2016 Camaro

Knurled wrote: In reply to Kreb: Part of the problem is European pedestrian-safety regulations which require cars to be taller and blunter in order to protect people who are too dumb to not walk in front of traffic. It's the same reason why we can't have new cars with retractable headlights anymore.

So how do cars like the Corvette get away with it?

In reply to bravenrace:

Simple, vette owners drive fast enough that pedestrians bounce off the top and are safely deposited back in the road on their heads.

That and as someone stated earlier the engine is far back from the bumper its not an issue? I remember when the greenhouse civic came out with its pedestrian safe front end and wipers. I thought why design a car around a hitting a pedestrian when we could just let natual selection take back over and you know, weed out the pedestrians that like to cross in front of cars... seemed to work well the previous 100 years of automobile manufacturing. Maybe next year's cars will have front ends make entirely of nerf!

This thread is funny.

I'm not a fan of the Hot Wheels looking styling but I'm not one of the people who would buy the car anyway. I do think it looks better than the previous car though. The Camaro buyers who want a big, fast, usable and flashy pony car are going to love it.

I'm sure it will be on posters in kids' rooms too.

In that regard it's probably a brilliant success. Doesn't matter what I think.

Mustang VS Camaro Sales year over year

Several WTF were ya thinking moments after anticipated recent new model reveals the last several years.

'14 Silverado/ Sierra, too square and bulky, I'll keep my '12 Sierra till next model change TYVM. Once seen in the showroom and a test drive later I own a '14 Silverado LTZ and berkeleying love it. Style didn't sell it, the rest of the package did. I get their styling clues now when I see it parked next to my '81 PU.

C7: watched the live reveal online w/ anticipation, much discussion here on GRM... WTF. The first few seen on the road were eye catching, then saw the ZO6 up close... absolutely berkeleying gorgeous car not to mention the awesome specs.

Ford did a great job hyping the S550 reveal, totally reeled me in w/ style and spec teasers. Awesome reveal. Once seen on the road and up close the style lacks for me coming from my retro look '05 S197. Modern specs could sell me on it tho. FWIW, Coyote swap would be ideal in my '05 but still miss the latest tech... compromises, always compromises.

Another WTF moment w/ the Gen 6 Camaro reveal. Same as w/ the C7, reserving style judgement for now until seen in person tho. As w/ the S550 the Camaro specs speak well to me. Gotta love the pony car wars.

FWIW, I swore off the BMW 3 series after '05 when the crease down the side made the 3 look like any Hyundai. Side impact regs I'd guess? OK, over that now and looking.

I understand jumping through government hoops leads to compromises and style may suffer. Some pull it off better than others.

Kreb wrote:

Knurled wrote: In reply to Kreb: Part of the problem is European pedestrian-safety regulations which require cars to be taller and blunter in order to protect people who are too dumb to not walk in front of traffic. It's the same reason why we can't have new cars with retractable headlights anymore.

Hogwash. An absurdly high beltline has nothing to do with that.

Actually, yes, it does. As you raise the nose, you raise the cowl. When you raise the cowl, it raises the entire beltline.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/taking-the-hit-how-pedestrian-protection-regs-make-cars-fatter-feature

And yes, the pointy nose sports cars have either lower and more rearward engines that allow lower noses, or they have mid or rear engines that allow for low noses. it's about the pedestrian hitting the ENGINE not the nose of the car. Some of the cars with lower hoodlines actually have mechanisms to LIFT the hood when they get hit by a pedestrian...

How many folks are getting run over by cars in Europe? Either people need to keep their cars on the road and off the sidewalks or pedestrians should start looking before stepping off the curb. This sounds like a solution to something that is not really a big problem in the big picture.

EDIT: This link says that 21% of traffic fatalities in europe are pedestrians, so that is a pretty high percentage. Maybe softer hoods will save a few lives.

EDIT EDIT: According to this link 14% of traffic fatalities in the US are pedestrians. I don't think we are better drivers than the Europeans, but I'm guessing we walk less.

fasted58 wrote: '14 Silverado/ Sierra, ....... I get their styling clues now when I see it parked next to my '81 PU.

Thank you. That's what I've been saying all along.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote:

fasted58 wrote: '14 Silverado/ Sierra, ....... I get their styling clues now when I see it parked next to my '81 PU.

