I'd pretty much signed off this train-wreck of a thread. But I will not stand by idly while someone bashes cars I love with lengthy and cutesy gripe-lists. Let me set you straight on the 4gen Camaro sir.

1. Styling? The 4gen Camaro graced the automotive world with the most futuristic and radical styling ever seen on any Camaro. It set a new standard for Camaro aerodynamic efficiency. Its wildly raked windshield set it apart and made it distinctive, racy and like none other.
2. Overall length? Was not out of the norms for other 2+2's of its day. The length and corresponding crush space also contributed to the car's splendid 5-star crashworthiness, saving the lives of countless fools who underestimated the car's prodigious, yet affordable power and torque.
3. Overhangs? These were part of the design for more than a few cars of the day, such as the Ferrari Testarossa. I like shorter overhangs too, and they are part of the new Camaro. But it's questionable to claim the overhangs were a major problem in the 4gen's styling.
4. Horrendous interior? What exactly. The ergonomic console? Steering-wheel-mounted stereo controls? Powerful multi-speaker tuned stereo with 12-disk CD changer? Form-fitting power leather seats? Easy to read, full instrumentation? Industry-exclusive T-tops? Versatile folding rear seat and hatch? Calling the interior "horrendous" is utter baloney, flies in the face of the incredible performance, feature and ergonomics value of the 4gen Camaro, and reflects quite poorly on any claim by you to be a real Camaro fan.
5. Ugly steering wheel? See 'crashworthiness' above. There are no doubt a lot of drivers who owe their lives and continued brain function to that wheel.
6. Plastic body panels? I happen to love my Firebird's panels. I can back in to any parking spot in America, and forget about getting parking lot dings as long as the folks next to me park forward.
7. Ghastly wheels? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder... but seriously - you think these are ghastly?



8. The 4gen's long doors provide much better access by my kids to my 4gen's back seat, than did the doors on my 2005 GTO. The 05+ MUstang's doors are also too short, IMO.
9. The 4gen Z28 was deserving of the name in every conceivable way. It ran rings around earlier Camaros, stock-for-stock. Its road performance, braking, and stability at speed provided tremendous value for the money. But I guess that's not enough for some
10. The cat floor hump is an inconvenience, but a minor tradeoff in the grand scheme of things.

Please stop beating on the Camaro just because you don't feel you are "getting your way" on every little thing like - - whether it has a slash in its name, or has absolute featherweight status, or has a CTS-V interior, or just the right curvature in its front fender where it meets the fascia

 

My God the below sounds like a political campaign ad, but anyway....

Ever heard any "catfish" jokes? How about "Batmobile"?

Wasn't "crash worthiness" one of the reasons that the F-body died (errr....hibernated)?

Length (we'll leave width out of this, as that is an age-old arguement not worth getting into)....

2002 Camaro = 193.5"
2002 Mustang = 183.2"

Don't know of any other 2002 2+2s (I'm sure there are some, but I simply can't recall), so I'll use a 2004 GTO for another 2+2 comparison:

2004 GTO = 189.8"

Did it make a significant difference in sales? Don't know, but I can tell you that when combined with the long hood, it took more than normal getting used to (parking lots and such).

It's equally questionable to claim that they were not, as there is no data to really support either claim.

Hmmm...do you have to be a "real Camaro fan" in order to like the interior? No doubt you are (world's largest understatement), but believe it or not, some folks didn't really care for the playschool buttons or the seat hump. There were indeed things I liked about my 99 T/A's interior (steering-mounted radio controls, and most especially the T-tops), but the interior overall was.....ok. Not earth-shattering (same could be said for my 99 Cobra, IMHO).

Nice conjecture. This is likely what is most on a potential Camaro buyer's mind when he sits in the car: Will this steering wheel help save my life?

I certainly never "forgot about getting dings", and still always parked out into the boonies, but I'll agree the plastic panels were a good thing.

There, we can agree to disagree with Charlie on this one!

See 1, 3, 4, & 5, then put that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" idea into play.

Personally, I thought the 01 & 02 Camaro wheels were ugly. Earlier ones were ok - but not the 01/02. My opinion, of course.

Those heavy *** doors were NOT a selling point, IMO. Like the dash and the hood, they were too long and too big. Back seats in most pony cars are pretty useless anyway. Once again, IMO.

From a pure dollar vs performance standpoint, the LS1 4th Gen most certainly set the standard for a performance value. Can't argue here.

Minor to some might be major to others. Weight is minor to some, but major to others. 305 HP (LS1) vs 260 HP (4.6 in the Mustang) was minor to some but major to others. In the grand scheme of things.

In a discussion forum, people don't tend to agree with everything other people say. I don't see where it is any more wrong to criticize the curvature in its front fender than it is right to drool over the steering wheel.

