Wow, it seems as if GM really wants these to sell (low $20k's) unlike Dodge and their overpriced Challenger.

It would be amazing if GM used the 3.6L DOHC as the base engine (as opposed to an OHV design). It would also be amazing if it had a modern dash/gauges, I can't stand the gauges in the Mustang, which ruins an otherwise performance bargain.

Starting in the low-$20k's? Oh, yeah, this car's a definite winner.

Sure, the tail lights are different and there some differences up front, but this look too similar to a Challenger. But the price is right, and the car can be modded to smoke the Challenger SRT8 for far less than 40k.

In my humble opinion, the new Camaro will arrive one year too late...

Don't get me wrong. I love the design. I love the retro and original camaro influences. It's a very nice design. I would buy one if they were selling them NOW... ... NOT a year from now. They've made so much hype about it that it's kind of disappointing to wait another whole year and some change.

Dodge played it right with the Callenger coming out this February. Smart move and a perfect way to maximize and capitalize on the current Hype. In my mind the challenger is going to steal a lot of the buyers who wanted the camaro but didn't want to wait.

However, most importantly, that camaro design is ahead of the curve today, but I'm pretty sure it will not be all that big a deal 2009. If you look at what every other automaker has coming out between now and then, you just can't deny the competition will be fierce by spring 2009. The Camaro will just be a side note.

They better start working on a smart and intelligent camaro that can keep up with the times. Maybe throw in a Hybrid option... some smart technology to set it apart from others in it's class.

IMHO

Gorgeous car for low $20k. Let us hope it is modder-friendly, and then the Mustang would finally have some serious competition.

Bryan:

Guess we posted at the same time, but I doubt anyone purchasing this car would car much for a hybrid option, but I'm sure there will be some tech it will have that the competition doesn't have, and even lack some tech that the competition does.

I'm sure it will do fine. Look at the Mustang... fairly basic car, and it sells like Grandma's cookies.

I wonder how close the production car is going to be to the concept one when it starts hitting production.

So far it looks like they changed the concepts side mirrors to a more conventional style just by looking at the first pic to the left, but I think that was expected for obv saftey reasons.

The car was always slated for 2009 so this isn't really new news at all. Most potential Camaro buy aren't going to buy a Mustang or Challenger. To this day I would never own Ford and my loyalties are rather indifferent toward Mopar. I grew up a GM guy and have built\restored two muscle cars. If they pull it off and retain the independent rear I will buy one. Don't get my wrong I think the Challenger is sexy as hell but I wouldn't buy one. A LS7 convertible is what I'm waiting for and if they don't make it I"ll do the swap myself.

You guys are jokin right? If you care to read closer, the 20K Camaro continuously talks about is a 6 cylinder POS. Only people who buy that are usually women (cuz they normally don't care what's under the hood).

Both Challenger and Camaro will be gobbled up and will not stay on lots long. GM is on a roll lately, and Chrysler seems to be getting their act together finally - and quite frankly, crap plastic or not, people are going to love the Dodge.

Low 20's can mean anything up to 23,995. And we're also talking about the V6 car. Not saying thats a bad thing, but whoever said the Dodge wont sell because the 2500, 2008 SRT8 cars are ''too expensive'' needs to see the difference between apples and oranges. They're all fully-optioned 420HP monsters. I see an entry V6 Challenger SXT around the V6 SXT Charger price point. That 3.5 mill with a 5speed manual will probably be fun. So still not bad.

And Challenger VS Mustang? Yes, it wil be more expensive. It always was in the past as well. But, if you think about it, even the current 5.7 has more power than the 4.6 Ford unit, and its refresh should be in the 385-400HP range. Mustang GT is 300-315, and then the next upgrade is Shelby, then you're talking stupid prices (but one helluva bullet to be sure). The car will be heavier, but even the current Charger/Magnum/300C can go toe-toe with a Mustang GT.

Good times are ahead of us :D

I test drove a V6 when they were putting the 3.8's in them. When I hit the gas it did a decent job of putitng me in the seat. Chevy's V6's, 3.0 and up are usually torquie motors.

