NEWS: Lutz Offers Details on the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro
09-30-2007 | 01:08 PM
#76
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Provided it is competitive and not overweight I can see two purchases of the car for me...
1) A used car to run F Stock and replace my E Street Prepared car.
2) A new car for "nice" ordered and optioned the way I want.
If it turns out that the car is overweight and not competitive then I guess I'll have some decisions to make.
1) A used car to run F Stock and replace my E Street Prepared car.
2) A new car for "nice" ordered and optioned the way I want.
If it turns out that the car is overweight and not competitive then I guess I'll have some decisions to make.
If I were to get one, it would be my driver/fun car. I'm pretty deep into Mustang drag racing, so will probably stick to that for more 'serious' stuff.
I'm not worried about the drivetrain (possibly excepting the IRS), but weight....that's a whole nuther issue for me.
Bob
09-30-2007 | 01:25 PM
#77
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 859
From: AR (PA born and fled)
I'm also with Bob. It would have been more aesthetically pleasing to not have the B pillar but if it means having a more affordable / lighter car then I'm all for it.
And yes Bob, there's more to life than late apexing the return road.
09-30-2007 | 05:27 PM
#78
Admin Emeritus
Joined: Dec 1997
Posts: 11,157
From: Nashville, TN area
Here's another newsbit that just came in on the same subject...
Filed under: Concept Cars, Coupes, Chevrolet, GM
While the concept car and the original Camaro were both hardtop coupes, the production version of the 2010 Camaro will gain a B-pillar. It may seem like a betrayal to some, and Rick Wagoner did pledge to make the production car virtually identical to the concept, but in the end, it's no big deal. Actually, a B-pillar is a plus. The chassis will gain rigidity with the pillar there, and it'll be easy enough to disguise. Paint it black, it'll blend right in. Class rival Challenger has met the same fate - there will be no pillarless ponycar revival.
[Source: Inside Line]
Permalink | Email this | Comments
More...
While the concept car and the original Camaro were both hardtop coupes, the production version of the 2010 Camaro will gain a B-pillar. It may seem like a betrayal to some, and Rick Wagoner did pledge to make the production car virtually identical to the concept, but in the end, it's no big deal. Actually, a B-pillar is a plus. The chassis will gain rigidity with the pillar there, and it'll be easy enough to disguise. Paint it black, it'll blend right in. Class rival Challenger has met the same fate - there will be no pillarless ponycar revival.
[Source: Inside Line]
Permalink | Email this | Comments
More...
09-30-2007 | 06:00 PM
#79
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 940
From: Southern Indiana
09-30-2007 | 07:29 PM
#80
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,802
From: Annapolis MD
Well this sucks... So much for rolling down all 4 windows.
Tell me one thing though. Why are people advocating the crappy T Tops? So we save weight gain rigidity loosing the windows going up and down but gain weight and loose rigity with T Tops that leak and for most people like me will rarely take them out? Tell me where that makes sense....
Tell me one thing though. Why are people advocating the crappy T Tops? So we save weight gain rigidity loosing the windows going up and down but gain weight and loose rigity with T Tops that leak and for most people like me will rarely take them out? Tell me where that makes sense....
Last edited by 5thgen69camaro; 09-30-2007 at 07:33 PM.
09-30-2007 | 07:32 PM
#81
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,446
From: Yelm, Wa USA
Well this sucks... So much for rolling down all 4 windows.
Tell me one thing though. Why are people advocating the crappy T Tops? So we save weight loosing the windows going up and down but gain weight with T Tops that leak and for most people like me will rarely take them out? Tell me where that makes sense....
Tell me one thing though. Why are people advocating the crappy T Tops? So we save weight loosing the windows going up and down but gain weight with T Tops that leak and for most people like me will rarely take them out? Tell me where that makes sense....
None of my t-tops leak on any of my Camaros Nor do any of my Convertibles. its all how you take care of them, When I drive & the weather is nice I take them off.
09-30-2007 | 08:08 PM
#82
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 181
From: Southern Cali, USA
the less moving parts the better. I don't need to be changing 4 power window motors. I hope you enjoy your mustang as much as I'm going to enjoy my camaro.
09-30-2007 | 08:17 PM
#83
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,802
From: Annapolis MD
But the question remains, if Quarter windows are eliminated to save weight and gain rigitity, what is the point in T tops that undoes all that? You loose everything you gained. You cant tell me more people want T tops than roll down 1/4 windows. Especially on this style...
Last edited by 5thgen69camaro; 09-30-2007 at 08:25 PM.