But that's just me. And I enjoy the banter.

 

Bigdarknfast.....

Charlie was referring to things that were generally frowned on by the non-enthusiast crowd that supplies most of the camaro's sales. He's right about that stuff....the door length, the overhangs, the hard to gauge distance when maneuvering, etc, were things that were part of the camaro design. The front overhang helped with aerodynamics, which helps with handling...the doors were just a byproduct of the long length, etc. Things like that were impractical compared with the Mustang, which had less performance but more everyday usability because it placed the "compromise" between performance and everyday usability further towards usability. It sold more because more non-enthusiasts could enjoy it. It was more "normal" compared with what people were used to.

Charlie is on a camaro messageboard, talking and debating about the things he wishes for because he loves the nameplate. He's not just bashing away. Weight is a serious issue, it's not just a preference. It's not the be-all end-all factor, but it's a big one. The automotive manufacturers recognize this and are in the process of going through a major shift to reduce weight. Cars will likely shrink. So it's not just mindless bashing. And I don't think he's being abusive about it....he just cares about it and does not want the car to keep getting heavier with each incarnation. It's going to this time...it probably won't next time. It'll still be a great car, and he'll probably think so too, because he's an enthusiast like the rest of us here.

And there's no such thing as a "true fan." Not of anything. Cars, movies, favorite franchises......

 

You don't have to like our cars. Go love your Mustang if you want. But it would be nice if, when you visit us in "our garage" here at this site, if you'd show some respect for the cars we love here. Calling our cars pejoritive names says a lot more about your character than that of the 4gen.
I imagine that was part of it (as was the cost of the plant at St. Therese). But it says something about GM's safety standards, that the last Camaro went out with its head held high regarding safety.
So far you've done nothing to disprove my point. I've not claimed there were longer 2+2's in 2002... merely that the 4gen was not wildly out there in length. The Jaguar XK8 was 187 in.; Honda Accord coupe (a 2+3) was 187; Monte Carlos (2+3) were 198 in.
No. But if you believe the 4gen interior was horrendous, that's a strong hint you are not a fan of Camaros. It's just another hint. People who admire and respect a car don't sit around posting lengthy and trite lists of reasons why it's "horrendous".
Safety concerns have blossomed to become a major factor in new car purchases. Maybe you are somehow immortal (or think you are) but us regular humans do wonder about staying alive when that drunk pulls out in front of us.
Well it's good we can agree on a few things.
(You've overlooked that the actual LS1 crank hp is more like 345, while the Mustang's 260 hp V8 of the day was, well, 260 ). Weight alone doesn't matter much to me. It's the POWER/TQ to WEIGHT ratio that matters, along with the POWER/TQ to PRICE ratio.

 

You know Big, a true fan wants the car to be the best it can be. A true fan can point to specific aspects of it and say, we blew this, let's do better next time. A true fan is not an apologist for failure. A true fan wouldn't attack someone else for wanting improvement.

Are you a true fan? I'm sure you are a fan - but you are not the sort of person which will help move the mark forward. In fact, I find your attitudes to be quite destructive and not productive in the least bit.

 

I'm all for improving the breed, and making the Camaro the best it can be. But I don't need to call something "horrendous" to get there. And I don't have to agree with anyone's list of issues, if I don't believe all items therein were/are actual drawbacks, or significant to the success of a car.

Obviously, there were mistakes made in the 4gen. It's widely known for example, that the low seating and long hood were an issue with women. If I happen to like those attributes, which I do, I'm allowed to post that opinion. People who don't like them, are clearly ok to post their dislike and I am allowed to challenge their opinions too.

Maybe we should talk about what a "true fan" is. Even that definition is a matter of opinion, but I will offer mine. I believe a true fan of the Camaro will definitely note areas of possible improvement. They will however also note the many things they admire about the Camaro... for example, it's long and amazing racing heritage... and the advantages of various attributes of its design. They aren't afraid to examine things needing improvement... but they are also realistic about what can be offered in a Camaro. They understand that any new Camaro now being designed and built is subject to many cost, safety, technology, materials, durability and styling constraints. Thus, they do not make ridiculous demands and they do not go off on a rant if such demands cannot be met. Part of this includes, refraining from premature announcements of doom for the car, if their unrealistic demands do not appear to be met in their perceptions of the car to come. They are patient, in the same way people are patient with people they care about in their lives, when those people are working to grow a new skill or reach a challenging objective. They do not chastise or prematurely speculate, before all facts are known, about the car's chances of achieving success or meeting expectations. Instead, they have a little faith, and they patiently wait and see. I guess that's a true fan... JM02....

