When Barack Obama made his state of the American auto industry speech, industry watchers lampooned the President for being the “Salesman-in-Chief.” More than a few members of the automotive punditocracy supported the idea, but said BO made a bad job of it. The Autoextremist led the charge, lambasting the Prez for using the word Voldemort—I mean “bankruptcy” in public. The Detroit News auto editor has followed the president’s lead, switching from cheerleader to salesman. And a damn good one too! (By his own admission.) “When you cruise around Macomb County in an ‘Inferno Orange’ Camaro SS. People make U-turns and follow you into parking lots. They ask if they can sit in it and want to know all the trim levels. Chevy was kind enough to drop one off for me over the weekend, and I probably sold more of the muscle car for the General than any Chevy dealer in town.” Hang on; did Chevy drop off a person or a car? [apologies to Jeff Puthuff] So . . . Manny ends his tired-aid by with a small dick joke.
Say what you want about muscle cars or exotic automobiles. Drivers compensating for something … excessive displays of wealth … whatever.
They’re fun to drive and great to see.
And they put head turners into an entirely new and affordable market.
Calling the Camaro an affordable halo car makes Manny an oxymoron. By definition, a halo car is NOT generally affordable. It’s something more like . . . the Chevrolet Corvette. Only Chevy doesn’t need a halo car any more than Ford. Anyway . . .
The whole point of a muscle car is to take a relatively tame and affordable machine, lose the tame, stretch the limits of affordable (not too far) and stuff it so full of steroids it explodes in pavement shredding ‘roid rage.
By all accounts, it’s mission accomplished (for the high end SS). But the Camaro is the wrong car at the wrong time (and, yes, we said that three years ago). GM needs a mainstream success for its mainstream brand: an attractive, comfortable (for all contained), well-built, fuel efficient sedan that’s wider than the Malibu.
In short, once again, the Detroit News mistakes what they like for what their patrons need.
A pure reflection of GM: too big, too bloated and too late. Why not just call it the Monte Carlo and be done with it ?
I was really looking forward to not liking the Camaro, in a sort of a rejection of all the inane hype from GM. But now that I’ve seen and driven it (V-6), it’s growing on me like a mullet, and I dig the 29 MPG highway bonus. The car certainly is right for ten years ago, but that can be said for nearly every model GM has done.
So here we are in the future. The economy is bleak. Energy is scarce and expensive (or at least that’s the fashionable way to regard it). We have a black president, and alien invasion or meteor impact is imminent (if life follows the Hollywood movie format). And we have the Camaro.
Considering all that, hmm, now I’m leaning toward the SS.
Screw it. Let’s Ride.
Ok. I am officially sick of “Retro” styling. I really can’t take this car seriously. It looks like cartoon rendering of the original 60’s Camaro.
No offence to those who like this styling. Just getting tired of modern take on the Thunderbird/Mustang/Camaro….
Yes a wider Malibu with a small thirst,might be wonderfull.Would it sell in this market?Would it generate excitement,and showroom traffic like the Camaro has?I doubt it would.
Even the GM haters/bashers,pay attention to the Camaro.Will they buy one?Not a chance.Would the same group of bashers/haters,buy a wider Malibu aka Impala?Same answer, no they will not.
So having said all that, the Camaro is here.People are dropping,by to have a look.Open minded people are seeing Malibu’s Cobalt’s
Silverado’s Impala’s[I own one and I love it]Potential buyers are looking at huge bargains.
If a guy comes in with his wife,three kids,and dog
just to look at a Camaro.Then wifey looks at a mini van 30% discounted.The Chevy dealer might just make a sale.
The Camaro is proof that GM is not dead.GM has a great line up of the best cars they have made in decades.At bargain prices.
People make U-turns and follow you into parking lots.
How is he sure they don’t just want to take his wallet?
If a guy comes in with his wife,three kids,and dog
just to look at a Camaro.Then wifey looks at a mini van 30% discounted.The Chevy dealer might just make a sale.
What mini van does Chevrolet or GM make?
Farago: “In short, once again, the Detroit News mistakes what they like for what their patrons need.”
