create a problem eventually once people just stop buying because they're just too expensive.2015 Camaro's base price: 25,7002016 Camaro's base price: 27,705That's a 7.23% increase in price. Inflation is not that. Inflation is typically in the 2-3% range.2014 Mustang's base price:22,5102015 Mustang's base price: 23,800That's a 5.42% increase in base price. Still above inflation rate(like I said the whole industry is doing that) but much less so. Actually, inflation for the US was 0.7% last year. Shows how fast car prices are rising in relation to everything else.

And the Miata is far more of a niche car and sells at much lower volume. To go up in cylinder count would mean a totally new car, a far cry difference from how the D3 cars can be optioned. It is just a silly comparison to make. Also, given recent sales numbers, the price increase on these cars is not really hurting them (save for the Camaro to an extent). It's just not an apples to apples comparison IMO.

[oldshurst442]

Poor 'Bong.

Fighting a non-existent war.

 

PS: Those GT500 versus Stingray comparisons are made by your precious car enthusiast magazines...

 

I could post proof of that too....but I wont.

You see...like I said...

Car magazine auto journalists push their agendas to sell their magazines...

 

So take it up with Scott Evans and Randy Pobst, brah!

 

OK...unto car prices.

A Ford Fusion SE ecoboost with the Sony radio thingy Im assuming is about 23 000 US...

A Mustang ecoboost goes for about that much too...

 

SMK I believe, said that pony cars' price tags are of those of midsized family sedans in the past...

I believe we are about that today too.

 

I hope you folk do not think that the 1971 396 Camaro was of low level mid size price tag back in the day...

I hope you folk do not think that the 455 SD Trans Am was as cheap in price as a Lemans sedan...

 

There were inline 6 engines as base engines in the pony cars...

Also...let us not forget that Camaro/Firebird and Mustang platforms were based off of compact cars back in the day. The F-Body later became bespoke...

Not bespoke platforms (Mustang today) and platforms from luxury car makers...

And today's pony cars are not 1 trick ponies either!

 

You got to pay to play.

But like I said earlier.

300 horse base 4 cylinder turbo cars are not exactly that entry level either...

1993 LT1 V8 Camaro Z/28 made 275 or 285 horsepower...as a TOP engine.

Today, the Alpha Camaro has that as a BASE engine...albeit from a turbo 4 cylinder...but its at a starting point, not at an ending point!

Edited August 5, 2016 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

If we jump back in time to 2002, the Camaro had a base price of $18,415 and the Z28 was $22,830 which got you the V8. 

 

Compare that to the 2002 Toyota Camry (the #1 selling family sedan then and now) a base Camry LE was $18,970 Camry XLE was $22,295, SE V6 23,700.

 

So very similar prices of the Camaro and Camry which put the Camaro priced right against the family sedan segment.  Thus it was very affordable.

 

Jump ahead to 2016.

Camaro 2.0T $25,700, SS $36,300

Camry LE $23,070, XLE $26,310

 

You used to be able to get a V8 Camaro for the price of a 4-cylinder Camry.  Prices of V8s have gone up, but you can't even get a 4-cylinder Camaro for the price of a 4-cylinder Camry now.  Camaro is now like a $30-50k car, while the Camry/Malibu/Fusion type cars are still $23-33k.

[balthazar]

But it's in a Chevy not a Cadillac is what he's getting at. Cadillac should be number 1 then Chevy number 2 not vise versa. I also doubt C63 or M4 fans care about anything Chevy because most likely their head is too far up their ass or nose too high in the air to notice.

When in the last 50 years has Cadillac had more HP than Chevrolet, never mind higher performance?

1965 : Cadillac ~ 340, Chevy ~ 375

1975 : Cadillac ~ 190, Chevy ~ 235

 

Gotta love these arbitrary mandates from out of nowhere...

[ccap41]

It's supposed to be the premium, high end brand isn't it? Shouldn't the premium brands get the best equipment first not the cheapest brand of the 4 under the umbrella?

[surreal1272]

It's supposed to be the premium, high end brand isn't it? Shouldn't the premium brands get the best equipment first not the cheapest brand of the 4 under the umbrella?

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric.

The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?

Edited August 5, 2016 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

 

But it's in a Chevy not a Cadillac is what he's getting at. Cadillac should be number 1 then Chevy number 2 not vise versa. I also doubt C63 or M4 fans care about anything Chevy because most likely their head is too far up their ass or nose too high in the air to notice.

When in the last 50 years has Cadillac had more HP than Chevrolet, never mind higher performance?

1965 : Cadillac ~ 340, Chevy ~ 375

1975 : Cadillac ~ 190, Chevy ~ 235

 

Gotta love these arbitrary mandates from out of nowhere...

 

1996 Corvette 300 hp

1996 Seville STS 300 hp

[oldshurst442]

If we jump back in time to 2002, the Camaro had a base price of $18,415 and the Z28 was $22,830 which got you the V8. 

 

Compare that to the 2002 Toyota Camry (the #1 selling family sedan then and now) a base Camry LE was $18,970 Camry XLE was $22,295, SE V6 23,700.

 

So very similar prices of the Camaro and Camry which put the Camaro priced right against the family sedan segment.  Thus it was very affordable.

 

Jump ahead to 2016.

Camaro 2.0T $25,700, SS $36,300

Camry LE $23,070, XLE $26,310

 

You used to be able to get a V8 Camaro for the price of a 4-cylinder Camry.  Prices of V8s have gone up, but you can't even get a 4-cylinder Camaro for the price of a 4-cylinder Camry now.  Camaro is now like a $30-50k car, while the Camry/Malibu/Fusion type cars are still $23-33k.

