finally a muscle car manufacturer that realized that muscle cars might need independent rear suspension.

I hope they at least make it an option. Sure a Turbo 4 might not have quite as wide of a power band as a big V8, but you're gonna get much better gas mileage out of the Turbo4. I wish car makers would go back to the early days as far as engine choices go. Chevy at one point had like 6 different engine options for the Camaro in the early days.

Ford is also considering putting their eco-boost twin-turbocharged 4-cylinder in the mustang and potentially as standard due to the CAFE standards.

"SVT:
finally a muscle car manufacturer that realized that muscle cars might need independent rear suspension."

The '04-'06 GTO has IRS.

They could put green badges on it and call it the enviro-camaro. But seriously,It sounds like a good idea to me. I'm all for it.

I'm not sure it'd actually help MPG all that much, since it's going to be a heavy car. Little engines with little torque (comparatively with a big v8) in heavy cars make little difference in MPG.

I'm impressed that nobody is complaining about this. I don't think it will be very popular, but hey choices are good.

GM has to have get rid of V6 3.1, V6 3.4 and V6 3.8 engines because they are utter crap. Those engines so many problems, after 20,000 head gasket goes bad etc....total crap.

2.0 and 2.4 Ecotech engines are the best GM made for the last 20 years.

2.0 Turbo charged...a way to go....

GM V8 engines are pretty good too :)

I'm sure that GM can squeze 300HP out of turbo charged 2.0 engine and that would smoke Mustang GT which is nothing but insufficient heavy crap.

I still don't understand why people are buying Mustang V6, and Mustang GT...it's beyond my mind.

Great, ugly and slow, but it gets 20mpg, and doesn't pollute. Better sell them for under 20k.

Make it a high performance all electric car like the Tesla, or hybrid like the Fisker Karma and then I will be impressed about GM's POS cars.

Aww man. An engine in a Camaro other than a low HP yielding 8? Thats just blasphemy.

Whats next, an interior approaching Korean quality?

Its like, someone at a US auto manufacturer has started looking at vehicles produced by other countries since 1990 or some shit.

I wonder how many of the usual complainers here have the money to buy a Nikko radio controlled car...

Dunno Hummmm. Although, I'm pretty sure its not a lack of money that allows people to deduce that most american automotive products are sub-par. The amount of choice in the market is a bigger catalyst for that, IMO.

I don't know why they make the cars so terrible. Nissan G35 coupe and G37-S coupe have so much more for same or less money.

Enough with the teasing. When is GM going to pony up the car at the Dealerships? I think it's been 2 or 3 years since the 1st pic of the Camaro was shown to the public. By the time it comes out it will no longer have the same - next generation effect to it. The Ford Mustang will probably have a new look by then. Too bad :(

Also how bout a Pontiac Firebird Model? Wait don't tell me, it's too hard to change a couple of body features here and there so maybe in another 5 years. Boooooooo

A turbo 2.0 I-4 would make me consider the car as a viable option. They'd have to up the power to 300 HP to make it worth it, but I think it would be more than sufficient to move the car out of it's own way even at 260 like the Cobalt SS. I mean, there's a weight issue there, but as long as the power to weight ratio was where it needs to be, I say go for it. Maybe the aftermarket and tuning community could squeeze more out of it like they have for the DSM/Evo and the WRX/STi, not to mention the various other turbo fours out there.

