Camaro Information Page

[YSSMAN]

Confirmed

God does exist! GM is making a smart move here, and hopefully they can push it out for less than $30K with a V8!

...I think it was on NBC (or maybe I'm getting my sources crossed) but I was reading that GM could get the car out in the neighborhood of $20K with a V6 assuming they use a lot of off-the-shelf pieces and ditch the 20 and 21 inch wheels.

Thats good news for me, because Ford was starting to get second glances from me on the Mustang...

 

[VIPFREAK]

God does exist! GM is making a smart move here, and hopefully they can push it out for less than $30K with a V8!

They had to or else there'd be a lot of pissed off people, I'm sure they are the same ones that were when GM announced the killing of it.

Unless there not around by then.

 

[skip0110]

The F-body had aged a lot; the last clean sheet redeisgn was in '82. It was a small minority that scremaed very loudly when it was cancelled, but there was very little demand for it.

I heard that another eason it was cancelled is that the F-body would have bnen unable to pass stricter side impact regulations.

 

[Onikaze]

Well...I think it's a good thing that the Camaro will probably carry a more futuristic take on the Retro theme than the others (though if you look, you pick out styling cues from all 4 gens) and it would be great to see it make it to production like that.

As long as GM keeps the looks as faithful to that as Ford did with the Mustang, and prices it within a grand of Stang prices with a bit more grunt, these will probably fly out.

The DOD will be a huge bonus, that alone makes me want a Camaro more than a Mustang right now.

400 Hp with better Mileage than a V-6 Mustang?

Challenger is glorious to old mopar guys, my dad had Chevies, I've always loved Fords, so the Dodge is just a neat sidenote to me, I'd never want to own one though.

Did anyone else notice just how much the GT-500 looks like that GT-Concept picture though? I hadnt noticed that til just now.

 

[Onikaze]

Nice.

That's the first time I've seen a GT-500 in the White/Blue and I freaking love it...just wish it said GT-350 and was a lot lighter.

 

[JohnBM01]

I thought the classic Shelby GT350s were light weight? I thought they were about 2700 lbs then. I think the Camaro here DOES need to be affordable. Obviously I wasn't born between 1945-1970 to know what it was like to get one of these cars, take it to the strip, and smoke the guy (or girl) in the other lane. I think they had to be affordable and powerful. I don't know too much about cubic inches of displacement because I've been so used to cubic centimeters. Most of those autos would have to be about maybe 4000+ cc of displacement and just mean from every position.

The point I'm getting across is that I believe the muscle car is back. Not only is it back, but with better engine efficiency and all. I'd like to see all or most old schoolers to be affordable, just to show that if the muscle car is back, they have to be at least affordable so anyone can take them to the drag strip, or do a little club racing. I have to say that I like the latest Camaro concept. Apparentely, retro is the way to go nowadays, so why not cash in? Surely when the next Camaro is released, this will generally add a spark for GM.

With the Camaro forthcoming, do you wish the Firebird/Trans-Am should make a return as well?

 

[194GVan]

It would be nice to see a return of the Firebird, but if they decided to go retro it would be nice to see it taken in another direction, perhaps another era of the car rather than a re-styled camaro concept. But they already have the GTO and that is quite a beast.

 

[Onikaze]

I'm betting that Ford will release a stripped out, lightweight, IRS having GT-350, price it maybe 5-6 grand less than the GT-500, give it maybe 350 Hp to stand above the base GT, and I will have to restrain myself from buying one.

Chevy will likely do the traditional RS, Z/28, SS run, RS being about 20k with a V-6, at least 200 Hp, probably 250 I'd bet, a real Z/28 with a mix of the 5300 and 4800 block/crank would be awesome, for a real 302 effect, probably 25k, and an SS360 for $30k even.

Though, I bet if the GT-500 and Challenger SRT-8 versions both push at 500 Hp hard enough, we'd see an SS427 with the LS7 in it.

 

[skip0110]

I thought the classic Shelby GT350s were light weight? I thought they were about 2700 lbs then. I think the Camaro here DOES need to be affordable. Obviously I wasn't born between 1945-1970 to know what it was like to get one of these cars, take it to the strip, and smoke the guy (or girl) in the other lane. I think they had to be affordable and powerful. I don't know too much about cubic inches of displacement because I've been so used to cubic centimeters. Most of those autos would have to be about maybe 4000+ cc of displacement and just mean from every position.

The old Camaros (1st gen) were about 3500 lbs. At one time you could get up to a 455 in a Firebird, which works out to about 7.4 L. Of course, times have changed, so much smaller displacements are acceptable. The mighty 455-SD was only rated at 290 hp, and the Pontiac 400 (6.6 L) was rated at 330 hp.

 

[Blackbird.]

On the GT500. I REALLY like the front, I'd probably lower it a tad. but I can't get over the rear. If you look at it straight from the back it looks like any other GT with stripes. Wish they kept the rear lights that was on the concept.

 

[YSSMAN]

With the Camaro forthcoming, do you wish the Firebird/Trans-Am should make a return as well?

Here is an interesting theory I developed early during the Detroit show: With the absence of the new 2007 GTO that was supposed to appear at Detoit, did GM decide to cancel the car alltogether and instead use the "Zeta-Lite" that would have underpinned the GTO to build the Camaro and Firebird again? Its an interesting theory (I think), but we really cant say for sure untill the end of the American show cycle that ends with New York.

Either way, it sounds like the car has the greenlight, which is awesome. My Dad allready said that when it is confirmed, he going to put his name on the list... Same for my Grandfather... As for me, I'd like to... But I would only go with a Z/28, no need for an SS here.

 

[Slicks]

The old Camaros (1st gen) were about 3500 lbs. At one time you could get up to a 455 in a Firebird, which works out to about 7.4 L. Of course, times have changed, so much smaller displacements are acceptable. The mighty 455-SD was only rated at 290 hp, and the Pontiac 400 (6.6 L) was rated at 330 hp.

True, but the torque was what counted.

The '71 Firebird had a 455 with, optioned out, 335HP and 480 lb-ft of torque. The 455 was at the large end of the muscle car engines, the smallest really being the Chevy 283 (somewhere in the 4800cc range), up to the Cadillac 500 (er... 8000cc's ish). Even in '74, when most other muscle motors had died off, the Firebird's SD-455 made 310HP and 390 lb-ft of torque (Keeping in mind, these were now net measurements, which were implemented in either 1971 or 72.

The most common ones were: Ford's 289, 302, 351, 390, 427, 428, 429, and 460. Chevy had the 283, 302, 327, 350, 396, 427, 454. Mopar had the 318, 340, 383, the notorious 426, and 440.

 

[YSSMAN]

You forgot about the Chevy 402 (it was still advertised as a 396) and the 409... Both were pretty popular engines in the Chevelle and Impala.