+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: 2009 Camaro is a go (/showthread.php?tid=4613)
Pages:
1
2
- G.Irish - 08-14-2006
HAULN-SS Wrote:I just hope it doesnt end up like the 05+ mustangs. Everybody and their brother driving one
Shit you'd better hope that everyone and their brother drives them, otherwise it will be gone again. Besides you've gotta accept the fact that if you are driving a sub $30k car that is worth having you are not going to enjoy any sort of exclusivity unless its a homologation special (i.e. Integra Type-R, Evo RS, etc.).
- Goodspeed - 08-14-2006
Yep, for this car to happen GM had to be sure that 100,000 of them would sell each year...I guess its now obvious that their bean counters figured they would sell that much annualy.
I predict they'll advertise the crap out of this car, with all that "American Revolution" stuff they have going on etc. If you look at the main reasons the last generation died, one was the fact that the cars were meant for 20-somethings but only 40 year olds could afford the 40k plus price tag. Also, GM did a terrible job advertising these cars the last time around....a few magazine ads and thats it. Hopefully it'll stay alive this time.
- .RJ - 08-14-2006
Goodspeed Wrote:one was the fact that the cars were meant for 20-somethings but only 40 year olds could afford the 40k plus price tag
Camaros/Firebirds NEVER had $40k+ price tags. You could easily get a Z28 in the low 20's (or cheaper) brand new.
The reason it failed is because the car sucked. Around the time I got out of school I drove a new Firebird WS6, always loved the way the car looked (on the outside) and the sounds it made. The interior sucked, looks like a playskool interior kit (i.e. standard GM crap), bus sized steering wheel, terrible ergonomics and squeeks/rattles in a brand new car.... and the seating position was like driving a bathtub. Who wants that crap?
- ViPER1313 - 08-14-2006
Me 8)
- .RJ - 08-14-2006
You drive a SHO..... your logic is clearly screwed up
At the time, I was driving the LunchboxÔäó, and anything with a worse interior than that thing gets a big "F".
- Goodspeed - 08-14-2006
2002 CHEVROLET CAMARO SS VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS
Description: Sport coupe / convertible
Model Options: Sport coupe / convertible
Wheelbase: 101.1 inches
Overall Length: 193.5 inches
Engine Size: OHV 3.8-L V6 OHV 5.7-L V8
Transmission: V6: Manual/5, Auto/4 V8: Manual/6, Auto/4
Drive: Rear
Braking: Power 4-disc/ABS
Airbags: 2 (front)
Gas Mileage: V6 M/5: 19/31 mpg V6 A/4: 19/31 mpg V8 M/6: 19/26 mpg V8 A/4: 18/26 mpg
MSRP Price: $ 18,000 to $ 37,000
I know you could get them for good prices, but I distinctly remember certain models like the Firebird WS6 Convertible, which had a base MSRP of 32k, would border the 40k mark after markups and options etc.
The only F-body I've been in was an LT1 SS Camaro, and it was a huge boat of a car...tons of room, you sat so low, and man was it fun
- .RJ - 08-14-2006
Goodspeed Wrote:Firebird WS6 Convertible, which had a base MSRP of 32k, would border the 40k mark after markups and options etc.
Markups on an american car? Hardly.... if you were paying MSRP for anything from the Big 3, you're a terrible negotiator. They've been handing out pretty deep discounts off sticker price for a long time, and the WS6 car I drove didnt have a sticker price anywhere near $40k. Even the 35th aniversary drop-top cars werent that expensive.
- G.Irish - 08-14-2006
Yeah but that would be like saying the Mustang was too expensive because a new Cobra costs around $40k. The average Mustang (even a GT) isn't anywhere near that expensive and neither was the average Camaro. Price wasn't the problem with the Camaro at all. They just let the design languish for too long while the Mustang improved. It wasn't even really that the Mustang definitively passed up the F-Body in performance.
- .RJ - 08-14-2006
G.Irish Wrote:It wasn't even really that the Mustang definitively passed up the F-Body in performance.
And until the '05 mustang was released, the Camarobirds handled better stock vs stock.... the 95+ mustang was also definately sucking in the interior/ergo/NVH department too, I guess the difference is in the exterior looks and marketing.
- Evan - 08-14-2006
The mustang has always been a victim of its own success.
The 94 car looked great when it came out. (at the time, it was a "throwback" design too, especially compared to the outgoing fox body)
but it looked dated after a couple years after everyone bought them.
In 2000 the updated car looked great. Ford did the "new angle" thing 5 years before the current trend of angular cars. They still look pretty good IMO but again there are tons of them.
IMO the 05 mustangs look old already.
(and someone needs to tell ford that "vintage style" interior does not mean take the exact same interior out of a 30 year old car and put it in a new one)
- Dave - 08-14-2006
I love how the WS6 looks and sounds. That is the last/only good statement I will say about camaros and firebirds. Personally, I think all previous models were ugly and I don't miss seeing them at dealerships I pass by. I only rode in Thayer's camaro once, and I could never own one. No wonder he loves the supra so much :-).
- Jeff - 08-14-2006
We just traded in a Firebird saturday. Silver/black leather. V8...automatic. It looks nice...but thats about it. I guess it would be a 98 or 99. I never saw the keytag to be sure. The only Camaro I have ever driven was a LS1 with a 6 speed. It was fast as crap. But the interior was all broken. I dunno....those cars never did anything for me.
- HAULN-SS - 08-14-2006
The WS6 birds are not the "hot shit" ones. Well, some of them were, some of them werent. The anniversary ones were the 180+mph cars, that had black beauty rings, yellow paint, crazy graphics.
I'd rather have had a ram air trans am. And really, i wish I had bought one when it was about 4 years old, and sold it now for twice what I paid for it. Those things went up in value like crazy for some reason. All of them are still 20+ around here for a nice example. As for handling, i never drove one in any twistys, but they were fast as crap in a straight line.
- Dave - 08-14-2006
i thought the WS6 was the same thing as the Camaro SS and had the ram air thingamajig, thus being the best evaR. What is the difference of the ram trans am?
- HAULN-SS - 08-15-2006
The ram air transam had slightly less power(15 less I think), and the ram air was part of the "forumula firebird" package. I think they stopped doing ram air except for the 35th anniversary of the "Firebird" instead of the TransAm...so the hot shit (yellow/black) ones arent really TransAms, they're firebirds, with a formula package, with the WS6 motor. Blah..i probably confused yall and myself.
- ButtDyno - 08-16-2006
Kaan Wrote:by the time 2009 comes around... who the hell is going to be able to afford the gas that would have to go into that bastard?The 06 Vette gets 17 city, 27 highway... not great but neither is the WRX, Evo, STi, etc. I would think this would be in the same range.