Let's see, what other cars get 20mpg average, or there abouts in 30k range:
The Acura TL does 18/26 with a dare I say 5 speed, a 3.2L engine making 258 hp and 233 lb-ft of torque and weighs 3600 lbs.
The G35 is 17/24 with yet again a 5 speed, a 3.7L engine making 306 hp and 268 lb-ft of torque, and weighs in at 3500 lbs.
The Lexus IS 250 21/29 with a 6 speed, 3.5L engine making 204 hp and 185 ft-lbs of torque, weighs 3400 lbs.
The Lexus IS 350 18/25 with a 6 speed, a 3.5L engine making 306 hp and 277 ft-lbs of torque, weighing 3500 lbs.
The BMW 328i makes 18/28 with 6 speed (finally, a modern trans), 3L engine making 230 hp and 200 lb-ft of torque and weighing 3400 lbs.
The 335i gets 17/26 with a turbo 3L, 300hp and 300 lb-ft of torque, 6 speed auto again, and weighing in at 3600 lbs.
The Dodge Charger R/T, 15/23 with again an ancient 5 speed, 5.7L engine making 335hp and 375 ft-lbs of torque, and weighing 4000 lbs.
The G8 GT, 15/24 with 6 speed (what, an American with a 6 speed?), a 6L engine making 361hp and 385 ft-lb of torque, and weighing in at 4000 lbs. 11.1 10.4
The Cadillac CTS, 17/26 with a 6 speed, 3.6L, 263 hp and 253 ft-lbs of torque, 304 hp and 273 ft-lbs of torque with DI, and weighing 3900 lbs.

Now, only one of these cars uses regular gas, and its the fastest of the bunch too. Doesn't make the worst gas mileage, and makes the most power and torque. It also has the most interior room and trunk space. Did I mention its the cheapest too?

Each one of these targets a different crowd. BMW, Lexus, and Infiniti are luxury sports cars. Acura is luxury as well but a different audience. The G8 and Charger are younger crowd more performance then comfort. The CTS is in the middle ground between younger fast crowd and luxury.

However, just to say that V8s and large displacement engines do nothing but drink gas is a pretty sad statement to make. Each one does what it does in a different way. The turbos in the BMW make it efficient and powerful, but also unreliable. The engine is pushed to the max, and will suffer because of it. The Lexus tunes its 3.5L for more power at the cost of gas. Following the pattern, it would make 14/22 to make 360 hp and rev to the sky. Displacement not tuned to the max means better gas mileage. Don't believe me, look at the 4.8L in the BMW 750i (15/23 at 4500 lbs and 6 speed) vs the 5L in the M5 (11/17, 7 speed, and 4000 lbs). The M5 makes more power, no question, but it does it at the cost of fuel. The L76 in the G8 GT can make 550 hp very easily if GM wanted, just tune it and change the cam. Just some food for thought and to clear some clouds.

"GM has to have get rid of V6 3.1, V6 3.4 and V6 3.8 engines because they are utter crap. Those engines so many problems, after 20,000 head gasket goes bad etc....total crap."

They've been phasing them out for some time, mostly due to the need to meet stricter emissions and MPG requirements while raising power slightly.

However, from what you're saying, it is clear to me that you have no idea what you're talking about. The only common issue I've seen with some older 3.1L and 3.4Ls was a failed *intake manifold gasket*. Head gasket failure is not common on these engines. They revised the gaskets, and the aftermarket followed suit (at least in the case of Fel-Pro, they have a nice PermaDry Plus intake set available). Later versions of the engine already have the revised gasket and don't suffer from this problem.

That (easy to fix, and long ago resolved) issue aside, these engines are very solid. Change the oil, and they just keep running. I've seen loads of these engines with very high mileage and they just keep chugging away.

As for the "3.8", that is an entirely different engine design. Both their 204 and 231ci (3.3L and 3.8L) Olds engines (not to be confused with the long gone 229 odd-fire chevy) have been around for AGES and are very solid proven engines. I could go into the history of this design, but suffice it to say that you are simply clueless. Look at what they did with the freakin Grand National and GNX, even way back then without the benefit of modern engine technology. That is one stellar engine design and it will be missed.

Their 3.5L and 3.9Ls don't have half the potential the 231 Olds engine did. I know it was an all-cast design, but if they could have even just redesigned it and added VVT and a couple of other goodies, that would have been pretty nice.

I think a 2.4 turbo would work well, depends on how it's tuned, Mitsubishi get a really nice fat torque curve out of their turbo 4's. Though it doesn't really kick in until about 3k rpm. Of course GM will likely cut a lot of corners with the car if they do one, like a 4 speed auto, or some other junk to ruin it. The car is really ugly as well. Still a turbo 4 would perk some interest from me. It could easily be as fast as the V8, get decent mileage, and handle better than the V8 car. If GM doesn't skimp all the other parts to try to make it a 17K bargain wonder which I bet they will.