OK...

But...

What 2002 V8 Camaro are we talking about?

The bare bones Z/28? On par with the V8 Pontiac Firebird?

Guys, the V6 Camry in 2002 had a much nicer interior than the bare bones V8 F-Body...

The F-Body's interior...well, do I have to sound like I hate the 4rth gen F-Body to prove my point?

Because I wont because I happen to LOVE the 4rth gen F-Body pony car.

Fast forward to the Alpha Camaro...isnt this Alpha Camaro interior worthy of a 30 000 US dollar car?

Because I will tell you straight out, the bare bones F-Body Z/28 barely had a better interior than a 2002 Cavalier Z24.

 

What other things does an Alpha Camaro BASE trim outshine a TOP OF THE LINE 2002 Camaro SS Anniversary Edition?

Other than the commemorative badging and striping and the T-Tops...

 

Because I assure you, the hardware under the hood (turbo) and the suspension system even in the turbo ecotec trim car and the bones of the platform are well worth the 2000 price hike over the 2016 Camry comparison versus the 2002 Camry comparison.

 

And let us not talk about the Pontiac Firebird...because the Pontiac pony car was at least 2000 dollars higher in price trim level for trim level versus the Camaro...which leaves us where we are now in 2016...

[balthazar]

^ What's that; is '300' more than '300' inside the Beltway??

 

2009 Cadillac : 469 HP

2009 Corvettte : 638 HP

[oldshurst442]

^ What's that; is '300' more than '300' inside the Beltway??

 

2009 Cadillac : 469 HP

2009 Corvettte : 638 HP

And that 638 HP Corvette had a Cadillac price tag. Maybe same price tag with that 469 HP Cadillac.Quite possibly a HIGHER price tag than it even..

 

And just to add to my post above...

SMK...

Find me the price tag of that 2002 Camaro SS anniversary edition and while you are at it, find me the price tag of the 2002 Pontiac Trans A WS6 collector edition (convertibles too) just to see how much those cost back in the day versus Toyota...

But also do an equipment list comparison including the quality of the interior materials with the last special editions F-Bodies with a  normal 2016 Camaro SS and see where the money went in the price tag.

When you do that, I promise you, you will think the Alpha Camaro is a steal!

 

Guys...the Alpha Camaro is much, much more than just a pony car...

Once you folk realize what that means, then you wont be bitchin' about the price tag.

Especially you SMK...

You dont like BMW, but Mercedes Benz has NOTHING in THEIR stable either at ANY price point that beats the Alpha Camaro in performance...

The upcoming ZL1 will EMBARRASS German cars twice and three times the ZL1's price tag in ANY performance metric you wanna throw at it!

The ecotec turbo 4 also is quite the performer out gunning ANY German car at that price point...

 

THAT is why the Alpha Camaro costs as much as it does..and its a STEAL!

Edited August 6, 2016 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

 

 

But it's in a Chevy not a Cadillac is what he's getting at. Cadillac should be number 1 then Chevy number 2 not vise versa. I also doubt C63 or M4 fans care about anything Chevy because most likely their head is too far up their ass or nose too high in the air to notice.

When in the last 50 years has Cadillac had more HP than Chevrolet, never mind higher performance?

1965 : Cadillac ~ 340, Chevy ~ 375

1975 : Cadillac ~ 190, Chevy ~ 235

 

Gotta love these arbitrary mandates from out of nowhere...

 

1996 Corvette 300 hp

1996 Seville STS 300 hp

 

And?

[ccap41]

It's supposed to be the premium, high end brand isn't it? Shouldn't the premium brands get the best equipment first not the cheapest brand of the 4 under the umbrella?

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric.The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?

And I completely agree that Lincoln should be the premium brand if that's what Lincoln is supposed to be for them but Lincoln is basically junk in comparison to Caddy. Lincoln is a century away from having anything performance-oriented.

Either way my opinion stands. I think Caddy should be the one with the super car first and the ATS/CTS should have gotten the 650/640hp/tq first. Not so much that Chevy shouldn't use it but that caddy should have gotten it first. I kind of view the Vette as its own thing because caddy doesn't have anything there yet but whatever the new mid-engine Vette is, I think should start as a Cadillac.

[El Kabong]

Honda saw fit to make the new NSX an Acura in North America. And it's not exactly brimming with enthusiast product these days.

FoMoCo's first priority, always and forever, is the Ford brand. It is the one that wears the family's name.

[surreal1272]

It's supposed to be the premium, high end brand isn't it? Shouldn't the premium brands get the best equipment first not the cheapest brand of the 4 under the umbrella?

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric.The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?

And I completely agree that Lincoln should be the premium brand if that's what Lincoln is supposed to be for them but Lincoln is basically junk in comparison to Caddy. Lincoln is a century away from having anything performance-oriented.

Either way my opinion stands. I think Caddy should be the one with the super car first and the ATS/CTS should have gotten the 650/640hp/tq first. Not so much that Chevy shouldn't use it but that caddy should have gotten it first. I kind of view the Vette as its own thing because caddy doesn't have anything there yet but whatever the new mid-engine Vette is, I think should start as a Cadillac.

First, Cadillac has been sporting 640HP for two years now with the Vette being the only other beneficiary of it until the upcoming ZL1. Second, who's do say they don't bump the power of the CTS-V by then?

My point stands that this is much ado about nothing.

[smk4565]

 

^ What's that; is '300' more than '300' inside the Beltway??

 

2009 Cadillac : 469 HP

2009 Corvettte : 638 HP

And that 638 HP Corvette had a Cadillac price tag. Maybe same price tag with that 469 HP Cadillac.Quite possibly a HIGHER price tag than it even..

