Reuss deniesCamaro.......!!!!
07-28-2002, 06:48 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: OR
Posts: 2,368
I think GM doesn't know exactly how to approach the market.. They seem to have some more or less defined techinical point to try to hit.. They're going to see what their R&D team brings up, then figure out how to market it..
At least they seem know what they want engineering/tech wise.. Now if they can only figure out how package and market it.. I think GM see's the light at the end of the tunnel....although GM is not quite sure how its going to look like when its finally in the light..
At least they seem know what they want engineering/tech wise.. Now if they can only figure out how package and market it.. I think GM see's the light at the end of the tunnel....although GM is not quite sure how its going to look like when its finally in the light..
07-28-2002, 10:59 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 201
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ken S:
At least they seem know what they want engineering/tech wise.. Now if they can only figure out how package and market it.. I think GM see's the light at the end of the tunnel....although GM is not quite sure how its going to look like when its finally in the light..</font>
At least they seem know what they want engineering/tech wise.. Now if they can only figure out how package and market it.. I think GM see's the light at the end of the tunnel....although GM is not quite sure how its going to look like when its finally in the light..</font>
07-29-2002, 08:37 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Miami, FL, US
Posts: 1,512
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by !!!TED!!!:
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Camaro, Firebird very much alive
By MARK L. REUSS, Executive Director, Architectural Engineering and GM Performance Division, General Motors, Detroit
July 29, 2002
To the Editor:
It was good to see the piece on our new Performance Division in your July 15 issue ("GM wants to push high performance").
While most of the story was accurate, I would like to state that I did not say GM is looking to replace, nor is there any plan to replace the Camaro and Firebird.
What I did say was that we are looking at low-cost, rear-wheel-drive platforms for future products. These do not include Camaro and Firebird replacements.
I even stated that I did not want to be quoted as announcing plans for a replacement of Camaro/Firebird.
</font>
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Camaro, Firebird very much alive
By MARK L. REUSS, Executive Director, Architectural Engineering and GM Performance Division, General Motors, Detroit
July 29, 2002
To the Editor:
It was good to see the piece on our new Performance Division in your July 15 issue ("GM wants to push high performance").
While most of the story was accurate, I would like to state that I did not say GM is looking to replace, nor is there any plan to replace the Camaro and Firebird.
What I did say was that we are looking at low-cost, rear-wheel-drive platforms for future products. These do not include Camaro and Firebird replacements.
I even stated that I did not want to be quoted as announcing plans for a replacement of Camaro/Firebird.
</font>
There will be no Replacement...
Meaning...they will not replace the camaro with some other car... Get it? it just a play in words. No replacement means that the camaro won't go away.
------------------
South Florida F-Body Association
1994 White Camaro Z28 A4 3.23
Surface-To-Surface Anti-Rice Missile
CAI, MAF Ends, AirFoil, Headers, !CAT, Cutout, Shift Kit, STB, SFC, Tunnel Brace, Enkei Wins and SS LS1 Wing.
Wallpaper 1024x768
"When I start my car, I want the neighbors to think the world is coming to an end" - Homer Simpson
07-29-2002, 09:01 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,463
Folks don't yet your shorts in a bunch. All this quoting of one internet site and then using letters and quotes from other sources to contradict each other is going to make most of you go crazy.
The fact is GM is still building a Camaro/Firebird right now. Since when does GM let some high level exec slip up ans spill the beans about future developments?? Not too often! And how many times do these execs tell the press and public everything they are doing? Again, not to often! So quoting the daily words of one exec won't do anything but cause a stirr.
Remember it takes years to develop a new car so don't get frustrated by daily ups and downs. Or this will be a very long agonizing road ahead. A few noted people have assured us here that GM is not abandoning affordable performace. And we all know what they were talking about. So lets keep the faith and give GM some some time to make the right decisions.
[This message has been edited by 99SilverSS (edited July 29, 2002).]
