Author Topic: 2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS Convertible; Day 1 (Read 21184 times)

Autos_Editor · « **on:** April 27, 2011, 04:05:11 am »

James gets into an "unordinary" car this week: the just-launched Chevrolet Camaro convertible. Where the coupe was an exercise in bringing back retro, the convertible multiplies that effect ten-fold, he says.
Read More...

Erik · « **Reply #1 on:** April 27, 2011, 08:27:39 am »

Quote from: AP on April 27, 2011, 08:06:50 am

A step up in the fun factor after those Hyundais eh? Today's muscle cars are so good that I may even prefer a late model over a restored original.

Anyone know why the hp is lower with the auto? Driveline loss presumably not the answer as I assume that the hp rating is assessed at the flywheel not the driven wheels.

Yeah, bet it is nice to have something with some torque for a change.

Damn nice that a manual transmission is available.

Sharp looking car!

Mike · « **Reply #2 on:** April 27, 2011, 08:29:33 am »

I think this car takes care of my sight-line issues I have with the coupe.

5 Wheel Drive · « **Reply #3 on:** April 27, 2011, 08:33:55 am »

Not too sure about the black with red hood stripe color combo, but man, what a cool looking ride!

I hope the clouds part for you this week James! Can't wait to hear your impressions.

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #4 on:** April 27, 2011, 09:03:41 am »

Looking forward to reading your daily reviews on this one James. If you think of it snap a picture with the soft top up.

wing · « **Reply #5 on:** April 27, 2011, 09:08:43 am »

There are a bunch in the gallery

safristi · « **Reply #6 on:** April 27, 2011, 09:19:42 am »

..HOT WHEELS.............the SUN will come UP tomorrow

..

two quibles fugly guages and handbrake in passengers seats thigh!! could be a feature NOT a BUG...

TopGun · « **Reply #7 on:** April 27, 2011, 10:03:15 am »

Quote from: Mike on April 27, 2011, 08:29:33 am

I think this car takes care of my sight-line issues I have with the coupe.

That's the conclusion MotorTrendy made...only they made it seriously. They said that the removal of the B-pillar made lane changes way less stressful.

Jaeger · « **Reply #8 on:** April 27, 2011, 10:48:50 am »

Quote from: Mike on April 27, 2011, 08:29:33 am

I think this car takes care of my sight-line issues I have with the coupe.

Yep, that oughta do it.

Does the ragtop offer an upgraded interior? I'd like to know if the Tupperware issues have been addressed - particularly the shiny plastic door inserts. I guess the Wall-E guages are to become a Chevy design theme - too bad about that.

Not that it's a primary consideration in a vehicle such as this, but I'd be curious to see what the mileage is over the test period.

Jaeger

Jaeger · « **Reply #9 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:12:35 am »

Quote from: Camaro Day 2

So… has the interior of the Camaro convertible been upgraded over the standard coupe? The short answer — no, no it has not. In fact, I’d go out on a limb and say it is worse, but only because there were obvious compromises required to make the Camaro a droptop. The interior bits that are not compromised because of the open motoring experience remain untouched, from what I can tell.

The biggest visible change to the interior is the sun visors, which are now paper thin, do not rotate and are about three inches in width. On a positive note, they do have vanity mirrors. The rest seems basically the same: the plastic door panel inserts in bright orange stand out, but for $50,000 they do not stand out in a good way. I’m warming to the gauge cluster that GM is soon going to be using in the new Chevrolet Malibu, but the steering wheel is still plain awful, but rumour has it GM is updating this soon.

Thanks for that comprehensive answer, James.

Jaeger

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #10 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:39:08 am »

The plastic door panel inserts is really what bothers me the most about the interior. I honestly don't think I've ever seen such cheap plastic used in a car interior. This car could be SOOOOO much better if they completely re-did the interior and put in on par with other $50k cars.

Ex-airbalancer · « **Reply #11 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:42:42 am »

Is there a windscreen for the car?