 

And just to add to my post above...

SMK...

Find me the price tag of that 2002 Camaro SS anniversary edition and while you are at it, find me the price tag of the 2002 Pontiac Trans A WS6 collector edition (convertibles too) just to see how much those cost back in the day versus Toyota...

But also do an equipment list comparison including the quality of the interior materials with the last special editions F-Bodies with a  normal 2016 Camaro SS and see where the money went in the price tag.

When you do that, I promise you, you will think the Alpha Camaro is a steal!

 

Guys...the Alpha Camaro is much, much more than just a pony car...

Once you folk realize what that means, then you wont be bitchin' about the price tag.

Especially you SMK...

You dont like BMW, but Mercedes Benz has NOTHING in THEIR stable either at ANY price point that beats the Alpha Camaro in performance...

The upcoming ZL1 will EMBARRASS German cars twice and three times the ZL1's price tag in ANY performance metric you wanna throw at it!

The ecotec turbo 4 also is quite the performer out gunning ANY German car at that price point...

 

THAT is why the Alpha Camaro costs as much as it does..and its a STEAL!

 

I am not saying the Alpha Camaro doesn't have far better performance and interior than the F-body, obviously it does.  I think a 2016 Camry interior is nicer than the Camaro still, but that is sort of besides the point.  The alpha Camaro has a high level of performance, the SS doing 0-60 in around 4 seconds is really fast, it is C6 Corvette level performance.  In that regard it is good value, but the price point has moved higher and higher too.  

 

My complaint of Camaro and Corvette is they are both getting more and more expensive.  Probably by 2020 you won't even be able to get a Camaro for under $30,000, the 2017 model is near $28k base.  I've always thought the Camaro should be an inexpensive sports car, because Chevy has the Corvette above it.  And if GM wants to challenge the Euro super cars, that is what Cadillac is for.  Chevy shouldn't be going after the Audi R8 or Porsche 911, or Ferrari California, etc.  Chevy should be worried about Ford and Toyota and Hyundai.  Let Cadillac worry about the Euro exotics or the Acura NSX.  And look at the NSX pricing, $150-200k, that is where the mid-engine Corvette is headed.  

 

And as far as the Alpha Camaro beating anything Benz makes, please.  Mercedes had a car with a 209 mph top speed 10 years ago.  GM never made a car that fast. The AMG GT will stomp any Camaro with ease.  If Chevy wants to take on Mercedes so badly, maybe they should make an Impala with a hand made luxury interior to take on Maybach.  I think people would pay $125,000 for a super luxury Impala, that makes as much sense as a $125,000 Chevy sports car.

[ccap41]

It's supposed to be the premium, high end brand isn't it? Shouldn't the premium brands get the best equipment first not the cheapest brand of the 4 under the umbrella?

But the only advantage the ZL1 has over its Cadillac kin is horsepower, which as Balth was alluding to, is not the be all end all metric.The same question could be asked of Ford as well. Why does Ford get the $400K super car while Lincoln gets yet another CUV?

And I completely agree that Lincoln should be the premium brand if that's what Lincoln is supposed to be for them but Lincoln is basically junk in comparison to Caddy. Lincoln is a century away from having anything performance-oriented.

Either way my opinion stands. I think Caddy should be the one with the super car first and the ATS/CTS should have gotten the 650/640hp/tq first. Not so much that Chevy shouldn't use it but that caddy should have gotten it first. I kind of view the Vette as its own thing because caddy doesn't have anything there yet but whatever the new mid-engine Vette is, I think should start as a Cadillac.

First, Cadillac has been sporting 640HP for two years now with the Vette being the only other beneficiary of it until the upcoming ZL1. Second, who's do say they don't bump the power of the CTS-V by then?

My point stands that this is much ado about nothing.

To each their own, man. Just my opinion of the matter.

[oldshurst442]

@SMK

 

What was that price tag on that Gullwing SLS AMG, SMK?

At least 3 times less...

And it took the 1990 ZR-1 Vette, Acura NSX and Dodge Viper to wake up Ferrari and Lambo....unto which M-B got that itch 20 years LATER to join..

 

ACURA, CHEVROLET and DODGE....

CHEVY and DODGE...

MAINSTREAM FAMILY HAULERS companies....

 

The ZL-1 Camaro will probably see at least 195 MPH...

Its still a lowly pony car adorning the Bow Tie...

 

And no....the M-B GT will NOT trounce it....

In some areas, maybe....in some areas NO!

 

Again....

What is that price tag on that M-B GT?

On the 911?

 

Yes, the Holy Grail of Sports Cars...

 

You know....once the Vette becomes mid-engined and performance stats really hit supercardome...which they kinda do now anyway...

All those Front engine RWD tricks the Vettes has now will be passed unto the Camaro...and the Vette aint no chump against the Germans....

 

AND THAT IS WHY THE CAMARO IS PRICED THE WAY IT IS!

 

The Camaro is still a steal for the performance gained with what all other companies are offering...

650 horsepower..

430 horsepower...

 

Are those power figures too huge for Chevy?

Is that what you folk are eluding to?

 

You got to pay to play, yet its stilll a Chevy....still cheaper with what you get from BMW, M-B, Ford or anywhere else!

Edited August 6, 2016 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

^^^

At least three times less for the Camaro it should read.

The Camaro ZL-1 will probably break a few performance records...

Yes....from the SLS to the Vette to Porsche's...

 

650 Horsepower/650 FT. LBS torque on a  compact chassis that is dialed in with a powertrain that is just unbeatable...

 

Modern Muscle Car to the power of 1000.

