Modern Camaro Forums banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
With GM taking it on the chin, how long can they..... (note, that's a QUARTERLY loss)

1. Go before dropping certain car lines and models.
2. Hold out against the high price of gasoline.
3. Most importantly to us car guys, if gasoline never returns to a reasonable price where people can use their cars for pleasure rather than necessity, what will it mean for Camaro sales and who wants to buy a 35,000 car that justs sits it the garage mostly ?
4. Will it require premium fuel to boot ? I for one can't afford a specialty car, I need it to be a driver.
5. How is it GM is so closed yet still about a car the public has known about for two years ?
6. Avoid the Camaro from being the overpriced, looks like a Chrysler Sebring, that the GTO was ?
GM dropped the Camaro/Firebird, the GTO, and the SSR, their record as of late for longevity of performance cars, (who can afford a Corvette ?) hasn't been one to brag about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
that's why the base camaro is such a hit with me...the thought of buying a 6.2 liter v8 is beyond ridiculous. the fact that gm will put their best foot forward with the di 3.6 and the six speed makes it a player for both performance and fuel economy. the only place that gm missed the mark is the weight of the vehicle...if they had brought the camaro in at around 3200 lbs, they might have been able to make the base engine the 2.8 version of the 3.6, putting out around 200 hp and 200 torque and those numbers are for the port injected verson of the 2.8. that would go a long way in pushing up the epa numbers.

as far as whether gm will actually produce the camaro....the nytimes ran a story in today's edition about ford and gm burning through their capital reserves at such a rate that it begs the question: will they be able to hold on until they can ramp up small car production to meet the demand, while they try and unload v8 sport utes getting 12 mpg.

things do not look promising, right now, for the camaro and that's a shame..in my book. the camaro could be a poor man's vette and could weather the storm even with 4.35/gallon gasoline.


jackg
06 sts6
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,867 Posts
the only place that gm missed the mark is the weight of the vehicle...if they had brought the camaro in at around 3200 lbs
Blame technology for that. No way a 4 seater car, that's supposed to be a daily driver, meeting all the new safety regs is EVER going to weigh in like that again, unless it costs 100k, because it's using Carbon Fiber and aluminum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
there must be technology brought to bear on the weight problem of passenger vehicles, just like the effort toward more effecient bateries are being developed, lighter materials must be developed and at a reasonable cost in order to ensure that larger cars can still be marketed and still afford some measure of economy and performance; you can't have both with an overweight vehicle.


jackg
06 sts6
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top