Second Gen T-Tops were held in a storage case whcih then could rest in the trunk...as I recall, the only issue was that they took up a lot of the already limited trunk space although I never minded that trade-off.

 

You know what they say about assuming!

I was always a TransAm guy until my 2000 Z/28...with the fourth gen, I liked the looks of the Camaro better than the TransAm while prior to that I alwys thought the TransAm was a much better looking car.

 

Yeah, I couldn't care less if I have little trunk space when the tops are off.

If I really want to put something in the trunk when the tops are off, I'll just use the back seats.

 

I can confirm that there is a 1-2 mpg drop in highway mileage with the t-tops off. Not much, just a slight decrease. 27mpg instead of my regular 29mpg on the highway. In my college days I took several 425 mile trips with the T-Tops off the whole way.

I can also confirm that the car will still hit 155 with the T-Tops off. Don't worry about how I know that.

 

I think that's why I like my T-Tops, my Boston, and my Def Leppard.

 

You know; just because it could stil hit 155 with the T-Tops off does not mean it's a good idea!

 

How can T Tops be both heritage and not old school at the same time. What does it matter?

They would be electric and roll down 1/4s and are currently used in Mercedees. B Pillars are for 2 seaters. The last they were used in Camaro was 69 the hayday of Camaro not disco. Actually T Tops were the Burt Renoylds 70's Again, what that has to do with the design I dont know but the 1/4's were on the most sought after year. The 69

 

See, that's the most sought after year for some of us - my number one is a 77-78 Trans Am S/E. Though I'd take a 10th Ann. Edition 79 in a pinch. Yes, weak years for power, but engines can be swapped or modified, looks are harder to change.

My 2nd most sought after year is 1990 - Last year for the myth, the legend, the IROC-Z

I'd pick up a 69 if the price was right, but I would prefer a 2nd 3rd or 4th gen. The 1st gen is in many ways just a copy of the Mustang. The Camaro and Firebird came into their own begining in 1970.

 

Very good point

Unfortunately the price wont be right because if you want that style you have one year to choose from and alot of people are choosing them.

Correct me if Im wrong and I very well maybe, but wasnt the mustang a unibody bumper to bumper from day one? The front of a 1st gen has a frame up front. GM used the same pony car formula but the front end is entirely open, and it has the 1/4 windows which Mustang picked up in 69-70. Shark gills and 69 wheel well lines had nothing to do with Mustang and unfortunately the wheel well lines dont have anthing in common with any other Camaro either. I know everybody knows this but I dont see anything the same as Mustang 1st gen. Actually the 71 Mustang grille looks alot like a 68 Camaro grille. Ford copying GM. I had always thought that the split bumper 70 was a move by GM to move toward the 65 Mustangs enclosed headlight look if only to capture the spirit of it. To me the 2nd gens of Ford and Chevy flip floped mimicing the others first gen.

T tops or not, Im hoping for no b pillar.

 

I hate Mustangs but acknowledge the fact that 1st gen Camaros were reactive designs to the Mustang 1st gen (64.5-66). They followed Ford's formula to the letter and improved upon it. FYI, 1/4 windows debuted on the 64-1/2 Mustang Coupe. The fastback became an option in '65 but it was outsold 5-1 by the regular coupe. Shark gills were also present on the 1st gen Mustangs. Check this cite out and learn a thing or two about automotive history before you start preaching about the 1st gen's Camaro's ground breaking styling.

mustangs/timeline/64-66

Furthermore, Camaro came into its own with the 70-1/2 which was heavily influenced by European designs of the time.

 

Your right about the 1/4 windows on 65 coupes.

there was no 64 model year, just an early 65 that used a generator rather than an alternator. Im assuming you mean Calender year. Youll have to refresh my memory as to where those Mustang shark gills are. I hope youre not talking about between the headlights and the grille in the 65 66 are you???

 

Structurally speaking, T-tops are better off than a targa.

Even in the concept design, after thinking about this quite a bit, I'm pretty sure that T-tops could be done.

BTW - I've heard numbers on the order of 80% being thrown around for the penetration of T-tops into the 2002 cars. T-tops make sense in that they don't require the huge expense of a convertible - which is why I bought my car with them.

It was for me, like many others have mentioned, on of the three things I had to have - no speed limiter (i.e. the upgraded wheels/tires/suspension package that allowed the removal of the limitier present on a base Z28), a 6-speed and T-tops.

GM is passing up a LOT of money if they decide to not have T-tops. The option is proven, it sells, it makes money, and a lot of customers want them.

If GM makes the decision not to have them, I hope that it has been duly considered with the voice of the customer - the ACTUAL voice of the customer, and not apocryphal guesses at what customers think or a catalog of opinions or somebody like Bob saying "I don't like them".

Customers spoke loudly and clearly in 2002 - "Give us T-tops!!!" Do the product planners really think things have changed enough in 4 years to eliminate them?

I doubt it.

Can the platform support them? Well, maybe not. It bodes well architecture-wise if there's a convertible in the works, since there will be a whole lotta structural stiffening going on (specifically at the A pillar).

 

One thing to consider is people got sold on T-Tops and got to like them in the years there was no verts to be had. It was as close as they could get to having a vert. I had a 79 and 81 new both t-top only because no verts. If I want part of the roof gone I want it all gone no half way. If you like them fine. The first year of the new Camaro we will see hard top only anyway

 

The problem with your point is the fact that when both were available the T-tops absolutely buried the convertibles in number of units sold. As in "it ain't even close" buried them...

Buried the hardtops too.

There's a lot of money in them, the functional question is whether or not GM is going to go after it.

 

For all those folks that seem to want the t-top really bad, I hope it's possible...IF... it can be done without changing the concept design. I sure hope that do not put b-pillars on the car to accomplish this however. I really think that could mess up the looks of the design and I really want the ability to roll down those quarter windows. It may be hard to believe, but to me, the ability to do that on my 69 achieves a similar open air feeling result as taking the tops off my 85 IROC, but with a lot less trouble. That loooong window down is just too cool. I sure hope that design element stays!!!