2009 Camaro?
05-29-2008 | 06:53 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
From: Tucson, AZ
2009 Camaro?
I'm not sure if there is a reason or not, but all of the boards for new Camaro Discussion have it listed as a 2010 Camaro - isn't it going to be a 2009?
I heard a commercial for the Camaro today and it got me to thinking.
I heard a commercial for the Camaro today and it got me to thinking.
05-29-2008 | 07:22 AM
#2
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
It is a 2010 model year arriving in 2009, a few months before the typical time that the 2010 car will come out. Also see Question #8 here:
https://www.camaroz28.com/articles/b...ew/index.shtml
Where did you hear a commercial for it?
https://www.camaroz28.com/articles/b...ew/index.shtml
Where did you hear a commercial for it?
05-29-2008 | 08:08 AM
#3
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
It should also be pointed out that as a 2010 model there is basically no chance that the car will go on sale before January 1st 2009. Some other websites and people at dealerships etc are reporting that they think it will be out early in a more traditional September or October release. This cannot be the case because of the "one January 1st per model year rule". I think a lot of the confusion about the 2009 vs 2010 ( including my own) came about because initially they said a 1st quarter 2009 release and people thought they were sandbagging and would release it early. Someone correct me if I'm wrong..
05-29-2008 | 08:41 AM
#4
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,025
From: Tucson, AZ
It is a 2010 model year arriving in 2009, a few months before the typical time that the 2010 car will come out. Also see Question #8 here:
https://www.camaroz28.com/articles/b...ew/index.shtml
Where did you hear a commercial for it?
https://www.camaroz28.com/articles/b...ew/index.shtml
Where did you hear a commercial for it?
05-29-2008 | 08:49 AM
#5
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
So I guess the 2010 Camaro is going to have a ~21 month run, eh?
(~October '08 - June 2010) Man, there are going to be A LOT of 1st-year 5th-gens out there! 
IMO, it should have been released as a mid-year 2009 as the early reports were indicating (a couple years ago, even THIS WEBSITE
had the forum entitled "2009 Camaro discussion", as did a couple other Camaro sites as well). The 1970 Camaro was a mid-model-year car (due to a strike at the time) ... I think GM should have gone with that again.But for the record, it was GM who OFFICIALLY announced the Camaro as being introduced as a 2010, and it was only "internet rumor/speculation" that it was going to be released as a 2009 (and again, those reports have been quashed for nearly ~2 years already).
05-29-2008 | 09:08 AM
#6
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
Correct, but GM does this for a few reasons.
1) Longer production run
2) they didnt want a short 3-4 month production run of 09's
3) They get to sell a 2010 Camaro when everyone else is selling old 2009 Mustangs and Challengers.
1) Longer production run
2) they didnt want a short 3-4 month production run of 09's
3) They get to sell a 2010 Camaro when everyone else is selling old 2009 Mustangs and Challengers.
05-29-2008 | 09:26 AM
#7
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
You're absolutely right, Al, but the fact remains, there are going to be nearly TWO production years' worth of 2010 Camaros on the market!! 
I sure hope that has a positive effect on the price (and by positive, I don't mean increased! 
)
...(in other words, a large supply for a large demand)...
I sure hope that has a positive effect on the price (and by positive, I don't mean increased! )...(in other words, a large supply for a large demand)...
05-29-2008 | 09:28 AM
#8
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Nifty little story...I don't think I told this one before.
When I was in the middle of producing the 1st CamaroZ28.Com Die-Cast car exactly at this this time last tear, I submitted the package artwork for approval. All of the CamroZ28.Com Die-Cast Cars are fully licensed by GM and have to go through an approval process before final production starts. The back of the package included the following text:
This limited-edition cutom die-cast collectible was produced to celebrate CamaroZ28.Com's decade of service and the upcoming 2009 Chevrolet Camaro.
http://www.cz28store.com/images/uploads/backsample.jpg
At the last minute, I got word that the "2009" portion did not pass approval by GM licensing with no real reason given. I started to speculate why, but I didn't know for sure. I had to make this post, some of you might remember it...
I was just informed that there was an interesting issue regarding the CamaroZ28.Com Custom Die-Cast car that everyone (including myself) has been waiting for. Evidently, there was a slight and unexpected issue with some of the verbage on the cardboard inserts inside the packaging and a tweak or two to the artwork needed to be made per GM's licensing division request. It was very minor, but when it comes to GM's licensing division, they are pretty firm on things. It really is not a big deal but believe me, I am just about as bummed about this as you guys might be, I am dying for these cars to arrive! Fortunately, it shouldn't add too terrible of a delay. Making the necessary changes are going to push the cars back a couple of weeks or so. Nothing really major, but I wanted to let everyone know anyway.
]
05-29-2008 | 11:51 AM
#11
2010 Camaro Moderator/Disciple
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,087
From: Chester, NY
05-29-2008 | 01:38 PM
#12
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,711
From: The Golden State
They had a tendancy to crack and split when stamped. Fisher Body had to order new dies.
GM's strike started in September 1970, and lasted 69 days.
The 1970 Camaro was introduced in February 1970.
I don't think time warps were involved with Camaro's production delays.
It's a mistake that's repeated just about everywhere. GM helped it along itself when they first claimed it was labor issues that delayed the 2nd gen Camaro. Although they abandoned that position, as you probably know, old tales die hard.
