Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 97

Thread: 2007 Camaro

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Californian by nature, living in Teggsas.
    Posts
    4,130
    look okay...personally, im getting tired of the retro stuff though. no matter how hard you try, youre just not going to bring that flavor back.
    An it harm none, do as ye will

    Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Slicks
    No, theyll use the IRS in the current chassis that its supposed to be based on.
    I haven't read anything on the Camaro replacement. Didn't realize development is already that far along. What is it based on or is it fresh?
    "Racing improves the breed" ~Sochiro Honda

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by jcp123
    look okay...personally, im getting tired of the retro stuff though. no matter how hard you try, youre just not going to bring that flavor back.
    Retro for Muscle cars or Roadsters is fine because retro is their whole appeal. Sure, modern efficient engines don't have the brutal nature of a Musclecar. Call it musclecar-light, although it probably outperform the originals.
    "Racing improves the breed" ~Sochiro Honda

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    Quote Originally Posted by PerfAdv
    I haven't read anything on the Camaro replacement. Didn't realize development is already that far along. What is it based on or is it fresh?

    Most seem to think it'll be on Kappa, but im thinking it'll be on Zeta like the 2007 GTO
    I am the Stig

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by fpv_gtho
    Most seem to think it'll be on Kappa, but im thinking it'll be on Zeta like the 2007 GTO
    I don't know exactly how modifiable the Kappa is but its going to be in the Pontiac Solstice, and its supposed to run a 4-cylinder. I remember watching on SPEED, they were saying that the whole thing with the Kappa is its verstility and ability to produce small numbers of niche market models. Interesting if the same platform can accomodate an eight. I see why you're thinking Zeta.
    "Racing improves the breed" ~Sochiro Honda

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    St Marys Western Sydney
    Posts
    20,953
    From what ive heard, Kappa can only accomodate 4 cylinder engines. Alot of people have been talking here lately about Holden releasing a Torana concept at the Australian Intenational Motor Show, based of Kappa, but with a twin turbo V6. Most say it'll be "based" on Kappa, not "built" off Kappa, which could explain why theyre saying V6 for something designed for 4 cylinders.

    For any Camaro to succeed, its going to need a V8 in the lineup, but of course start with a V6 so that it can get enough sales for the business case. Zeta is a very low cost, V8 capable, RWD platform which GM already has on the drawing board for several other projects, so theres no reason why it cant be done. The only question may be if its too big..
    I am the Stig

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Californian by nature, living in Teggsas.
    Posts
    4,130
    Quote Originally Posted by PerfAdv
    Retro for Muscle cars or Roadsters is fine because retro is their whole appeal. Sure, modern efficient engines don't have the brutal nature of a Musclecar. Call it musclecar-light, although it probably outperform the originals.
    maybe but...i dont know. doesnt make me want to buy the new one over the original. it's just folly to me to copy the look since you can't use chrome bumpers or much chrome trim, are bound by aerodynamics, etc...you really just can't get the flair of the original into a new production model.

    i do like it when they take certain small elements of the original and put it into the new, like they did with the SN-95 Mustangs. 3-bar taillights, long hood/short deck, and the side scoops made it into that design so that it clearly paid homage to the original, but was by no means a copy at all.
    An it harm none, do as ye will

    Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    4,708
    Quote Originally Posted by jcp123
    maybe but...i dont know. doesnt make me want to buy the new one over the original. it's just folly to me to copy the look since you can't use chrome bumpers or much chrome trim, are bound by aerodynamics, etc...you really just can't get the flair of the original into a new production model.

    i do like it when they take certain small elements of the original and put it into the new, like they did with the SN-95 Mustangs. 3-bar taillights, long hood/short deck, and the side scoops made it into that design so that it clearly paid homage to the original, but was by no means a copy at all.
    I wouldn't call them a copy just an update. The 2005 Mustang's looks were inspired by the 1964 model, but there are diferences exterior and interior wise. If the 2007 Camaro is inspired by the 1967 Camaro, great!!! The 67 to 69 were the best looking of them all And now with modern engines, tranies and suspensions...what more could you ask for?
    "NEVER ALLOW SOMEONE TO BE YOUR PRIORITY, WHILE ALLOWING YOURSELF TO BE THEIR OPTION"

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Californian by nature, living in Teggsas.
    Posts
    4,130
    I'll admit I'm biased. There's probably not much that could convince me to buy a new car no matter how it looked, I'm just too into the classics to do that. So if I wanted one that looked like the originals, I'd get an original. Not particularly fond of the new engines, though I guess the suspensions are alright...although I could definitely go for the OD trannies nowadays. Definitely the biggest shortcoming of the classics to me is the 1:1 top gears.

    Not trying to flame, but just my $0.02
    An it harm none, do as ye will

    Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by jcp123
    I'll admit I'm biased. There's probably not much that could convince me to buy a new car no matter how it looked, I'm just too into the classics to do that. So if I wanted one that looked like the originals, I'd get an original. Not particularly fond of the new engines, though I guess the suspensions are alright...although I could definitely go for the OD trannies nowadays. Definitely the biggest shortcoming of the classics to me is the 1:1 top gears.

    Not trying to flame, but just my $0.02
    Didn't read it as a flame. You've got to admit the '05 Mustang is the super looking car. IMO the best looking Mustang ever. But I can see what you're saying about the originals and the copies...
    "Racing improves the breed" ~Sochiro Honda

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    35
    Hi all! I'm part of the newer generation. As far as cars, I've owned a Ford Escort, Toyota Tercel, Camaro Iroc (350 baby!), and currently have a 2003 v6 stang (all of these in a two year period).