But if the Detroit News gave their patrons what they need, like, ohhh, The Truth About The Auto Industry and Detroit’s Place In It, they’d stop buying the Detroit News. What their patrons want is to feel like they’re doing everything right and always have and that the rest of the world is doing them wrong. And their patrons will pay for what they want.
@npbheights your right,shows how much attention I pay to minivans.When I bought the Impala,it was from a full line dealer.It must of been Pontiac Montana’s I was looking at.
My mistake.
By definition, a halo car is NOT generally affordable.
Two words: Toyota Prius
It’s something more like. . . the Chevrolet Corvette.
Yes, yes it is. You’d think they would have noticed that, wouldn’t you?
Only Chevy doesn’t need a halo car any more than Ford. Anyway…
And that’s also true. Halo cars make a lot of sense for a luxury brand, which is why it’s a crying shame that Cadillac and Lincoln don’t have them.
I argued this (in a lonely fashion, too) in the Corvette Must Die thread: no one buys Malibus and Cobalts and such because the Corvette exists. Oh, there are certainly people who buy Cobalts and then use the Corvette to excuse the sins of the brand, but that’s not the same thing. Those people wouldn’t buy a Focus because the Ford GT is better than the Corvette; they’re Chevy fans to start.
The mainstream Halo car serves the same purposes as it’s luxury equivalent: exemplify the core values of the brand and get people into the showroom. Unlike the luxury halo car, it doesn’t automatically mean the biggest, best and fastest. Toyota, as mentioned, has the Prius for this exact reason; if GM wanted a mainstream halo car, they’d have done better to put the Holden Effigy concept into production as the new Malibu.
your right,shows how much attention I pay to minivans.When I bought the Impala,it was from a full line dealer.It must of been Pontiac Montana’s I was looking at.
They don’t sell the Uplander/Montana in the US, but they do sell it in Canada and Mexico. That said, those vans are terrible; the Caravan is a far superior choice.
Camaro is simply the wrong car at the wrong time. It is a weekend toy for aging baby boomers; a third car. The few baby boomers who still feel rich will buy one. Six months after it has been released, Camaros will be clogging up the dealers lots and Chevy will be putting $$$ on the hood to move them.
Camaro is simply the wrong car at the wrong time. It is a weekend toy for aging baby boomers; a third car.
The V8 model, sure, but the V6 makes much more sense. For the price of a Civic Si, you get a rear-drive coupe with much more power, room and refinement.
But you’re right about timing. Had this come out earlier, it would have been a big hit. Right now, the kind of people who would buy the six in quantity have no money and no credit and/or are already making payments on Si’s, WRXs, GTIs, MS3s and Mustangs.
If anything, look at the Camaro as a traffic builder in the same way Chrysler will use the Fiat 500.
Gosh…that Malibu is narrow.
“When you cruise around Macomb County in an ‘Inferno Orange’ Camaro SS. People make U-turns and follow you into parking lots. They ask if they can sit in it and want to know all the trim levels.”
I’ve had the smart for almost a year, and people still come up to me in parking lots asking about it, looking inside, etc. How many people are going to do that for a year-old mullet tank?
But if the Detroit News gave their patrons what they need, like, ohhh, The Truth About The Auto Industry and Detroit’s Place In It, they’d stop buying the Detroit News. What their patrons want is to feel like they’re doing everything right and always have and that the rest of the world is doing them wrong. And their patrons will pay for what they want.
Ha, people have already quit buying that rag (and the Freep too). The News is only delivered two days a week (Thursday and Friday) with the Free Press being delivered on three days (Sunday added). The rest of the week you can get ripped off at news stands with a cut down paper.
What, Chevy isn’t going to sell a million Camaros a year?!
Sime I’m already as lonely as I’m going to get anyhow, I’m going to defend the new Camaro-
1. It will motivate showroom traffic. People will come by to see them….and perhaps see a great deal on something else. THAT is what Halo cars do, and that’s why Corvette has remained a Chevy all these years, when logic would have made it a Cadillac or at least a Pontiac. It brings in the floor traffic.
2. It will sell. Perhaps not a million, but it will sell. Look around you and you’ll notice all tons of old Camaros. Most of the buyers of the new Camaro will the single girls women in their 20’s and 30’s – the same demographic who bought most of the old Camaros. The muscle Camaros are the halo car for the all those 6 cylinder Camaros out there.