The Mustang is no competition for this car and the Challenger is just Dodge seeing a good idea and trying to steal some of the thunder.

In the V8's I hope they don't put that stupid "skip-shift" in the manuals again. That little feature sucks really bad. I have a 97 Camaro SS with a 5.7 and 6-speed. It has the stupid skip-shift (which forces you to go from 1st to 4th). The only way to get around it is to take it over 3300 rpms (when cruising I don't want to have to go that high). If I allow the skip shift to work the car performs like a honda. I know there are work arounds but it would be nice for them to just not add it at all.

I used to wonder why they don't move the release date up to take advantage of the Transformers hype, but I'm actually glad they are not rushing it to production and potentially messing it up.

Way to go Chevy, 09 will be a good year, but seems so far away :)

Hey James, quit your bitchin and pick up one of these for $12.50 :-)
http://www.adaptiveperformance.com/SKIPSHIFT.htm

Best 12.50 you'll ever spend on a workaround!

The only thing missing from this car is a pair of milky breasts.

I'm really hoping the pricing is reasonable for the entry level V8. I've had two 85s, an 87, and an 89 Camaro. I want to make one of these my next one. But a high 30s price out of my range. Low 20s isn't bad for the base V6 but really it should start at $20,000. In the last generation thats around what they started at. A base Z28 was $26-27. They need to have the base V8 model (likely to be the SS this time around with the Z28 being the high revving model like in the 60s) out for $28-29 if they want it to sell. If the Z28 turns out to have an LS7, that can go for more but if they use the same V8 for the SS thats going in the G8 GT, it needs to be priced the same or close to it.

a TF bumblebee version would be nice.

just don't make the disc brakes caliper-less like the TF bumblebee. LOL!

I used to be a person that would turn my nose up at a v6 "base" version of a car like this. If they put the wrong v6 in it, I still will. If they put a good v6 in (like the 300+ hp DI 3.6 from the CTS), then I would take a closer look. The v8 will always be more desirable, but considering what the mustang's 4.6 is putting out, a good v6 would really make the camaro shine next to the mustang.

I agree that Feb 09 is too late (for me anyway). It feels like we've been looking at pictures of this things for ages. The retro-style fad will be half over by the time it get on the dealer's lot. More importantly, my mid-life crysis will be over by the time it gets on the dealer's lot.

I'm pretty sure the camaro ss with the 430 hp corvette motor will cost around the same price as the charger.

360hp Z28 versions with the G8 will easily be $30+

Whatever they decide to call the ridiculous 500hp+ car, it will be $50+

Cars are all too expensive... At least the chevy will be more fuel efficient.

I'm pretty sure the camaro ss with the 430 hp corvette motor will cost around the same price as the charger.

360hp Z28 versions with the G8 will easily be $30+

Whatever they decide to call the ridiculous 500hp+ car, it will be $50+

Cars are all too expensive... At least the chevy will be more fuel efficient.

The REAL question is:

do muscle cars have a "worthy" market in the day of $90 a barrel / $3.50 and up a gallon oil? By worthy, I mean a market large enough to guarantee a return on the investment, factoring in not only gas prices but coupe sales?

IMHO they will never sell 100,000 of these...unless it also has AWD as an option for the winter climes.

In total my overall opinion is with Rod. People put up a lot of mouth when something is talked about...but putting up the hard cash when the product is actually available is something completely different (as GM's historians will confirm)

Affordable macho car. It is not only cool but also affordable? I think it will sell very well. It would be even more cool if it had a flex fuel system. It would make it cool, macho, affordable and green. :)

I agree with Snake and Bryan: with gas going ever higher, will people fork over for those cars? Whats more, the Camaro isn't coming out until late 2008 as an 09 model.

By then, we'll have been seeing the Camaro concept since 2006 (its a shame that it took 3 years for it to come to market, by then most companies would already be refreshing or redesigning a model), and the hype about it will have died except in the GM and Muscle Car circles. People first saw this car in 2007 ( in the movie Transformers) by 2009 they will be thinking "this is a new car?"

And by 2009, I expect most people will be begging for $100 a barrel oil (as by then, it will probably be $120 or something), and V8 ANYTHING is going to seem a little extravagent for anyone making in the mid $40,000s a year (where most American's pay lies).

