CAMARO CONCEPT...
#3
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: July 8, 2005
Location: Northern BC, Canada
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it's not retro. does it have to be? in two or three years time the whole retro thing will be overdone several times over. They lost out on the retro trend, might as well look towards the next big thing. And this camaro is only a concept at this time. When the '05 was still a concept car it was being considered a 2 seater. The real thing will be considerably different.
#4
If they make the glass taller, I will be dissapointed. That is one of the things that makes it look long and lean. That being said, your version isn't as bad as I though it would look.
Also, the gas cap is on top of the "hip" on the concept, so there is no need for it where you have it. And, if they move that or otherwise touch the rear half of the car (besides the tail lights), I will also be dissapointed -- as the rear quarter of the car is the best feature IMHO. And, even if they did put it there, it will probably be body color (if you were going for the ss look).
If you want to get real with the production look, you should raise it just a bit and ditch the three "vents" on the side (or at least make them inserts like the SN95s). It would just be a production nightmare to make them like that (it is a pity to, as I like them).
It is not that I am dissing you work, as it is quite good, but I just don't want them to touch any of the proportions or key lines of the car. Of course they will and it will look terrible in comparrison (just like the Mustang), but I can still hope, right?
I personally am glad they didn't go the pure retro route. The Mustang and Challenger have that covered in spades. Old styling cues on a modern car without being too swoopy is the right look IMHO. I just don't have much faith that GM will pull it off when it comes to production time. Let alone what the competition will do in that time.
Also, the gas cap is on top of the "hip" on the concept, so there is no need for it where you have it. And, if they move that or otherwise touch the rear half of the car (besides the tail lights), I will also be dissapointed -- as the rear quarter of the car is the best feature IMHO. And, even if they did put it there, it will probably be body color (if you were going for the ss look).
If you want to get real with the production look, you should raise it just a bit and ditch the three "vents" on the side (or at least make them inserts like the SN95s). It would just be a production nightmare to make them like that (it is a pity to, as I like them).
It is not that I am dissing you work, as it is quite good, but I just don't want them to touch any of the proportions or key lines of the car. Of course they will and it will look terrible in comparrison (just like the Mustang), but I can still hope, right?
I personally am glad they didn't go the pure retro route. The Mustang and Challenger have that covered in spades. Old styling cues on a modern car without being too swoopy is the right look IMHO. I just don't have much faith that GM will pull it off when it comes to production time. Let alone what the competition will do in that time.
#8
I actually like the way the side profile looks much more like a real car.
The profile of this car is gorgeous... now they have to work on cleaning up some of the details in the front and rear ends and the car will be a great looker and competitor.
The profile of this car is gorgeous... now they have to work on cleaning up some of the details in the front and rear ends and the car will be a great looker and competitor.
#9
I think we won't see anything close to this when it comes to production. why you ask? I think it looks better than the corvette. I'm assumming if this car makes production that it will be in the same market as the mustang and challenger. So why would chevy offer a car that is hotter looking than the corvette for less cash?
#11
I think also that the real thing, the production model will be quite different. If you take a good look at the concept mustang in 2003; right now it's sure different. But they still kept some of the interesting features.
#13
I think also that the real thing, the production model will be quite different. If you take a good look at the concept mustang in 2003; right now it's sure different. But they still kept some of the interesting features.
#16
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 2, 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"It doesnt need to look retro." Are they bringing the Camaro back because the 05 Mustang sold so well? The new Mustang sold very well because of its retro look. Reason enough to bring the Camaro back? Should it look retro? I think it should look some what retro. Its what a number of people are looking for in cars these days.
#17
AKA 1 BULLITT------------ Legacy TMS Member
Chevy is following Ford's succesful recipe of taking the best of a model and projecting its modern evolution. The Camaro will be a winner, just like the Challenger.
#18
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I generally like the Camaro, as much because it's not so much a full throttle "repro" car like the Challenger, but a more interpretively done "retro" exercise that, while reflecting distinctive Camaro design themes and elements, doesn't try to relive the past and reproduce them 1:1. I think it is a much better mix of old and new than perhaps the Challenger, however well executed, is.
In terms of deatails, that's where I get nervous because GM is so often, though not always (Solstice), rather inept in translating compelling concepts into equally compelling production cars. The handoffs from design to engineering to manufacturing seem to be clumsy at best and compromise the design details that distinguish a memorable car from and also ran. But the Solstice and a few others show that GM does have the capability.
In terms of deatails, that's where I get nervous because GM is so often, though not always (Solstice), rather inept in translating compelling concepts into equally compelling production cars. The handoffs from design to engineering to manufacturing seem to be clumsy at best and compromise the design details that distinguish a memorable car from and also ran. But the Solstice and a few others show that GM does have the capability.
#20
Nothing GM could ever make until they gut the company will EVER sell.
"oh boy! they are using the platform from the... blah blah blah..."
Its so uninspired! Take a darn chance already, GM!
Re-releasing the Camaro just years after they CANCELLED it is sooooo GM, it's not even funny.
The car is ugly. The car will be expensive. There will probably NOT be a base model in the 25k range. It will be a last ditch one-off effort to make some bucks. And so it will inevitably fail, just like the 2002 camaro did!
- and good riddance to bad rubbish. in my opinion. Leave the DESIRABLE car making to the BIGGER 3- Ford. Dodge, and Imports (in that order). They know how to do the job right.
"oh boy! they are using the platform from the... blah blah blah..."
Its so uninspired! Take a darn chance already, GM!
Re-releasing the Camaro just years after they CANCELLED it is sooooo GM, it's not even funny.
The car is ugly. The car will be expensive. There will probably NOT be a base model in the 25k range. It will be a last ditch one-off effort to make some bucks. And so it will inevitably fail, just like the 2002 camaro did!
- and good riddance to bad rubbish. in my opinion. Leave the DESIRABLE car making to the BIGGER 3- Ford. Dodge, and Imports (in that order). They know how to do the job right.