Thank you. That's what I've been saying all along.

Moreso that I have Bushwhacker Cut-Out flares on the '81 that further resembles the '14. Gotta arrange a pic of that.

Chris_V wrote:

Kreb wrote:

Knurled wrote: In reply to Kreb: Part of the problem is European pedestrian-safety regulations which require cars to be taller and blunter in order to protect people who are too dumb to not walk in front of traffic. It's the same reason why we can't have new cars with retractable headlights anymore.

Hogwash. An absurdly high beltline has nothing to do with that.

Actually, yes, it does. As you raise the nose, you raise the cowl. When you raise the cowl, it raises the entire beltline. http://www.caranddriver.com/features/taking-the-hit-how-pedestrian-protection-regs-make-cars-fatter-feature And yes, the pointy nose sports cars have either lower and more rearward engines that allow lower noses, or they have mid or rear engines that allow for low noses. it's about the pedestrian hitting the ENGINE not the nose of the car. Some of the cars with lower hoodlines actually have mechanisms to LIFT the hood when they get hit by a pedestrian...

Hogwash, pigwash, whatever you want to call it. It's a conscious decision to have a tiny, narrow set of windows. Nobody else that I can think of has such a crappy ratio of sheet metal to window volume. If it was necessary, everyone else would do it.

For arguments sake, let's say that the hood height was mandated. Is there any reason other than aesthetics that the roofline has to be so low? That the line of the fenders can't drop, picking up a lower window-sill? No. It's looks. It's the same reason that so many cars have crappy headroom in the back seat. The designers decided that a swoopy roofline sells better than headroom.

By the way, I have nothing against Chevy. I like the Silverado, Corvette and Sonic to mention a few.

Now that you guys mention it, absolutelly appalling styling on just one surface of the vehicle may simply be a part of GM's new "brand identity"...There's the nose on the Silverado and Camaro, and the tail on the Corvette.

The problem with automotive focus groups is they listen to the sheeple. which is fine. But then when the sheeple make a dumb decision, they don't make said sheeple aware of the negatives of that choice, such as massive rims and rubber band tires with a treadwear rating of 200 on a 5000 lb suv. When the sheeple say "I want giant rims so Ivan be a baller yo!" The folks running the focus group need to say "do you like replacing tires every 10,000 miles at a steep 1,500$?" Do the execs do that? Hell no, because R-tards are execs. They themselves don't know the negatives. After all, they make a killing at their job, and therefore, can afford 1,500$ tires changes. Whilst the family of five has to forego movie night for the rest of their lives...

I've always said it- "if you ain't a racing, why are you selling cars?"

That applies to companies and individuals.

Kreb wrote:

Chris_V wrote:

Kreb wrote:

Knurled wrote: In reply to Kreb: Part of the problem is European pedestrian-safety regulations which require cars to be taller and blunter in order to protect people who are too dumb to not walk in front of traffic. It's the same reason why we can't have new cars with retractable headlights anymore.

Hogwash. An absurdly high beltline has nothing to do with that.

Actually, yes, it does. As you raise the nose, you raise the cowl. When you raise the cowl, it raises the entire beltline. http://www.caranddriver.com/features/taking-the-hit-how-pedestrian-protection-regs-make-cars-fatter-feature And yes, the pointy nose sports cars have either lower and more rearward engines that allow lower noses, or they have mid or rear engines that allow for low noses. it's about the pedestrian hitting the ENGINE not the nose of the car. Some of the cars with lower hoodlines actually have mechanisms to LIFT the hood when they get hit by a pedestrian...

Hogwash, pigwash, whatever you want to call it. It's a conscious decision to have a tiny, narrow set of windows. Nobody else that I can think of has such a crappy ratio of sheet metal to window volume. If it was necessary, everyone else would do it. For arguments sake, let's say that the hood height was mandated. Is there any reason other than aesthetics that the roofline has to be so low? That the line of the fenders can't drop, picking up a lower window-sill? No. It's looks. It's the same reason that so many cars have crappy headroom in the back seat. The designers decided that a swoopy roofline sells better than headroom.

It HAS headroom. It's just that the sides are high because the cowl is high, making the windows narrower. But the distance from floor to roof is the same as older cars. Otherwise it would end up being the height of an SUV with a similar CG. The article described exactly why this is.