So lack-of-hype+high-gas-prices= a unknown future for the muscle car. Lets face it, its not coming out to lots of praise. The most talking being done about this car is by GM and people who already buy GM cars.

I think GM's problem is that it doesn't know that the rules of 1960 do not apply today. GM hasn't been an destination automaker for so many people in a long time, it pretty much is only popular (among non-bulk buyers) in the mid-west and among its employees. There aren't legacy GM shoppers or "car families" anymore. Releasing models geared towards the past is not going to sell well except with those that buy only GM, or those with money to just blow on a car everyonce in a while (I do expect these to sell well with corporate execs and people in LA, if only because they want to do a burn out once or twice). Then, after those customers buy the initial few, it will be done with.

The Mustang (arguably) sold well because 2005-2006 was the final years of the Baby Boomers cultural dominance in America, and ever since they have been leaving the eyes of the media (unless, we are tracking retirement reports). Then those people bought loads of nostalgic cars and such like the Mustang or the 300C, but today the Mustang doesn't sell as well as when it did. By 2009, will it be selling at all? I do not know. Like Rod said, most people will be over the retro-craze by then, and the few that are left, well, they might not buy 100,000 of these, maybe half that at most.

Hmm, GM has been taken pre-orders for the Camaro since July..

Yeah, but has GM's own history proves, pre-orders don't last forever.

What happens when the pre-orders - the people "buying into the early hype" - have their cars and are gone from the marketplace? Who will support this car then?

A Camaro will always presell - just like a Mustang and a Corvette. The marquees have long-term fans and they are the ones hopping at the bit to be the first ones to buy one, after just *hearing* a word about something new.

But GM's wants - needs - to sell 100,000 of these. 100,000 muscle COUPES in today's market is completely unheard of! Not a single company, IFAIK, in America sells even CLOSE to that number.

If they get 15,000 pre-orders, even 30,000...what next? Who will buy 70,000 more coupes in an SUV & sports sedan country??

I can see this thing selling, but not nearly the number GM is claiming. A 100,000 sales target is trouble in the making.

Cool! It will be on sale the day before analog tv's will be broadcasts digitally! But what's the price?????

@John

The SS model will likely have the 367hp LS2 that the G8 has. The Z28 model some think is slated to have the 500hp LS7. Now if they want an inbetween, then the 430hp LS3 might be an option on the SS model.

Remember that GM builds a lot more LS series V8s than just those going into the Camaro. Trucks, SUVs, the Corvette, etc all use that engine. The 367hp LS2 is just a slightly detuned LS2 likely with a different cam and ECU tuning than the 400hp LS2 that the Corvette has. So it can produce those engines in far more volume than Chrysler builds 6.2L Hemi's.

Uhm, no. The G8 doesn't have an LS2, that engine is dead. The 360 horse 6.0 is a L76. Also the LS7 is dead after 08 so it wont be in a Camaro either. Look for LS3 or possibly LS8 as the high end V8. As for people buying 100,000 coupes, how many Crudstangs sold their first year? ~170K of them, so yes 100K Camaros is very possible and probable.

Dan:

Thanks. I was going to say it first, but now I have to eat that post. 'munch munch'

Yah the 36-one horsepower V8 in the G8 is the L76, and the LS7 may very well be dead in 08. Some have stated that it may live on for a Camaro Z28 and G8-R that will be used in 09, and we know the Corvette is getting a 6.2L LS3 and a LS9.

But as far as 100,000 Camaro's goes, I do not think we will see that, as I have stated. Why? The reason the Mustang sold so well was because it was the first of these retro-muscle cars, and that was two years ago. The Camaro is launch 4 years post-new-age-muscle car hype, and thats a awful long time. Considering most cars (well, except those made by domestic manufacturers) usually see a redesign every three or (less often) four years, by now 2008 a new Mustang is going to have to be in the works if Ford wants to keep any sales in it, and the Camaro is going to seem a bit dated of a design (remember, we've been seeing this since the concept debuted LAST YEAR).

