2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos

NEWS: Tall, Grande, Venti: GM releases extra large version of Camaro pic

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-11-2008 | 12:16 PM
  #46  
jg95z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Originally Posted by FS3800
but that's not a camaro...
Ah yes, but it goes well with using 57 Chevy headlamp bezels for the dash guages, no?
Old 01-11-2008 | 12:23 PM
  #47  
christianjax's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 881
From: Jacksonville Florida
Originally Posted by Jono
From what I can tell the proportions have changed slightly as Z284ever has said. I think this picture shows the diffences in proportion the best.
I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.
Old 01-11-2008 | 12:46 PM
  #48  
John_H's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 146
I think it is the rear wheel wells, they seem to be a little bit smaller. It'll probably look great with a larger size wheel.

The more I look at the comparison photo, the more excited I become! Something tells me no one is going to posting on the board when the photo of the production top dog is shown. We'll all be down at the dealership trying to be first in line to buy it.
Old 01-11-2008 | 12:55 PM
  #49  
Z28Wilson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Originally Posted by christianjax
I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.
Also the space between the end of the doors and the rear wheel wells. It would appear that the trunk is a bit longer as well (more rear overhang) as the rear glass doesn't come as close to the end of the trunk on the pre-production car.

In fact, the entire pre-production car's greenhouse would appear to be shifted forward slightly. And if those really are 20" wheels, they look awfully small in comparison to the rest of the car.
Old 01-11-2008 | 01:39 PM
  #50  
99SilverSS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
Also the space between the end of the doors and the rear wheel wells. It would appear that the trunk is a bit longer as well (more rear overhang) as the rear glass doesn't come as close to the end of the trunk on the pre-production car.

In fact, the entire pre-production car's greenhouse would appear to be shifted forward slightly. And if those really are 20" wheels, they look awfully small in comparison to the rest of the car.
I think the wheels are 18"s. I don't think the greenhouse is moved on the car but the door is a bit shorter and starts a bit further forward.

I think the jury will be out until production specs are listed and we can see the numbers to show what our eyes are picking up or not.
Old 01-11-2008 | 01:49 PM
  #51  
SharpShooter_SS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 766
From: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
No, you guys got it all wrong. The filler cap isn't on either side or behind the plate or a taillamp - nope, the new Camaro doesn't need a filler cap. It's got a reactor under the hood - no need for gas so no filler cap - see, that was simple.
Old 01-11-2008 | 03:36 PM
  #52  
jg95z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Originally Posted by SharpShooter_SS
No, you guys got it all wrong. The filler cap isn't on either side or behind the plate or a taillamp - nope, the new Camaro doesn't need a filler cap. It's got a reactor under the hood - no need for gas so no filler cap - see, that was simple.
Don't you mean "Mr. Fusion"?
Old 01-11-2008 | 04:11 PM
  #53  
jrp4uc's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,724
From: Hebron, KY
no roof lines

It appears the roof detailing has been lost. I realize there is a sunroof option apparently, but I was hoping these lines (similar to the C6 Vette) would make it to production. I imagine it's not cost effective for them to appear on non-sunroof cars.
Old 01-11-2008 | 04:28 PM
  #54  
Doug Harden's Avatar
Prominent Member
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Originally Posted by jrp4uc
It appears the roof detailing has been lost. I realize there is a sunroof option apparently, but I was hoping these lines (similar to the C6 Vette) would make it to production. I imagine it's not cost effective for them to appear on non-sunroof cars.
This is the same car as the rear shot with the sunroof.....non-sunroof cars should still have the "reverse mowhawk".
Old 01-11-2008 | 10:29 PM
  #55  
JakeRobb's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,497
From: Okemos, MI
Originally Posted by Dragoneye
I believe several people made comments about why not put the lights here:

European license plates are wider than US plates. If they put them there, they'd have to make a whole different bumper for other countries.

Originally Posted by FS3800
the heritage thing would be to put it behind the license plate like the 1st gen camaros
My Grand National has the gas cap behind the license plate, and I have to tell you, that would be a deal breaker for me on a new Camaro. It's seriously that annoying.
Old 01-12-2008 | 04:18 AM
  #56  
TrickStang37's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by christianjax
I've looked long and hard at these two and the ONLY differences I see are the wheel size, rear bumper bump, side marker lights are wider, and the space between the front wheel well and the door is shorter on the production version. (shortened hood length?) Exhaust tips, and the reverse lights. NO big deal at all. Scott was right.
here ya go, jus helpin you out.

Old 01-12-2008 | 06:25 AM
  #57  
MasterZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 321
From: On the street
Very nice super excited now!
Old 01-12-2008 | 08:06 AM
  #58  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Originally Posted by TrickStang37
here ya go, jus helpin you out.

Thanks for the comparo. The changes are small but worthwhile. The pics reaffirm that the pre-prod car is a better looker than the concept... in my humble opinion, of course.

The back of the concept looks slab sided compared to the pre-prod. Great improvement there!

I reckon the wheels are either 19" or 20", remembering the concept sported 21" fronts and 22" rears.
Old 01-12-2008 | 09:49 AM
  #59  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by TrickStang37
here ya go, jus helpin you out.


Nice job.
Old 01-12-2008 | 11:32 AM
  #60  
JakeRobb's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,497
From: Okemos, MI
Originally Posted by SSbaby
I reckon the wheels are either 19" or 20", remembering the concept sported 21" fronts and 22" rears.
I'll bet you a premium membership that they're 18".

I think the concept is the "sexier" car. The longer hood, shorter deck, and six extra inches of width gave it better proportions.

That said, I think the proportions of the production car will make it much more livable, and that the sacrifice in sexiness is minimal and only noticeable when the car is right next to the concept.

I'd like to comment on some of the differences noted in TrickStang's image:

Originally Posted by TrickStang37
1. I disagree that the fender in front of the front wheel has more chunk. In fact, comparing them side by side, it appears to have considerably less chunk.

2. We've known since day 1 about the larger mirrors.

3. I think the sharpness of the body line near the bottom of the door will be more pronounced in better light and with metallic paint.

4. We have it on good authority that cars without a sunroof will retain the roof channel.

5. The thick window molding will be much less visible on darker-colored cars. Ditto for the B-pillar.

6. I think the characteristic I miss most from the concept is the body line that intersects with the wheel well. However, moving that body line up (along with increasing the gap between the wheel well and the shoulder line) is going to put a lot more room in the rear seat and trunk, and IMO that's going to be worth it.

7. One thing you missed is that there is more door below the body line on the bottom of the door. The body below the door has also gotten a bit thinner compared to the concept.

8. Finally, one more difference: you'll be able to buy one like the white one for a reasonable price, whereas the silver one is off limits.

Last edited by JakeRobb; 01-12-2008 at 11:34 AM.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.