NEWS: Lutz Offers Details on the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro
10-04-2007 | 03:58 PM
#166
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,897
From: Greenville, SC
A good idea of the B pillar has been right infront of us all along. The Bumble Bee.
Here it is on the outside of the car and I expect the production car to look much like this. This is the real movie car and not a chop.
Here is another side shot to get an idea. Keep in mind the fixed rear window in also a strenght point as windows today are glued in to help support the roof and airbags. Yes glass today has become part of the structure.
Here it is on the outside of the car and I expect the production car to look much like this. This is the real movie car and not a chop.
Here is another side shot to get an idea. Keep in mind the fixed rear window in also a strenght point as windows today are glued in to help support the roof and airbags. Yes glass today has become part of the structure.
Also, I know this is a "model" car but I hope GM does a better job with the gaps, it looks like the top of the door is 1/4" below the top of the window frame
Hmmmm, I keep noticing things... Again, I know this is a model car, but there isn't any window weatherstripping? I wonder what it will look like for the production car. I LOVE the clean looks this car has and I think a door frame would take away from that.
Last edited by Silverado C-10; 10-04-2007 at 04:04 PM.
10-04-2007 | 04:08 PM
#167
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Dude.... You asked me...."just look at that car....isn't it just SCREAMING for T-tops"?... and I gave my opinion.
Never said they were not doing it and never said you were wrong, just stated why I don't like em on the 5th gen.
If you don't want an honest ansewer don't ask the question Dude.
I think it is time for all of us give this thread a rest..................
Never said they were not doing it and never said you were wrong, just stated why I don't like em on the 5th gen.
If you don't want an honest ansewer don't ask the question Dude.
I think it is time for all of us give this thread a rest..................
But I still got it....no t-tops.
Dude.
10-04-2007 | 05:17 PM
#168
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,576
From: Arlington, Texas
10-04-2007 | 05:21 PM
#169
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,897
From: Greenville, SC
10-04-2007 | 06:24 PM
#170
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
10-04-2007 | 11:00 PM
#174
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
I will be buying a new Camaro whenever they finally do hit the showrooms. If its an '09 or 2010 I'll buy one. With or without B pillars, I'll buy one. I won't buy one with T-tops but thats just my preference I don't care if they offer them. Even though the date that the cars will hit the showroom hasn't changed and I'm not particularly worried about the B-pillars I have to say that I am a little upset about both pieces of "news". Even if it has always been planned for B-pillars and 1st quarter of '09 I am still dissapointed. It has been suggested for a long time that both were the case. Very knowledgeable people on the board have basically told us this was the case. But I can't help but still feel like the date is getting farther back. 2010 model means that there is NO CHANCE that there will be any models hitting the showrooms before January of '09 as a model year can only contain 1 January 1st. We all knew that there were going to be changes to the way the car looks when it hit production but as excited about the Camaro as I am this news definately doesn't increase my enthusiasm for the car and I think thats really what GM needs to be doing right now. The transformers giveaway definately does increase the enthusiasm though. I kind of wish I had read this thread first.
10-05-2007 | 10:18 AM
#175
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,576
From: Arlington, Texas
I have no idea if they will do that (or can) with the production car, but the "look" was very smooth and flush, as you can see from the pix of the bumblebee car.
10-05-2007 | 10:21 AM
#176
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,576
From: Arlington, Texas
You can see the pilar structure if you look through the windshied to the passenger side, but on the outside (drivers side) all you see is blacked out glass. W/ a tint, I'll bet you couldn't even tell. IMO, this is the way to go.
10-05-2007 | 11:04 AM
#178
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Here's a G35 pic, looks doable, unless the rules have changes....
You can see the pilar structure if you look through the windshied to the passenger side, but on the outside (drivers side) all you see is blacked out glass. W/ a tint, I'll bet you couldn't even tell. IMO, this is the way to go.
You can see the pilar structure if you look through the windshied to the passenger side, but on the outside (drivers side) all you see is blacked out glass. W/ a tint, I'll bet you couldn't even tell. IMO, this is the way to go.
10-05-2007 | 01:26 PM
#180
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,711
From: The Golden State
My goodness!!! Are we STILL on the subject of B-pillars??! Let it go, guys! 
There are new rollover standards that dictate the pillar or reinforcing the roof. The new standards are that the roof must withstand 2.5 times the vehicle weight. Again, MB CLK gets around it by alot of reinforcement. And again, although it's the size of a Cobalt, it weighs more than the new, significantly bigger 2008 Cadillac CTS... not exactly a featherweight.
The rear windowglass will cover it just the way your 4th gen Camaro's massive rear hatch glass covers up the fact that only about half of that glass you actually see out of... the rest hides the hatch structure-frame.
A non-issue.
Most likely yes, the 'Vert's windows will roll down. But Convertibles don't have roof crush standards.
Well said!
FWIW: GM attempted to classify the 4th gen T-top as a convertible to keep it in production a little longer. Not sure what the hangup was, but it didn't work.
