Originally Posted by Z28Wilson

So, lemme get this straight. Scott Freaking Settlemire knows less about what's going on with Camaro development than you do. Ok, just wanted to get that one right.

Originally Posted by falchulk

The rest of the world seems to get it. A few of you guys dont. You associate old with bad. Everything new comes from being inspired by things in the past. There is nothing tired about good ideas from the past being brought up to date on new cars. There were the same guys yelling that the mustang would flop becuase fo retro styling. They were right...........I guess otherwise it would be selling 500k per year?? Whatever your hangup is, a good looking car is a good looking car no matter what decade the designer was inspired from. Lets see what the car looks like before bashing it out of an irrational hate for that buzzword "retro".

Originally Posted by dream '94 Z28

We don't get it...that's rich. There's a difference in being inspired by the past and copying it down right.

What made the original designs great is that they were fresh, original, and completely new. They borrowed few if anything from previous designs.

As far as the rest of the world...well...America seems to be the only market I can see where 'retro' is being rolled out in force.

Originally Posted by Red Planet

Once again:

>Has to have muscular V8 engine.with class leading performance....(accent the 'class leading)
>Has to stick to the road like velcro. (I still love the fact that a 4th gen SS will whip a Viper on a road course --stock to stock)
>Has to LOOK like a Camaro....and be recognizable from a 1/4 mile
>Has to do this at a Chevrolet price.

Originally Posted by falchulk

Really, look around. You must be looking only at the Japanese............

Originally Posted by Jason E

The only 2 things I HATE about the new Mustang are its most retro parts...the dash and the nose. Otherwise, the sides of it, the rear and the performance of it are hard to argue with.

Here's going to be the clincher for me...t-tops. I know it doesn't seem like that big of a deal, but I live with my tops off my car (which is a real bitch with white leather seats!!!! They're immaculate, but they make a black car look easy by comparison). If it has hints of retro and t-tops, I'm ok with it. If its more blatant like the Mustang, its going to take some more convincing. If its retro and has NO t-tops (which I'm beginning to doubt because Mustang will have them soon...thanks <a href='http://consumeralertsystem.com/cas/zx-hclick.php?hid=280' target='_blank'>ford</a> ), I'm going to convince my dad he needs one and I'll grab his Formula from him, thank you very much...

I'm beginning to think I should go grab my GP back of the lot and wait on buying the GXP. If this car is as gorgeous as Settlemire says (and I believe him), in January if I've gotten rid of my GP (which will only have 90k on it or so when the Camaro debuts) for 60 months worth of GXP payments, I will be pissed at myself. My current GP will make a great daily driver even in '08, and then I have zero payments and I can order a new Camaro.

Then again, I can get a new $32,795 GXP for $23,900. Decisions, decisions...if this car is blatantly retro though, I think more than 50% of us will be somewhat dissapointed...

Originally Posted by Darth Xed

I don't think many in are 100% bashing the idea here, just expressing their preference.

I've said several times already that I've pretty much given in to the idea that it will be retro... even though I'm not wild about the idea.

Originally Posted by Chuck!

I am in the Darth camp, too. Those of us who don't like retro dont think the car will flop if it turns out to be full blown retro. If there's a ton of 1st gen in there it will probably sell like hot cakes, but it won't appeal to me. If I am going to have a car that looks like a firstgen, I minus well buy a 1969 and have fun building it myself.

Originally Posted by falchulk

Less safe, cost more, not as fast or as comfortable stock.

Originally Posted by dream '94 Z28

I am looking around. I'm looking the Japanese, the Europeans, the Italians, the French, the English.....

I don't see a car from Nissan looking like the original 240X....
I don't see a car from <a href='http://consumeralertsystem.com/cas/zx-hclick.php?hid=271' target='_blank'>mercedes</a> that looks like a 300SL....
I don't see a car from BMW that looks like a 2002 (that was a model in the ealry 70's BTW)...
I don't see a Ferrari that looks like a Daytona Spyder....
I don't see a Porsche that looks like a 356....

I do see a new Mustang that looks a whole lot like a '68...
I do see a new HHR that looks alot like a '48 Suburban....
I do a PT cruiser that looks alot like something from the '30's and '40s...

IMO...the rest of the world 'gets' it just fine......

Originally Posted by falchulk

Mini and porsche just for starters. Styling has not changed. Not to mention that most of the cars you listed take styling cues from the past. You cant look at those cars and not see their heritage.

This is pointless, I guess we see how it turns out and if its "retro" you wont have one. I have noticed that the anti retro thing is more of a teenager/early twenties problem. It does nto seem to effect the large majority of people outside that age range. Lets hope thats then intened market if GM goes "retro".

Originally Posted by falchulk

Less safe, cost more, not as fast or as comfortable stock.

Originally Posted by Darth Xed

Less safe? True.

Not as fast? If he builds it himself, he certainl;y can make it wickedly fast.

Not as Comfortable? Perhaps...

Costs more? You are totally wrong here. A new car will depreciate... a classic will actually gain value.

Originally Posted by Chuck!

He does have a point with the price. The first gen I'd love to buy basically is a shell (has extra sentamental value since my dad owned it in the early 70's). Since it wont have the original motor, I'll be rebuilding it how I want to and not back to stock. I'd assume I can tie up $50,000 in the car real quick, and if I were ever to sell it I doubt it'd fetch more than $35,000. But that would probably be a pretty stable price where as the Camaro will depreciate for the next twenty five years. I Figure after 5 years of ownership a new $30,000 car easily becomes a $15,000 - $20,000 car though, so there really isnt much of a difference.