Not neccessarily. As I've said numerous times in the past when my then 16 year old stepson wanted a 1995 Mustang GT, I tried to push him into the V6 because of insurance costs. AAA then quoted me that the insurance on the V6 was double that of the V8 GT. It depends on what the market sets based upon accident/claims data.

As a new car, Camaro initially will probably have its rates based upon the purchase price, so yes, technically a V6 will be cheaper. However if the V6s have far more accidents and claims in the first few years, I can see their rates surpassing those of the V8 Camaros.

Only time will tell.

 

[QUOTE=CamaroZ282008;4337775]I highly doubt a mid level v-6 will make a huge impression on 90% of even performance drivers. This is a CAMARO, not a 350z,S2000 or Supra. A v-6 in the 350z with 300 h.p. works, why? It's smaller, lighter and has two less seats to deal with. The Camaro is a Musclecar the existense of Camaro/Mustang is based on the base models, but a mid level v-6 won't cut it. I agree with the lower h.p. v-6 for highschool kids,girls and the driver just starting out. These buyers want a good looking, fun and economical buy for the money. Thats what the lower v-6 offers. I really think there should only be one v-6, and 3 v-8s. QUOTE]

I have been lurking on this site for about as month now, but I registered to respond to this post. I am looking forward to the new Camaro, and I have a job where I can afford one. Although I don't currently work in the auto industry, I was a tech and service advisor for almost 7 years. At one point I had 5 Chevys in the driveway- 68 Malibu, 85 IROC, 86 'Vette, 98 Cavalier, 99 Suburban. Now I'm down to only two- 05 Cobalt and the Suburban. I believe that I am just as likely to buy a Camaro as anybody else on the planet.

Having said that, I think the above poster is dead wrong. If GM is going to produce the SS427 I want, they are going to have to sell a lot of the V6 cars to cover basic platform costs. That means that they are going to have to attract many buyers that know nothing about Camaro's, and care less. That means a relatively inexpensive, justifiably quick, good looking sport coupe. The target audience will be the same people that shop Hyundai Tiburons, V6 Rustangs, 350Zs, Civic SIs, Volkswagen GTIs, used BMW 325iCs, and any other $18,000 - $25,000 coupe you care to name. As long as they like the way it looks that market will be fine with a 275BHP car, and they don't care how many cylinders are under the hood. If we can convince enough sorority chicks to buy V6 cars, the V8's we want will be there. If we can convince the newly graduated office staffer/lawyer/nurse/teacher to buy a V6 Camaro instead of a 350Z too, then the V8's will be really affordable. If we can convince rental car companies to buy a lot of V6's, then the price of V8's should be downright stupid cheap.

I don't know if market research and the business case mandate one V6 or two, and I don't care. I just want them to make the right decisions on style, content, and pricing so that the car I'm waiting for is there when I want it, and available at a price that doesn't smell like rape.

As a final note, don't forget that GM has to be seriously looking at this car as a "world" car. Many countries tax vehicles based on things like displacement, number of cylinders, or rated BHP so engine choices that don't make sense in Denver might be extremely profitable in Madrid, Beijing, or Budapest.

 

Fixed double post. Everybody repeat after me... "Thank you Cap'n Pete".

 

Sorry for the double post. Damn this new-fangled internet.

 

You can "Edit" and then "Delete" your duplicate post .

BTW, welcome aboard the site, and I think you just hit the nail on the head in your post!

 

I respectfully disagree, and here's why: the "basic platform costs" will mostly be paid for by other models.

The key word is "flex". Oshawa is being reconfigured as a flexible assembly aka "flex" plant. This is a new way of building cars, and it leads to a new way of thinking about individual model costs within a platform architecture. It's a big, big deal. To grossly oversimplify (and warning: I am not an engineer, just an informed enthusiast), flexible manufacturing means that multiple models sharing a basic platform architecture can be built on the same assembly line, on the same (mostly) tooling, and the product mix can be varied easily on short notice. The "basic platform costs" in this case will be spread among a huge range of cars built in Oshawa, Australia, and possibly China, and even the tooling costs for the Oshawa cars will be (mostly) spread among Camaro, Impala, Grand Prix/G8, and whatever other Zetas GMNA requires over the next several years.

Flex is why DCX will be able to sell 30k Challengers a year and make money -- they'll be built in a flex plant (Brampton), on a platform and line that are mostly paid for by the large volumes of 300s and Chargers being built on the same platform, on the same line, by the same people. Flex is why GM COULD (not saying they will, just saying they could) do the same with the Camaro, on a line that is running several hundred thousand Impalas and G8s a year.

 

Fair enough. I'm still willing to bet that the V6 will provide most of the volume, and past experience shows that V8 cars will be much cheaper if GM sells 60,000 V6's than they will if GM only sells 30,000 V6's. Trust me- if I'm wrong I'll be so happy I'll have to replace the seat covers in my car.