The fact is GM is still building a Camaro/Firebird right now. Since when does GM let some high level exec slip up ans spill the beans about future developments?? Not too often! And how many times do these execs tell the press and public everything they are doing? Again, not to often! So quoting the daily words of one exec won't do anything but cause a stirr.
Remember it takes years to develop a new car so don't get frustrated by daily ups and downs. Or this will be a very long agonizing road ahead. A few noted people have assured us here that GM is not abandoning affordable performace. And we all know what they were talking about. So lets keep the faith and give GM some some time to make the right decisions.
[This message has been edited by 99SilverSS (edited July 29, 2002).]
07-29-2002, 10:28 AM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
I'm tired of keeping the faith. Friggin JACKASSES.
"Hey, I got a great idea... let's take one of the world's most recognized nameplates, let it languish for 10 or so years with no major redesigns, no advertising, and ZERO engineering support and then kill it because of 'low sales'..."
"Then, we'll bring out the SSR, WHICH WILL NEVER MAKE A FRIGGING DIME (***MARK MY WORDS***), and waste all that development money on what could accurately be described as the El Camino... which we could have saved a ton money on if we just brought the Ute over from the Austrailian market."
"After that, we'll ignore the ponycar market ENTIRELY and push a laughably underpowered Monte Carlo SS and Silverado SS to keep our 'performance image'."
Somebody show me the business case that has the Aztek making more money than a new F-car would have. Love to see that one.
How fookin stupid can you possibly be?
NEWSFLASH:
The 2003 Cobra is quicker than any Corvette short of a Z06, and damned close to a Z06 in a straight line.
The Silverado SS is a joke. Thanks for the nice wheels and the badging, HOW ABOUT SOME DAMNED HORSEPOWER? For the cash spent on the cosmetic bullsh!t, an eaton blower like the one on the 3800 could have been mounted on the 6.0 liter.
The Monte Carlo SS? Don't even get me started...
Dear God I wish someone at GM would see this. We are among GM's most faithful customers. I BLEED Chevrolet, and NO ONE is listening.
Here ya go, commit this to memory...
Cavalier SS - New body style and a 200hp performance option for the younger crowd.
Malibu SS - Might not even want to go there, keep working on the quality and content and eat the Camry and Accord for lunch.
Impala SS - 280hp Supercharged 3800.
Monte Carlo SS - 280hp Supercharged 3800.
S-10 Replacement - 275hp I6.
Silverado SS - 400hp OR GO HOME!
Corvette - 400hp OR GO HOME!
Corvette Z06 - +450hp OR GO HOME!
SSR - DROP IT. Waste of effort. Give us an El Camino based off of the Ute.
Now, take all that money that was flushed down the toilet on the SSR and redirect it towards a Camaro. A Mustang GT eating, 7.0 liter Z28. A razor-sharp handling SS with the gonads to blow the 2003 Cobra right off the road, and a 6 cylinder convertible that makes every 20-something year old single girl on the planet cream in her BVD's when she thinks about owning it.
I am so tired of hearing the "you just don't understand the industry" bullsh!t. Alfred Sloan bent the automobile industry to HIS will. Sloan promised that GM would make "the best car in EVERY segment", and then he made it happen. Where is that courage? Where is the vision that says "WE'RE THE BEST DAMMIT, AND WE'RE GONNA PROVE IT"????
Sloan never would have accepted the idea that Ford could beat GM AT ANY segment of the market.
He would have called the best and brightest together and said:
"Alrighty, Ford thinks they can outsell us with their Mustang, what are we gonna do about it?"
Camry and Accord? Cannon fodder. Gear the company up, get the best engineers in the world AND HIRE THEM FOR CHRIST'S SAKE (none of this "let's train a contract guy for a few years and then let him go right when he starts to realize what the hell he is supposed to be doing" nonsense). Then MAKE A BETTER CAR, and tell the world "HEY! This is a better car!!!!!"
