2015 Camaro Rumors
11-04-2012 | 01:19 AM
#16
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 666
From: Stockton, Ca. USA
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
they already got that, it's a corvette, I for one dont want the camaro down sized, the whole idea for the camaro is to be some what pratical. I dont see what the big deal is with having a 3700# camaro.
and it appears GM is once again wasting too much money in R&D and is going to bankrupt itself again. They had a good thing going with running each generation of camaro for 10 years, they should do it again. Not this spend 8 years designing a great car and then throw away all that progress after only 5 years of sales. The 5th gens are still very hot cars, they have a lot of sales left in them. There shouldnt be any talk of a 6th gen yet, it should be very quite ,it will only hurt sales.
The real improvement GM can make to the 5th gen is to come out with a Z28 with a smaller v8 and a lower price tag than the SS, if you could get a striped down v8 camaro price in the middle then it would attract a lot of buyers.
Futhermore Gm needs to concentrate on making quality vechicles and improving their reputation for reliability while making small astetic changes necessary to bolster sales like what they have done with the 2013 malibu. this is how the *** brands are run.
and it appears GM is once again wasting too much money in R&D and is going to bankrupt itself again. They had a good thing going with running each generation of camaro for 10 years, they should do it again. Not this spend 8 years designing a great car and then throw away all that progress after only 5 years of sales. The 5th gens are still very hot cars, they have a lot of sales left in them. There shouldnt be any talk of a 6th gen yet, it should be very quite ,it will only hurt sales.
The real improvement GM can make to the 5th gen is to come out with a Z28 with a smaller v8 and a lower price tag than the SS, if you could get a striped down v8 camaro price in the middle then it would attract a lot of buyers.
Futhermore Gm needs to concentrate on making quality vechicles and improving their reputation for reliability while making small astetic changes necessary to bolster sales like what they have done with the 2013 malibu. this is how the *** brands are run.
01-17-2013 | 12:46 AM
#17
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 3
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
I agree put the Camaro on a diet. No AC, no electric windows, same motor as the 1 LE, but with the ZL-1 magnetic ride control. = Z/28
is it crazy talk to think they could get the car down to 3400 pounds????
Come on we're the country that putting a f%^ing man on the moon. How hard could this be?
is it crazy talk to think they could get the car down to 3400 pounds????
Come on we're the country that putting a f%^ing man on the moon. How hard could this be?
01-17-2013 | 02:14 AM
#18
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,647
From: Jupiter, FL
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
I agree put the Camaro on a diet. No AC, no electric windows, same motor as the 1 LE, but with the ZL-1 magnetic ride control. = Z/28
is it crazy talk to think they could get the car down to 3400 pounds????
Come on we're the country that putting a f%^ing man on the moon. How hard could this be?
is it crazy talk to think they could get the car down to 3400 pounds????
Come on we're the country that putting a f%^ing man on the moon. How hard could this be?
01-17-2013 | 09:26 AM
#19
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
These are common requests but the problem is that it will hurt sales and actually discredit the vehicle line to the majority of the buyers. By not having AC, power this and that...people will think that Chevrolet is a substandard company. Consumers have grown to expect things like that coming standard on any car. Only a small percentage will want or even understand a true 1LE, and the rest will scoff at the perceived cheapness of Chevrolet and go elsewhere.
It is easier to put a man on the moon than change consumer mindset. Ask any marketer. 
Actually, most consumers will ask "Ford/BMW/etc. can put AC on their performance car, how hard could this be for Chevrolet?"
Come on we're the country that putting a f%^ing man on the moon. How hard could this be?
Actually, most consumers will ask "Ford/BMW/etc. can put AC on their performance car, how hard could this be for Chevrolet?"
01-17-2013 | 11:35 AM
#20
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
Deleting A/C and electric windows will save 10s of pounds on a car that's 100s of pounds overweight. Hell, sometimes electric windows are lighter than manuals! Difficult/impossible to "add light weight" to an inherently big and heavy platform 
It is *too late* for this Camaro iteration.
Here's hoping that the next one is *significantly* smaller and lighterweight. Reports that the C7 is actually heavier than the C6 Corvette are not encouraging, though...
It is *too late* for this Camaro iteration. Here's hoping that the next one is *significantly* smaller and lighterweight. Reports that the C7 is actually heavier than the C6 Corvette are not encouraging, though...
