| ||||
|
[ Post New Message | Reply | Edit Profile | Register | Search | Current Connections | Message Board FAQ | Lost Password? ]
look at this craptastic article on new camaro Posted By: pawn65 On: 07-09-2008 @ 10:12:11 Reply | Edit http://www.arcamax.com/automotive/s-343374-594114 Eric's Autos: There Will Be No 2009 Camaro Eric Peters The new Camaro is doomed. Motorheads don't want to hear it; refuse to believe it - but ugly realities are coming down hard on the '09 Camaro that will very possibly cause GM to pull the plug before the first one ever rolls off the line. Doubt that? Consider the stillborn rear-wheel-drive next generation Chevy Impala - nixed because of concerns within GM about the possibility of meeting the pending (2012) 35 mpg fuel economy edict recently passed by Congress. A lighter front-drive car with a V-6 instead of a V-8 can make the cut; a V-8 RWD Impala can't. So it's gone. So is the talked-about next generation GTO. And the future of the G8 sedan looks not so good. GM is openly talking about scaling back the entire Pontiac division - and ending its role as a performance brand. No bull; not my opinion. Just facts. Now consider the 2009 Camaro - and the world in which it will have to swim. Gas prices are already surging toward $4 per gallon for regular unleaded. And Camaro's not even here yet. By the time the car reaches production status in about eight months or so, we may very well be at $5 per gallon. Maybe more. At the same time, the buying power of the dollar is falling down the well - so everything is becoming more expensive, not just gas. And most of us are not making more money to compensate. Quite the opposite. Inflation and income stagnation are hitting us hard. Those of us who still have jobs and have been able to maintain the same income we had a year or so ago are few, thankful - and nervous. Buying a new car is not on our agenda. And buying a frivolous new car even less so. Camaro is not an exotic; it is a "Joe Sixpack" kind of car - so middle class and working class buyer skittishness is no small thing. GM is well aware of these facts - which are going to kneecap Camaro (and any car like it) on the consumer level. Whatever the projected sales potential was two years ago should probably be cut in half. Bet your bippie that the bean counters within GM have thought about this, too. That's bad enough - and by itself could be sufficient to make going ahead with Camaro in 2009 about as sensible as building something like a Series 62 Cadillac would have been in 1979. But wait, there's more. Don't forget the 10,000 pound Tallboy bomb that's about to fall onto GM's head (and ours) in the form of the 35 mpg CAFE edict. That changes ... everything. The recession, crippling gas prices and declining buying power of the dollar are merely the coupe de grace. A V-6 Camaro could maybe meet the current 27.5 mpg CAFE requirement for passenger cars without major engineering changes/expenses or hitting buyers with a "gas guzzler" surcharge that would bump the purchase price of the car up by $1,000 or more. But 35 mpg? Only a few four-cylinder economy compacts and hybrids make it under that bar. Anything much over about 3,200 pounds with an engine larger than 3 liters is getting iffy. With a 300-plus hp V-8 engine and rear-wheel-drive? Forget it. Don't believe it? Chew on this -- The current Ford Mustang GT - a car very similar in layout/power and so on to the pending '09 Camaro - manages just 17 mpg in city driving and 26 mpg on the highway. That's with the 4 liter V-6 engine, by the way. The GT's 4.6 liter V-8 (300 hp) slurps it down at the rate of 15 mpg in the city and 23 mpg on the highway. To survive 35 mpg CAFE, the V-8 Mustang GT would have to somehow nearly double its current average fuel economy. How is this going to be achieved, exactly? Think Ford is worried about the Mustang's viability? You'd better believe it. The new Dodge Challenger is in even worse shape, CAFE wise. Its wonderful 6.1 liter V-8 won't last long in this world, given city mileage of 13 mpg - and highway mileage that isn't even out of the teens (18 mpg). Yes, a V-6 version is coming, but the most efficient engines of this size/type that Chrysler has available - like Ford - don't come close to delivering 35 mpg. Camaro's in the same pickle. Neither the base V-6 