Why the New Camaro Will Fail
6/21/06, 02:34 PM
#1
The Mustang Source FOUNDER
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 29, 2004
Location: Vestavia Hills, Ala.
Posts: 9,887
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
Why the New Camaro Will Fail
Why the New Camaro Will Fail
By Eric Peters
Published 6/20/2006 12:07:16 AM
By Eric Peters
Published 6/20/2006 12:07:16 AM
Watching Ford bathe in the glory of its resurgent, retro-style Mustang has surely been agonizing for General Motors -- as well as deja vu all over again.
Back in 1964, when the first Mustang appeared, GM also had to stand there empty handed, with nothing to offer customers but fumbling excuses -- and promises that something was in the works. Three years later, in 1967, the first Camaro finally appeared. It was a good-looking car and did well. But the Mustang had a critical three-year head start. Camaro was caught playing catch-up. It had some good years -- especially in the mid-late 1970s and through the 1980s, when Tuned Port Injection IROC-Zs were as common as Ocean Pacific shorts and boom boxes as street performers -- but faltered badly in the 1990s after a not-so-hot restyle.
Sales drooped to unsustainable levels within a few years and GM eventually cancelled the Camaro (and its sheetmetal sister, the Pontiac Firebird) after the 2002 model year.
Now GM is frantically rushing an all-new Camaro to market, perhaps as soon as 2007. The news has been accompanied by great fanfare and hagiographical commentary in the motor press -- the same way news that Pontiac would be bringing back the GTO ginned up much tub-thumping and happy scribbling back in 2003. (Much of this rah-rahing issued from the pens and laptops of over-40 guys who could remember the good old days when obstreperous V-8 muscle cars prowled the streets -- and pined for their youthful days-gone-by returning.)
But the revived GTO died quickly and quietly -- despite heroic horsepower numbers and better performance than any classic-era GTO ever delivered. Some of us saw it coming from the get-go.
The new Camaro will probably die on the vine for the same reasons -- and a couple of new ones, too.
And again, it's not all that hard to understand why. Or to see the iceberg dead ahead.
Unlike the Mustang -- which has always managed to appeal to a broad base of buyers ranging from young women to old men and everyone in between -- the Camaro is and always has been a strutting muscle machine. A car for drive-throughs, Friday night cruising, and teenage boys.
That works fine when it's 1969 -- and young, single guys can still afford to buy (and insure) such a car. It doesn't work so well in today's hamstrung, hyper-regulated and cost-inflated world. Part of what killed the latter-day GTO was its $30k price point. The young (under 30) guys who might want such a car couldn't afford it -- and the older guys who could had grown up. They wanted something less goofy. So did their wives. The same problem will surely beset the coming Camaro -- unless GM, by some miracle of Enron-esque accounting, figures out a way to sell the thing for less than $25,000.
And that still leaves the insurance issue. (Will GM offer to cover the nut?) And the reality that the market slice for cars of this type has become narrower than Paris Hilton's waistline. Ford has already vacuumed up a goodly chunk of the prospective buyers. Import sport compacts will prove stiff competition for the remainder. How many new Camaros must GM sell to make the project economically viable? And how hard will that be given the late start, limited buyer pool -- and the very real danger of $3 per gallon (or more) fuel? A 15 mpg V-8 muscle car in a world of $70 fill-ups is apt to be about as popular as Hummers and Navigators and Excursions -- sheetmetal Brontosauri that face extinction (or at least, massive discounting just to get them off dealers' lots).
These are daunting challenges.
But the thing that will drive a stake through the new Camaro's hood, deep into its small-block heart, is the polarizing, hyper-macho cod piece styling. If the production car ends up looking like the show car that's been in every buff magazine and all over the news, it will be the belly flop heard 'round the world.
The enduring genius of Ford's Mustang is that it transcends testosterone -- and the muscle car era. Fitted with a hi-po engine and stripes, it's a car that guys absolutely love. But it doesn't alienate women -- and women are half the market, don't forget (and most guys have a woman in their lives who they'd prefer not to annoy with their choice of car). The previous generation (1994-2002) Camaro was an "in your face" kind of car -- and so is this new one. You either love it -- or you hate it. And the question is, can GM afford such a confrontational machine with inherently limited appeal -- one that's already hobbled by being late to the game, fighting for a relatively small subset of prospective buyers and which will likely arrive just in time for the next ugly uptick in gas prices?
The smart money (or mine, at least) says don't bet the farm on it.