01-17-2013 | 11:57 AM
#21
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
Deleting A/C and electric windows will save 10s of pounds on a car that's 100s of pounds overweight. Hell, sometimes electric windows are lighter than manuals! Difficult/impossible to "add light weight" to an inherently big and heavy platform It is *too late* for this Camaro iteration.
It is *too late* for this Camaro iteration.
Here's hoping that the next one is *significantly* smaller and lighterweight.
Reports that the C7 is actually heavier than the C6 Corvette are not encouraging, though...
01-17-2013 | 12:17 PM
#22
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
Toyobaru made a brand new FR 2+2, the Scion FR-S, Subaru BRZ. It is no bigger and weighs no more than a 1990ish 240SX, while being at the same performance and price points. No exotic materials required. They're doing pretty well...
No reason Chevy shouldn't be able to make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials, either.
Done right, lighter-weight is *cheaper* than overweight. For the same performance, you can run a less powerful engine and smaller wheels/tires/brakes, etc. There's a big knock-on effect if you start with a reasonably small lightweight platform. Ditto if you start with a big, overweight platform. You add a ton more cost and additional weight to get the desired performance.
01-17-2013 | 12:50 PM
#23
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
The Camaro should NOT be competing with the FR-S and BRZ. Let the Code 130 go after those. That class is too small to be a Camaro. And that class is the wrong target for Camaro.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
BTW, Charlie over at GM Insider posted that there may be a RWD chassis in development that's smaller than Alpha. If that's true, THAT platform can be used to go after the rice burners. And they can come up with a new name for it when they do.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
BTW, Charlie over at GM Insider posted that there may be a RWD chassis in development that's smaller than Alpha. If that's true, THAT platform can be used to go after the rice burners. And they can come up with a new name for it when they do.
01-17-2013 | 01:04 PM
#24
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
The Camaro should NOT be competing with the FR-S and BRZ. Let the Code 130 go after those. That class is too small to be a Camaro. And that class is the wrong target for Camaro.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
If the next gen Camaro is moving to Alpha+ as it is rumored, its going to be roughly the same size and weight as the current model. It may shave an inch here and there, get a nip and a tuck, and perhaps lose up to 200-lbs. But it isn't going to be competing with the Toyobaru RWD twins.
Chevrolet needs to push the Code 130 into production, and as a 2-door coupe AND a 4-door sedan. (I bet the 4-door would sell at least 2X more than the 2-door.)
01-17-2013 | 01:19 PM
#25
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
That's not exactly what I was saying. I *do* think that they should compete for some of the same customers. Both are (or *should* be smallish/relatively lightweight FR 2+2s. One with modest 4-cylinder power and one with big V8 horsepower optional.
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Are they going to make that? Chrissakes I hope they lower the hood/fenders/beltline about 4" or so!
No, the Camaro *should* be a smallish car. That was the original idea: small 2+2 with somepower. It emphatically should NOT be a 3800-4000+ lb. behemoth!
I should certainly NEVER have gotten as big as the current car! Going back to original size/weight would be fantastic.
The Camaro is supposed to be a pony car, not a muscle car. Bring back the Chevelle name or Impala, or whatevs for anything over 3600 lb in V8 form. 3800-4100 lb. "Camaro"? A travesty...
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Let the Code 130 go after those.
That class is too small to be a Camaro. And that class is the wrong target for Camaro.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
BTW, Charlie over at GM Insider posted that there may be a RWD chassis in development that's smaller than Alpha. If that's true, THAT platform can be used to go after the rice burners. And they can come up with a new name for it when they do.
01-17-2013 | 02:23 PM
#26
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 455
From: Stafford, Va
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
That's not exactly what I was saying. I *do* think that they should compete for some of the same customers. Both are (or *should* be smallish/relatively lightweight FR 2+2s. One with modest 4-cylinder power and one with big V8 horsepower optional.
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Are they going to make that? Chrissakes I hope they lower the hood/fenders/beltline about 4" or so!
No, the Camaro *should* be a smallish car. That was the original idea: small 2+2 with somepower. It emphatically should NOT be a 3800-4000+ lb. behemoth!
I should certainly NEVER have gotten as big as the current car! Going back to original size/weight would be fantastic.
The Camaro is supposed to be a pony car, not a muscle car. Bring back the Chevelle name or Impala, or whatevs for anything over 3600 lb in V8 form. 3800-4100 lb. "Camaro"? A travesty...