version nor the high-powered V-8 model have a prayer of achieving CAFE compliance. If they're produced, buyers will be facing huge "gas guzzler" surcharges that will only add to the growing roster of negatives arguing against making a purchase - from $75 fill-ups to the general uselessness of cars of these type, beyond their ability to provide a good time. And here's the deal: Chrysler's already on the hook; the commitment to production has been made. It will have to at least try to make a go of it. For awhile. Ford has a strong buyer base for the Mustang; a case can be made that even with gas guzzler fees and generally awful times, economically speaking, it's worth trying to hold the line - at least, for the moment. But Camaro? GM no longer has a sure bet buyer base; the name has been out of circulation for almost seven years now. That is a long time, regardless of other external issues, such as gas prices. Rebuilding a brand/make of car is tough in the best of times. In bad times, it is a fool's errand. And it's a luxury that cash-strapped, no longer number one GM cannot afford to indulge. If Camaro sinks - as all signs indicate it will - GM will lose a ton of money. Remember that unlike Challenger (which is "spun off" the existing Charger sedan) GM has had to invest a great deal in what amounts to a brand-new platform/tooling and so on to make this happen. Big sales are needed to make it up. It increasingly looks as though that is extremely unlikely to happen. Which is why GM may just abort the whole thing before it ever sees the light of day. You wait and see. = www.ericpetersautos.com or EPeters952@aol.com for comments. -- 2000 Zinc Yellow Mustang GT "Spring Feature" 1 of 917.  Posted By: ThumperNC24 On: 07-09-2008 @ 10:22:36 Reply | Top | Edit its too late for them to pull the plug at this point anyway. yeah, things are going to change a lot by 2012, but this is already a go -- http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2210351 94 Formula A4 
Hooker Cat-Back, BMR STB, 1LE Front Sway Bar, LPE CAI, Eibach Pro-Kit, UMI Adj. PHB, Koni Sport 4/3 Shocks, Taylor 8mm Wires, NGK TR55 Plugs '94 Nissan Sentra 5spd Winter Beater Posted By: 94RedFormula 
On:
07-09-2008 @ 10:25:35 Reply | Top | Edit
 Makes a lot of sense, but it still sucks - GM waited too long.  --  94 Formula M6 - Jackie - I'm the bomb diggity! ...Crunkmaro said so!  
!CAGS, Hooker Catback, Lingenfelter CAI, Trick Flow intake elbow & 20% tint!!  Posted By: BigMike On: 07-09-2008 @ 10:27:13 Reply | Top | Edit Uhhh, somehow if they magically pulled the plug now they would lose no money? I think the majority of the money slated for R&D on the new Camaro is already a sunk cost. They have to sell something to make that back. -- 
--Mike Posted By: Tyrel On: 07-09-2008 @ 10:33:40 Reply | Top | Edit sigh, i hate change. --  Posted By: jumper297 On: 07-09-2008 @ 11:03:28 Reply | Top | Edit If he doesn't understand what the CAFE standards are he should look it up before he puts his retarded ramblings in print. CAFE says that the FLEET average (meaning all vehicles under 8500 lbs.) need to hit a certain MPG. Which means the Camaro could still come out but cars like the Malibu would have to increase fuel economy and some more sub-compact types and hybrids will have to come out. They're already dumping some SUV's so that will help the average. The dumbass keeps saying that each car needs to hit the 35 mpg mark, which isn't true. -- 95 Formula 1 of 7,448 
"Life is too short to drive a slow car." Posted By: roubenbird On: 07-09-2008 @ 11:17:17 Reply | Top | Edit Even if it were, GM managed to get 30 from the LS1 6 years ago. Gee, I wonder if any of GM's technology has changed in 6 years to be able to get that mileage? I'd almost think that the LS1 with displacement on demand tech would do it. Not that any of that matters because it's just speculation on my part, but still the Camaro will sell just to earn back a little $$$ for GM's investment. -- Being rebuilt, It'll take a while: 