This is America dammit. We're the best, we know it, and so does everybody else. It's about damned time GM started thinking that way too.
"Hey, I got a great idea... let's take one of the world's most recognized nameplates, let it languish for 10 or so years with no major redesigns, no advertising, and ZERO engineering support and then kill it because of 'low sales'..."
"Then, we'll bring out the SSR, WHICH WILL NEVER MAKE A FRIGGING DIME (***MARK MY WORDS***), and waste all that development money on what could accurately be described as the El Camino... which we could have saved a ton money on if we just brought the Ute over from the Austrailian market."
"After that, we'll ignore the ponycar market ENTIRELY and push a laughably underpowered Monte Carlo SS and Silverado SS to keep our 'performance image'."
Somebody show me the business case that has the Aztek making more money than a new F-car would have. Love to see that one.
How fookin stupid can you possibly be?
NEWSFLASH:
The 2003 Cobra is quicker than any Corvette short of a Z06, and damned close to a Z06 in a straight line.
The Silverado SS is a joke. Thanks for the nice wheels and the badging, HOW ABOUT SOME DAMNED HORSEPOWER? For the cash spent on the cosmetic bullsh!t, an eaton blower like the one on the 3800 could have been mounted on the 6.0 liter.
The Monte Carlo SS? Don't even get me started...
Dear God I wish someone at GM would see this. We are among GM's most faithful customers. I BLEED Chevrolet, and NO ONE is listening.
Here ya go, commit this to memory...
Cavalier SS - New body style and a 200hp performance option for the younger crowd.
Malibu SS - Might not even want to go there, keep working on the quality and content and eat the Camry and Accord for lunch.
Impala SS - 280hp Supercharged 3800.
Monte Carlo SS - 280hp Supercharged 3800.
S-10 Replacement - 275hp I6.
Silverado SS - 400hp OR GO HOME!
Corvette - 400hp OR GO HOME!
Corvette Z06 - +450hp OR GO HOME!
SSR - DROP IT. Waste of effort. Give us an El Camino based off of the Ute.
Now, take all that money that was flushed down the toilet on the SSR and redirect it towards a Camaro. A Mustang GT eating, 7.0 liter Z28. A razor-sharp handling SS with the gonads to blow the 2003 Cobra right off the road, and a 6 cylinder convertible that makes every 20-something year old single girl on the planet cream in her BVD's when she thinks about owning it.
I am so tired of hearing the "you just don't understand the industry" bullsh!t. Alfred Sloan bent the automobile industry to HIS will. Sloan promised that GM would make "the best car in EVERY segment", and then he made it happen. Where is that courage? Where is the vision that says "WE'RE THE BEST DAMMIT, AND WE'RE GONNA PROVE IT"????
Sloan never would have accepted the idea that Ford could beat GM AT ANY segment of the market.
He would have called the best and brightest together and said:
"Alrighty, Ford thinks they can outsell us with their Mustang, what are we gonna do about it?"
Camry and Accord? Cannon fodder. Gear the company up, get the best engineers in the world AND HIRE THEM FOR CHRIST'S SAKE (none of this "let's train a contract guy for a few years and then let him go right when he starts to realize what the hell he is supposed to be doing" nonsense). Then MAKE A BETTER CAR, and tell the world "HEY! This is a better car!!!!!"
This is America dammit. We're the best, we know it, and so does everybody else. It's about damned time GM started thinking that way too.
07-29-2002, 01:29 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 145
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PacerX:
I'm tired of keeping the faith. Friggin JACKASSES.
.</font>
I'm tired of keeping the faith. Friggin JACKASSES.
.</font>
I am 39 years old and I refuse to wait until I'm 45 to get a new performance car. Clearly GM has to wake up.