    First of all, I would have gotten a v6 Camaro if they were still being made. The Stang is the only new car I've ever gotten. It cost me 12,000 without a trade-in. It was the best performance deal for the money and I couldn't afford a v8. If they bring out this 2007 Camaro, I will be a convert if it follows it's tradition of more performance, less comforts. I get GMS pricing on the GMs, so they should be as cheap as the stang for me. The 1993-2002 Camaros were ass-hat ugly, but the firebirds were awe-inspiring (in a good way). I say, screw the retro looks, give me a new, modern body with a freakin' mean hood scoop that's actually functional!

    I love the looks of the 1999-2004 stangs, but despise the new retro style coming out. As far as I'm concerned, new cars deserve modern bodies. I'm not supporting the new GTO's looks. If Pontiac is going to make a car called the GTO, it should have hood scoops, side scoops and a freakin' mean looking front end. GM should have called GTO the Holden Monaro and released it over here as a new brand sport luxury coupe/sedan with a standard v6. However, they had shitty market research on the inside.

    A 2007 Camaro can have a completely modern, perfectly aerodynamic body with mean side scoops and cowl hoods that kill (read 2005 Corvette). You say P.T. Cruiser, I say P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute."

    By the way, what's with all this boxy shit? I want a slippery, aerodynamic, fuel-efficient body with a monster of a fuel-injected engine on the inside spewing out enough horsepower to take that slippery body to 250 mph.


    These opinions are myne only.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    2,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Meltdown
    First of all, I would have gotten a v6 Camaro if they were still being made. The Stang is the only new car I've ever gotten. It cost me 12,000 without a trade-in. It was the best performance deal for the money and I couldn't afford a v8.
    Couldnt afford the insurance? Cause you can easily find a used 98-01 Z28 for 12K. (thats what im doing )
    The 1993-2002 Camaros were ass-hat ugly, but the firebirds were awe-inspiring (in a good way). I say, screw the retro looks, give me a new, modern body with a freakin' mean hood scoop that's actually functional!
    Aww i like the looks of the 4th gen camaros...

    Come on now you know thats pretty
    I'm not supporting the new GTO's looks. If Pontiac is going to make a car called the GTO, it should have hood scoops
    There working on it...

    A 2007 Camaro can have a completely modern, perfectly aerodynamic body with mean side scoops and cowl hoods that kill (read 2005 Corvette). You say P.T. Cruiser, I say P.T. Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute."
    What if the new body stlye its more aerodynamic than before? I couldnt see GM making a less aerodynamic body for the camaro.
    By the way, what's with all this boxy shit? I want a slippery, aerodynamic, fuel-efficient body with a monster of a fuel-injected engine on the inside spewing out enough horsepower to take that slippery body to 250 mph.
    Dont get your hopes up, you know the Camaro wont surpass the perfomance of the Corvette, thats on of GMs rules.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Coldenflat
    Posts
    4,557
    a new version of the camaro!? sweeeeeet. a ride in a 94 is what sparked my love for cars........VERY fun to drive

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    35
    Not the insurance, wanted a new car. I needed it to last me through college and be fairly docile. This v6 Mustang fit the bill nicely. I hate to buy used, too many bad experiences. I can go over the car with a toothbrush, looking for bad gaskets, rust, listening for noises, any kind of imbalances, etc. Then, the next day, all of my gaskets start to leak, the floor falls out from under me, The motor and transmission mounts all self-destruct, leaving me with an engine flopping around on the k-member and a broken driveshaft, etc.

    Don't really know about insurance difference between v8 and v6, the 87 Camaro IROC with the modded 350 was a beast; but, it was cheaper to insure than the mustang because it was 17 years old.

    It doesn't seem like there would be too much of a difference in premiums with the same basic model of car, anyone have any first hand experience with this? Say, a new v8 car or a new v6 of the same body style.

    I can't freakin' wait until I'm 25.

    That Camaro SS isn't bad from that quarter-view, but overall that's some ugly shit! I absolutely loved the third gens though, and the fourth-gen firebird transam.



    Forgot to add something, I know my 250 mph car isn't realistic (I was just kidding about it). I'll have to fabricate my own fiberglass body some day and put it on a single seat tube frame with a LS2 on the back to power the rear wheels.



    Damn't, forgot something else, in order to stay well on topic I think this should be the 2007 camaro body - http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/chevr...vmWouZojCuf78F

    Ohhhh, just look at that modern, aerodynamic beauty. Imagine that 2600 pound baby in rear wheel drive with a modern 5.7. I'd buy it.
    Last edited by Meltdown; 10-05-2004 at 06:38 PM.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    2,666
    Quote Originally Posted by CdocZ
    a new version of the camaro!? sweeeeeet. a ride in a 94 is what sparked my love for cars........VERY fun to drive
    It truly is something you ahve to experience to appreciate it. People just dont realize the ground pounding torque the car has throught the whole power band. And the way they thow you back into your seat when you hit the throttle, no matter if its from a stop or a rolling start. You can feel the G forces pushing you backward, i love it

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-18-2021, 05:13 PM
  2. R-35 GTR delayed until 2007!
    By Nildo in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 206
    Last Post: 07-01-2005, 01:15 PM
  3. Mustang or Camaro
    By Wagsy in forum Classic cars
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 09-06-2004, 11:36 AM
  4. Mustang Cobra or Camaro SS?
    By mechanixfetch in forum Car comparison
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-17-2004, 03:38 PM
  5. Lingenfelter Camaro
    By FERRARI~KING in forum User's rides
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-15-2003, 03:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •