Ummmmmm...Sixty8, I have a question for you:
Do you really think that a Camaro (if produced) would NOT have a convertible? The "if it were a hardtop" was referring to a specifically-produced car. As in "If it were a convertible, this would be a problem, and if it were a hardtop, this problem would still exist." It's called proper grammar, you should check into it Seriously, re-read the post. Even being a hardtop, or the convertible, or whatever body style someone bought, the negative ramifications resulting from a high beltline would be a deterrent, especially in comparison to the Mustang, which has a design far more conducive to open-air touring.
NOS: I said nothing about trunk space. Sixty8 as usual misinterpreted what I said, which was "trunk access." I agree with you that in this class, trunk space isn't all that important. But access still is. My biggest question is why they made the trunklid the way they did. Why doesn't it extend down the rear to the bumper like virtually every other car? With it the way it currently is, one would have to lift things OVER the rear and into the trunk, and as another poster mentioned a few days ago, that is a big negative.
Finally, I am well aware this is a concept, but some things need to be addressed, ESPECIALLY if they are asking "SHOULD WE PRODUCE THIS??"
My answer? They should produce a Camaro based on this design with a completely different interior, a lower beltline (which would reduce the heavy-handedness of the design and also not require such massive wheels for balance of proportions), and with a better rear decklid. As is, it is a good start.