New Camaro tail lights

So basically what we have here is a bunch of dudes that don't like the Camaro because it's not a 400hp FRS/BRZ. Face it, it doesn't matter WHAT GM puts on it for tailights, it will always be ugly because you have already decided you don't like the car. Unless it was a different car, in which case it wouldn't be a Camaro now would it? BTW, the lights are pretty different from the Prelude lights in the picture. Similar basic outside shape maybe, but pretty darned different otherwise... Geez

And for the record, I want a 2014 Z/28

Well someone is a Cheby Fan Boi

I'm not a fan of the new camaros, but I think the new one is a big improvement on the previous version, front and back.

Flight Service wrote:

nicksta43 wrote:

It looks fine.. Oh wait that is the Prelude

Oh wait, that's a 69 Camaro

No I like the ones these replaced, I am a GM fanboi and always will be. I hate these new lights.

I'll say it again: Damn, the 2014 z/28 is finneeeeee.

Flight Service wrote:

nicksta43 wrote:

It looks fine..

And history repeats itself yet again.

reminds me of the sc400 tail lights

That's funny, I guess I'm not alone in that opinion, I searched images for an example of sc300/400 tail lights and a bunch of pics of new comaro tails came up lol. http://s23.photobucket.com/user/xXPestilenceXx/media/IMG_20120730_160056-1.jpg.html

I think it's an improvement over the first gen post resurrection Camaro. I think it's also a damn sight better than the Aberration that is the C7 Corvette.

The Camaro always had a large single rectangle (or at least rectanglish) tail light. Except for 70-73 when they were round. The 08-13 looked all wrong. I'm ok with the new lights, and yes the 2014 Z/28 is awesome.

Gearheadotaku wrote: The Camaro always had a large single rectangle (or at least rectanglish) tail light. Except for 70-73 when they were round. The 08-13 looked all wrong. I'm ok with the new lights, and yes the 2014 Z/28 is awesome.

The 08-13 taillights always made me think of a Vega for some reason.

Looks like GM got tired of all the complaining about how the Corvette tail lights looked like the Camero. So... they fixed it.

I have not liked the looks of the Camaro since the 3rd gen

LainfordExpress wrote: When did calling something an "abortion" become an acceptable thing to say? That's second or third time today I've read that turn of phrase. Not only is it vulgar, but it doesn't even make any sense. How can it be an abortion? It exists! It wasn't aborted, it was born. No offense to the OP, just when the hell did this start being a thing?

I always love it when people don't fully understand the meaning of a word and get offended when someone uses it in a proper manner; but, you're so quick to be butthurt instead of doing some quick research.

Read #2 and #3 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion

1. What most people instantly think of when they hear abortion.

2. Monstrosity

3. arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest

Seems to me he used it in an appropriate context. I don't see any vulgarity nor do I see it as unacceptable in any sense of the imagination.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you used a "Jump to Conclusions Mat" from Office Space hence your overly sensitive response :).

And I like the original tail lights but the new ones don't bother me. I'll have to get used to the new ones on my new Z/28.

accordionfolder wrote: I'll say it again: Damn, the 2014 z/28 is finneeeeee.

That car, in that color, reminds me of the pile of Styrofoam packaging that I have stacked in a corner of my shop.

This makes me sad, because Camaro's and Firebirds were my favorite cars growing up. But GM started to lose me with those cars after the '73's, and have lost me more with each successive change.

Yeah, the current Camaro is a bad-ass car, but I just find it boring. To me, the taillights are the the least of the styling problems here.

DirtyBird222 wrote:

LainfordExpress wrote: When did calling something an "abortion" become an acceptable thing to say? That's second or third time today I've read that turn of phrase. Not only is it vulgar, but it doesn't even make any sense. How can it be an abortion? It exists! It wasn't aborted, it was born. No offense to the OP, just when the hell did this start being a thing?

I always love it when people don't fully understand the meaning of a word and get offended when someone uses it in a proper manner; but, you're so quick to be butthurt instead of doing some quick research. Read #2 and #3 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion 1. What most people instantly think of when they hear abortion. 2. Monstrosity 3. arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest Seems to me he used it in an appropriate context. I don't see any vulgarity nor do I see it as unacceptable in any sense of the imagination. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you used a "Jump to Conclusions Mat" from Office Space hence your overly sensitive response :).

I always hate it when some kid (I'm guessin your about 20?) who doesn't understand that goofs like him have watered down the original meaning of a word and then point to the watered down meaning as a sign of their "genius".

Hoop wrote: I rather like the new lights, they're certainly better than the innovatively-challenged ones they replace. On the subject of etymology, one could argue that the OP did in fact use abortion correctly. Now, in contemporary parlance, the word has indeed been used to describe a medical process with which you may or may not agree, but according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, 'abortion' can also be defined as:

arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a result of such arrest

So really, any negative reaction you may have to its usage here is simply the work of your own enculturation.

You're another genius...."enculturation?" lol, wow you're impressin us all tough guy.

If we were talking about Harley "fags" we'd all be OK with that and not butthurt. Definitions can and do change over time.

There are a lot of things more wrong with the Camaro. The tail lights are low on the list. And I like the car.

plance1 wrote: I always hate it when some kid (I'm guessin your about 20?) who doesn't understand that goofs like him have watered down the original meaning of a word and then point to the watered down meaning as a sign of their "genius".

Well, no.

Yes, the word does indeed come from the Latin word aboriri, which simply meant 'miscarry'. However, I wouldn't necessarily call anyone a goof for using its other meanings. For instance, Thomas Jefferson used it in 1800:

Thomas Jefferson; Letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush: The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, & they believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes.

And later, Charles Dickens used it as well:

Charles Dickens, Pictures from Italy, Chapter 10 Insomuch that I do honestly believe, there can be no place in the world, where such intolerable abortions, begotten of the sculptor’s chisel, are to be found in such profusion, as in Rome.

I think it's pretty clear that the other definitions of 'abortion' were well established by the time the OP used it, and as much as I love a good English debate, it's time to let this one go.

I should explicitly state that I am simply a car guy who also dabbles in English for a day job. No tough guy here.

And quit being big giant hairy Bob Costas's about it

And while we're talking about it, I think the front end is an improvement as well..

You know what bothers me the most about Chevy's? That huge freaking gold bow tie! Man that thing is fugly. Yet they seem so proud of it that it has to dominate every vehicle they sell, except for the Corvette. I don't mind the bow tie shape itself, just this iteration and size of it.

The Camaro is still ugly as sin.