Here's a bit more detail:
"The delay of introduction of the '70 Camaro was not purposeful, nor was it related to labor problems; it was late because the quarter panel draw dies failed during final die tryout and had to be rebuilt from scratch. Fisher Body had lots of troubles drawing the 1970 quarter panels without wrinkles and splits. They attempted to correct the problems by modifying the draw dies during final tryout but the problems got worse instead of better. Fisher finally had to redesign/rebuild the draw dies, which delayed the launch by 4-5 months. Chevrolet decided to extend the 1969 model, which created a wild scramble, as this meant extending part supplier contracts for the '69 (suppliers had already committed their facilities to other business), finding alternate capacity for '69 parts, etc. The PR department attempted to spin the delay in a different direction for public consumption as GM never publicly admitted any internal problems or failures, especially within Fisher Body, its biggest manufacturing Division, with the biggest tooling budget. But the delay of the 1970 Camaro was a black eye for Fisher Body Die Engineering, as it was the first production launch delay that was ever laid at their feet."
http://www.camaros.org/geninfo.shtml#ModelYear
http://www.camaros.org/geninfo.shtml#ModelYear
Last edited by guionM; 05-29-2008 at 01:41 PM.
05-29-2008 | 03:43 PM
#13
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,308
From: Oshawa - Home of the 5th-gen
Ok, thank you for the history lesson (I'm not trying to be facetious ... that's actually quite interesting ... obviously I was completely unaware of the facts, as I'm sure many people probably are?! ).
BUT, that doesn't take away from the fact that a mid-year release was still labelled under THAT model year, NOT the next model year!!
Having a short introduction year would:
A) Make them more rare, and therefore more of a collector's item down the road (vs. ~21 months' supply, making them a dime-a-dozen, instead of rare)
B) Allow for a quicker move into a new model year, which would give them the opportunity to introduce "new stuff" with the car that will otherwise have to wait until mid 2010 (ie: new engine / sub-model, or just updates to their option groups, something along those lines).
C) Prevent the 2010 Camaro from becoming "stale" in the market (this pretty much relates to A) & B) ).
D) Keep consistant with past practise.
BUT, it's too late to change that decision, now isn't it?
(I'm not trying to be facetious ... that's actually quite interesting ... obviously I was completely unaware of the facts, as I'm sure many people probably are?! ).BUT, that doesn't take away from the fact that a mid-year release was still labelled under THAT model year, NOT the next model year!!
Having a short introduction year would:
A) Make them more rare, and therefore more of a collector's item down the road (vs. ~21 months' supply, making them a dime-a-dozen, instead of rare)
B) Allow for a quicker move into a new model year, which would give them the opportunity to introduce "new stuff" with the car that will otherwise have to wait until mid 2010 (ie: new engine / sub-model
, or just updates to their option groups, something along those lines).C) Prevent the 2010 Camaro from becoming "stale" in the market (this pretty much relates to A) & B) ).
D) Keep consistant with past practise.
BUT, it's too late to change that decision, now isn't it?
05-29-2008 | 03:44 PM
#14
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
Actually, it was delayed mainly due to a problem with the rear quarter panel stamping (which for the time was pretty complex).
They had a tendancy to crack and split when stamped. Fisher Body had to order new dies.
GM's strike started in September 1970, and lasted 69 days.
The 1970 Camaro was introduced in February 1970.
I don't think time warps were involved with Camaro's production delays.
It's a mistake that's repeated just about everywhere. GM helped it along itself when they first claimed it was labor issues that delayed the 2nd gen Camaro. Although they abandoned that position, as you probably know, old tales die hard.
Here's a bit more detail:
I posted a whole story on this some time ago if you have time to do a search here on it (I'm kind of pressed right now).
They had a tendancy to crack and split when stamped. Fisher Body had to order new dies.
GM's strike started in September 1970, and lasted 69 days.
The 1970 Camaro was introduced in February 1970.
I don't think time warps were involved with Camaro's production delays.
It's a mistake that's repeated just about everywhere. GM helped it along itself when they first claimed it was labor issues that delayed the 2nd gen Camaro. Although they abandoned that position, as you probably know, old tales die hard.
Here's a bit more detail:
I posted a whole story on this some time ago if you have time to do a search here on it (I'm kind of pressed right now).
05-29-2008 | 04:22 PM
#15
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 287
From: Richmond, VA
Ok, thank you for the history lesson (I'm not trying to be facetious ... that's actually quite interesting ... obviously I was completely unaware of the facts, as I'm sure many people probably are?! ).
BUT, that doesn't take away from the fact that a mid-year release was still labelled under THAT model year, NOT the next model year!!
Having a short introduction year would:
A) Make them more rare, and therefore more of a collector's item down the road (vs. ~21 months' supply, making them a dime-a-dozen, instead of rare)
B) Allow for a quicker move into a new model year, which would give them the opportunity to introduce "new stuff" with the car that will otherwise have to wait until mid 2010 (ie: new engine / sub-model, or just updates to their option groups, something along those lines).
C) Prevent the 2010 Camaro from becoming "stale" in the market (this pretty much relates to A) & B) ).
D) Keep consistant with past practise.
BUT, it's too late to change that decision, now isn't it?
(I'm not trying to be facetious ... that's actually quite interesting ... obviously I was completely unaware of the facts, as I'm sure many people probably are?! ).BUT, that doesn't take away from the fact that a mid-year release was still labelled under THAT model year, NOT the next model year!!
Having a short introduction year would:
A) Make them more rare, and therefore more of a collector's item down the road (vs. ~21 months' supply, making them a dime-a-dozen, instead of rare)
B) Allow for a quicker move into a new model year, which would give them the opportunity to introduce "new stuff" with the car that will otherwise have to wait until mid 2010 (ie: new engine / sub-model
, or just updates to their option groups, something along those lines).C) Prevent the 2010 Camaro from becoming "stale" in the market (this pretty much relates to A) & B) ).
D) Keep consistant with past practise.
BUT, it's too late to change that decision, now isn't it?
Clyde