According to GM's Fastlane Blog, Bob Lutz has ordered that all pre-production Camaros have all of their camouflage removed.
Lutz has ordered the removal of all camouflage so that further aerodynamic and cooling efficiency testing can be done. What this means is that from now on until the Chevy Camaro is finally released all spy photos of the coupe and convertible will be fully undisguised.
In addition to the announcement, GM also released an official teaser image of the production Camaro.
Full Story: GM Fastlane Blog
Related Stories:
2010 Chevy Camaro Caught Nearly Naked!
Chevrolet Camaro Production Starts on February 16, 2009!
Comments (17)
OH MY GOD!! AMAZING!
Posted by Noya | January 3, 2008 4:25 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 16:25
NOT!!
Posted by Noya | January 3, 2008 4:27 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 16:27
Nice looking, but I would like to see it in person.
Posted by longdxcommuter | January 3, 2008 5:02 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 17:02
proportion just arnt righ compared to concept
Posted by o | January 3, 2008 6:19 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 18:19
Crap. That's what it is. It's futuristic alright, straight from a bad 80's movie. I have two major issues with it. First, why are the windows so short? I've noticed this on all cars (Dodge?!). WHY? I'd love to drive a full size car with the visiblity of a Dodge Viper...... I'd like to hang my arm out of the window while crusing down the highway on a nice summer day, not have it sitting at ear level.... This is what happens when car designers think that everything needs 20 inch rims. The second issue. What is this car going to look like at the drag strip. I'm not talking about a the local rich kid coming down to show off, I'm talking gear head fully loaded stuff. Take a look at the mid 90's Camaro. While I personally didn't love it, it did look good with a full exhuast kit, blower and drag slicks. The 80's Mustangs have a similar look. The 90's Mustang, umm, no, they were just to girly looking, the new models have made good progress in fixing this.
So GM, when you get around to updating the Camaro again in a decade look at what people will do to this car. Start there, and maybe you'll come up with something that didn't fall out of Robocob.... That or just go ask Holden to design it. The new GTO looks so much sexier.
Posted by Brian | January 3, 2008 10:46 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 22:46
This needs a 4 cylinder turbo diesel. 0-60 won't matter much when you can only drive it on the weekends because of 10 dollar gas.
Posted by mf | January 3, 2008 11:40 PM
Posted on January 3, 2008 23:40
@ Brain
From what I was reading, the reason why the windows are shorter and the doors are taller, is to help prevent side impact Intrusion from taller vehicles. A Lot of new production cars are the same way.
Posted by SteelCity1981 | January 4, 2008 5:11 AM
Posted on January 4, 2008 05:11
HOLY CRAP those windows are short!! Imagine going to a drive thru, you wont be able to fit the bag of food through those windows!!
That thing must have HUGE blind spots.
But who cares just put a big engine in it and call it a day!!
Posted by CtK | January 4, 2008 7:29 AM
Posted on January 4, 2008 07:29
Hilarious.. People are complaining about windows and blind spots... Have you ever driven a camaro before!!?!!.. Guess not. Go buy a grocery getter and let your wife drive the man's car. Sports cars never comply with perfect ergonomics. I'm concerned with the dimensions but I find it hilarious that people are more worried about fitting a super sized fat bag through a window so they can fling it all over the interior.
Posted by GHST | January 4, 2008 11:32 AM
Posted on January 4, 2008 11:32
Personally I like the looks, although a billet aluminum grille would be on my short list. Fully independent suspension (FINALLY) and the wonderful sound of a free breathing V8. 400+ HP. Price at 30-35K. I have a commuter car already.
Test drive, please!
Posted by Kell | January 4, 2008 1:02 PM
Posted on January 4, 2008 13:02
A 4 cylinder diesel huh. Poseurs should stop posting on the sports cars. Muscle cars should be muscle cars, not cars that look the look but have no power.
Stupid side impact beams. Government regulations may make cars safer, but they ruin a lot of the better aspects of cars. What if I want to be risky? They government should let me decide what kind of safety gear I want in my car. European cars are more powerful and lighter weight than those imported to the USA. Why is the government stabbing us in the back? I didn't vote for that...
Posted by Cheap Car Lover | January 4, 2008 1:33 PM
Posted on January 4, 2008 13:33
What? European cars are built with the same safety features if not more so then american cars.
Posted by SteelCity1981 | January 4, 2008 6:27 PM
Posted on January 4, 2008 18:27
i think he meant the cars sold in europe that arent sold in N/A EX: renault alfa romeo etc... and euro-spec versions of the models we get here.
Posted by Dane | January 6, 2008 10:05 PM
Posted on January 6, 2008 22:05
this looks too much like a vette in the rear, and the front looks nothing like the old camaros to me. this will be a disaster for GM, just the same as the GTO was. will sell a ton first year, then will be laughed at. learn from chrysler and ford, they did the "retro" trend RIGHT with the charger, challenger, and mustang. give it horizontal late 60's-esque tails, and a plain grille with just circular headlights, and now we're talkin.
Posted by erik | January 8, 2008 8:13 PM
Posted on January 8, 2008 20:13
First off, no, it does not look like a 'vette.
The "short windows" y'all speak off give it a "retro" look that GM and Chrysler have way over done with the PT cruiser and HHR and such.
Third, Instead of forceing mexicans to speak english, teach these stupid Americans how to write! It's called spell check! USE IT.
Grammer is wasted here on all you web monkeys.
Use these words correctly: Hear, Here, They're,Their, Too, Two and to. Did anyof you get past 4th grade, or were you sniffing glue the whole time. Delete this stupid comment and post a real story!
Posted by All your Base | January 10, 2008 12:49 PM
Posted on January 10, 2008 12:49
@All your base:
You're kidding, right? You misspell forcing and in the very next sentence reprove people for not using spell check?
You say that grammar is wasted on these "web monkeys." What you fail to address is your own lack of proficiency with the English language. Allow me to expound:
1. "y'all" is not a word
2. Use a space after a comma, okay?
3. Try putting spaces between words as well. I've heard that helps.
Goodness....
Posted by Are belong to me | January 10, 2008 5:37 PM
Posted on January 10, 2008 17:37
pretty nice muscle car but doesn't scream muscle power or extreme aggressive looks like back in the 60's!!!! a v8 with 400+ bhp =( i just hope the torque is close to 700nm if not then i guess its like a chevy version of that mustang!!! needs a supercharger lol maybe that will get it up to power i just don't want the guy in his stock I-4 or H-4 with more torque and bhp!!!!! but looks ok hope the interior isn't that wood looking or the low quality plastic!!!
but would love to see in person =)
Posted by cruse | January 25, 2008 12:40 AM
Posted on January 25, 2008 00:40