I just saw my first two on the road this weekend..and in all honestly my first gut reaction was with just a glimpse of the side profile from the road was "Challenger!" Then it hit me it was a Camaro. Then I saw one parked in a parking lot this weekend...and even for a V6 without the RS package it looked great...like it could eat a Mustang for lunch.

However the size does give it a Challenger like road presence. The think definatly grabs you more than the old ones.

 

Car and Driver didn't seem to think so. There aren't many places to hide the laws of physics.

For the record, I really like the exterior of the car. But trust me, park it next to a 4th Gen (as I have with my own) and you can "see" the mass of the car. It's hard to explain, everything on the car is "big"....from the height of the firewall to the wheel/tire combo and everything in between.

Of course I've sat in the production car. Several times in fact. The interior was weird when we saw the first cobbled test pics and it's weird now. No "posing" going on here, just an honest opinion.

The 4th Gen interiors weren't much to look at, but at the same time they didn't try to force the whole awkward 1969 retro-modern thing...

 

I voted exceeded my expectations.

On the street I think the car definitely has presence. Do I think it looks bulky and unweildly? No, not really to an unacceptable degree anyway. The other day I saw both a new Camaro and a new Challenger on the street and I thought of the two, it was the Challenger that looks its weight - it just looks like a two tonne car whereas the Camaro looks less so.

As far as the interior goes, I dunno it seems fine - certainly different, not bad but different. Honestly, Camaro interiors have never, ever blown me away. The two-tone looks good.

As far as buying go - if I were buying now, the stars aligned properly and I had choices that came down to the new Camaro, a G8 GT, or either a very low mileage '06 GTO or '02 WS6, I can't honestly say which way I'd go (although there would be some savings with the GTO(and its very nice interior) or the WS6(and its way-over-the-top aggressive looks) I could get cost parity with the new cars by throwing in some modding).

But, back to the new Camaro, I like it. Getting seat time is pretty much a pipe dream here at the moment, I've seen two on the road and two in the showroom and both of those showroom cars disappeared within a day of my first seeing them so I didn't even get close to them. It's great to see them back and I really hope it sells very well.

 

After owning a 4th gen for the past 10 yrs., my expectations were exceeded. I expected a lower level of interior quality.

 

Hey self appointed bearer of the standard for logic on the internet, is it too much to ask that you not selectively edit my posts to suit your own agenda?

I also stated in my post that I didn't care for 20 inch wheels. There is no reason for such a wheel size other than to pander to the bling set. Perhaps you are unaware that if the wheel was of a smaller diameter, the savings in mass could be put to better use. Like, you know, in the width. How's that for logic?

And as for being "optimized" for smaller tires, that's laughable. If by optimized, you mean that the handling is the best they could do with such an arrangement, then I agree. However, if you mean that this arrangement is best for handling, you're more delusional than I thought. C5 / C6 Corvettes have the same staggered tire sizes yet they are much faster in competition with a square (same sized) wheel set. Does that fry your fanboy logic meter? *gasp* GM did something illogical. So why run the staggered sizes? One reason is appearance. Many people like a "rubber rake" to their performance cars. The other is safety for lousy drivers. It is much easier to dial in nice safe understeer with smaller tires on the front.

Actually... know what? Just forget I posted this. I've done a pretty good job of ignoring your painfully myopic and biased postings. How 'bout you go back to ignoring me, mmmkay?




And Kris, you know me a bit and probably know that I prefer functionality first and foremost. Therefore it should be no surprise that I can't stand the new car's interior. I didn't care for the quality of the cheap interior in my '91 and I don't care for it in my '96. The difference is that they are/were more logically laid out and not nearly as painful to retrieve important info.

 

I agree, I am 6' and found the lack of headroom to be surprising. If I was going to race one with a helmet on I would have problems...

 

I don't understand. I'm 6'4", and when I sat in one, I wasn't touching the headliner.

 

It is a very wide car, 75.5 in. 4th gen was 74" , 2010 Mustang is 73.9 in, a Malibu is 70.3 in, and a 3 series coupe is 70.2 in. In my opinion that gives it more a bigger car feel, but it also gives it the bold stand out presence. That is a place they could save size and weight, but do we really want a 6th gen that is 5 inches narrower? Making the car narrower will make it look taller.

What could we realistically expect from a 6th gen? 2-3" shaved off the sides and length?

 

I don't know. Was the one you sat in equipped with a sunroof? The salesman said that the headliner in the sunroof equipped cars was much thicker than the cars not so equipped. I don't know if that is true or not. The first thing I did when I sat in it on the showroom was to adjust the seat to where I would want it and my head was so close to the headliner that it was not funny...

 

I agree with that. In fact, if I didn't follow such things, I could be convinced that the Camaro was a slightly shorter wheelbase version of the Challenger. Park the Camaro next to the Challenger, and it's the only car which the Camaro doesn't dwarf. But the Challenger doesn't dwarf it either.

It's not only the width, it also has a very high cowl which exaggerates the mass greatly. The car is just plain big...no tip toeing around that.

I also wonder if this gen will make it's mark on the auto-X and road course, as previous Camaros have. I agree that visibility from the cockpit will probably have you taking some penalty seconds, from all the unseen cones you'll hit.
The a-pillars are probably the thickness of my thighs.

 

That's what I'm interested to see. Those are hard-core handling guys who will run with whatever cars work. And if they don't work, they'll let you know (Chewbacca).

 

Optioning out a Camaro as I would want it pushes it to over $38K. At that price point, several cars similarly or better equipped come to mind including the Mustang. 370Z, Challenger, G37s coupe or even the Genesis coupe. Actually, once you start hitting at or near the $40K range I'd even have to put a base Corvette in that mix as well even though it's a bit more pricy.

If the only thing a person cares about is horsepower and torque for the dollar spent then the Camaro is a heck of a deal but for an all-around performance car to live with long term, I think there are vehicles out there at or near the same price range that I would say are as good or a better value for the money.

What it comes down to is personal preference.

As I said above, the new Camaro is a good stab at things and I don't have any complaints that would necessarily keep me from buying one but I think they have a ways to go if they want to really appeal to other than just Camaro enthusiasts.

 

Y'know, another car that looks pretty decent when you see it on the road.

It also doesn't seem like a pony car contender, but rather something that goes toe to toe with nissan's Z-car.

 

It isn't much of a contender, They dropped the ball by not offing the 4.6L V8 in the coupe. MotorTrend got 14.2 @ 99mph with the top of the line Genesis coupe. The Nissan Z car is much faster (13.3 @ 107mph )and doesn't have a back seat so it really isn't in the same class of car as that. The only thing the Genesis coupe has going for it is RWD, other wise it would just be another Mitsubishi Eclipse sporty chicks car.

 

The Genesis Coupe is a pretty decent car, especially for the money. Whether a performance minded buyer would buy one over a 370 or a 'Stang or a Camaro is questionable but I think it's at lease a valid contended for the average buyer looking for an affordable, good looking, good handling, good performing two door coupe (whether one is looking for two or four seats).

I wouldn't really call it a "pony car" either but then again, what constitutes a "pony car" is mostly a matter of opinion and everone seems to have one about that issue.