A more "c6ish" guage cluster.

a turn signal switch that doesn't feel like you're snapping a twig everytime you use it.

HIDs as an option (or at least included on one of the more expensive packages I suppose)

 

The interior is too retro. I feel GM should look at the GTO interior when designing the production car's interior. The retro interior on the concept will only appeal to those who want to feel like they are driving a 1st gen Camaro, while the exterior (albeit retro in some aspects) is a fresh enough design to appeal to a number of demographics. In other words, a more modern, nicely constructed interior, such as the interior in the GTO, most likely wouldn't offend anyone, whereas the retro interior has already offended a lot of people. This will help make the car appeal to as many people as possible.

Sorry for the long reply for this thread, but I'm not sure how to sum that up any better.

 

I frankly think it's outrageous that this car will weigh in at 3600 lbs. or more -- for the hardtop!!! True, the public has been dumbed-down enough to purchase 5000 + lb. trucks, but in this age of $4 per gallon (soon, baby, soon) gas, GM must be out of their minds to make this car a guzzler.

The only reason I was EVER interested in the 4th-gen. was it's relatively-low weight and decent gas mileage (for the time).. A pudgey, bloated, cartoonish 5th-gen will send THIS lifetime-Chevy fan straight to the Dodge Challenger.... it may be heavy, but it's got selective engine displacement and looks GREAT...

 

You know, one more thing ----- if they really are so interested in what the rabid-members of this post have to say about their upcoming Camaro, than they are already showing signs of once again under-achieving. As I said, I have been a lifetime Camaro fan (and owner: two original '67 convertibles and three 4th-gen cars), but I sure hope that GM has at least A LITTLE concern as to what Mustang, Challenger, Supra, GTO, 300. etc. fans want in a car. For God's sake, I couldn't even began to criticize the creaking, smashing, shaky suspension of a 4th-gen convertible (a surprise, since C&D said the cars were amazingly solid) without the members of this site coming down on me to defend such sad engineering. Is THAT the kind of feedback GM wants...!!??!!! I am not at all ashamed to say that I rented a new Mustang convertible and drove it on some great, winding and un-even roads up in Marin County, and found it to be the most solid convertible I've ever driven... shouldn't THAT kind of engineering be the goal of GM...?

 

f-body fan, you are either terribly misinformed or making some serious assumptions.

 

Now that the summit has passed, is there any reason not to open this up for discussion?

And what feedback did you (as a group) provide when asked?

I don't want to know how "regular" you are.

Regardless of what they changed in the suspension, the FR500C is a tube-frame, race-ready, $200,000+ factory racecar, and is completely irrelevant when we're talking about the handling of a stock Mustang, unless your only point is that you could buy a brand new Lamborghini with roughly the same amount of money it would take to make a legit racecar out of a present-day showroom-stock Mustang.

That said, nobody is saying that Mustangs are the worst-handling cars on the road. They are just below the standard set by the competition, past and present. GTO, Corvette, and 4th-gens all handle better, and based on history and the Jenny Craig comments from a few months ago, I'm guessing the 5th gen (the truly relevant comparison in this discussion and in the buyer's market once it's available) will handle significantly better.

I wouldn't mind a more serviceable engine bay, but don't forget about weight distribution. LS1 Camaros are about four inches away from being front-mid-engine cars, and that's good for handling. I know the wheels have been moved forward quite a bit on the 5th gen relative to the 4th gen, and I'm guessing that's going to give us a slightly better weight distribution while still allowing for a serviceable engine.

 

The group overall seemed to favor the console gauges. I know I did.

Well...I don't feel any different than any other car guy, anyway.

Great points there!

 

That's what I wanted to hear!

 

Good, because I think that the interior.. just like the rest of the car needs to stand out from the rest of the cars out there. Going with a safe GTO interior isn't going to cut it. I know for a fact that the interior will be where we see the most changes from concept to production but I hope they keep the main feel of it untouched. I am sure they will try to make most people happy, but is impossible to make everyone happy. So... let's just wait and see what the interior will look like.

 

Ditto that.

 

Its not a tube frame car, and it is relavent to the production car since they didn't alter suspension pick-up points (only a switch to adjustable coil overs and adjustable sway bars) and represents what the stock car is capable of.


If you consider the Mustang, Corvette competition - I'll take that as a compliment, we seen the GTO best the Mustang (although the Mustang was able to best a 350Z), and I'll say, 4th gen vs S-197 in an apples to apples comparison, the Mustang would hold its own or better compared to the 4th gen ( mainly on the basis that the S-197 has a stiffer chassis). Ultimately your implication is that the Mustang doesn't handle(or handle well), and I'm refuting that. When the F5 arrives, I fully expect it to handle better than the S197 as I would hazard a guess that it will be equipped at minimum with the de rigueur F-bod tires that are generally 20mm wider than what is equipped on the mustang.

 

I looked into it, and you're right, it's not a tube frame car. It is, however, reinforced with a roll cage. The price tag is $125,000. Nearly a hundred grand over the Mustang GT. I could take a hundred grand and make my 1993 Buick Regal (which I purchased two years ago for $950) accelerate, stop, and handle like a race car, especially if I had all of the resources of an organization like Ford Racing. I still contend that any discussion of the FR500C is completely irrelevant to a discussion of the handling of a stock Mustang. Yes, if you have a hundred grand, you can build a really cool Mustang. So what?

I consider Corvette and GTO competition for the Mustang inasmuch as they are American rear-drive V8 cars. In particular with the release of the GT500 and the other recent Shelby variants, there are now Mustangs in the same price classes as both of those cars.

A quick Google search indicates that the Mustang GT pulled 0.84g on a skidpad. An '02 SS or WS6 will pull 0.87.

I'll admit that the suspension on the S197 is more sophisticated, and that the ride is nicer, but I don't think either of those will be the case when you compare the S197 to the F5. For Ford's sake, I hope that the next generation of the Mustang steps up the game.

 

I can see that this might derail this thread so I am going to make one comment in rebutle and then I would like for this to move on so that it doesn't cause the thread to get locked or get my post and yours deleated.

The Mustang is "not" a handling car. It is straight line vehicle and I know this because I have driven many and currently own one. The point here is not that it "can" be a well handling car the point is that in stock form no iteration even in the GT-500 trim is a well rounded handler.

I am looking for that when I purchase a Camaro. I feel like the only way we are going to make the stigma that is associated with the Camaro name disapere is by giving it a more well rounded not so drag race only suspension.

So basicly the point is this the Mustang is by no means a road coarse car, and neither is the Challenger...The Camaro could fill a gap there that would allow those of us who enjoy tight roads, and or autox events a vehicle to purchase that won't require coil-overs before being competitive, all the while by making the muscle car more versitle and able to attract a buying crowd who had not previously looked at a Camaro.

 

Article, photos, video here:
http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=523533

 

And the points you mention about Camaro handling were exactly the reasons I bought a Z/28 in 1969, strong engine package coupled with very good handling qualities. And that is what I will be looking for in the 09/10 Camaro, whether it is called Z/28 or something else.
Clyde