Muscle Car¹⁰⁰⁰

[smk4565]

First off the ZR-1 or NSX didn't wake up Ferrari.  Ferrari F40 came out in 1987 and could do 201 mph.   It can hang with a lot of modern day super cars and it is nearly 30 years old.  In fact, the 2017 Acura NSX or Corvette Z06 can't hit 200 mph.

 

And my complaint about Camaro and Corvette together is they are pricing them way above Chevy prices.  Chevy won't have a sports car people can afford, Ford can cash in with the Mustang (as they already are beating Camaro in sales) and even the Challenger outsold the Camaro last month and the Challenger sucks.  I think we are only a a few years away from the Camaro costing more on average than a Cadillac ATS, and when that happens it will sell like a Cadillac ATS.  And Ford will laugh and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

I have said in the past I don't think any Camaro should have over 500 hp, once you get above 450-500 hp that is Corvette territory.  Corvette I'd like to see start at $48k with a V6 and top out around $90,000.  I would keep it similar to Porsche Boxster pricing.  

 

I am also 100% in support to GM building sports cars and super cars above $100,000, and I am all for them building 600 hp cars.  Those should be Cadillac's though.  the high price and high power should be at the high end brand.  Chevy should build a sports car the average income can afford.

 

That being said, if Chevy were to push Camaro to the $47-90,000 price point, and Corvette to the $100,000+ price point and introduce a new sports car in the $25-35,000 range, I could see the logic to what they are doing.  But I feel like Chevy is leaving their customer behind as they chase these high prices.

[balthazar]

A Chevy cannot be priced outside of where Chevys are priced. 

[oldshurst442]

Ferrari 308/328...THAT market...

were kinda rubbish. Beautiful, but not very awe inspiring in the performance category.

Plus not very reliable.

 

The F40 was gunning against the Porshe 959.  THIS would be at tad high for Vette market in 1984-1987.

The ZR1, NSX and the Viper all made mince meat of Ferrari in the performance department with the Ferrari 308 and the Countach...

The Porsche 928 was also garbage.

THIS would be 1989/1990 when Chevy wanted a smidgen of their past glory with the Vette.

Thanx to that 1989/1990 ZR1 we have the C5R/C6R/C7R in Lemans and the Z06 cars along with the Blue Devil all hinting at the Corvette's racing heritage fro 1957-1969....

 

After Dodge, Chevy and Acura showed some muscle is when Ferrari, Porsche and Lambo got serious in the low end of their market....

SMK, The Corvette in the early 60s ate Ferraris at the race track....

As did the little Cobra coupe and Ford with the GT40...

SMK, in the late 60s with the Trans Am racing, both Camaro and Mustang beat Porsche and their air cooled 911 predecessor....

Dude, dont be an arrogant Eurosnob when it comes to American sports car performance....I assure you...the Yankee cars kick Euro ass!!!

 

What is this Chevy price tag you hold?

 

Find me and compare 1969 Impala 6 cylinder to base 1969 Camaro.

Find me and compare 1969 427 Impala SS to 1969 396 Camaro SS

 

Then do the same for a 1996 Impala SS and a 1996 Camaro SS both with the regular LT1 260 HP for the Impala and 285 or so for the Camaro

 

Then do the same for a 2016 Impala LTZ 3.6 liter 300 horse to a 3.6 liter V6 Camaro AND the Camaro V8...

 

I assure you, the Camaro in 2016 still compares in price to its Impala brother in price...

 

Then do research and see where that 1969 ZL1 comes in price vis a vis a Corvette in 1969 and do the same for the 2016 ZL1 vis a vis a 2016 Vette...

 

COINCIDENTALLY...

CORVETTE'S RACING HISTORY FROM 1957-1969 IS ANOTHER REASON WHY THE VETTE HAS TO GO MID-ENGINED...

ZORA WANTED IT THAT WAY SINCE THE FIRST VETTES RACED INTERNATIONALLY..

 

BUT THAT IS FOR THE OTHER THREAD!

Edited August 7, 2016 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

1969 is less clear than one might think; Impala is a trim level of many on the full-size '69 Chevy.

 

'69 Biscayne 2-dr I6 : $2687

'69 Impala 2-dr I6 : $2927 

'69 Caprice V8 (only) : $3294

'69 Impala SS427 : $3349 

'69 Camaro I6 : $2638

'69 Camaro RS/SS : $3118

'69 Camaro Z/28 : $3209

'69 Camaro ZL-1 : $7269

'69 Corvette : $4763

'69 Corvette ZL-1 : $7763

 

 

'69 Corvette coupe was 77% higher in price than the '69 Biscayne.

'16 Corvette coupe is 104% higher in price than the '16 Impala.

 

Considering there is a FORTY-SEVEN year span here, I see zero significance.

Likewise, there is zero point to maintaining a set price gap over half a century!

Frankly, that's STILL not a huge disparity between '69 & '16.

 

MOAR ~

'69 Nova I4 : $2237

'69 Corvette ZL-1 : $7763

'69 Cadillac Calais 2-dr : $5484

'69 Fleetwood S60S : $7284

(excluding the Series 75 limos; not really consumer products)

 

LOOK at the Chevy price swing! Look how it eclipses Cadillac!
Which brand had higher prices & performance??

 

 

WILL THIS STUPID ARBITRARY GARBAGE PLEASE END NOW?

[oldshurst442]

Thanx Balthy...

 

And yes...

 

"Considering there is a FORTY-SEVEN year span here, I see zero significance."

 

That was kinda my point in that from 1969 to 2016, barely anything has changed yet...you raised  VERY SIGNIFICANT POINT:

 

"Likewise, there is zero point to maintaining a set price gap over half a century!