3. I like the retro look and think it’s appropriate for the Camaro just as it is the Mustang. Remember that the Ford Probe was going to be a Mustang for a while… but styling (and FWD) killed that idea – had the Probe been actually named Mustang, it would have killed sales too. So, if you’re going to revive the name you have to have a family resemblence.
Although the Camaro is not the car for me, I think it’s quite a good value proposition. Around $20K, over 300 HP, 29 mpg, 100K mile warranty….the fact is that is a lot of car for the money.
Every review I’ve read (buff mags, Edmunds, cars.com, various newspapers) has been glowing, so let’s hope that translates into real sales. They certainly need a hit.
And it’s not that surprising that the hometown paper might be slightly interested in helping out the hometown employers. Would you lambast the Montpelier Times Argus for saying “Vermont maple syrup really tastes great!” ???
The Camaro is exactly the right car. It will bring shoppers to the showrooms who may end up in a Malibu. Next year Chevy will have the Cruze, Spark, new Equinox and the Orlando. The Camaro will bring more bodies to the showroom to see all the new metal.
It will motivate showroom traffic. People will come by to see them….and perhaps see a great deal on something else.
But how long would that bump in traffic last? Are people beating down the doors of Dodge dealers to see the Challenger? They will see some new traffic, but not for very long.
It will sell. Perhaps not a million, but it will sell. Look around you and you’ll notice all tons of old Camaros.
Why did they stop production of the Camaro in 2002? Because it wasn’t selling. Less than 50,000 units sold in 1998. Less than 30,000 Camaro’s were sold in 2001. Just over 42,000 in 2002. Given the economy, do expect the Camaro to annually sell more than that?
Why did they stop production of the Camaro in 2002? Because it wasn’t selling.
A fair point and a damn good argument, but man, that design was impossibly old…. not to mention ugly…not to mention that it was assembled with all the quality of monkey dung.
Did you ever sit in one? It was in no way comparable to a variety of sporty secretary cars available in its price range at the time.
The new car is, by all accounts so far, a pretty nice ride, which to my way of thinking changes the odds. It’s possible that the new Camaro will turn out to be a Thunderbird instead of a Mustang, but let’s bet a beer on it. The Mustang has sold pretty well, and for all intents and purposes, the Camaro is identical in its demographic appeal.
Given the bad economy, I’d say that first year sales will be about 40K (I’m also expecting a dead-cat bounce in the economy) but would be double that if the economy were better.
So, a friendly bet? Of course it will have to be a domestic beer…. but it’s doesn’t have to be a funky mass-produced one, right?
@ Raskolnikov:
“Although the Camaro is not the car for me, I think it’s quite a good value proposition. Around $20K, over 300 HP, 29 mpg, 100K mile warranty”
That 100k warranty is powertrain only. The real warranty is much shorter for stuff that is much more likely to break. It ain’t no Hyundai warranty.
According to Chevy’s website, starting price is $23k plus delivery… I wouldn’t call that ‘around 20k’.
29mpg is based on Chevy’s claim. Let’s see how real world testing goes. Methinks it’ll be closer to 25 mpg on the highway… just like most other 300+ hp V6 engines.
I’m loving the Camaro now.
Inferno Orange is a horrible color though, and no green?
The Camaro is a striking design. I haven’t sat in it or driven it to know for sure, so the verdict is still out with me regarding materials and driving feel. Anyhow, the V6’s mileage is admirable – comparable to the Honda Accord V6 Coupe.
I think it is a Halo car for them in the sense of the interest it has generated. It’s overexposed without a doubt, but that still doesn’t take away from the looks and performance. I’m sure it will turn more heads than a Vette for the foreseeable future – at least with the SS. Gotta swap those swamp-ugly wheels out on the base model.
I will also defend the Camaro, it’s the type of car only GM can deliver and a car that does have a big audience out there who would like to buy it. It also draws positive attention to the brand and the entire company.
The car was actually selling in 2002 but the model cycle was up. Instead of committing money to redesign it they decided it was better spent on making more trucks and SUVS which were making more money, which most of you bashed GM for. Obviously not redesigning the Camaro and keeping it in the game was a huge mistake and very big blow to both the Chevrolet and Pontiac brands (it pretty much destroyed Pontiac at that point).