I changed my mind about the Camaro. When I saw the concept pics I thought the car looked hot. After seeing these pics it really doesn't look very good - looks bloated. I'm pretty sure Ford will screw up the look of the 09+ Mustang and add more weight to an already overgrown pig so it probably won't matter.

I was concerned with a v6 camaro but it looks like GM has decided to put my fears to rest and shoehorned a 4 banger instead? maby they should make it a hybrid or beter yet a hydrogen powerd camaro, omg a 4 banger CAMARO i love it this means my car still can cown a low range model of the chevy, ha haha how about a desiel version for god sakes..

Why not put the 2.9L (or bigger) in it? Great way to showcase what can be done with modern diesels along with the extra torque.

Audi and BMW and maybe MB will be doing it with their sports cars for a while.

Looks good

Will be interesting to read future Camaro vs Mustang comparisons.

Lol, they're already going to produce the "Ironman" Camaro again?

"Lol, they're already going to produce the "Ironman" Camaro again?"

"Ironman"...AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Thats is so funny and witty!

AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!!!!!

Nice option for this car. Bump it up to 300 hp and then it's a deal, I mean you could have a mediocre v8 in a mustang or an advanced turbo 4 in a camaro. Better mileage and cheaper than the v8. A DI turbo 6 would do wonders with about 350+ hp, and then they could stick to smaller advanced engines for the camaro and keep the v8 engines for the corvettes. Why would you even bother with a mustang's underpowered, guzzling v8.

"I think a 2.4 turbo would work well, depends on how it's tuned, Mitsubishi get a really nice fat torque curve out of their turbo 4's. Though it doesn't really kick in until about 3k rpm."

Read up on GM's Ecotecs. Their 2.0L turbocharged ecotec makes an astoundingly flat torque curve, starting around 2K. They're tuned quite well. I just think the V6 will be a wiser choice for the entry-level model, as far as costs go.

I think it's an odd decision, something that brings bad thoughts of 2.3 turbo mustangs and the really bad 4-cyl powered 3rd generation f-bodies, but on the same token the ecotech is a decent enough engine in its own regard. I would hope they stroke or bore it out a little because even with a turbo, 260 ft/lbs of torque is no longer considered much for what this thing is going to weigh.

I think the decision to use IRS across the board was a poor decision, as Lutz correctly indicates, it is going to push pricing past the mustang, and thwart off any chance of getting volume sales at the rental lots (The bread and butter for these pony cars).

IMO, IRS should only be available on the SS. Just put a live axle better than the 7-5/8" 10-bolt that was in the 4th gen cars. That alone should drop the price significantly.

I agree, the General is taking too long to release this - The car is going to feel old and outdated before it even hits the showrooms.

That would be interesting to make: camaro vs mustang

an e100-fueled ecotec 2.0L motor is the direction to go with the new camaro. turbo, 11:1 c.r. 5-speed auto. end of story.

I own a car dealership in canada and who ever said the 3.1 3.4 and 3.8 are crap knows nothing the 3.8 is the best motor hase ever produced with little or no problems. and get 21mpg city 31 highway and is 15 years old with modernisation it could do even better

I own a car dealership in canada and who ever said the 3.1 3.4 and 3.8 are crap knows nothing the 3.8 is the best motor hase ever produced with little or no problems. and get 21mpg city 31 highway and is 15 years old with modernisation it could do even better

I own a car dealership in canada and who ever said the 3.1 3.4 and 3.8 are crap knows nothing the 3.8 is the best motor hase ever produced with little or no problems. and get 21mpg city 31 highway and is 15 years old with modernisation it could do even better

I own a car dealership in canada and who ever said the 3.1 3.4 and 3.8 are crap knows nothing the 3.8 is the best motor hase ever produced with little or no problems. and get 21mpg city 31 highway and is 15 years old with modernisation it could do even better