Frankly, that's STILL not a huge disparity between '69 & '16."

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"WILL THIS STUPID ARBITRARY GARBAGE PLEASE END NOW?"

 

 

I surely hope so!

Edited August 7, 2016 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

BTW- the Ferrai 308 was utter garbage. Sure, it looked zippy, but it was slower than turtle piss.
16.7 in the quarter mile is no sports car.

[oldshurst442]

BTW- the Ferrai 308 was utter garbage. Sure, it looked zippy, but it was slower than turtle piss.

16.7 in the quarter mile is no sports car.

Yup....

 

The successor...the Ferrari F355 however, was not.

Why?

 

Let SMK figure it out!

Edited August 7, 2016 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

1969 is a long time ago, doesn't matter today.  To me the Camaro should be a car that a 20-something can afford.  Stagnant wages in the US and student loan debt is a whole other topic/debate, but there are people in their 20s buying new cars.  Most of these people are probably in the Focus/Civic price point, but I there are younger buyers with no kids looking to spend $25k on a car and want something sporty, they don't want a Camry because their parents have one.  They have limited options.  And I'll say that I think it was a mistake for Toyota to kill the Celica, they are killing Scion, hopefully they bring the Celica back as a $20-25k sporty coupe, even if it is front drive with 200 hp.  Young people would like it.  Young people don't want a  Corolla that is boring as wallpaper paste. Then you have Camaro/Corvette buyers who's kids are grown and gone, maybe they want a 2nd car, at these prices they might think it isn't worth it to drop $40k on a V6 Camaro, their daily driver Avalon or Impala already has that and is easier to get in and out of.

 

The Supra is coming back, but I know it won't be cheap, Toyota is going to be going after Infiniti or maybe higher trim Camaro buyers.  But again nothing for the average income folks.  And maybe people wanting crossovers is also killing the sports car.

[oldshurst442]

 

 

 

1969 is a long time ago, doesn't matter today.  To me the Camaro should be a car that a 20-something can afford.  Stagnant wages in the US and student loan debt is a whole other topic/debate, but there are people in their 20s buying new cars.  Most of these people are probably in the Focus/Civic price point, but I there are younger buyers with no kids looking to spend $25k on a car and want something sporty, they don't want a Camry because their parents have one.  They have limited options.  And I'll say that I think it was a mistake for Toyota to kill the Celica, they are killing Scion, hopefully they bring the Celica back as a $20-25k sporty coupe, even if it is front drive with 200 hp.  Young people would like it.  Young people don't want a  Corolla that is boring as wallpaper paste. Then you have Camaro/Corvette buyers who's kids are grown and gone, maybe they want a 2nd car, at these prices they might think it isn't worth it to drop $40k on a V6 Camaro, their daily driver Avalon or Impala already has that and is easier to get in and out of.

 

The Supra is coming back, but I know it won't be cheap, Toyota is going to be going after Infiniti or maybe higher trim Camaro buyers.  But again nothing for the average income folks.  And maybe people wanting crossovers is also killing the sports car.

You mention Supra...

 

The last generation TT inline 6 Supra cost more than the Vette did.

 

To you, a Camaro should be where an average joe 20 something year old could afford it..

Why?

Through-out the Camaro's history, a V8 Camaro was ALWAYS out of reach for an average 20 something year old...

 

Besides, if an average 20 something year old could afford a Honda Civic Si, or Ford Focus RS/ST, VW Golf GTI or a Subaru BRX, he could afford a Camaro. A 2.0T Camaro...

 

You also mention Celica....

In the 1980s, a Celica was ALWAYS priced in and around Camaro V8 territory. Trust me, average 20 something year olds in the 1980s could NOT AFFORD BRAND NEW 5.0 Mustangs, Celicas, Supras, Trans Ams, Camaros, Nissan 300 ZXs, Vettes, Mercury 5.0 Capris, Thunderbirds, Monte Carlos, Nissan 240 SXs and the like.

 

Civic CRX or Golf GTI 4 Valves, or Cavalier Z24 is where they were at.

Nissan Sentras and Toyota Corolla GTs...Maybe a Nissan Pulsar.

Definitely Pontiac Firefly turbos!

OK....Camaro iron duke 4 cylinders or 2.8 V6s Ill give you.

 

Guys, stop with the nonsense all ready!

Edited August 7, 2016 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

SMK ~

• 20-yr olds don't buy cars, average buyer age is like 51.

 

• The 'wallpaper paste' Corolla starts at $18130 with destination, no WAY a 'sporty' new Celica would start at $20K.

The ATP overall for cars is $33K now. Your lense for cars & pricing is cracked.

 

• Camaro starts right where the lowest possible point the Celica (which is not coming) could : $25,700.

[smk4565]

Now to jump in the Deloran and go back to 1991, when Dodge, Chevy and Acrua supposedly put Ferrari and Lamborghini on notice.

 

The Ferrari 308 and Mondail were crap, but everything in the early-mid 80s was crap.

 

The Contach came out in 1974 and 1990 was the last year.  If you look at the 1985-1990 era they had a 455 hp V12.

Those ran 0-60 in 4.7 seconds with a top speed of 183 mph.

In 1990 the Diablo came out, 0-60 in 4.5 seconds top speed of 202 mph.

 

The Ferrari Testarossa came out in 1984, 0-60 was 5.2 seconds, top speed 180 mph.

the 512TR came out in 1991 and did 0-60 in 4.8 seconds, and did 195 mph.

The Ferrari 348 was good for 0-60 in 5.4 seconds, top speed of 170 mph in the early 90s.