 

[QUOTE=Mjolnir;4338947]I do not understand you're point? You basicly just mentioned everything I did again...I noted there has to be a BASE v-6 for the 18k dollar range.
What I do not think is right is having a v-6 and trying to merket it to buyers looking at spending 18k to possibly 25k. A buyer looking at a 350z doesnt cross shop a hyundai tiburon. Theres something you have to understand and that is, the fact that like I said before this a camaro. You may think yeah whats my point well my point is a Camaro is heavy for a v-6. I had friends in hs with a 3.8 mustang and v-6 firebird, yes they looked good but were complete dogs and sounded like crap. A 260-280 h.p. v-6 is fine for the base buyer...thats it. A BMW 325I, 350z are purpose built for a six. A Honda civic and VW GTI are also keyword LIGHT. The Camaro needs ONE v-6 with 260-280 just enough performance for the base buyer yet affordable enough to sell like you mentioned 60K plus v-6's. The v-6 and I really do agree with you on this IS the most important camaro as far as keeping the production alive and well. The bottom line GM make a v-6 for the masses, and three v-8s. I say 3 v-8s for this reason. If you can sell a Base v-6 for 18K out the door you will have the needed volume/sales to produce the faster/better v-8s, If you have a 5.3 v-8 ala RS for 25K you're door to door with Mustang GT, A z28 with a 6.2 For 28K will be a lot faster then a GT, but also fill the void between the 25K and 32K price range which goes from a mustang GT to a 350z,s2000 or G35 c. Then you have the SS with a supercharged 6.2 for 35K and wipe out the GT500 buyers completely. By the way obvisouly the Camaro is going to be the Mustangs rival once again right? I just wonder how close they can come as far as competitive pricing next to the stang? I heard a rumor that the GT competitor would be no more than 500 dollars more? Can anyone confirm this yet?

 

what if that was the "SS" model.

 

i don't think there's anything to worry about..

the way i took that interview is that upon initial launch there will be the economical v6.. probably a pushrod 3.9 making around 250hp, then the hi performance v6 probably a 3.6 maybe even direct injection, making 275-300hp.. then the base v8, probably the upcoming 6.2L ls3 making 400-450hp

i'm thinking the base 3.9L camaro will be comparable in price to the v6 mustang of the time, and the 6.2L camaro will be comparable in price to the mustang GT of the time... and the 3.6L camaro will be somewhere in between

then a year or two after the initial launch.. they will release the super camaro with 500+ horsepower

i have no insider information.. but this seems the most logical way of doing things

 

As a side ote to what I wrote earlier...

after some researching, it seems the base V8 (when offered) outsold every other V8 except for 1967, 1980, 1981 and on many years, where I could find the data, the base V8 sold nearly as many as the V6.

so...Would Chevy be wise in offering a H.O. V6 instead of a "true" base V8?

 

To CamaroZ282008- I both agree and disagree with you on several key points, but I think some of the problem is that my reply wasn't clear enough. I admit the 350Z and Tiburon markets are different in specific, but I was referring to the coupe market in general. The Camaro will be competing in that market, and it is uniquely suited to challenge both ends. The days of “Chevy vs. Ford” are over, and GM must compete and win against cars from Europe, Japan, and (soon) China. The Camaro has great “American” styling (like the 350Z has Japanese heritage), but it needs to compete on more than looks. That is why I feel it needs an entry level V6 at 250HP and an up-market V6 at 300HP. The small motor competes on price at the low end, and the big motor competes on power at the high end. Traditional Detroit displacement should offset weight. Remember… GM cannot be solely concerned with what works on Woodward anymore. Now GM also needs to think about what works on Senbon Dori.

GM needs to, and has made it clear they will, market it in the 18k to 25k range. Nobody buys a Mustang in that range, but they list at that and GM has said they will be around $500 more than the Ford. We know GM can match the Mustang in price and performance, but they could also put a smaller motor in it and beat it on price. Not coincidently, that would make the Camaro more viable overseas and more attractive to rental fleets. Other than Hertz customers nobody rents a car to go fast, so a small drop in performance and a huge drop in price is actually a good thing.
And, as I said, anything that costs little to no money to implement but increases sales worldwide makes the SS427 or Z/28 I want closer to reality.

So, to recap… GM has several motors using the same architecture. GM has a new coupe. I want a sick V8. The rest of the world wants a small motor. The majority of “muscle cars” (Mustangs) are sold with V6’s. The more V6’s GM sells, the cheaper my V8 gets. Why not supply two V6’s for basically zero added investment and increase sales?

 

I now understand what you're saying compelety and agree 100 % with what you have to say. I guess just a single v-6 and 3-v8s really woulden't make sense. Maybe 10 years ago, but the more I thought about it the more I tend to agree with you. There will always be the Chevy Vs. Ford rivalry as each brand has their own diehard fans, but like you said the market is alot different now. I'am all for what ever GM thinks will make the Camaro succeed the most in todays market place. The economical v-6 and performance v-6 does make sense also. Give the v-6 to the foundation buyers who seek a Great looking, fun and sport coupe while at the same time offer the True HP/TQ enthuiest the v-8s. My only fear with the 2 v-6's and 1 v-8 is the thought that the high power v-6 will be the GT competitor and the V-8 will be high priced and out of the Z28/GT buyers price league. I'm sure GM will have a direct competitor to the Mustang GT...just hope it's not a v-6.

 

Though it is not 1st class, I wouldn't count out the Camaro because of its interior. I'm also not worried about paying for the top-line engine in an SS. I want a good car, not a cheapo-mobile car for some school kid. My only disappointment with the entire 5th gen thing is the size of the car. I wish they could have made it smaller. But I understand the need to compromise given GMs situation. It's going to be a great car and everyone's who loves F-bodies is going to love it.

 

Bingo. This man speaks the truth.