balthazar

Well, the '60s vette is a coupe, not a hardtop. I believe technically it has an A-Pillar & a C-Pillar. The 'split' would not enter into it.

Hershey is either 11th-15th or 12th-15th (it ends on the 12th).

Did you intend to leave a 5" gap between the windows, or fill that with silicone? I know you're joking, but the joke has been repeated enough that I'm afraid some people actually think that it's a possibility.

Just remembered I am working the Rutgers game Sat, too- so Carlisle is definately out. I intend to hit Hershey Fri and sleep in my expansive Chevy truck and finish out Sat- we'll see how that goes. I wish the show ran into Sunday. I am not adverse to meeting up, tho the logistics would be formidable: I just wander in my own secret-systematic patterns, with no idea what field I'm on at a given time. I do have a 'mobile', however...

This thing is a plucked chicken compared to the iconic C2. It's not quite ugly (actually, IMHO; it is)- it just doesn't have any fluidity or cohesiveness- the smooth, gradual radiuses of the body mixed with the sharp-edged RR quarters and the Stude Cruiser taillights.... it doesn't work. It's highly European in an era when being that struggled to approach 2nd best. Prediction: $500,000K

Of course: with the end of Divisional Engineering & proprietory powertrains, what was left? Never should've happened. BTW- I would not argue the X-Body or A-Body, but the G- and B-Bodies were still far more than just different grilles.

The Mustang top is an imported power-retractable sliver of a roof with only a passing resemblence to the factory styling. Frankly, I think it looks bad; real cheap. Maybe somebody will 'gotta have' it, but I doubt there'll be many takers. This unlikely possibility {aftermarket roof for the 'maro} overlooks the formidable price increase involved, too (convert $ tag + aftermarket top/shipping/installation). How many grand away from the announced base price steel roof WITH no B-pillar (if only) are we at now: 15K??

I would like to, but with Englishtown last weekend and Hershey after C, I will miss it. Besides, a junkyard that has been closed for the better part of 20 years but has opened back up with limited Sat-only hours is on schedule for this weekend. That, plus another yard I have not been to in about 10 years, but had good vintage stuff (then at least).

There was a 900,000 mile Cadillac, tho I don't have any details and that info was from the late '70s.

When have you ever seen a convertible where the rear windows don't roll down ?? EDIT:: My bad- I think I see what you're saying; that the convertible might NOT have ANY quarter windows. With the width of the Camaro C-pillar already- that would make for a HUGE 'C-pillar' with the top up- I would put up cash money that wouldn't happen for that reason alone, not to mention once again: to develop the 2 different shells (this one would admittedly be a minor change) would be a waste of money. The markedly different look of the convert (roof up) and the steel roof car is another consideration: it would change the look of a car that is primarily about 'The Look'. The convert WILL have quarter windows without a doubt.

Lord no, and so many make this same automatic assumption ('GM is always late to the game'). GM had a 4-spd auto well before ANYONE else. I should note tho, that it was NOT an OD trans- in this era ODs were only found on manuals. The HydraMatic (in numerous versions) was a 4-spd up thru '64 when the HM-315 passed and the THM-400 came online (3-spd). There was also the lighter-duty RHM 375 3-spd from '61-64.

First GM 4-spd automatic was Olds's HydraMatic of '40 (developed by Cadillac Engineering, beginning in '32). Not sure how many gears Olds's Automatic Safety Transmission of '37-38 had. First GM 4-spd manual appeared in 1935 GMC light duty trucks. For cars; it was in the '57 Corvette.

AAS :>>"We are all ASSUMING that the convertible will have "no B-pillar and back windows that roll down," but have we even seen the concept convertible with the top up? What if the production version ends up like the last generation convertible (just the window in the door)? That kind of kills the argument of "if they are designing the convertible without a B-pillar then why not just make the hard top off that platform.""<< No it would not. A convertible shell/unibody needs to be designed with safey in mind in the event of side impacts. Regardless of whether the convertible top features a coupe style (no rear side glass) or not, there is no roof and no attached B-pillar in the convert for strength. Therefore, the sides & floor system need additional reinforcement for reasonable passenger safety. No one has yet offered up as to why the same shell/unibody with a welded-on roof would not also be used under a hardtop Camaro. It is not safety (convertible is unquestionably less safe than a hardtop), it is not weight (negligable), it is not cost (the same shell under the convert & hardtop would save massive amounts of development/engineering money).... To be honest, I believe that the economies of scale may show a net cost advantage if production gets high enough because a fixed quarter window would be cheaper than a hardtop (no sealing/wind noise issues, no window regulators, power motors, wiring, tracks, etc)... if you ignore the R&D/testing of the 2 separate approaches. The arrangement of the convertible top/quarter window (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with this issue from a structural standpoint. hyperv6 :>>"In the future with new computer designs and new materials it meya be returned to the cars we love."<< Like steel, rubber, glass & plastic?

>>"the irony is the guy the most upset about the B-pillar is someone who would never buy a new car, so his opinion is essentially pointless"<< No more so than anyone else's opinion about a car they have no intention of buying. -- --- -- --- -- >>"The bottom line is in a realistic way is there anyone here that can show them how to build a true hardtop that will have NHV of a post car, cost of a post car, weight of a post car and strenght of a post car. If it was that simple we would have it. No gut involved just limits that can't be moved."<< If you truely believe this is absolute, you cannot logically explain convertibles. -- --- -- --- -- Again on the "hidden B-pillar"- no one is objecting to the LOOK of a B-pillar, so hiding it does nothing. If anything, it's akin to fake hood scoops: gives the illusion but the illusion is fake. The objection to a B-pillar is that ITS THERE and cannot be eliminated/retracted, not how it looks or if it's "hidden".