 

1991 Porsche 911 Turbo did 0-60 in 4.4 seconds 12.9 seconds 1/4 mile, top speed of 166 mph.

 

Here are the numbers for the NSX, Corvette, Viper.

The ZR-1 did 0-60 in 4.9 seconds, a 13.2 second 1/4 mile and top speed of 171 mph.

The 1991 Acura NSX did 0-60 as fast as 5.7 seconds, but 6.3 seconds with the automatic, top speed was 168 mph.

The 192 Dodge Viper did 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, top speed was 165 mph.

 

All 3 of those cars were slower than a discontinued Contach.  The Porsche 911 was more in line with Viper/Vette/NSX pricing and it could out accelerate them all.  The ZR-1 and Viper were fast for their time and much cheaper than a Ferrari or Lambo, but others had already hit that level of performance.

[ccap41]

Why is top speed a measurement of super car right now? That's the least cool spec about sports cars unless it's an actually stratospheric number like the veyron or Hennessey Gt(?)

Honestly a figure 8 time is more impressive because of the switchback, accelerating, and braking all play a role. What's the SS vs AMG GT do in a test like that? Hell. We will find out track times between the 1LE and AMG GT before long at MT's best drivers car along with the GT350R.

[oldshurst442]

Now to jump in the Deloran and go back to 1991, when Dodge, Chevy and Acrua supposedly put Ferrari and Lamborghini on notice.

 

The Ferrari 308 and Mondail were crap, but everything in the early-mid 80s was crap.

 

The Contach came out in 1974 and 1990 was the last year.  If you look at the 1985-1990 era they had a 455 hp V12.

Those ran 0-60 in 4.7 seconds with a top speed of 183 mph.

In 1990 the Diablo came out, 0-60 in 4.5 seconds top speed of 202 mph.

 

The Ferrari Testarossa came out in 1984, 0-60 was 5.2 seconds, top speed 180 mph.

the 512TR came out in 1991 and did 0-60 in 4.8 seconds, and did 195 mph.

The Ferrari 348 was good for 0-60 in 5.4 seconds, top speed of 170 mph in the early 90s.

 

1991 Porsche 911 Turbo did 0-60 in 4.4 seconds 12.9 seconds 1/4 mile, top speed of 166 mph.

 

Here are the numbers for the NSX, Corvette, Viper.

The ZR-1 did 0-60 in 4.9 seconds, a 13.2 second 1/4 mile and top speed of 171 mph.

The 1991 Acura NSX did 0-60 as fast as 5.7 seconds, but 6.3 seconds with the automatic, top speed was 168 mph.

The 192 Dodge Viper did 0-60 in 4.5 seconds, top speed was 165 mph.

 

All 3 of those cars were slower than a discontinued Contach.  The Porsche 911 was more in line with Viper/Vette/NSX pricing and it could out accelerate them all.  The ZR-1 and Viper were fast for their time and much cheaper than a Ferrari or Lambo, but others had already hit that level of performance.

 

 

1989 Porsche 911 Turbo was caught with its pants down....the Vette ZR1 came out in 1989....

You mention the 1991 911...2 years AFTER the ZR1

 

The 348 was still slower

The F355 came out in 1994.....and it had similar ZR1 numbers!

 

The Dodge Viper was untouchable...only the mid 1990 911 Turbos caught it...

The Viper came out in 1992... 400 horsepower....

 

The Acura showed the Germans and Italians that a supercar could be daily driven AND be TROUBLE FREE!!!

 

Testarossa and 512 were cars ABOVE this realm.

This is Porsche Carrera GT and 918 territory.

McLaren F1...

The Viper and Vette to this day are not in this category....

The C8 might be though!

And yet both the ZR1 and Viper held their own in a category that they surely were not involved in any shape or form.

But the Viper and Vette were exotics in their own right too...

Look at the numbers again SMK...in some areas, the Yanks are faster....

 

So yeah...

 

I think I wasnt far off my statement of saying that the ZR1, NSX and Viper put the Germans and the Italians on alert!

Edited August 7, 2016 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

SMK ~

• 20-yr olds don't buy cars, average buyer age is like 51.

 

• The 'wallpaper paste' Corolla starts at $18130 with destination, no WAY a 'sporty' new Celica would start at $20K.

The ATP overall for cars is $33K now. Your lense for cars & pricing is cracked.

 

• Camaro starts right where the lowest possible point the Celica (which is not coming) could : $25,700.

I know most new car buyers are older, and most 20-somethings or the average 20-something isn't buying a $30k new car.  I said the 20-somethings there are buying cars, there are some out there, or maybe even in the 25-34 demographic that are going to buy a new car for $25-29k, there isn't much choice, except a rental spec Camaro or Mustang.

 

In 2002 a V8 Camaro was $22,300, the same as a Camary XLE.  Todays Camry XLE is like $26,000.  Now todays V6 is also 2002's V8.  In 2014 $24,700 was the price of a Camaro V6, now it is $29k for a base V6.   Nearly $5,000 increase in 2 years.  Put any options on that car (like $1,500 for an automatic transmission) and you get to $35k really quick, even for the 4-cylinder car.  

 

The Scion tC is $19,300 right now, and has 180 hp, Toyota could easily make a Celica for $20k base.  It is a Corolla chassis with a coupe body and pick a corporate 4-banger to put in there, even the Camry's 4-cylinder/6AT in a 2,900 lb car or whatever a tC weights can feel peppy to drive.  We aren't talking sub 6 second 0-60 time, but it could be a sporty looking car with some fun factor for younger buyers.

[smk4565]

 

 

I think I wasnt far off my statement of saying that the ZR1, NSX and Viper put the Germans and the Italians on alert!