I’ve said this numerous times, if all Chevrolets reflected this type of distinctive heritage styling and did their names justice and were as well executed then perhaps GM’s story would be a little different. Other Chevrolets sharing the same showroom with this car will show just how badly styled they are from the rental Impala (bring back the 60s look and RWD for a real Impala) to the wannabe-Civic Cobalt.
I’m not going to lie, I am seriously considering ditching my G8 GT and getting a black 1SS instead. Cars that looks this epic don’t come along very often and I don’t think I want to get one that’s been pre-beat on like these types of cars generally are.
People can buy a plastic econobox from the Japanese with a reputation, this is the kind of car with the kind of styling and the kind of performance and the king of feeling and the king of heritage the Japanes could never produce.
Screw it, let’s ride x 2.
“Camaro is simply the wrong car at the wrong time. . . . Camaros will be clogging up the dealers lots and Chevy will be putting $$$ on the hood to move them.
I totally agree, and another reason I’m pissed they stole tax payer dollars to prop up a failing non-Government entity! What an ugly POS of a car, with a real narrow appeal (aging rednecks with Boz Scaggs posters in their garage). The faster these bastards go under the better, and they better cough up what they stole. There is NO American car (ok a Vette) worth over $15k, and there idiots don’t get it.
Just curious…has anyone here had enough exposure to this to comment on the headroom available?
” an attractive, comfortable (for all contained), well-built, fuel efficient sedan that’s wider than the Malibu.”
A four-door Camaro?
jkross22:
“29mpg is based on Chevy’s claim. Let’s see how real world testing goes. Methinks it’ll be closer to 25 mpg on the highway… just like most other 300+ hp V6 engines.”
No, I believe it’s the EPA number – after all, it is a direct-injected V6, and the six-speed tranny has a tall top gear.
If things weren’t so shaky in every aspect (the economy, GM BK) I’d be one to say “LET’S RIDE X3”
Of course, the Walter Mitty in me would settle for the V6 :-)
@nick r I had good look at a preprodution/pilot car,before I retired.At 5 foot 10 inches I got slightly more head room than my 2000 Firebird rag top.But at 55 years of age the new F body is a LOT easier to get in and out of.
Me thinks ageing boomers = buyers
Look around you and you’ll notice all tons of old Camaros.
Not here in Boston. I haven’t seen one in years.
As for it driving showroom traffic, in the first six months, maybe. After that, the aging baby boomers will either have theirs already or be totally bored with it.
And, btw, I owned a ’78 Firebird. I’m the target audience, and I’m completely uninterested.
“People can buy a plastic econobox from the Japanese with a reputation. . .
Are you kidding? The only time I’m forced to drive a crappy American car is when on travel, and it makes me feel cheap. The plastic, and the smell of glue is unique to the mullet built American car.
Too bad this ugly piece of shit can’t outrun its own ugliness.
Given the bad economy, I’d say that first year sales will be about 40K (I’m also expecting a dead-cat bounce in the economy) but would be double that if the economy were better.
The important question is how many Camaro’s does GM need to sell to break even. I remember Bob Lutz saying they need to sell in the region of 100K, perhaps it was more, a year to break even. Do you think they can sustain 100K sales a year for several years? Even in a good economy, you were thinking 80K, which for a full year is barely over 100K. At 40K, they won’t even get 50K for a full year. If they sell 50% more cars than the old Camaro, they would sell in the neighborhood of 60K a year. Even at twice as much, they sell 80K. If the 100K is accurate, they would fall quite a bit short of what they need to sell to break even.
This car will likely be great, but it won’t sell in nearly enough numbers to make it a success.
A four-door Camaro?
What, like the Pontiac G8?
GM may want to consider emulating what Nissan did in the 00’s:
– Tease enthusiasts about a new and exciting car, a redesign of a car that hasn’t been in production for years.
– Officially announces a flagship/halo/whathaveyou sporty car backed up with a strong marketing campaign about how the company will be making cool and exciting cars.