Ted 99 TA WS6 Conv
07-29-2002, 01:36 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,165
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 99SilverSS:
It takes a long long time to develop, engineer and produce a new car. The public rarely even notices because GM starts working on a mid cycle update or facelift as soon as the model is finished. Meaning the C6 development started as soon as the C5 program was over. Do you think these people stop working once a vehicle is produced? Not exactly. If a 5th Gen Camaro is to be produced we will see just how agonizingly long it will take to bring the car to market.
</font>
It takes a long long time to develop, engineer and produce a new car. The public rarely even notices because GM starts working on a mid cycle update or facelift as soon as the model is finished. Meaning the C6 development started as soon as the C5 program was over. Do you think these people stop working once a vehicle is produced? Not exactly. If a 5th Gen Camaro is to be produced we will see just how agonizingly long it will take to bring the car to market.
</font>
------------------
Mark
94 Z28, Red, A4, 3:23
Lone Mods--LPE CAI, !Lapeer Dragway.
(Hey, I'm a college boy I can't afford gobs of bolt-ons!)
Best time: 14.658 @ 95.1
with SES light on and Driver off! (First and only time at track)
The F-body will NEVER die.
07-29-2002, 02:03 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
"PacerX all in due time."
Due time was in 1999. GM needs to be on a 4-5 year replacement cycle. The S-10 has been in the same form for 9 years. I was working on the current Park Avenue in 1993... The car should have been reworked for a 2003 launch, but won't be.
"How long do you think it will take to engineer and develop this Cobra Killer Camaro that will make the chicks cream their BVD's?"
24-30 months from program approval. Anything else is too long. The whole idea with Lutz streamlining the development process was to get down to this amount of time. That's 1 year for development prior to the time that 52 week body tooling has to be kicked off (all of the big stamping dies are the long lead). Styling should be done already. AT MOST, grant 30 months. Base the car off of the CTS platform, shorten it, and let it rip.
"Think about your answer and add 10-15 months jsut because GM works slower than the other OEM's and thats how long it will be till your rant can be heard and answered."
I HAVE thought about the answer, and develop products for the automotive industry for a LIVING. 30 months, not a DAY more. Cut out the 6 month ahead-of-launch PPAP for suppliers while you are at it. Make it 3 and everybody saves money.
"It takes a long long time to develop, engineer and produce a new car."
30 months. The damned powertrain is already done - LS6/T56, LS6/4L60, either package a 12 bolt in the CTS body or go with a beefed IRS. CTS is ALREADY GETTING an LS1/LS6 - the front end of the car (besides exterior panels) IS VIRTUALLY DONE from a packaging viewpoint.
"The public rarely even notices because GM starts working on a mid cycle update or facelift as soon as the model is finished."
The PROBLEM is the fact that GM keeps farting out mid-cycle updates and never updates the ENTIRE VEHICLE. Look at the product cycle on a Camry some time - 4 years, 5 years, TOPS. The ENTIRE F-body PLATFORM should have been redone for 1998-1999. C6 should have launched as a 2002-2003.
"Do you think these people stop working once a vehicle is produced? Not exactly."
First, because of the contract employment situation, the same people who were with C5 when it started ARE GONE - they work for SOMEWHERE ELSE. GM is busy training a whole slew of new folks for C6 even as we speak.... they just happen to be paying the same amount for these new folks who are learning on the job as they were for the people who worked on C5 and quit.
Oh yeah, and it's not called training - it's called contract employment. "Give us a recent graduate, and we'll pay +$65 an hour to train him in the business so that he can run out and find another job for more money in 2 years."
I have a picture of the group that worked on F-car, the minivans and Impala chassis. It's a before and after picture. The before is right around 1996, after is 2001. Roughly 80% of the folks in the before picture ARE GONE by 2001.
"If a 5th Gen Camaro is to be produced we will see just how agonizingly long it will take to bring the car to market."
30 months. 30 stinking-goddamned-kick the program off-get it on the road-do it now-months. AND CANCEL THE SSR WHILE YOU ARE AT IT.... Better yet, base the 5th gen OFF OF the SSR and save some time. THEN ****-can the SSR.