 

So much so that the ZR-1 ended production in 1995, took until 2009 to come back, the NSX limped on with no sales until 2002, died, came back in 2016, and the Viper has never sold well, and is now being put out of production.  

 

Meanwhile in the 90s, Porsche was the only German company really building super cars, now they all do.  BMW and Mercedes back then and 850i and SL600 type cars, but they were tanks with V12s, meant for luxury not track performance.

[oldshurst442]

 

SMK ~

• 20-yr olds don't buy cars, average buyer age is like 51.

 

• The 'wallpaper paste' Corolla starts at $18130 with destination, no WAY a 'sporty' new Celica would start at $20K.

The ATP overall for cars is $33K now. Your lense for cars & pricing is cracked.

 

• Camaro starts right where the lowest possible point the Celica (which is not coming) could : $25,700.

I know most new car buyers are older, and most 20-somethings or the average 20-something isn't buying a $30k new car.  I said the 20-somethings there are buying cars, there are some out there, or maybe even in the 25-34 demographic that are going to buy a new car for $25-29k, there isn't much choice, except a rental spec Camaro or Mustang.

 

In 2002 a V8 Camaro was $22,300, the same as a Camary XLE.  Todays Camry XLE is like $26,000.  Now todays V6 is also 2002's V8.  In 2014 $24,700 was the price of a Camaro V6, now it is $29k for a base V6.   Nearly $5,000 increase in 2 years.  Put any options on that car (like $1,500 for an automatic transmission) and you get to $35k really quick, even for the 4-cylinder car.  

 

The Scion tC is $19,300 right now, and has 180 hp, Toyota could easily make a Celica for $20k base.  It is a Corolla chassis with a coupe body and pick a corporate 4-banger to put in there, even the Camry's 4-cylinder/6AT in a 2,900 lb car or whatever a tC weights can feel peppy to drive.  We aren't talking sub 6 second 0-60 time, but it could be a sporty looking car with some fun factor for younger buyers.

 

And do you think 20 something year olds could have afford Camry XLE price tags?

Like I said...

 

Civic Si and Golf GTIs were the cars that mommy and daddy bought for them.

How much did those go for?

15 000?

Pontiac Firefly turbos and Cavalier Z24s...

Asuna Sunfires...

Ford Probes too. Those being the most expensive that the average joe 20 year old bought with mommy money!

 

Camaro LT1 V8s were out of their reach...

[oldshurst442]

 

 

 

I think I wasnt far off my statement of saying that the ZR1, NSX and Viper put the Germans and the Italians on alert!

 

So much so that the ZR-1 ended production in 1995, took until 2009 to come back, the NSX limped on with no sales until 2002, died, came back in 2016, and the Viper has never sold well, and is now being put out of production.  

 

Meanwhile in the 90s, Porsche was the only German company really building super cars, now they all do.  BMW and Mercedes back then and 850i and SL600 type cars, but they were tanks with V12s, meant for luxury not track performance.

 

 

The LT1, LT4 C4, LS1 C5 Vettes took its place for it was CHEAPER to build because the LT5 was an expensive powerplant and low and behold, the LT1, LT4 and LS1 Vettes were even faster, lighter and actually, those caused even MORE havoc to the Germans and the Italians forcing the Germans to really offer a zillion 911 trims to specialize to dominate and the Italians to offer more expensive low end 308/328/348/F355/F430/360 Modena/458 and so forth and so forth....

[balthazar]

• Camaro doesn't care where an old Camry was priced, it's a relevant as the price of bananas. Camaro is not being priced on a toyota boredom pod price timeline.

 

• '17 Camaro starts at $26.3K, not 29K. That's a $4K increase…. in FIFTEEN YEARS.

 

• Chevy will sell around 75K Camaros for '16- pretty great for a car that you are somehow worried no one can afford.

[FordCosworth]

Why is top speed a measurement of super car right now? That's the least cool spec about sports cars unless it's an actually stratospheric number like the veyron or Hennessey Gt(?)

Honestly a figure 8 time is more impressive because of the switchback, accelerating, and braking all play a role. What's the SS vs AMG GT do in a test like that? Hell. We will find out track times between the 1LE and AMG GT before long at MT's best drivers car along with the GT350R.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet?

Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro.

Edited August 7, 2016 by FordCosworth

[smk4565]

 

 

SMK ~

• 20-yr olds don't buy cars, average buyer age is like 51.

 

• The 'wallpaper paste' Corolla starts at $18130 with destination, no WAY a 'sporty' new Celica would start at $20K.

The ATP overall for cars is $33K now. Your lense for cars & pricing is cracked.

 

• Camaro starts right where the lowest possible point the Celica (which is not coming) could : $25,700.

I know most new car buyers are older, and most 20-somethings or the average 20-something isn't buying a $30k new car.  I said the 20-somethings there are buying cars, there are some out there, or maybe even in the 25-34 demographic that are going to buy a new car for $25-29k, there isn't much choice, except a rental spec Camaro or Mustang.

 

In 2002 a V8 Camaro was $22,300, the same as a Camary XLE.  Todays Camry XLE is like $26,000.  Now todays V6 is also 2002's V8.  In 2014 $24,700 was the price of a Camaro V6, now it is $29k for a base V6.   Nearly $5,000 increase in 2 years.  Put any options on that car (like $1,500 for an automatic transmission) and you get to $35k really quick, even for the 4-cylinder car.  

 

The Scion tC is $19,300 right now, and has 180 hp, Toyota could easily make a Celica for $20k base.  It is a Corolla chassis with a coupe body and pick a corporate 4-banger to put in there, even the Camry's 4-cylinder/6AT in a 2,900 lb car or whatever a tC weights can feel peppy to drive.  We aren't talking sub 6 second 0-60 time, but it could be a sporty looking car with some fun factor for younger buyers.