2009?? Are you joking me? I mean jeeze I thought these things were already out since I see them all the time on TV and Transformers. Consequently I've also seen more ragged 1960s and early 70s versions since the movie as well.

F the Camero, get a new Skyline cause it comes out in 2008 and will decimate all.

According to Chevy's own Camaro website the V8 is the LS2 this will likely be updated to the LS3. As of yet there has be no mention of a Z28 at all besides it's a handling package code. There is not a reason to make one with a lessor V8. For GM the engines cost about the same to make and have similar fuel economy it would just increase production cost. This is not a G8 but rather a modified GTO. Just as the GTO received LS motors so shall the Camaro.

People find this attractive?! From certain angles it has a mean stance, but overall it looks like they took a classic idea and mutated it into a wanna-be robot muscle car. look at the front grille! the car looks like a rejected cast member from that horrible CGI Cars movie.

I generally agree with the previous posts that state that 100000 vehicles sold mark might be a lofty number. I think the Camaro is well designed and if the base model has a competent V6, it will be the volume seller. The problem is really two fold. First, these vehicles fall into a difficult catagory to maintain those sales numbers. (It will sell to nostalgia types or as a weekend vehicle with those with money to burn), but buyers tend to move on from these cars for more practical vehicles after the initial rush has worn off. Second, America is facing the possibility of high gas prices as the norm ( we have historically been shielded from generally high gas in the pas , 70's oil crunch not withstanding). The commutes of many Americans has increased in time/distance and gas costs play a major factor in their budgets. The appeal of the muscle car wanes in this environment (just like it did in the 70's) as more practical and efficient cars take a higher priority for the consumer.

Now to my understanding this is going this is SRT 6.1 425 hp version!! Wouldn't the R/T and 6 banger be alot less!! I don't think that to high considering thats thier top model!!

I don't understand why everyone is griping!! This is 40k yes!? But, isn't the SRT there top of the line model! The R/T and the 6 banger will be much less!!

These are not muscle cars. They are pony cars. Some might be to young to remember. I still own a 70 z28 that I drive almost every day. Great car runs like a top easy to work on. Even a pony with large motor is still a pony. I have had half a dozen different motors over the years in it. 35o 427 454 and the 496 that is in to this day. The 496 was built in 83 along with a six speed this old car keeps up with most things built today. Cost to run is rather cheep. insurance is very cheep. Unlike any new sports car. Gas is about the same as the new mustang gt500sc gets 14 in town and 20 on the flyway. no payments.

I love this car so far. My fear is that they will price it right out from under me. Of course I'm referring to the fast model :P

Gas prices don't scare me, I have a beater for commuting and groceries. Honestly, who would consider commuting in a car like this? Gas prices aside, I would expect buyers to try to preserve cars like this, not beat them to hell in rush hour (hence the term 'beater').

It's just the old GM we've always known. Instead of advancing the state of automotive technology they fall back to gimmicks. Look where this thinking has put the company. Just the same old crap and a re-hash of and idea that was bad in the first place.

"Chevrolet Camaro Production Starts on February 16, 2009!"

--> WHY THE EXCLAMATION MARK!? Because this site is so god damn biased towards american cars? Obviously.

I hope this car is actually a good car that raises some standards. I'd hate to see GM pump out yet another retro POS in yet another effort to milk the people.

The styling is nice. The Challenger is retro, but ugly.

Chrysler has been playing the one-note BIG grille note for too long.

They seem incapable of building reliable cars, something Ford and GM are doing a lot of these days.

Hmmm...another impractical car that fanboys will gush over and memorize stats of but never actually buy.

Reggie:

It is called the torque report something the many non-American makes have struggle with out forced induction.

Loki:

They aren't impractical if they bring joy their owners. It's a lot better then being on meds for stress issues which we can do little about.

I vowed to never drive a Chebby - especially as ugly as they all turn out. The last gen Camaro looked stupid and the interior was so 80's it made me want to puke. The engine was always plenty powerful, but couldn't make up for the hideous body and interior. This upcoming Camaro? It has this Mustang driver taking a serious look.