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Are they going to make that? Chrissakes I hope they lower the hood/fenders/beltline about 4" or so!
No, the Camaro *should* be a smallish car. That was the original idea: small 2+2 with somepower. It emphatically should NOT be a 3800-4000+ lb. behemoth!
I should certainly NEVER have gotten as big as the current car! Going back to original size/weight would be fantastic.
The Camaro is supposed to be a pony car, not a muscle car. Bring back the Chevelle name or Impala, or whatevs for anything over 3600 lb in V8 form. 3800-4100 lb. "Camaro"? A travesty...
overall length/ overall width/ overall height in inches
2012 Code 130R 173.1/ 71.5/ 54.7
2013 FR-S 166.7/ 69.9/ 50.6
1967 Camaro 6 cyl 184.6/ 72.5/ 51
2013 Camaro V6 190.4/ 75.5/ 54.2
01-17-2013 | 02:49 PM
#27
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 455
From: Stafford, Va
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
I'm with you guys too.
Add to that a 2 Door wagon/ Shooting Brake to take on the Mini Cooper.
Or (and), instead of a separate 4 door model, add smaller suicide doors like the Saturns had.
Or (and), instead of a separate 4 door model, add smaller suicide doors like the Saturns had.
01-17-2013 | 03:01 PM
#28
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 455
From: Stafford, Va
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
The Camaro should NOT be competing with the FR-S and BRZ. Let the Code 130 go after those. That class is too small to be a Camaro. And that class is the wrong target for Camaro.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
BTW, Charlie over at GM Insider posted that there may be a RWD chassis in development that's smaller than Alpha. If that's true, THAT platform can be used to go after the rice burners. And they can come up with a new name for it when they do.
I could see the Camaro losing an inch here or an inch there, but that's about it.
It should certainly NEVER be smaller than the original car.
BTW, Charlie over at GM Insider posted that there may be a RWD chassis in development that's smaller than Alpha. If that's true, THAT platform can be used to go after the rice burners. And they can come up with a new name for it when they do.
https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/aut...e-talk-871339/
01-17-2013 | 04:36 PM
#29
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
That's not exactly what I was saying. I *do* think that they should compete for some of the same customers. Both are (or *should* be smallish/relatively lightweight FR 2+2s. One with modest 4-cylinder power and one with big V8 horsepower optional.
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Are they going to make that? Chrissakes I hope they lower the hood/fenders/beltline about 4" or so!
No, the Camaro *should* be a smallish car. That was the original idea: small 2+2 with somepower. It emphatically should NOT be a 3800-4000+ lb. behemoth!
I should certainly NEVER have gotten as big as the current car! Going back to original size/weight would be fantastic.
The Camaro is supposed to be a pony car, not a muscle car. Bring back the Chevelle name or Impala, or whatevs for anything over 3600 lb in V8 form. 3800-4100 lb. "Camaro"? A travesty...
My point was that if a manufacturer can make a modern version of a ~1990 240SX at the *same weight*, without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods, GM can make a modern 3400 lb. V8 Camaro without resorting to exotic materials or manufacturing methods.
Are they going to make that? Chrissakes I hope they lower the hood/fenders/beltline about 4" or so!
No, the Camaro *should* be a smallish car. That was the original idea: small 2+2 with somepower. It emphatically should NOT be a 3800-4000+ lb. behemoth!
I should certainly NEVER have gotten as big as the current car! Going back to original size/weight would be fantastic.
The Camaro is supposed to be a pony car, not a muscle car. Bring back the Chevelle name or Impala, or whatevs for anything over 3600 lb in V8 form. 3800-4100 lb. "Camaro"? A travesty...
That would be a travesty if they shrunk the car to those dimensions.
I can see the Camaro getting closer to it's original size and dropping some weight, but it should NEVER be smaller than the original.
Oh, and by the way, have you seen the articles about the 1LE? That car is getting HEAPS of praise thrown at it. Probably the best handling Camaro of all time. All 3800 lbs of it.
01-17-2013 | 04:39 PM
#30
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Re: 2015 Camaro Rumors
I don't know much about the FR-S as I agree it is in a different class. Anyone have an idea about how the crash standards, rigidity, and such (not to mention weight) would be impacted by stuffing a 6.2l V8 in the FR-S in place of the 2.0l 4-cylinder?