The Nova didn't get the seperate sub-frame until 1968!!! That and it was below the f-body on the GM food chain....so why in the world do you think the Nova set the platform for the f-body???

 

I seem to also remember Nova being at the bottom of the barrel too. If you were driving a Nova, it was a sure sign that you either were unwilling or were unable to afford more.

A Chevelle was one notch above.

That doesn't mean I don't like those cars....but that's just the way it was. For every Nova SS, I'd see a hundred Nova 4-doors with straight six or 307. You'd see about a thousand base Chevelles for every big block.

With all that said....I believe that old names can carry alot of equity. Like an inheritance...you can respect it, nurture it and make it grow.

Or, you can blow it all , like a drunken sailor.

 

Or you could resurrect it and really screw things up. This applies most to names which have already had their reputations killed.

Nova, Fiero, Malibu: Goodbye!

 

I am again with the Pres DH here. If no regard is given to a name, it won't get any, unless it is almost as good or better than what it was or is percived to be. Fact is, when most hear Chevelle or Nova, they think of high powered musclecars and don't care about the models that were V6's or whatever. When people hear the name Impala they think B-Body, they think of a full-size, V8, RWD sedan, with an available higher performance option. The current Impala is not that and shouldn't have been called it. They should have came up with something new. FWD is BS and shouldn't be used on cars that were RWD, its for use on cheap econo cars. Even F**d didn't leave RWD as much as GM did and certain markets, now they all want to bring it back because they were idiots to switch in the 1st place.

Lets be real here, the GTO should be an American car, a new design, have some ties to what it was visually, a car without a limit on production, and be more affordable. It is none of those things. It is a rushed, imported car with the name GTO on it and turned into a Pontiac. I am a believer in doing things right and to the fullest to make the best and greatest, something GM used to do. Now they've taken a great name and used it on a car that isn't a Pontiac and should not be a GTO, as said before, it should be a Monaro. The GTO and Pontiac however, are not as popular/known as Chevrolet and the Camaro is, if similar tactics are used with a 5th Gen, it will work against them, maybe on a Chevelle too or any other name they decide to bring back. I feel the GTO being what it is, is working against them because every1 I talk to away from the boards doesn't like the idea, and you always get 1 of these , or "GM is stupid," or "cars today just aren't done right," and to be honest, if I was working on these kinds of cars or any cars and heard alot of people say those things, (they wouldn't cause I'd do things right) I would want to improve and change things completly so people would say different and have high regard for what I was doing because it means that much to me, its called passion. I just don't think they have it enough or care that much, and that needs to change. All we get are lousy decisions, excuses, non-spectacular cars, and vehicles that are about nothing but money and not the car or what the buyer really wants.

 

That's probably true. But let's not forget one all important fact.

For the thousands of high powered muscle cars that everyone thinks of today.....millions of plain jane 4 doors rolled off the assembly line to make them possible.

 

Like when? Over the past 20 years, the best thing GM has been able to do is bleed money like they've just had their throat cut ...

I think a lot of people have some seriously thick Rose coloured glasses on at the moment ...

 

Do all of your friends think the 3rd gen is the best looking Camaro, too?



GM forgot how to make a RWD car. They're still making badass RWD LS1's in Australia, so GM imported one, rather than waiting 5 years to design a new one.

There will always be the closed minded types who hate the car because it's not American, or whatever random nitpicky reason, but for every closed minded guy who's too old school for his own good, there are 5 who are glad to see RWD performance back at GM, with at least some semblance of affordability.

Every "boo hoo, they're ruining the GTO name by making a high powered Pontiac sedan out of it" whiner has several other "Hey, a new GTO with more HP than most every car out but the Cobra and Corvette? Cool!" guys right behind him.

"Not agressive enough, needs more hood scoops and tachs and spoilers, the only GTO I remember is the one I saw in Dazed and Confused" doesn't really get much attention anymore, it's the same old tired record.

 

The way I see it, the difference between "legendary" names of a bygone era and "legendary" names today is: RWD performance potentials vs FWD dead ends. Whan I mean is that when you think about those 60s-70s cars, even the dinky little 6cyl's, you think "Oh man, the things I could with to that car!". The things you COULD do. If you so chose. You could mod the hell out of it and make yourself a street killer. It has the basic setup inherently built into it. The potential is the same, whether an original SS or an original 6cyl stripper. Not so today. I don't care if a Focus can outrun those old cars. Does anyone feel real passion for a Focus, Neon, et al that look like imports and have "Domestic Rice" written all over them? I know I could never feel that. Style and chassis have no relation in this. I don't feel the passion for FWD Cadillac Eldorados, regardless of how gorgeous they are. Those old RWD cars, ALL of them, not just the performance models and the SS models, it's like they're soldiers on a field, like beasts waiting to come out of hibernation. Those are the cars of preference for most of us on here. I would get tons more automotive satisfaction driving a bone stock I-6 60s car with zero power options than I would any fully loaded 90s+ FWD safetymobile. I mean RWD is the main common denominator we are MISSING today, the minimal requirement. At least give us THAT. Please. Give us the potential to build on it ourselves by spending our own money to make it a beast if we choose to, at or beyond factory specs.