"When Alfred P. Sloan ruled GM the cars wern't the best on the road but Harley Earl made them look better."
General Motors had 72% of the North American market in the 1970's because of the systems that Sloan put in place. Oh, and by the way, GM cars WERE the best on the road. Earl drew pretty cars and set up a world-class styling organization, but GM engineering (specifically Fisher Body, Chevrolet, and Hydro-matic) was the undisputed king of the industry. While it isn't as bad as Ford, GM needs to come to the startling realization that you need WORLD-CLASS engineers and designers to make WORLD-CLASS cars.
"However when Sloan ran GM taking over for Durant he just kept the corp. together and organized GM into what it is today."
Examine market share before and after Sloan. The defense rests. Oh, and one more thing, the malaise at GM can be traced DIRECTLY back to the Vega program. Cole was an idiot, and GM has been gun-shy about leading technology ever since. LET IT GO FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, IT WAS 30 YEARS AGO.
"GM listens to Wall Street today more than before."
If anybody wants Wall Street to run their business, please reference the last couple of weeks on the market.
"They work for investors more than before because competition is much sronger than before."
Up until recently, guess who the #1 stock holder in General Motors was? That's right kids... GM employees and retirees.
Due time was in 1999. GM needs to be on a 4-5 year replacement cycle. The S-10 has been in the same form for 9 years. I was working on the current Park Avenue in 1993... The car should have been reworked for a 2003 launch, but won't be.
"How long do you think it will take to engineer and develop this Cobra Killer Camaro that will make the chicks cream their BVD's?"
24-30 months from program approval. Anything else is too long. The whole idea with Lutz streamlining the development process was to get down to this amount of time. That's 1 year for development prior to the time that 52 week body tooling has to be kicked off (all of the big stamping dies are the long lead). Styling should be done already. AT MOST, grant 30 months. Base the car off of the CTS platform, shorten it, and let it rip.
"Think about your answer and add 10-15 months jsut because GM works slower than the other OEM's and thats how long it will be till your rant can be heard and answered."
I HAVE thought about the answer, and develop products for the automotive industry for a LIVING. 30 months, not a DAY more. Cut out the 6 month ahead-of-launch PPAP for suppliers while you are at it. Make it 3 and everybody saves money.
"It takes a long long time to develop, engineer and produce a new car."
30 months. The damned powertrain is already done - LS6/T56, LS6/4L60, either package a 12 bolt in the CTS body or go with a beefed IRS. CTS is ALREADY GETTING an LS1/LS6 - the front end of the car (besides exterior panels) IS VIRTUALLY DONE from a packaging viewpoint.
"The public rarely even notices because GM starts working on a mid cycle update or facelift as soon as the model is finished."
The PROBLEM is the fact that GM keeps farting out mid-cycle updates and never updates the ENTIRE VEHICLE. Look at the product cycle on a Camry some time - 4 years, 5 years, TOPS. The ENTIRE F-body PLATFORM should have been redone for 1998-1999. C6 should have launched as a 2002-2003.
"Do you think these people stop working once a vehicle is produced? Not exactly."
First, because of the contract employment situation, the same people who were with C5 when it started ARE GONE - they work for SOMEWHERE ELSE. GM is busy training a whole slew of new folks for C6 even as we speak.... they just happen to be paying the same amount for these new folks who are learning on the job as they were for the people who worked on C5 and quit.
Oh yeah, and it's not called training - it's called contract employment. "Give us a recent graduate, and we'll pay +$65 an hour to train him in the business so that he can run out and find another job for more money in 2 years."
I have a picture of the group that worked on F-car, the minivans and Impala chassis. It's a before and after picture. The before is right around 1996, after is 2001. Roughly 80% of the folks in the before picture ARE GONE by 2001.