WS6 3o5 TBI 88' Formula, 670cfm Holley Projection Throttle Body Holley Projection Intake Mainfold, Underdrive Pulley,Dual Snorkle & Factory Cowl Induction,now with short straight pipes, UMI Subframe connectors, Fourth Gen seats, Three row Radiator, Posi rear end (2.73),TPI heads, 1.6 roller rockers 15.543 @ 88.21mph Posted By: Tyrel On: 07-09-2008 @ 11:21:41 Reply | Top | Edit my Vette at an avg speed of 85mph the other day did 28.5mpg. Displacement on demand and a diet would get it around 32-34 no problem. -- Posted By: 2piececrank On: 07-09-2008 @ 11:33:11 Reply | Top | Edit Of course, he never quotes anyone from GM, so where is he getting his facts from? My guess...his ass. -- 
1989 Silverado 4x4, 355cid, RV cam, 160 thermostat, Vortec Heads, Stainless Exhaust, Hypertech Chip 1980 T-top Camaro, In the works: 355 cid race prepped block, Eagle crank and SIR rods and KB flattop pistons, Weiand heads, TH350 http://www.cardomain.com/id/2piececrank Posted By: hurley_21_07 On: 07-09-2008 @ 12:11:50 Reply | Top | Edit NO do NOT listen to this guy. He is a nobody running his mouth. It was posted either here or on Tech and he was simply made fun of. He's a moron and most of what he says is retarded. and he doesn't even realize what CAFE really is. In short, he's an idiot with a strong assanine opinion. Dan -- '98 Trans-AM WS6 Mods: MTI Clear Lid & Filter, Pacesetter LT's, TSP True Duals, BMR STB, BMR SFC's, 180 Thermo, LS1Edit, Sitting on Sumitomo 315's and TTII's
==Sold but NEVER forgotten: 1997 Camaro V6 - Intake, Ignition, 180 Thermo== Posted By: roubenbird On: 07-09-2008 @ 12:29:02 Reply | Top | Edit Nope, I'll take everything he says as the TRUTH. -- Being rebuilt, It'll take a while:
WS6 3o5 TBI 88' Formula, 670cfm Holley Projection Throttle Body Holley Projection Intake Mainfold, Underdrive Pulley,Dual Snorkle & Factory Cowl Induction,now with short straight pipes, UMI Subframe connectors, Fourth Gen seats, Three row Radiator, Posi rear end (2.73),TPI heads, 1.6 roller rockers 15.543 @ 88.21mph Posted By: Jeremiah On: 07-09-2008 @ 12:40:27 Reply | Top | Edit Yeah, this same kind of article has popped up all over the place and has been for a few years now. These are just tree-hugging, save the planet types that think if they tell you its going to bomb, then maybe you wont buy one and it will bomb. -- 2005 GMC 1500HD 6.0L, 2006 Pontiac Grand Prix 1991 Camaro - 24 Hours of LeMons race car. Pics: http://72.167.14.32/~jeremiah/24hoursoflemons/ 
"Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." Posted By: BigMike On: 07-09-2008 @ 13:47:21 Reply | Top | Edit Why does everyone keep misusing and misspelling the word asinine? It may fit by definition, but it's just not correct as most people use it. Thesaurus.com is not your friend... read a book instead. Syntax is important. Ok, I'm done now... I already made my relevant contribution to the thread earlier. --
--Mike Posted By: RedLT4Mike On: 07-09-2008 @ 14:08:07 Reply | Top | Edit the sky is falling.... don't look up and see for yourself, just trust me! -- 383ci. // LE2-LT4 Heads-Intake, Joe O. 234,246 .573 .565 109 lsa CSR WaterPump // Centerline Telstars w/28in. MT ET Street Radials Moser 9in. 4.10's // 6-Speed w/RamPGHD // B&M Ripper Shifter // NX Wet  Posted By: 94RedFormula
On:
07-09-2008 @ 14:19:21 Reply | Top | Edit
I feel so dumb for buying into that. I hang my head in shame! -- 94 Formula M6 - Jackie - I'm the bomb diggity! ...Crunkmaro said so!
!CAGS, Hooker Catback, Lingenfelter CAI, Trick Flow intake elbow & 20% tint!! Posted By: dan On: 07-09-2008 @ 14:29:41 Reply | Top | Edit your all in denial..this man is a genius! -- 98 formula m6 13.125 at 105.22 1.949 60' with just a lid 84 trans am ws6 l69 700r4 3.73 91 firebird lsx project 92 d250 tow rig, 99 firebird vsux Posted By: RsCamaro96 On: 07-09-2008 @ 14:49:25 Reply | Top | Edit that guy just wants to get everyone to read his stuff. they would lose to much money to not make the car think of all the people waiting for it to come out. the parts for the cars are already bought the cars are going down the line as you read this all the machines have been programed to build them think of that lose. would you take that lose or would u just make the damn cars and make your money? if gm does do this i wont ever buy another gm car again. Posted By: kingandrew On: 07-09-2008 @ 15:08:51 Reply | Top | Edit I'll buy a camaro, put a sign on it that says "Abort this!" and drive it into his house. -- 
99 m6 Trans Am, Dynatech stainless steel longtubes, 391rwhp, dual cut-outs, SLP CAI, LSX intake,TR224 cam
|
||||
| If it looks (c) it probably is - All work done by James Hogan | ||||
