See , the current system is basically just like that . The major "command center" being the PCM and BCM(body control module) . The major issue of the stereos , is once you remove the radio , theres a break in the data stream of all those linked modules . "IF" Onstar , and navagation systems did not come into play , the radio could be removed from the system and powered again by a standard 12v switched and constant 12v . But due to both , ALOT of info needs to go thru the radio . Basic examples , the audio system in your car is how Onstar communicates with you , the info centers normally located on the IP cluster on Malibu's and G6's are displayed in the radio display due to space limitations in the IP cluster . Navigation systems need inputs from your vehicle speed sensor to calculate travel time ect ect ect . For a Company like GM , streamlining all these inputs in 1 common data stream linking several different modules to the pcm , makes for a much simpler wiring harness , easier diagnosis for GM techs . Its a win win for GM , simplicity reduces cost in materials and labor( i.e. without GM's system , the wiring harness would be MUCH more complicated because all those systems would have to be separated and then linked = more wire , longer time to install on the assembly line ) .

In the end , their not gonna abandon a system like for the small amount of people that put a aftermarket radio in their car . If anything , stuff like this is gonna get more complicated with all auto manufacturers .

Were talking about the electronics end of it man . The head units themselves are still replaceable should u choose . Put whatever u want there . The harness u need to buy to keep the data stream linked is costly though , hence the complaint .
Nowadays , should a stock radio go bad outa warranty , new factory pullouts and used factory radio's are cheap cheap cheap , compared to GM's astronomical list price .

 

I plan on bypassing all that crap and trying to put a PC in instead. All the MP3's I want, GPS if I want, Communication with the car's computer, and anything else I can think of.

 

You make an interesting point about the Scion and how they designed it with the target buyer (young people) in mind, leaving much room for customization...however, saying that young people were/are the target buyers for Camaros is a little iffy...

I remember reading somewhere that the average Camaro owner is a male in his forties with a household income of $60k and up...and most older guys are not going to be ripping the stock audio system out and replacing it.

Seriously...how many teenagers do you know that could've dropped $30k on a brand new SS?

 

A single din radio would be nice. I know I find a hard time finding a good double din that I actually want. There is always a kit but they never look just right.

 

I see that someone else works in the auto industry. You are exaclty right, GM will always push for integration so that they can maximize space and minimize cost. On a standard car today there are already about upwards of 30 different electronic modules on vehicles! COuld you image if there was a module for each car function? You have about 100 little boxes placed around the car with a ton of wiring.


One point that I'd like to make which is probably not well known is that most modern mid to high-end production radio systems are FAR superior to aftermarket systems. Yes they do not have the power ratings of say a 1500 watt sub amp, but the tonal quality is far superior.

I should know because I develop ampliers for a car manufacturer which I cannot mention. What I can tell you is that a production audio system is specifically EQ'd to match the accoustic cabin of each individual car. Things like cloth/leather interior, speaker location with ref to driver, natural resonances of trim pieces, frequency cold spots, and more are all used to equalize the listening experience for the listener.

I mean, for gods sake, each speaker in a 8-ch system could have as many as a dozen different filters on each channel! That would be the equivalent of buying a 12-band equalizer and amp for each speaker! I don't think you could through enough money at your car to match the level of accoustic tuning that already goes into your car.

If all you car about is loud base and nothing else, then scrap your OEM system. But if you want a quality system, with more than acceptable volumes, buy the high-end audio system when you pick up your new camaro.

 

Why cant they buy the 25 Grand V8 base model. I think 20-30 something would be more realistic. Ins companies would kill a teen in ins prices.

 

Yeah...and hope that radio or audio technology doesn't improve. Top line audio from 1995 sounds pretty crummy compared to today, but in the future, your 2005 model will be forever stuck with the same unit. You wouldn't be singing it's praises if they had "integrated tape players" on 1980-1995 cars, especially if you still owned one.

PS - I doubt the system you describe is going into the base model, which is the one that usually gets the audio upgraded.

Can you tell, I hate integrated audio? Can't they just integrate the extra functions into something else like the ECU?

 

I may not be the average Camaro buyer, but I bought my SS brand new when I was 20. Before anyone asks... yes it was funded 100% with my own money. I worked my butt off for this car because it was my last chance to buy a brand new Camaro.

I had a replacement Head unit in the car 3 or 4 months after it was purchased. Within a year the entire audio system had been replaced. Of all my friends with F-body's, who's average age is between 25 to 30, I believe only one has a completely stock stereo.

 

It might be better than a $100 Kenwood, but they fall far short of the type of stuff I like to run. More importantly, many new head units have built-in equalization curves that change with the volume ****, which means that just using a line-output-converter isn't going to cut it... you're forced to go to something like a JL Cleansweep, but then you've got to install a remote volume **** and use that instead of the one on the radio. Plus it requires external active crossovers, time alignment devices, blah blah blah.

The stock radio is "good enough" for just as many people as the stock cylinder heads or camshaft is "good enough" for. While those of us who demand audio quality unattainable from the stock system may be few, we unfortunately face an uphill battle that gets harder and harder, even more so than those who demand more from under the hood.

 

The thing is, after a few years or so of production you WILL be seeing these cars (used) getting into the hands of your teenage drivers. Let me tell you now, these will be the most ticked of the camaro owners if the stereo system isn't very easy to change out. Chances are, once these things hit the teen circuit, them stereo systems will be changed or modified more than Dennis Rodman's hair.So let's not forget the second, third, or even fourth owners of these cars. If they stop buying the cars because they can't customize them worth a nickle, then who knows? Is the camaro still a camaro?

 

That is correct, most models of '07 and up in development have variable equalization with volume ****. Why? Because each speaker has a different freqeuncy repsonse and distortion response at different amplitudes. The function of a variable EQ in your volume **** ensures that no frequency will distort at volumes levels than 90%. An aftermarket amplifier and cross-over could never guarantee this!

Without this feature in your system you could have, say frequencies of 7-8kHz distorting on a 3.5" mid-range but the rest of the band is OK. That's what I meant about tonal quality. OEM audio engineers ensure that with a high-end audio system you hear crystal-clear everything that is on your CD player, like-it-or-not, at all volume levels.

Whether GM decides to use these types of advanced features is up to them. All I can tell you is that this is not new technology to a lot of GM's competition. If they were using Digital Signal Processing like others already have, then I recommend this system any day over the aftermarket.

 

Your idea of "crystal clear" and mine are very, very different. OEMs use this DSP to compensate for the major problems with the super cheap drivers they are using in non-ideal locations. One of the biggest things they do, is what you mention about them preventing distortion. They do this by pulling way back on the bass output, therefore limiting power levels and excursion levels of the cheap drivers with underpowered amps driving them. They also equalize the overall response to compensate for frequency response problems associated with the cheap drivers and cheap crossovers. Throw a little time alignment in to help compensate for the lousy locations, and bam! You have an OEM system that's "good enough" for most folks. My systems fix these shortcomings instead of putting a band-aid on them.

DSP is a nice thing in many cases, but it's no replacement for a well designed system using equipment that's much higher quality than an OEM is willing to spend the money on.

We can debate this forever, but the fact is, OEM systems do not (and will not) live up to the levels that some of us want for the simple fact that it's not feasable for an OEM to put the money into stuff that 95% of the owners won't appreciate. They're fine and dandy for the "average joe" but there are plenty of us who want more.