>>"Can't compete with BMW with a pushrod."<< Ahh, another appearance by Mr. TenthofaSecond. Let's see if your theory holds any water. C&D, 3/2004: "...quicker than the M3 to 100 and 140 mph..." "...trap speed was 107 mph compared to 106 for the m3 and m5" "...the Cadillac's best lap -- 1:25:35 @ 74.7 mph)-- edged the m5 by 0.138. And there was no doubt... that there was another second or so that we were unable to explore." The CTS-V had a front tire pressure issue, even tho it out-skidpadded both bmws. M3 ran a 1:24:47 @ 75.4 mph. Clearly, Cadillac has ALREADY handily competed with BMW "with a pushrod". You will ignore this, of course.

For Philly fans (I am one), this has been one crazy, exciting season the last month. In my house there's 2 Yankee fans, a Red Sox fan & me: so far we're all in!

hyperv6: >>"As for weight... As for the crap... Profit is the whole point... If it was that easy..."<< While valid points, your post is heavy with bean-counter POV- not the directing force the majority of Camaro buyers are hoping is in control on this one. As for the 'hidden B-pillar' advocates: you quite simply don't get it. I've owned 20 vehicles to date, 11 which have been hardtops/ pillarless (my average model year owned : 1965). Weather permitting, I ALWAYS rolled down all windows BECAUSE it was a hardtop. Arguing that 'many/most people won't put all windows down' is akin to arguing for the elimination of the pickup bed 'because many/most people don't put anything in it'. One could easily apply the same arguement to NAV and sunroofs, but we have those, don't we? What percent of cars have sunroofs- 5-10%? This should be about individuality and expressionism in an extremely expressive car, not about penny-pinching, not at this stage in GM's history.

God these M-Bs are ugly, IMO. There are 2 of this vintage in a nearby town I work in: one is pushing up daisies on a side lawn and the other is extremely bedraggled. Both are cancer-riddled- not sure how many years in MA this vintage will last. I never see (or at least: notice) this old of a M-B running around central NJ anymore- they all seem to have disappered (except for the rare summer-cruiser SL). My buddy, who's an engineer, coverted over a Rabbit to veggie-oil, and is planning to do a mercedes diesel sedan (not this old) next.

The 'cost' arguement doesn't wash; the way Chevrolet is doing the Camaro, they must engineer 2 different unibodies- one a reinforced, pillarless shell with roll-down rear side glass, and a less-reinforced, B-pillared coupe with glued-in glass.... rather than using the convertible shell and being completely locked-n-loaded right out of the box. The 'less weight=better performance' arguement doesn't wash either: 100 more lbs only costs you 1/10th of a second in the quarter mile- a B-pillar makes a far greater & more direct impact than a --say-- 13.8 sec 1/4-mile vs. a 13.7. Besides- there's no aftermarket remedy for a B-pillar- there will be dozens of Camaro-specific performance upgrades before the car even hits the showrooms. One more thing: a true hardtop Camaro would be exactly the type of detail that so many hand-wringers here are always harping about: it would be GM 'not just matching the competition, but surpassing them', but many of these same individuals are simply shrugging their shoulders just like they've alleged 'die-hard' GM fans have done in the past. I agree with Camino's post above 100%. Give me the hardtop, &#036;h&#33;can the NNNAAAVVV and the sunroof (how much does that bull&#036;h&#33; weigh ??

hyper: twice you mentioned "under 4000 lbs"; have there EVER been any educated guesstimations on exactly how much weight a hardtop Camaro would have to gain vs. a coupe? I get the impression that some think it's literally many 100s of lbs. Should be no more than 75, based on past weight differences hardtop vs. coupe. Personally, I do not think this will limit sales, and if I personally was in the market for a Camaro, I'd still buy, but I do think it sucks all the same. Sixty8... man... sorry.

And as alluded to above: no I-8 Cadillacs, ever.

Me : '04 Silverado 2500HD, '64 Catalina, '64 Grand Prix, '59 Invicta, (non-GM: '94 F-150, '40 Ford COE). wife : '03 Grand Prix. brother : '07 Silverado 3500, '99 Tahoe, '71 GTO, '68 Firebird, (non-GM: '70 Mack UH). bro's woman : '9x? S-10, '96? Camaro. sister : '99? Olds Bravada. B-I-L : '07 Silverado 3500, '89? Silverado 3500, '69 Firebird, (non-GM: '96 F-250). father/mother : '07 Lucerne, (non-GM: '97 sentra). grandfather/mother : '06 CTS.

Interesting insight, moltar; what with your consistant snipes at Pontiac being a 'rental car division'... you've personally only rented Pontiacs 10% of the time (less if you include your '1-timers'). Another reason for the cheap shots, then?

I was in NY this weekend.... sorry; not NYC, but "the O.C.". Walked in the woods, hiked, took in a cemetery & a small-town fall festival/street fair- all very enjoyable and relaxing. I lived in major cities in the past (Detroit & Balto) and I hated it. As Mr Smith says to Neo "It's the smell." The crowding, the herding, the attitudes, the ego-centricity, you can have it.

>>"The recalls have prompted complaints from China that its manufacturers were being blamed for design faults introduced by Mattel."<< Too small, easily extracted magnets are one thing, but I can guarantee you Mattel never specified 200-times allowable lead content paint. It's 2007, not 1947- there is no excuse in modern times to not know this or not catch it before the 1st drop of paint hits a toy. Is China getting a bye because of a perception they're still '3rd world'? Where is China's apology?