 

Yes, well, now that you've hand tailored the definition of "true fan" to be the opposite of how you view charlie, I think this is a good opportunity to point out just a couple posts up, where I said there's no such thing as a "true fan."

Invoking the "true fan" argument automatically fails j00 at teh intranetz...I'll see you BOTH in my office after school

 

Isn't this the point Charlie was trying to make though? Dyed-in-the-wool Camaro fans might buy the car no matter what. The 4th Gen didn't see overwhelmingly strong sales because it didn't appeal to a wide enough audience. That's the point. So if a "non"-Camaro enthusiast (but general auto enthusiast) offers up hints as to how to make the car more appealing to him, why wouldn't you listen?

I think you take this all waaaaay too personally. There was nothing said that "attacked" the car, only areas where it could/should have been improved.

By the way, it was convenient that you posted the Camaro SS in regards to the wheels. But what about these, which saw duty on 90% of 2001-2002 Camaros produced?

 

Your cars? My Mustangs? That's interesting. I guess because I have gone "back and forth" between the two (F-body & Mustang), and currently don't own an F-body, that I cannot visit "your garage" and state an opinion?

Ok.

And I didn't call "your cars" any names. I was simply pointing out that others most certainly have. I can post the results of search, if you like.

LOL. Ya ok.

I guess the Monte Carlo could have almost, sort of been considered a competitor....

Oh for God's sakes, here we go again. Overall, I don't think it was "horrendous". Others might have - hence my point.

And you're most welcome to believe I'm not a fan of whatever you wish.

See above.

Hehe...I'm not a regular human I guess, but I'm not immortal either.

Kind of scary, actually. I best go take a tylenol.

Quite aware of that - but it added nothing to my point. Then again, you posted nothing to refute my statement either.

Power to weight is a significant part of how a car accelerates. This is why a bloated pig like the 550 HP GT500 doesn't get beat too bad by a 430 HP C6.

But in every other performance category, that extra 800 lbs or so is going to HURT IT. Badly. Hence my point.

Might want to be careful with that one....if you're only going to use "power" as your performance metric.

BTW...There is a difference between "fan" and "fanboy", but I'll get in trouble if I expound on that anymore, so I'll leave it at that.

Bob

 

Ding ding.

Ding ding.

Ding ding.

Ding ding.

Ditto boxer's post.

 

I think it’s very unfair to critique the 1993-2002 4th Generation F-body in 2008. The market has changed and so have we the buyers. Hindsight is always 20/20 but why pick traits off of a car designed in the late 80’s and early 90’s for a different market and different time.

Ya know I’ve got issues with the door seals on the Ford Model A. I sure hope the 2008 Fusion has that issue resolved.

There are many more reasons why the 4th Gen F-bodies didn’t fare well in the market say after 1996 then the cars style. I also don’t see the constructiveness in listing issues one has with the 4th Gen as somehow a lesson proved and that must be fixed in the 5th Gen. It’s not worth trying to out-think the room as if to fix a long defunct car for the good of the new one. The 4th Gen car wouldn’t sell very well in 2009 but it was never intended to either. The 5th Gen is off in a very different direction so I think it’s safe to say 4th Gen styling issues won’t arise in the 2010 model. So let the 4th Gen rest in peace.

-In just ten years our beloved ’93 Camaro and Firebirds will qualify for collector car status.

 

"Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are destined to repeat them."

Not an original statement on part, but thought it might hold some applicability.

 

Yep, it might. So "might" this one: 'A penny saved is a penny earned'.

I'm not holding my breath though. Seriously, what difference does it make, to bring up all these 4gen foibles and re-hash them now? The 5gen has already been designed. Preproduction cars are already out there for final testing. Is GM going to magically change the overhangs, the interior, the curb weight now? Obviously not. So it makes one wonder - why are certain folks complaining about the 4gen? Don't try to tell me it's out of loving concern.

 

Huh? How about "a post saved is a post not made". Makes just as much sense in the context of this discussion.

But anyway...I think some folks bring up the 4th Gen as a lesson (of sorts), vice really complaining about it.

But I've been wrong before, so who knows!

 

Oh, I don't know. Maybe because the 5gen has already been designed?
Here's yet another example of, IMHO, disrespecting the Camaro. To help you prove your point, you went out and dug up a nice-n-yucky picture, with a dirty, scratched-up car and a ho-hum urban backdrop. You cared little about how the Camaro is represented, as long as you could show I was "biased". Well guess what, you're right! I AM biased. I would do the same if posting a picture of my wife on here. I wouldn't post a picture of her with her hair wet or messed up - I'd go get the best shot I could find... because I respect her and want her to be represented well in this public place. Those who don't respect the Camaro much, well any old dingy picture will do. You COULD have instead chosen a picture like this:



Or this:





Oops how did that last one get in there?