You're "not particularly worried" about the B-pillars & you know the dates haven't changed..... yet you're upset about both pieces of news??
No one has put down any information whatsoever indicating this, yet you feel like the date is being pushed back???
It's been said for some time that the 5th gen Camaro will be in showrooms around the turn of the year, but you seem to have problems with the car showing up in showrooms after the 1st of the year (keeping in mind we're talking about roughly a 1-2 month span??
Dude.... Do you have anxiety issues??
There are new rollover standards that dictate the pillar or reinforcing the roof. The new standards are that the roof must withstand 2.5 times the vehicle weight. Again, MB CLK gets around it by alot of reinforcement. And again, although it's the size of a Cobalt, it weighs more than the new, significantly bigger 2008 Cadillac CTS... not exactly a featherweight.
The rear windowglass will cover it just the way your 4th gen Camaro's massive rear hatch glass covers up the fact that only about half of that glass you actually see out of... the rest hides the hatch structure-frame.
A non-issue.
The government classifies convertibles differently than coupes and they have to meet different criteria and crash standards.
I wish I could word this more clearly but it is simply not possible...
If they could engineer t-tops into the car in a manner that it would remain safe, affordable and reliable, and meet all standards without increasing weight dramatically, they would have.
If they could engineer the car in a way that they can remove the B-pillar in a manner that it would remain safe, affordable and reliable, and meet all crash standards without increasing weight dramatically, they would have.
No car company does things the opposite of what their buyers want "just because". I have no idea why people think otherwise. Does anyone really think the engineers are going "Yeah...let's stick a B-pillar in there. Not because we need to, but just to **** them off and watch them cry a lot. It will be a laugh riot! Hey! Here's another idea! We could give them t-tops, but just for kicks...let's NOT let them have 'em! The ol' one-two punch, it will be a hoot. That will sell less cars? Who cares?? The auto industry isn't hurting for money these days or anything! Screw 'em! Hahahahaha!! Hey, someone give me a $100 bill so I can light my cigar."
Please let go of the "they could give us what we want but they just don't want to" conspiracy theory.. They know what we want, the signal is loud and clear. If they can do it, they will. This isn't 1969 and some things have to be different whether we like it or not.
I wish I could word this more clearly but it is simply not possible...
If they could engineer t-tops into the car in a manner that it would remain safe, affordable and reliable, and meet all standards without increasing weight dramatically, they would have.
If they could engineer the car in a way that they can remove the B-pillar in a manner that it would remain safe, affordable and reliable, and meet all crash standards without increasing weight dramatically, they would have.
No car company does things the opposite of what their buyers want "just because". I have no idea why people think otherwise. Does anyone really think the engineers are going "Yeah...let's stick a B-pillar in there. Not because we need to, but just to **** them off and watch them cry a lot. It will be a laugh riot! Hey! Here's another idea! We could give them t-tops, but just for kicks...let's NOT let them have 'em! The ol' one-two punch, it will be a hoot. That will sell less cars? Who cares?? The auto industry isn't hurting for money these days or anything! Screw 'em! Hahahahaha!! Hey, someone give me a $100 bill so I can light my cigar."
Please let go of the "they could give us what we want but they just don't want to" conspiracy theory.. They know what we want, the signal is loud and clear. If they can do it, they will. This isn't 1969 and some things have to be different whether we like it or not.
FWIW: GM attempted to classify the 4th gen T-top as a convertible to keep it in production a little longer. Not sure what the hangup was, but it didn't work.
Okay, I just found Rampants post on page 7 of this thread. So, that is what so many of you are mad about? I personally barely see the difference, and it by no means threatens the cars shape or style. I looked at other coupes with b-pillars, cars that I happen to think are as hot as hell, and the b-pillar doesnt stand out...at all. The photoshops that I have seen on the Camaro and the look that Bumblebee has, doesnt turn me off of the new Camaro at all. Really, what is the big deal?
Oh I know, maybe your guy's mascara is running to much and you can't seem to find a tissue from your purse.
Oh I know, maybe your guy's mascara is running to much and you can't seem to find a tissue from your purse.
Even though the date that the cars will hit the showroom hasn't changed and I'm not particularly worried about the B-pillars I have to say that I am a little upset about both pieces of "news". Even if it has always been planned for B-pillars and 1st quarter of '09 I am still dissapointed. It has been suggested for a long time that both were the case. Very knowledgeable people on the board have basically told us this was the case. But I can't help but still feel like the date is getting farther back. 2010 model means that there is NO CHANCE that there will be any models hitting the showrooms before January of '09 as a model year can only contain 1 January 1st...
No one has put down any information whatsoever indicating this, yet you feel like the date is being pushed back???
It's been said for some time that the 5th gen Camaro will be in showrooms around the turn of the year, but you seem to have problems with the car showing up in showrooms after the 1st of the year (keeping in mind we're talking about roughly a 1-2 month span??
Dude.... Do you have anxiety issues??