 

And do you think 20 something year olds could have afford Camry XLE price tags?

Like I said...

 

Civic Si and Golf GTIs were the cars that mommy and daddy bought for them.

How much did those go for?

15 000?

Pontiac Firefly turbos and Cavalier Z24s...

Asuna Sunfires...

Ford Probes too. Those being the most expensive that the average joe 20 year old bought with mommy money!

 

Camaro LT1 V8s were out of their reach...

 

A 2002 GTI bas was $19,460, VR6 had an MSRP of $20,845.  The GTI 337 (limited edition) was $22,775.

 

Base 2002 Camaro $19,015 and the Z28 (LS1 V8) was $23,430.  They were pretty much the same price.

[smk4565]

• Camaro doesn't care where an old Camry was priced, it's a relevant as the price of bananas. Camaro is not being priced on a toyota boredom pod price timeline.

 

• '17 Camaro starts at $26.3K, not 29K. That's a $4K increase…. in FIFTEEN YEARS.

 

• Chevy will sell around 75K Camaros for '16- pretty great for a car that you are somehow worried no one can afford.

4 cylinder Camaro is $26k, the V6 is more.  The sales chart doesn't lie, Camaro is down every month, people wonder why.  But you can't see out of if, and the price keeps going up faster than competitor cars go up.  And the options list runs the price up fast.

[smk4565]

 

 

 

 

I think I wasnt far off my statement of saying that the ZR1, NSX and Viper put the Germans and the Italians on alert!

 

So much so that the ZR-1 ended production in 1995, took until 2009 to come back, the NSX limped on with no sales until 2002, died, came back in 2016, and the Viper has never sold well, and is now being put out of production.  

 

Meanwhile in the 90s, Porsche was the only German company really building super cars, now they all do.  BMW and Mercedes back then and 850i and SL600 type cars, but they were tanks with V12s, meant for luxury not track performance.

 

 

The LT1, LT4 C4, LS1 C5 Vettes took its place for it was CHEAPER to build because the LT5 was an expensive powerplant and low and behold, the LT1, LT4 and LS1 Vettes were even faster, lighter and actually, those caused even MORE havoc to the Germans and the Italians forcing the Germans to really offer a zillion 911 trims to specialize to dominate and the Italians to offer more expensive low end 308/328/348/F355/F430/360 Modena/458 and so forth and so forth....

 

I don't think Ferrari or Lamborghini have ever cared what the Corvette did, different segment, different buyer.   Porsche makes 100 versions of the 911 so they can hose buyers $750 for painted AC vents, and $2500 for personalized door sills, or charge you $20,000 to take out the back seat.

[balthazar]

• And the 4-cyl Camaro is….. TA-DA! a Camaro. Still gets these (handful) of "20 yr olds" into a Camaro, doesn't it?

Or should the V8 still be $22K, the V6 $18K and the 4 $15K??

 

Camaro 2.0T, 6-spd, 275 HP/295 TRQ, 21/30 MPG, "excellent agility, ample grunt, not a stripper, still gets you many of the qualities that led C&D to name the more potent Camaro coupes to 10Best List for '16"", 0-60 : 5.4 (only 0.3 sec off the '16 V6)…. what's not to like?? 

 

"Gee, I got this brand new Camaro with close to 300 HP, I get 25 MPG, got great handling, looks…. bu-uuuuut a 14 year old Camaro cost $4000 less. $h!, I got screwed!"

Yea; that's something no one has ever said.

 

• Camaro is down in sales this year, but who cares?? Accountants for General Motors and dealerships. Who cares about them?
Still on pace to sell around 75K- a excellent number for a car with such diversity of configurations.

 

• And you yourself have often advocated for higher priced version if consumers want them/buy them. So if a $70K Camaro finds buyers, you're in favor of that, right?

[ccap41]

Why is top speed a measurement of super car right now? That's the least cool spec about sports cars unless it's an actually stratospheric number like the veyron or Hennessey Gt(?)

Honestly a figure 8 time is more impressive because of the switchback, accelerating, and braking all play a role. What's the SS vs AMG GT do in a test like that? Hell. We will find out track times between the 1LE and AMG GT before long at MT's best drivers car along with the GT350R.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet?

Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro.

It was on their SnapChat while they were testing a couple weeks ago. Almost positive it was the 1LE not the ZL1.

I'll try and Google some $h! to figure it out.

[FordCosworth]

Why is top speed a measurement of super car right now? That's the least cool spec about sports cars unless it's an actually stratospheric number like the veyron or Hennessey Gt(?)

Honestly a figure 8 time is more impressive because of the switchback, accelerating, and braking all play a role. What's the SS vs AMG GT do in a test like that? Hell. We will find out track times between the 1LE and AMG GT before long at MT's best drivers car along with the GT350R.

The 1LE is in BDC? I don't recall any " first drive " or test yet. And I also don't see that package available on Chevy's site either. How could one include a car that's not for sale yet?

Last I heard, the 1LE packages are available in late 2016, on 2017 SS and LT V-6 Camaro.

It was on their SnapChat while they were testing a couple weeks ago. Almost positive it was the 1LE not the ZL1.

I'll try and Google some $h! to figure it out.

Thanks for the reply. Even if it's not the 1LE, but is in fact the ZL1, that car is also not available.

Either way, how can car(s) not out yet, be included in any sort of comparison? BDC has some odd eligibility requirements. More more what Olds says rings true - M/T's credibility is questionable.

Edited August 8, 2016 by FordCosworth