Every time you turn around there's a new music video or a new movie where they're sliding around and crashing and burning one of those old cars like it doesn't mean a thing. They'll use a classic Nova but never an 87 Nova.. They'll put an old Malibu through its paces but never a modern Malibu. Honkin' Grandvilles and land yacht Fleetwoods get killed for entertainment, but never an 80s Grand Am or Cavalier, for examples. Why is that? It's for the wow factor.. it's like "hey there's a respectable heavy old RWD mean machine hunk of steel getting its ***** handed to it in a blaze of glory.. yeeeeah.. now I feel like a tough guy and I'm bored and I have no attention span and this show sucks.. what else is there to do?". Well there's nothing "mean machine" about today's cars regardless of their speed. They don't garner nearly as much respect out of the box, they have NO mysticism about them, and there's no legend potential about them. When I see those original cars from way back when, I automatically feel a sense of awe, like that car was built to serve a purpose, and there it is, loyally still serving its purpose and looking damn good doing it. Like it's got a face it's looking back at you with, and deserves respect. Most of you even like the decidedly modern 90s Impala SS that's slower than so many 2002 cars. Why do we get along with the "Whale Body" so well and seek it out? Inherent RWD potential, that's why. RWD to FWD is like a tiger to a cat. If a 1970 Chevelle LS6 was somehow turned into a FWD with the same motor, then fully restored to sparkling brand new condition, I'm sure most of us on here would feel uneasy about ever wanting to own it. I can't see how anyone wants to take a modern FWD junkcar and baby it and store it in the garage and hand it down to their kids. WTF. I just don't see how that can be done genuinely. I think that's a major difference between then and now. RWD vs FWD. Styling is a whole 'nother issue, but at least give is the right underpinnings to work with. We need RWD econoboxes. I'll take a Chevette over a Z24 Cavalier.

Just MHO, GT

 

Yeah dude, . I'm talking not only friends but any1, people that own all kinds of cars, at car shows, anywhere, etc., any1 I get to discuss cars with.

Yes, but they should have thought of that ahead of time, again lousy business decisions.

Don't get me wrong I'm glad alright, but I would've liked to see it done differently/the way it should have been.

 

i agree with everything exept the part about the videos thing,i think they drive old cars in them it's because they like them as much as us.

 

Z28Wilson, nice post... well written and clear. I see your side, and I can't pose a counter-point to what you say there. All I can offer is that I -personally- see a lot of cues and links to the 1st gen Mustang too, but I also see LOTS that is totally new and never before done. General detail, specific lines and creases, flow lines, belt line, wheels, exhaust, interior(?!?!), materials, engine, drivetrain, etc, etc. I don't dee it as "retro". Well-linked to it's past for sure, but not "retro". I think judging what we see as retro or not is a subjective thing - it's based on personal taste, not some equations or rules. That's where we have differing opinions - and I think that's OK.

So, aside from that, I am totally with you on the rest. Maybe links to it's past IS why it remains popular. As I said in another post, you can add a little, or change a little from time to time, but don't stray from the recipe that sells. I'm SURE this car has been seen and judged by MANY PEOPLE as it has gone from concept sketches to prototyping, and I doubt seriously if Ford would have approved it if it didn't get overwhelming acceptance from the focus groups - both Mustang-loyal groups(like clubs, etc) AND the general public groups that are "randomly selected". It's OK for a few of us to "not like it" or not like "something about it", nobody can win 'em all, but I'm betting the majority of the public with real $ to spend will "approve" of it enought to buy it.

But if Camaro "evolves and changes", would it still BE CAMARO? I mean, if it loses the iconic traits or spirit that we identify with that car/body, should it really have the same name? This is gross example, but I could have easily called a '73 Maverick a Mustang because it had a 302 V8, RWD, 2-door, economically priced, similar sized car that shared many peices with the Mustang (i.e. the general formula for a pony car), but it didn't have the running horse emblems, long hood/shortdeck ratio, side scoops, etc. like a MUSTANG ALWAYS HAD. Was Monza V8 a Camaro? Could it ever be? Not in my eyes... but that doesn't take anything away from each car being "special" in it's own way.