It's 2007 -- not 1967.
Like a botox'd, aerobicized, fish-netted Cher crooning on the mothballed battleship Iowa, you can sing longingly about turning back time all you like. Actually doing it, of course, is a tougher thing to engineer.
Eric Peters is an automotive columnist and author of Automotive Atrocities: Cars We Love to Hate (MBI)
6/21/06, 03:48 PM
#3
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: June 19, 2004
Location: Phoenixville, PA
Posts: 6,840
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Good piece. Every car show I got to, when anyone comes up to my car wearing a Chevy, or Bowtie, or Camaro shirt, I ask them 2 questions. the 1st is " I'm safe to say your a Chevy guy with the shirt and all" Ususall they say a resounding YES. The second question is always "how do you like the new Camaro that is coming?" About 80% of all Chevy/GM guys I have talked to DO NOT LIKE IT!!! They most all say its too edgy looking and too futuristic. One guy this past Sunday, I was at a 60's-70's Muscle Car show. I pulled my car in, and parked along the side. Not technically in the show, but I was told I could bring my car and park it for people to check out. I had a guy in a beautiful '69 Yellow Camaro Z28. I asked him, and he says they missed the boat!! He then goes on to say that GM should have done what Ford did with the Mustang. Only time will tell if this article will be a fact or not.
6/21/06, 05:06 PM
#5
I think the article is right for the most part, but so far, we've only seen a concept. There are a lot of things that they could do with the Camaro to make it competitive
1, soften up the lines a bit, maybe offer an RS trim which would not be as aggresive and more appealing to women
2. Offer a legitimate entry level car, the pervious F bodies were not refined at all. The fit and finish were awful and the V6 was unappealing. If they can at least match the fit/finish and ergo of the Mustang it will be competitive
3. The cost being spread out on the zeta platform can allow the car to be offered with an IRS, something they can do to sell the Camaro over the Mustang. Ditto for powertrains, unless the Hurricane motor is in the next car, the Chevy small blocks have a power advantage in additon to DOD and a strong aftermarket.
So if GM does it right, they can build a formidable competitor, but I don't think they have the track record.
1, soften up the lines a bit, maybe offer an RS trim which would not be as aggresive and more appealing to women
2. Offer a legitimate entry level car, the pervious F bodies were not refined at all. The fit and finish were awful and the V6 was unappealing. If they can at least match the fit/finish and ergo of the Mustang it will be competitive
3. The cost being spread out on the zeta platform can allow the car to be offered with an IRS, something they can do to sell the Camaro over the Mustang. Ditto for powertrains, unless the Hurricane motor is in the next car, the Chevy small blocks have a power advantage in additon to DOD and a strong aftermarket.
So if GM does it right, they can build a formidable competitor, but I don't think they have the track record.
6/21/06, 05:21 PM
#6
FR500 Member
Join Date: August 15, 2005
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard the zeta platform is also pretty heavy, so the Camaro could (also) be a porker. It is still a concept, so I'm pretty sure GM still can tweak (soften) the styling and pull some weight out to make it more appealing. Whatever the case, GM can not afford to screw it up.
6/21/06, 05:30 PM
#7
Originally Posted by hi5.0
I heard the zeta platform is also pretty heavy, so the Camaro could (also) be a porker. It is still a concept, so I'm pretty sure GM still can tweak (soften) the styling and pull some weight out to make it more appealing. Whatever the case, GM can not afford to screw it up.
6/21/06, 07:21 PM
#9
Originally Posted by hi5.0
I heard the zeta platform is also pretty heavy, so the Camaro could (also) be a porker. It is still a concept, so I'm pretty sure GM still can tweak (soften) the styling and pull some weight out to make it more appealing. Whatever the case, GM can not afford to screw it up.
I'm sure that the Camaro will match up pretty closely with the Mustang in terms of size and weight, it has to really exceed in terms of content and function if it will pose any challenge. The writer really did nail it on head when he said the biggest advantage the Mustang has is universal appeal. I don't believe the Camaro has the same allure in pop culture.
6/21/06, 07:46 PM
#10
Cobra Member
Join Date: July 7, 2004
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The most blazing fact that sticks out to me is the fact the Mustang appeals to men AND women of all ages. Not just men... over 40.
I just don't see many women buying that Camaro. The Stang, yes.
I just don't see many women buying that Camaro. The Stang, yes.
6/21/06, 08:49 PM
#11
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
In the late 90's I read all about the Camaros & Firebirds. The look was good enough for me. The price I could afford.