I think the new Camara will put Cheverolet/GM back on top. I think it will be one of their best selling vehicles. It is on my wish list. Now if they can make it a flex fuel system, it would be a definite plus. It would take the 'gas hog' out of 'muscle car'.

Cool...glad to hear there will be a Camaro again.

Too bad though, it will miss the second muscle car era by about 5 years.

why did it take so freaking long

Weight.

Yeah Weight is the key here. If they follow Chryslers lead of producing tanks for cars, then this will never survive, regardless of it being a V6.

I say aim to produce the car ~3200lb which is a little shy of the last model.

Selling 100k units is easy if they can convince fleet buyers with a low base and convertible selling price. I think this can only be accomplished using a cheap engine and transmission.

I think what they need to do is have a fairly basic car priced low enough to compete with the scion TC, Altima coupe, mustang coupe, et al., in terms of base price. So I see a three tier setup required.

Base
- Cheap low-tech V-6
- M5 tranny or 4-speed auto

RS Package
- New DI V6 from Caddy
- 6 speed normal clutch manny or auto

Z28 Package
- LS3 (Or whatever)
- 6 speed DSG-esq manual

RX-7 Guy:

In case you haven't noticed (and obviously the people on this site haven't either) HORSEPOWER IS TORQUE. Horsepower is simply Torque x RPMs. In fact, it's the more favorable of the two in sporty cars (whereas trucks favor lb/ft over hp for towing). For example, a car with 100 hp and 200 lb/ft might be quick at first, but it would be SLOWER, I repeat, SLOWER than an equivalent car with 200 HP and 100 lb/ft. Why? Because the car with 200 HP can spin the wheels faster at higher rpms. Whereas the car with 200 lb/ft can simply tow more weight at slow speeds. Again, horsepower is a measurement of torque x RPMs.

Want an example? Check out this review of the euro focus, 236 lb/ft at 2,000 rpms and 136 hp! Sounds great right? Except it does 0-60 in 9.3 seconds, my 109 HP fit (the car I actually own and drive) beats that by a full second and gets better gas mileage as well.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/112_0711_european_2008_ford_focus/driving_impressions.html

"I think the new Camara will put Cheverolet/GM back on top."

I highly doubt a single car will pull GM "back on top," especially since this is NOT a car everyone will want/buy. That's a car next to impossible to make.

@rx-7 guy

showing peak numbers does not tell the whole story.

0-60 times in your comparsion did not talk about weight, or gearing, tire types and sizes, drivers, fuel type or any other possible factor that could affect the outcome of that comparsion.

no ones gonna care by the time feb 19th 2009 rolls around, too damn far away

@ RX-7 Guy:

Just because hp is dependent upon torque DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE THE SAME THING. Torque is a unit of force, while hp is a unit power. Force and power are two different things.

mf and Coolant: I think you were both responding to me (?)

Well, mf, I wasn't trying to compare those two cars, that was just one example. Also, a LOT of those factors no one's going to talk about anyways, like who was the driver!? Motortrend's testers were driving, and they test each car in similar situations and multiple times to get consistent results. Yes I know the weight of the car makes a difference, but these are not two totally different classes of vehicle, the Fit is only slightly smaller than the focus, maybe 300-400 pounds heavier, and it has 27 less horsepower, so that's a pretty close comparison. Still, all I was stating was that torque does NOT make a car fast. In fact, as I said before, in terms of sports cars, or "speed" in general, horsepower is better than torque in an all's equal comparison.

RX-7 Guy - you compare a diesel engine against a gas engine. thats retarded.
Honda Fit
5-Speed Automatic Overdrive 27 / 34 mpg 30.5 average
5-Speed Manual Overdrive 28 / 34 mpg 31 average

"Even though its specialty is overtaking, this engine doesn't do badly at standing-starts. The 0-to-62-mph time is 9.3 seconds, equating to sub nine seconds for 0-to-60. And all this with 42.7 mpg U.S. in the European combined urban/highway economy test."

doesnt matter what gm calls its v8 for a certain vehicle, they are all based on the same basic dimensions. 4.8, 5.3, 5.7, 6.0, 6.3, 7.0 have interchangeable parts since they debuted on the corvette, camaro/firebird as the ls engines.