– Follow up with a line of products consistent with the marketing campaign’s promises of cool and exciting cars
Instead of doing what Chrysler did: Build a sexy and exciting car (what they build it from should not matter) and try to let it generate revenue for the company based solely on the fact people had fond memories of them when they were in high school with little apparent marketing behind it.
psarhjinian:
Co-Rrect! (yes, another great car that will not live up to expectations – it should have been the “Impala SS”)
mikey,
They don’t make the Montana anymore, either. GM can not even do a minivan right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDQrPnAhSmI&feature=related
Makes you want to run out and put your wife and kids into one of those awesome rides.
To be fair, the U-Body was improved by GM later on with excellent results:
They don’t make the Montana anymore, either. GM can not even do a minivan right.
As stated, they do still make the Montana and Uplander for Canada, at least as of MY2009. And they still suck just as much as they did when they were chased out of the US.
Put it this way: when Chrysler and Kia are showing you up, you’ve got problems.
Oh, there are certainly people who buy Cobalts and then use the Corvette to excuse the sins of the brand, but that’s not the same thing. Those people wouldn’t buy a Focus because the Ford GT is better than the Corvette; they’re Chevy fans to start.
@psarhjinian: What do you think made those people Chevy fans in the first place?
The aging boomers who might want this car… A lot of them are looking at portfolios that are in distress.
Of those boomers with the means to buy the car, many of them were burned by GM before and are perfectly happy with the zippy performance of a V6 Camry SE. And like the reliability a whole lot more.
Detroit burned a lot of boomers; looking to them for salvation with a toy car is probably not the best plan.
Also consider… the price of real classic iron is probably way down. Why would a boomer buy a New Camaro caricature of the old Camaro when he can have one an actual representative sample of a dream car from his youth? I just googled a bit and there’s a ’66 Mustang 2+2 Fastback for sale in Webster, MA, for $22K. Admittedly, it’s not suitable as the daily driver but for what one would pay for a decently equipped New Camaro, one could buy the Ford and a 3 year old Malibu for the daily commute.
Whoa! A ’63 T-bird convertible for $11,500? Honey! I need the checkbook! Ummm… I’ve got to pay for some Girl Scout cookies I ordered!
I don’t consider just expensive cars to be halo cars. The Corolla and Prius for example are reliability and efficiency halo cars. The Camry is the all around Halo car. Works for me.
What do you think made those people Chevy fans in the first place?
God knows…
People tend to be brand-loyal after purchase out of a need for self-justification. Chances are that a serious Chevy fan grew up riding in his/her parents’ Chevy, or their first new car was a Chevy and it treated them well, or they hang out with people who all like Chevies.
They aren’t Chevy fans because of the Corvette, they’re Chevy fans and the Corvette makes them feel better. Your halo car shouldn’t be an excuse or a sop.
It’s a cool car, as is the Camaro, but it does nothing for Chevrolet that a better Aveo, Cobalt and Malibu wouldn’t be more effective at.
I’ve had the smart for almost a year, and people still come up to me in parking lots asking about it, looking inside, etc. How many people are going to do that for a year-old mullet tank?…
Actually, after talking to you about your car and finding out what it’s real world mileage is they are probably saying: “Wow, compromising safety, utility, and performance for mileage that is really not all that great just does not make any sense.” The “mullet mobile,” however, will be cherished 30 years from now. The smart will a forgotten footnote in history, most likely listed with the Yugo.
There are far too many stereotypes left in regards to what kind of people drive what kind of cars. I am a 20 year old, non-redneck person and I take offense that people assume the Camaro is meant for baby boomers or rednecks. I myself have a 1977 Camaro and think this new Camaro is amazingly sexy and good looking. Widen your viewpoint a little people and let go of the negativity and stereotypes.
I had the opportunity today to view/sit in the 2010 Camaro. Excellent room. Sharp car. A winner, no doubt. Unbelievable attention to detail from what I witnessed. No better value out there IMO.
“I’ve had the smart for almost a year, and people still come up to me in parking lots asking about it, looking inside, etc. How many people are going to do that for a year-old mullet tank?…”
You mean people laughing at you?
Sorry this car doesn’t rock my bolt. That grill…ugh! The back, vey ugly, too.
I keep my tastes like in the 60s, Challenger the looker (yeah crap interior), Mustang the keeper, and Chevelle-Camaro-other-countless-brands’- whatevers, forgetable.