09-30-2007 | 08:22 PM
#84
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,446
From: Yelm, Wa USA
Admittedly Its also in how many miles I put on the car... I have to admit a bias toward 1/4 windows and against T-tops. Quarter windows can have similar faults.
But the question remains, if Quarter windows are eliminated to save weight and gain rigitity, what is the point in T tops that undoes all that? You cant tell me more people want T tops than roll down 1/4 windows. Especially on this style...
But the question remains, if Quarter windows are eliminated to save weight and gain rigitity, what is the point in T tops that undoes all that? You cant tell me more people want T tops than roll down 1/4 windows. Especially on this style...
09-30-2007 | 08:24 PM
#85
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 122
From: St. Louis, MO
I've posted this many times, but as a vette owner, I love the targa and drop it whenever I geta chance, it's very easy, feels/looks great, and I really enjoy it. But the sucker does leak. As a camaro owner, I take the t's out often as well. Juts reall partial to 'em. Guess I'll get a sunroof.
09-30-2007 | 08:26 PM
#86
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
I'm certainly more 1/4 mile biased than most, and understand what having T-tops would take away. However, as stated above, I like them enough that T-tops are the one thing I would be willing to compromise on.
It matters not that you don't think it makes sense.
All that said...we've known for a while that T-tops won't happen, so at this point, it is little more than another idle topic of conversation...as far as I'm concerned.
Bob
09-30-2007 | 08:29 PM
#87
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,802
From: Annapolis MD
How was it safer than a hard top? I was under the impression from people whove posted here the 4th gen was engineered for Ttops from the getgo. I took that to mean that your car had the extra reinforcement weight whether you had ttops or not. Maybe scott can weigh in...
09-30-2007 | 08:36 PM
#88
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,802
From: Annapolis MD
Sure I can tell you. And you can tell me the opposite. And who is right? You don't know - and neither do I.
I'm certainly more 1/4 mile biased than most, and understand what having T-tops would take away. However, as stated above, I like them enough that T-tops are the one thing I would be willing to compromise on.
It matters not that you don't think it makes sense.
All that said...we've known for a while that T-tops won't happen, so at this point, it is little more than another idle topic of conversation...as far as I'm concerned.
Bob
I'm certainly more 1/4 mile biased than most, and understand what having T-tops would take away. However, as stated above, I like them enough that T-tops are the one thing I would be willing to compromise on.
It matters not that you don't think it makes sense.
All that said...we've known for a while that T-tops won't happen, so at this point, it is little more than another idle topic of conversation...as far as I'm concerned.
Bob
"Lutz said the standard coupe structure is necessary to keep production costs down and ensure the Camaro's frame is as light and tight and possible."
It was not in favor of the T Tops. I like the 1/4 windows you perfer the Ttops. As you said youre aware of what the Ttops take away. So if the reason for loosing the roll down 1/4s is to keep things "light and tight" then what is the justification for T Tops.
The only one that would make sense to me is the majority wants them. But even then, that makes Charlies arguement and I thought yours but Im guessing Im wrong on that, that roll down windows are bad because they cost weight irrelevant I would think.
Last edited by 5thgen69camaro; 09-30-2007 at 08:39 PM.
09-30-2007 | 08:40 PM
#89
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,446
From: Yelm, Wa USA
Youre kinda aruging my point, and very well at that. The reason for the B pillar given was
"Lutz said the standard coupe structure is necessary to keep production costs down and ensure the Camaro's frame is as light and tight and possible."
It was not in favor of the T Tops. I like the 1/4 windows you perfer the Ttops. As you said youre aware of what the Ttops take away. So if the reason for loosing the roll down 1/4s is to keep things "light and tight" then what is the justification for T Tops.
The only one that would make sense to me is the majority wants them. But even then, that makes Charlies arguement that roll down windows are bad because they cost weight irrelevant I would think.
"Lutz said the standard coupe structure is necessary to keep production costs down and ensure the Camaro's frame is as light and tight and possible."
It was not in favor of the T Tops. I like the 1/4 windows you perfer the Ttops. As you said youre aware of what the Ttops take away. So if the reason for loosing the roll down 1/4s is to keep things "light and tight" then what is the justification for T Tops.
The only one that would make sense to me is the majority wants them. But even then, that makes Charlies arguement that roll down windows are bad because they cost weight irrelevant I would think.
09-30-2007 | 08:59 PM
#90
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 940
From: Southern Indiana
Why not have all 4 windows not roll down then by your justification? Hell, weld the wheels in place while your at it, they don't need to move.