"If a 5th Gen Camaro is to be produced we will see just how agonizingly long it will take to bring the car to market."
30 months. 30 stinking-goddamned-kick the program off-get it on the road-do it now-months. AND CANCEL THE SSR WHILE YOU ARE AT IT.... Better yet, base the 5th gen OFF OF the SSR and save some time. THEN ****-can the SSR.
"When Alfred P. Sloan ruled GM the cars wern't the best on the road but Harley Earl made them look better."
General Motors had 72% of the North American market in the 1970's because of the systems that Sloan put in place. Oh, and by the way, GM cars WERE the best on the road. Earl drew pretty cars and set up a world-class styling organization, but GM engineering (specifically Fisher Body, Chevrolet, and Hydro-matic) was the undisputed king of the industry. While it isn't as bad as Ford, GM needs to come to the startling realization that you need WORLD-CLASS engineers and designers to make WORLD-CLASS cars.
"However when Sloan ran GM taking over for Durant he just kept the corp. together and organized GM into what it is today."
Examine market share before and after Sloan. The defense rests. Oh, and one more thing, the malaise at GM can be traced DIRECTLY back to the Vega program. Cole was an idiot, and GM has been gun-shy about leading technology ever since. LET IT GO FOR CHRIST'S SAKE, IT WAS 30 YEARS AGO.
"GM listens to Wall Street today more than before."
If anybody wants Wall Street to run their business, please reference the last couple of weeks on the market.
"They work for investors more than before because competition is much sronger than before."
Up until recently, guess who the #1 stock holder in General Motors was? That's right kids... GM employees and retirees.
07-29-2002, 05:20 PM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by 99SilverSS:
PacerX again good points. You want to know why a 5th gen wasn't ready for 03? Ask Ron Zarella, and Don Hackworth where the new Camaro is and I bet you they can shed some light on the subject. Rewind to 1996 when they were at the helm and the time when GM had the opportunity to develop the newxt gen car came and went.
The Camaro also has a bigger problem than development. Where are they going to build it? Remember UAW rules....
GM budget for new vehicles is not as large as you may think. Big programs get first billing I don't know about you but I think its safe to say a new Camaro is not tops on GM's list.
Think about this little tidbit. GM's 195,000 NAO employees support 450,000 retired, widowed employees and families in pensions/ MEDICAL. When the stock market takes a dive guess what so does GM's financial planning and investments the money still keeps going out to pay for these people. So GM has to "throw billion dollar" chunks of cash at a time to this growing fund.
So now you see why GM minds its "p's" and "q's" when Wall Street says jump. GM asks when where and how high!
Think about GM's purchasing of Dawoo and the Fiat deal. Both eating away at GM's cash bank.
30 months ha thats funny. It's what they shoot for and what they tell eveyone but its amazing how long something takes when they change so many things and have a "few" 5-6 month delays. Then like magic the cost flies past the budget and then what??
GM's market share of North American sales was 55% in 1955 it has been falling ever since. Give whomever credit you want.
GM paying and training contract employees then letting them go.... your preaching to the choir, unfortunetly..
</font>
PacerX again good points. You want to know why a 5th gen wasn't ready for 03? Ask Ron Zarella, and Don Hackworth where the new Camaro is and I bet you they can shed some light on the subject. Rewind to 1996 when they were at the helm and the time when GM had the opportunity to develop the newxt gen car came and went.
The Camaro also has a bigger problem than development. Where are they going to build it? Remember UAW rules....
GM budget for new vehicles is not as large as you may think. Big programs get first billing I don't know about you but I think its safe to say a new Camaro is not tops on GM's list.
Think about this little tidbit. GM's 195,000 NAO employees support 450,000 retired, widowed employees and families in pensions/ MEDICAL. When the stock market takes a dive guess what so does GM's financial planning and investments the money still keeps going out to pay for these people. So GM has to "throw billion dollar" chunks of cash at a time to this growing fund.
