I have to say that I hate Mustang and Challangers because they are simply copies of cars of the old days. My initial response to the Camaro concept was oh no not another retro car. The more I examined the car and compared it with my 69 Camaro the more I realized that the designers did an amazing job of designing a car that is a unique blend of modern with styling cues from the old days. Watching the show saving GM they showed an intial design of the Camaro concept that was essentially a 68 Camaro and Ed Wellburn sent them back to the drawing board. Thanks ED. I will buy the Camaro because it does remind me of my first car and first love, my 69 Camaro but I will love this car for the courageous design of taking the best of old styling and blending it with a modern design that just looks fantastic.

 

couldnt agree more.. so glad they didnt go the way Dodge went and make it a carbon copy

 

Fellas, denial isn't just a river in Egypt.


If you like the styling of the car, great, but don't delude yourself into thinking it is any less retro than the Mustang or the Challenger.

Don't even get me started on the bizarre interior....

 

Guys, I like the CAMARO as much as anyone, but it IS retro. Maybe not a complete copy (for that matter neither are the Mustang or Challenger) but it is retro. Lets get real here.

 

As long as we are using cheesy cliches... opinions are like buttholes, everyone has got one and most of them stink.
I think the Camaro is the perfect balance of a modern design and retro style. Mustang throws retro cues at the car arbitrarily, Challenger is a very retro outside with a completely unrelated modern interior. The Camaro team did a great job of keeping the theme through-out the car.

 

If you watch the saving GM show you will see what they had originally planned which was a carbon copy of the 68 Camaro. If you see the new Challanger next to the old Challanger you will see that the cars are essentially the same with minor tweeks. The Mustang is less so but things such as taillights are a great example of simply too retro for me. I think the Camaro is an interesting blend of both retro and modern design. Clearly if they were to start from scratch they would not have come up with a large open grill but beyond that most of the styling looks appropriate for a modern car. When you get to the rear of the car they could have sold out an duplicated the 69 rear end with similar taillights, backup lights and shaping. In stead they did some nice blending of concepts.

On the interior at least they didn't just take stuff from other cars or trucks and throw it into the interior of this car. Most of the Mustang interior and 100% of the center stack comes from my Ford F-150. The Challanger is much the same and the interior is a real let down. Having said that both of those cars will sell just fine.

I think the Camaro is more sustainable because it is a car that when compared to a car like the G37 it is still very cool. Of course I am bias because of my passion for the 69 and as a former owner of a 94 Z-28.

Raven99, Actually the name of the river is Nile not denial, our education system has really let these kids down. Yes, I will supersize my number 1 thanks.

 

+1

 

oh of course it's retro.. but lets get real here.... you cant deny that there is a futuristic look to the car as well.. retro isnt black and white.. one car can be more retro than another.. i'd call the Camaro futuristic retro, as opposed to a carbon copy like the Challenger.. you cant say that they are both the same level of retroness, if you think that's the cas youa re just deluding yourself

 

I'm not gonna get into a what is "more" or "less" retro argument. The car speaks for itself. BTW I happen to like the design alot. However, I'm not gonna rationalize that it is better than the Mustang or the Challenger because it is less of a "copy" than those cars are. IMO they are ALL copies.

PS - Nothing wrong with that either - the originals are classics for a reason. Just don't deny or try to equivicate that the Camaro is something that it is not. It's RETRO.

 

If I seen the 2010 Camaro on the street and didn't know nothing about the 2010 Camaro I would not say oh that’s look like the 69 Camaro. GM could have called this car something else. If anything the interior of the car may give it away than exterior. The Mustang looks like a retro Mustang and the Challenger look like a retro challenger.

 

lol.

you've never heard the saying before, i take it?

denial
denile
de nile
the nile

wow. i hope that was sarcasm.

 

You own a 69 Camaro and you hate retro?

Interesting arguements in this thread why other people should still like the car for different reasons than they already do though.

 

I think it's interesting when some people talk about 'retro' cars. I have one friend that says he'd rather have an old car like the '68 than a new one. I guess I'm rather spoiled, because I'm getting used to the better ride, less sound, and better handling of the newer cars.

I agree with what some others have said before. Challenger is way retro, Mustang is fairly retro. However Camaro just has some retro cues, but some modern lines as well. There's a big difference. Mustang is more retro than Camaro. Nothing totally wrong with that, either. I admire all three.

 

Is a 4th gen camaro a "retro" 2nd gen? Is the 94 mustang a retro 64? Does a new gen have to look completely different from all previous gens to not be "retro?" I think if it was that way it would lose its identity for the sake of 'not being retro' whatever retro is supposed to mean.