If you raised the hood and cowl and also raised the roof to get tall side windows, you're into minivan territory in height and proportions. In order to get classic car proportions, you'd need to lower the cowl and the hood line to get taller side windows at the same height roofline. That means lowering the engine, or making a shorter engine. The Corvette shoved it as low and as far back as possible. The Camaro is not a Corvette, nor should it be.

Woudl your rather the Camaro get these proportions: tall over the hood and drop down to the windows?

In reply to Trackmouse:

I think there is probably a lot of truth in that.

In reply to Trackmouse:

That's also largely because the sheeple don't actually care (or know) to consider such things when making their purchase decisions.

The good news in all of this is that we don't have to buy what we don't like. I didn't like the Aztec either, never bought one. It was styled by committee and focus groups,too.

In reply to Chris_V:

I get what you're saying about proportions. Where we diverge is that the basic premise of your argument seems to be that the cowl HAS to be high like it is. And that dictates everything else. I ask why? It simply doesn't make sense that every other vehicle on the market has a more window friendly set of proportions. The Mustang has a virtually identical set of specifications other than the overall lower weight, and it's much more open. Until you can give me something more specific than some vague assertion that it's got something to do with preserving kneecaps, I'll stand by my position that it's all looks/image driven.

Consider light trucks if you will. In San Francisco you could rent out the unused underhood volume in a Silverado/F-150/Ram for good money. There's no functional reason for that hood to be so massive and squared off except to convey the proper macho attitude. I'm prepared to accept that vanity in a truck. In a Camaro, it just seems like a bygone remnant of the age of screaming chicken pony cars driven by guys with big hair crossed with post 911 seige mentality. It sucks IMO. But I'm just one (opinionated) guy.

Kreb wrote: bygone remnant of the age of screaming chicken pony cars driven by guys with big hair crossed with post 911 seige mentality.

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

Seriously though, I appreciate both sides of this debate…it’s nothing like those fools that don’t realize Bud is the KING of beers and Coors sucks.

OK, now it's ON!!!!!

Actually it's not. If you're still sippin' that swill, we might as well be different species, and I'm extoling the virtues of Alpo over Science Diet.

In reply to Kreb:

Aside from the other things I mentioned, taller beltlines allow for more dashboard real estate, both 2-dimensionally (how much switches and screens and crap you can throw at it) and 3-dimensionally (how much crap you can package back there). You wouldn't be able to package all the modern trappings in a short dashboard, nor would you be able to cram an automated dual-zone HVAC system and two fuseboxes and multiple airbags and height-adjustable pedals and an electric steering column and 14 different hidey-hole stowage pockets and a bunch of things I'm forgetting.

No, the Miata doesn't have all that. Nor does the Corvette. Neither of those vehicles are platform-sharing a chassis where those things are expected in some of its other models.

T.J. wrote: EDIT EDIT: According to this link 14% of traffic fatalities in the US are pedestrians. I don't think we are better drivers than the Europeans, but I'm guessing we walk less.

You should see my co-workers.. we definitely walk less

Have to remember, I was hit was a pedestrian last year. Thankfully to no long term ill effects, but it was scary to get scooped off of your feet and unto the hood of a car

I rented a 13 vert Camaro V6 for 2 weeks, that trunk was so freaking small we could keep one medium sized suitcase in it, we had to keep the rest of the luggage in the back seat. Which means we had to raise the roof to have any security on our stuff. A few items actually blew out of the car as we had nowhere to store them. I parked beside a 13 Mustang at Daytona 24 and he had 3 cases in his trunk.

I attempted to get a pop can out of a 12 pack case in the rear footwell and could not fit my hand between the front seat and the rear seat squab.

I am an overweight 5'11" and felt claustrophobic with the roof down, the windows are like portholes.

The whole car had ridiculous amounts of scuttle shake.

The V6 was not horrible.

Not sure I would even try that experiment again.

How is this new model in any way better? This is a serious question.

Wait...pedestrians are hitting engines? What kind wet noodles are modern hoods made of anyway?

I'm 6'2", and have absolutely NO problem with the sightlines in a 5th gen Camaro. My '90 Miata with the soft top in place, however...