I went and test drove more than once. The power was good, but I never was comfortable sitting in the drivers seat.
I never seriously considered owning one.
The '99-2004 Mustangs were nice, but didn't have the power except for the expensive Cobras.
I am a comfortable and happy man now.
The Camaro is a last chance effort to keep interest in Chevy.
I went and test drove more than once. The power was good, but I never was comfortable sitting in the drivers seat.
I never seriously considered owning one.
The '99-2004 Mustangs were nice, but didn't have the power except for the expensive Cobras.
I am a comfortable and happy man now.
The Camaro is a last chance effort to keep interest in Chevy.
6/22/06, 04:11 PM
#12
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 14, 2004
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Galaxie, I agree that they should soften the lines, and definitely have a comparable fit and finish to the mustang. However, As far as having a power and IRS advantage over the mustang...I don't think it will matter. Its just like the 90's all over again.
6/23/06, 05:02 AM
#13
Closet American
Join Date: July 17, 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
Posts: 5,848
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I agree with most of what he said, save this paragraph:
I think he's waaaaay off the mark here. I think a little softening here and there might be needed, but otherwise, I think Chevy did an amazing job of styling a fresh new sport coupe that looks completely modern, yet still totally evokes the late '60s Camaro.
But the thing that will drive a stake through the new Camaro's hood, deep into its small-block heart, is the polarizing, hyper-macho cod piece styling. If the production car ends up looking like the show car that's been in every buff magazine and all over the news, it will be the belly flop heard 'round the world.
Youngins.
6/23/06, 09:43 AM
#15
GT Member
Join Date: June 4, 2006
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think history is repeating itself. GM has waited too long to bring back the Camaro, in my opinion, and as such, has lost too much time and market-share to the S197. And if GM doesn't offer a decent V6 with a styling that will appeal to more than the muscle-car clan, they'll have abysmal sales when they do come to market. I used to love the late '60's Camaros when I learned to drive in the '80's, but I don't like the new design. I think the beltline is too high and the roof too short - sort of looks like a chop-job to me.
All I know is that Ford has very much impressed me with the S197 and I'm planning to get one this fall. The new Camaro is coming out way too late for me to even consider it because I need to replace my '96 Saturn soon.
By the way, I learned a new word from the article: hagiographical. Judging by the usage in the article, I think the author is meaning that some sources are idealizing the history of the car and the story of its comeback.
All I know is that Ford has very much impressed me with the S197 and I'm planning to get one this fall. The new Camaro is coming out way too late for me to even consider it because I need to replace my '96 Saturn soon.
By the way, I learned a new word from the article: hagiographical. Judging by the usage in the article, I think the author is meaning that some sources are idealizing the history of the car and the story of its comeback.
6/23/06, 09:58 AM
#16
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: April 13, 2006
Location: McAllen, Texas
Posts: 2,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by karman
The power was good, but I never was comfortable sitting in the drivers seat.
The Mustang however, has a higher seat, making it more comfortable.
Long story short; you are right
6/23/06, 10:37 AM
#17
Legacy TMS Member
I had not even been in a 90's era F-body until recently. I was a passenger in a 90's Camaro last week, and I just had to wonder what GM was thinking. You had to almost lay down on the ground to get into the seat.
I know pony cars are full of ergonomic compromises. But I was shocked at how unfriendly and uncomfortable the F-body was. I am only surprised that it took until 2002 to kill it.
I know pony cars are full of ergonomic compromises. But I was shocked at how unfriendly and uncomfortable the F-body was. I am only surprised that it took until 2002 to kill it.
6/23/06, 10:41 AM
#18
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 2, 2006
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this thread is spinning into the Off Topic Zone, but I drove my friend's 1997 Trans Am and was very disappointed with the seating. The seat was so low, it made it difficult to get in, and once I was in and driving, I had a terrible view of the road due to the weird height/tilt/location of the seat. I dont care how much faster his car is than mine. I'd never own a car that felt so uncomfortable, especially compared to my Mustang.
6/23/06, 11:26 AM
#19
On performance alone, the 90's F-body smoked the SN95 Mustangs (except the Terminator).
The proportions are a little off on this Camaro Concept, the high beltline is standard fare on all new cars, and the roof will probably come up if the car is greenlighted for production
The proportions are a little off on this Camaro Concept, the high beltline is standard fare on all new cars, and the roof will probably come up if the car is greenlighted for production
