BAD ASS TA WS6

iTrader: (5)

Don't feed the troll.

Speaking of price It'll Run. I wonder how they will play this out. ATS V is starting around $64k. That's a hopped up model gunning for M3/4 sales. Optioned SS with other models down the road I think will be spendy. Camaro will have magnetic ride in the SS standard as well. GM always gets funky with numbers and models overshadowing each other.

SSCamaro99_3

iTrader: (1)

Overall, Ithink it is pretty good. I will say the wing is a little iffy for me. The problem here is this car is not built to the ideal of this particular forum, and most mass produced cars won't be. Most of us look at F-bodies as extra fun cars. Volme sales come from peopel that have to live with them every day, and that is where the compromises that we dio not like come from. GM built the F-body we all wanted fro 1993-2001, and it was a miserable sales failure. It was inexpensive, fast, looked good, and was basically impractical other than for having fun. We love them, but most of the world does not.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

This is my biggest complaint about the front, it's just too busy/tacky with that lighting arrangement. That's the first thing which needs to be cleaned up; the lower grille/bumper skirt area on the SS is a bit annoying as well, it needs to be slimmed down in some way. The rear is a big problem, with the upper bumper contours and tail light design needing improvement. The steering wheel needs to be replaced ASAP.

z28pat

iTrader: (10)

It's got the 455 hp and pretty awesome 8speed auto going for it, the looks are lacking in my opinion a bit but I'd get one .

RAMPANT

iTrader: (17)

From the side of the base models, I got to say I think the Camaro looks nothing like the Mustang, as a few have said and looks far better than Fords effort.

As long as there is no wing on it and a spoiler, I like it. Hopefully they simplify the front on the Z cars. I'd drive one if it has head clearance for my 6'1".

Juicy J

iTrader: (5)

I typically am one of those that has trouble liking a car at first, but I love the SS 6th gen from every angle besides the rear. The rear is pretty boring, but I think the rest of the car makes up for it. Though this car does look similar to the 5th gen, which I still do not like, this car corrects the issues I had with the 5th gen... mainly being the goofy/cartoony looking front end. I really just think you throw some wheels on it and you have a really good looking car. I look forward to seeing what GM does aesthetically with special 1LE/Z28/ZL1 type packages in the future.

TT427

iTrader: (1)

No question in my mind, those 2 pics ^^^ make it easy for me. The Mustang you almost have to ask yourself what end is front...

It'llrun

Is MR actually standard on SS? I thought it was optional. If it is standard, I'm expecting the SS to MSRP in base form for right around 38k and to quickly see it top 50k for upgraded models. That pricing could indeed hurt sales. They have the option of less profit... 37k would be under current 1LE pricing and they have the benefit of saying the new performs better, gets more power, weighs less, gets better economy(expected) and has been much advanced technologically. Anyway, I'm expecting a 26k 4 banger, but perhaps they'll keep that one in the 24k range while bringing the V6 up, along with the SS.

I like the steering wheel quite well, but I agree with the "busy" aspects... kinda like the Mustang, too many lights and "trick turns" across all the plastic. It's like they were shooting for the "cool" affect rather than functionality. As for the rear, I'm not unhappy w/ it. I actually like the exterior fine in general, except the fog lamp bezels and surrounding area... too large for the lights.

I don't believe anyone actually thinks the 2 look alike, kinda like the 1967... they don't look alike, but anyone can see many similarities. Those opinions are based on specifications and design cues rather than an overall side by side view, which will show the differences nicely. The most obvious differences are in the roof lines.

Oh, and you'll easily fit into a new Camaro. The rearward vision may still suffer.

Just remember, the tail end has the large red light covers and the front end has the large white looking lights and that gaping hole... you know, like it's totally obvious which is which to basically anyone.

TheBlueKnight

iTrader: (4)

Car looks pretty good. I'm diggin the nice interior. Definitely wouldn't mind the turbo four with a boost controller and good dyno tune with the A8.

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

Oddly enough, the V6 or turbo 4 camaro base models are more affordable then the ecoboost or v6 mustangs when you match them option for option. GM priced it well with a good starting MSRP around 24k, considering how much power you can get into with the v6 model for that price compared to other cars in that category. The younger crowd is going to be thinking, why buy a honda civic si for that price with only 205hp when you can have 325hp.

spawne32

iTrader: (2)

I stand corrected, they are actually estimating the LGX v6 to be around 355hp. good gourds.

It'llrun

You're looking @ 2015 model pricing as if 2016's will get the same pricing... they won't. Expect a notable increase. Currently, we simply cannot do an accurate option to option comparison. All Mustangs get push button start, for example... not an option and priced accordingly. The new Camaro will offer this too, but we don't have pricing for this yet.

For comparison today: Chevy lists the standard V6 @ $24,700 MSRP and I'd expect the 2015 2L Turbo version to start just a few hundred higher. The base Mustang is the V6 model and starts @ $23,800. The 2.3L starts @ $25,300... it wouldn't surprise me to see the 2L start @ $25,300-26k and the V6 to be only a little higher.

SS may start 36k, but I'd be happy to see a 33k start since it already starts @ $2,200 higher than Mustang GT, 2015 to 2015. Chevy may have planning when they bumped prices last year... you know, bump it now and then either maintain with the new model or only bump it a little more because you've created a cushion already(smart thinking, really).

I'm still wondering why you think the Camaro is more affordable option to option. It's more expensive, period. Go "all out" on a Mustang GT and it's going to be over 50k ... do the same for the Camaro SS and it's going to be over 57k. That's just "gettin' stupid" on the build, but the point is, I don't see any option to option price advantage when you're paying more all the way.