How does the roof get cover once it is down?

wing · « **Reply #12 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:45:25 am »

No windscreen, manual cover if you want to bother

Jaeger · « **Reply #13 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:46:55 am »

Quote from: CanuckG35 on April 28, 2011, 08:39:08 am

The plastic door panel inserts is really what bothers me the most about the interior. I honestly don't think I've ever seen such cheap plastic used in a car interior. This car could be SOOOOO much better if they completely re-did the interior and put in on par with other $50k cars.

Amen to all of that.

Jaeger

Erik · « **Reply #14 on:** April 28, 2011, 08:54:24 am »

Quote from: CanuckG35 on April 28, 2011, 08:39:08 am

The plastic door panel inserts is really what bothers me the most about the interior. I honestly don't think I've ever seen such cheap plastic used in a car interior. This car could be SOOOOO much better if they completely re-did the interior and put in on par with other $50k cars.

Don't see the issue with that. The much lauded mustang interior just has hard, cheap looking, grained plastic door panels. At least Chevy decided to use a little styling on them.

inco · « **Reply #15 on:** April 28, 2011, 09:07:17 am »

As much as I really like the looks of the topless Camaro, I find it really disappointing in terms of any rear seat leg room. For me to drive and have the seat back, in order to be comfortable, there is like maybe two inches of space there. That's between the seatback and the rear cushion. Ouch.

A great way to solve that problem would perhaps give people an option of putting a seat there or something like a storage locker/container if people don't need the rear seat. Option it out as a real two seater or a four seater.

Snowman · « **Reply #16 on:** April 28, 2011, 09:19:21 am »

Some people will never "get" muscle cars.

TopGun · « **Reply #17 on:** April 28, 2011, 09:30:54 am »

Quote from: Snowman on April 28, 2011, 09:19:21 am

Some people will never "get" muscle cars.

I'm starting to think it's more than just muscle cars Snowy! Welcome to DashStrokers.ca...where interior plastic quality ranks above all else!

You're likely the only other one that noticed you get more power with the stick...cool...400hp and 410lb/ft with the auto...426hp and 420lb/ft with the MT.

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #18 on:** April 28, 2011, 09:39:04 am »

Quote from: Erik on April 28, 2011, 08:54:24 am

Quote from: CanuckG35 on April 28, 2011, 08:39:08 am
The plastic door panel inserts is really what bothers me the most about the interior. I honestly don't think I've ever seen such cheap plastic used in a car interior. This car could be SOOOOO much better if they completely re-did the interior and put in on par with other $50k cars.

Don't see the issue with that. The much lauded mustang interior just has hard, cheap looking, grained plastic door panels. At least Chevy decided to use a little styling on them.

Whether it's an issue or not will depend on the person I suppose. For me personally, I think that the interior materials used in the Camaro are extremely sub-par. IMHO, the much cheaper Cruze has way better materials. I absolutely love the look of the Camaro, but I find it a shame that they didn't do a better job on the interior.........it could of been a much better package if they did.

Jaeger · « **Reply #19 on:** April 28, 2011, 10:01:56 am »

Quote from: CanuckG35 on April 28, 2011, 09:39:04 am

Quote from: Erik on April 28, 2011, 08:54:24 am
Quote from: CanuckG35 on April 28, 2011, 08:39:08 am
The plastic door panel inserts is really what bothers me the most about the interior. I honestly don't think I've ever seen such cheap plastic used in a car interior. This car could be SOOOOO much better if they completely re-did the interior and put in on par with other $50k cars.

Don't see the issue with that. The much lauded mustang interior just has hard, cheap looking, grained plastic door panels. At least Chevy decided to use a little styling on them.

Whether it's an issue or not will depend on the person I suppose. For me personally, I think that the interior materials used in the Camaro are extremely sub-par. IMHO, the much cheaper Cruze has way better materials. I absolutely love the look of the Camaro, but I find it a shame that they didn't do a better job on the interior.........it could of been a much better package if they did.

I agree. It's nothing but a transparent excuse by GM apologists to deride critics of the subpar interior as "dashstrokers" who "don't get" muscle cars. There's no reason I can see why a $50k car can't have a decent interior to go along with whatever other attributes it might possess, regardless of the class of vehicle in question.

Jaeger