So now you see why GM minds its "p's" and "q's" when Wall Street says jump. GM asks when where and how high!
Think about GM's purchasing of Dawoo and the Fiat deal. Both eating away at GM's cash bank.
30 months ha thats funny. It's what they shoot for and what they tell eveyone but its amazing how long something takes when they change so many things and have a "few" 5-6 month delays. Then like magic the cost flies past the budget and then what??
GM's market share of North American sales was 55% in 1955 it has been falling ever since. Give whomever credit you want.
GM paying and training contract employees then letting them go.... your preaching to the choir, unfortunetly..
</font>
Regardless as to how we may feel, Camaro is NOT a priority at GM at the moment. We can pick apart Zarella's words as much as we want, but he didn't say anything new or earth breaking in his initial statement, or his followup to Autoweek, and I am befuddled that so many people here have gone off the deep end over all this.
Camaro is comming back, but there are things GM has to do 1st. There is no current platform to build Camaro off of. Yes, they can use Sigma's rear suspension, but unless you want a car with the proportions of a Volvo C70, GM will have to design a new floorpan & body structure for a new Camaro (and not just chop up a CTS), which pretty much has been out in the open for quite a while.
I have no idea how far along things are regarding Camaro. I do know Lutz initiated design ideas last fall. I'm guessing the 1st ideas are probally just now begining to firm up, and with the time it actually takes to bring a car to market, if no problems develop, the next Camaro should be out a year after Mustang at the earliest (meaning 2005 as a 2006).
Zarella didn't back track, he didn't change his story, he obviously ruffeled someone's feathers (above OR below him). He said Camaro wasn't being replaced. I guess everyone forgot that there is NO Camaro to replace? He also said that there is no Camaro program. Camaro wont become a program till it get's final approval...hello?
So everyone, put down the pipe, take that extra dose of perscribed medicine, and go back to your daily business. No one's buried Camaro, and no one's given it final approval (just like we've been hearing for some time).
07-29-2002, 06:03 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by guionM:
[b] Couldn't have made those points better myself.
Regardless as to how we may feel, Camaro is NOT a priority at GM at the moment. We can pick apart Zarella's words as much as we want, but he didn't say anything new or earth breaking in his initial statement, or his followup to Autoweek, and I am befuddled that so many people here have gone off the deep end over all this.
</font>
[b] Couldn't have made those points better myself.
Regardless as to how we may feel, Camaro is NOT a priority at GM at the moment. We can pick apart Zarella's words as much as we want, but he didn't say anything new or earth breaking in his initial statement, or his followup to Autoweek, and I am befuddled that so many people here have gone off the deep end over all this.
</font>
350Z
Infiniti G35 Coupe
Mustang Mach1 / Supercharged cobra / 2005 Mustang
SVT focus (3 and 5 door)
WRX and WRX STI
EVO
Civic Si
MR2
Celica
RSX
Tiberon
SVT lightning
Neon SRT4
SRT10 Pickup
Eclipse / Sypder
Supra (?)
Sentra SER
Golf (now w/ 200hp + 6 speed)
and more
..Have been produced or approved for production and will be vying for all the Camaro owners left out to dry by GM - Many of them die hard Chevy fans left with nowhere to go unless they have $35K or more for a GTO or Corvette or want an automatic transmission (note that everything listed except the trucks can be had in stick).
Sure, the high volume programs will be the priority... but some day GM management will realize that the people screaming "CHEVY! CHEVY! CHEVY!" weren't the ones driving Malibus, Cavaliers and FWD Impalas and that a loyal fan base is worth more than they ever imagined.
I bought a Mustang because there was no new or updated Camaro to replace my old. The scary thing is - I really like it.
------------------
If it breaks, it wasn't high performance enough.
2001 Mustang Bullitt GT
2000 Jetta M5
[This message has been edited by WERM (edited July 29, 2002).]