The V6 Camaro is currently said to be rated @ 335hp and the 4cyl is @ 272. That's plenty of reason to reconsider the little Civic. That said, the Civic is still much lighter and most youngsters today probably believe that FWD car will offer much better economy.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

I consider the camaro a steal compared to the mustang. Looking at the base models the gt doesn't even gave brembos all around. No 8 speed auto. And it's down 20 hp and 55 ft lb of torque. Not to mention the nearly undeniable fact that it will most likely out handle it as well.

And extra 3k or so base to base is a no brainer when I look at what it offers over the mustang. On the 15 models base to base SS manual without destination they are only like 1000 bucks apart I believe. ~32.5 to ~33.5. Ford doesn't show you price with destination initially on the website. Chevrolet does. Misleading. Both without destination are like 1200 apart. Gms destination is like 100 bucks more. With destination they are like 1300 apart.
That will go up no doubt. And it should.

Difference between cheaper and better value/ more for the money. I would never expect gm to be able to sell this car for the same price as the mustang. If they dropped its performance in nearly every aspect of course they could. Hopefully the body panels and other pieces will at least be strait on the new camaro. 15 mustang owners aren't that impressed with how it's put together lol.... Get what you pay for...

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

It'llrun

You're comparing price of 2015 models and claiming that since the Camaro is only like $1,300 more, it's a steal... look at all the standard equipment you don't get with the Camaro, but do with Mustang. The Camaro has a few advantages too, but the Mustang GT gets some pretty cool features, like line lock, not available on Camaro, which I'd like to see for 2016.

The 2016 Camaro will indeed cost more. They only question is, how much more. I'm expecting the Camaro 1SS to start @ $35,995. I wouldn't be shocked if it were $36,995 instead, but I don't see that as a good spot for Chevy and they're not going to try pricing the car out of the market right away.

Since GM raised prices last year, they may just keep the new Camaro in the same pricing or very close for the 2016 model. I'd be surprised, but would also be impressed if they do.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

I know the camaro will increase in price. I have a brain. I wasn't arguing that point. My point was...
Even with a price increase to expected levels ( hopefully gm isn't stupid) the camaro is still a better performance value in my eyes. I'm also biased. But I also think it's a respectable point of view with what looks to be coming.

I agree. I'm hoping for 34,995 msrp pre destination. But 35,995 is a safe bet. I couldn't fault gm with a slightly higher than normal price increase with what the car looks to deliver. If they come in lower that's awesome. If they go over 36 they just lost... In sales.

It'llrun

I just read a little 'insider info' and we may REALLY be in for a surprise with the SS. There's a chance it really will be "super light" (by current standards). It came from a guy who I'm fairly confident has knowledge and if he's right(and he's only hinting), the Camaro SS could actually tip the scales @ 3,650 or so and maybe less! Talk about a stunner... that would be one.

It would also all but completely justify a 36k+ starting price, coupled with all we know already. That's news I'm interested in hearing. It would also very likely put the squeeze on the current Corvette in standard trim. That would be a good lead in to a mid-engine Corvette(which I personally don't support).

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

I been thinking the same thing after watching this video. Been talking about it on camaro6.

http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showth...=409305&page=3

They confirmed model for model 200+ lbs at the reveal. The other video the guy even mentions it... As if he's speaking to the doubters.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 1ss comes in under 3700 lbs. they are using small brakes standard. I would doubt the 2ss will meet that mark with bigger rotors and I'm guessing will come in around 3735 ( right at 200 under 15 2ss manual). Unless bigger brakes are part of an additional handling pack with MRC or something.

The auto will have an even easier time hitting 200 imo. The autos were heavier in the 5th gens. The new 8 speed is even lighter than the tr6060.
And that's another thing I've never been torn between an auto and manual camaro in the past. I'm really considering the auto this time...

It'llrun

They're using difference brakes from 1 to 2 SS? WOW! That's a bit much, if only for weight reduction. I mean, everyone wants the best handling and that includes awesome brakes. Where's the advantage of a 15 lb lighter car if it runs outta brakes after a lap or 2? I don't see a good trade off there if it was about weight loss. On the other hand, it may be light enough that the lighter brakes are fine. I doubt it, but we'll see.

Problem is, losing weight isn't often easy, even of you're starting @ 3,900 lb.

I'd go auto w/o question. There's just no good reason not to for a car regularly driven, considering how great they are these days. Paddle shifters make it good to go.

UltraZLS1

iTrader: (13)

It's just a popular idea floating around having bigger brakes 2ss. I'm not sure what will happen wouldn't be surprised either way. This could also explain the model to model 200 pound talk. SS hits the mark ( but only in 1ss form) and so do the 6 and 4 models. This could still be risky though and I would still look at gm as being misleading if the 2ss can't make 3735. But it's the only way I see them not getting completely lamb basted if they miss the mark.

And yes I've also thought that maybe it's just that light that the rotors will be enough. 13.3 or 13.6 front I can't remember. Just going off of what other sizes other cars are using and weight this could be a hint to a ~3650 ss. Or a hint that it won't brake very well with standard brakes and will offer larger on either a 1le type package or the MRC package ss. Really don't know right now...

Advantages either way. Offering a light as possible 1ss could offer better dominance at the strip. Easier to fit drag wheels over smaller brakes as well. While a 50-100 lb heavier 2ss with MRC and 14-15 inch rotors and bigger calipers for the track. It also gives the impression of a lower starting price with a bare bones 1ss. Something from the ford playbook...