I think the guys that desire to see Camaro continue to change and evolve would really be happier just seeing "new" cars developed; remembering the Camaro for what it was, but loving the new car for what it is.
This is such a goofy example, but it's like me changing my name...
I was named at birth, and that's who I'm gonna be throughout my whole life. Sure, I'll change... I'll get older, my hair will turn gray (or fall out! ), I may get a little shorter, less muscular and less attractive(not that I ever was), hopefully a little smarter and wiser, and so on. BUT, I will ALWAYS be a white male, with hazel eyes, tall and slim, with a dimple or two, some freckles, my voice will be the same, my ears the same shape, my head the same shape, my arms the same length, and my passions the same (hopefully). So for me to suddenly become a black man, or a Chinese woman, would create chaos to those who have known and loved me all my life, and called me by name... they just wouldn't recognize me by that name anymore.
Likewise, if I physically stayed totally the same, but changed my name, now look at the confusion! Everyone that knew me would still call me by my old name - because they recognize me from my traits - but I would not respond to that name anymore. It would be crazy.

I think car model names should be treated similarly as people's names are - give it one at birth, associate characteristics with it, and leave it that way. If the formula doesn't work out, let it die gracefully - don't try to change a white male into a black female and keep the same name, or let an old model die then bring it back again as something new with the same old name. Likewise, if the model withstands the test of time and it's traits and characteristics prove themselves "timeless", then leave them there and leave the name with them, but let it age and evolve.

This is making my head hurt! It's a hard thing to explain.
I think guionM was on the right track in his initial post. Most of us are in general agreement too I think, but there are gonna be subtle differences between our thoughts and desires - that's what makes us individuals, and variety is a good thing.

 

I think all four generations of Camaro and Firebird have been true to the Camaro name... they have been their time's interpritation of the Camaro (or Firebird) , while taking it into a new era.... yet all were unmistakably Camaro/Firebird, without resorting to recycled styling.

If you want to know what I think the most eratic moniker of all time has been... it's Thunderbird.

Think about Thunderbird... what it started as... all the things it became over it's life, and what it is back to now... It's just all over the place.

 

I have never in my life seen a post that serves as so clear of an example of something I've ever written.

This post demonstrates pretty much every point I made at the begining of this thread about the perils of reserrecting a car name from the past, and how history is anything one wants it to be, regardless as to what history was... in reality.

I'm not going to say anything else beyond my point's been proven beyond all doubt.

 

....percieved reality.

I would ask......why bring back a name that has been mothballed, unless the intent was to recall something from the past models that made them legendary......and want to use that to simply sell the new model?

The danger in this is if you do it half-@$$ed you'll be lambasted.....and rightfully so.

Some would ask, if it failed the 1st time, why bring it back??

In every situation there are variables........

In the case of the Camaro.......it's mission has always been an answer to the Mustang and one-upmanship in the horsepower wars. The 6 banger versions only existed to increase sales to allow for the high performance versions. There were only the hardtop and convertible 2 door models to choose from....a pony / sports car for sure. Kinda' like building a legend from the top down.

The Impala was the family sedan....it was given the performance SS editions in part because there weren't any other platforms available in the early 60's. But it's mission was good basic transportation. It was available in many configurations, 2 door, 4 door, convertibles & station wagons. If I'm not mistaken, the Bel Air was actually an upgrade from the Impala. Built from the bottom up.

The Nova was also a car built from the bottom up, so to speak. Also available in multiple configurations. A V8 was a real tight fit in the early models.....even required a different block casting to fit the oil filter. Chevy's small car of the day....not discounting the Corvair of course.

The Chevelle was also available in 2 door, 4 door, convertible and station wagon configurations...truly a good mid-sized car.

Both the Nova and the Chevelle shared in the horsepower wars and some true legends were built off these platforms....but you could not say this was their true mission.

Cars like the Lemans, Tempest, Grand Prix, Monte Carlo had certian niches carved out for themselves...mostly personal luxury sedans.

The SS moniker has always been an add-on performance designation to nearly every Chevrolet...... you just could never be sure what car someone is refering to if they said they had an SS.......

But certian option codes and performance models made their own legends.....i.e. the GTO and in a similar fashion the Z/28....both were eventually known by those names alone.

I don't believe there is any doubt as to what the mission is / was for these cars......and I also know that anyone you ask will also know what these cars represent. The Beach Boys didn't write songs about the Catalina or Vega...LOL!

Things get real foggy as time goes by and it doesn't help when car companies slap nameplates on cars at will.....with no reason other than hoping some familiarity will lead to additional sales.

 

Just wanted to mention that "Little GTO" was never a Beach Boys song, it was by Ronnie and the Daytonas. http://www.gto.vg/default.html

For people interested in car songs in general, this is an awesome link: http://cartalk.cars.com/Radio/Music/song-index.html