Topic: 2011 Chevrolet Camaro SS Convertible; Day 1

[safristi]

..seems like a replay of the VETTE..............build it cheaply inside and hope they will come....'cos the body is bootifool and the engine powerful.......hell why not put an upturned milk crate in a Ferrari...kind of thoughltless NO!!!???.. ..
t he olde spoiling the ship for a ha'penny worth of tar........... TAR those beancounters and feather them too.......

[5 Wheel Drive]

For those looks, and 426hp, 420 lbs of torque with a 6 speed manual, I could live with the interior.

[nsmyhte]

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.

A different engine is used with the auto.  I beleive the L99 engine is used with the auto and the LS9 (or maybe LSA) is used with the manual.

Also, I beleive the engine with the auto features active cylinder management allowing it to run on 4 cylinders sometimes.

[whaddaiknow]

For those looks, and 426hp, 420 lbs of torque with a 6 speed manual, I could live with the interior.

I guess it depends on how you use your car.
If you bring it to the tarmack, you really don't care for the interior.

If you use it as a 'statement' on public roads occasionally 'punching it' so others would be aware of your 'presence', enjoying the ride the rest of the time then your interior quality becomes more important as this is what you're looking at when driving.

If you want it as 'chick magnet' your date may not even look past the cheap interior, as the ladies generally don't care for the size of your 'ball$' but your 'other' side. And besides, where's the back seat when you're ready to sc0re?  

[dirtyjeffer]

meh...looks good for what it is, but the Mustang was out first, looks better, performs better, wins "muscle car shootouts" every time has a FAR better interior and if you "want a deal", have plenty of used ones for sale as they weren't "MIA" for close to a decade...anyone excusing the cheap dash should slap themselves in the face and wake up...a cheap dash is acceptable on a $20k compact car...it is absolutely UNACCEPTABLE for a $50k "sports car".

[Snowman]

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.

100%. The interior of my STi is garbage day and lacking many features but that is not why I bought the car. The drive-line, handling, MT6 and driver ergonomics are far more important and where the money should be spent on by the manufacture in my opinion. People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

[whaddaiknow]

People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

50K isn't exactly 'nothing'

[Snowman]

People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

50K isn't exactly 'nothing'

It is what it is and the price of admission to get into a 400 hp MT convertible. If a person wants a nicer interior, more features, and different styling to go along with that then I invite them to look at the alternatives. Happy car shopping.

[whaddaiknow]

People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

50K isn't exactly 'nothing'

It is what it is and the price of admission to get into a 400 hp MT convertible. If a person wants a nicer interior, more features, and different styling to go along with that then I invite them to look at the alternatives. Happy car shopping.

If GM follows this attitude, it deserves to go under.

The offering from Ford has all that AND a nice interior ALL at $7,000 less.

[Jaeger]

People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

50K isn't exactly 'nothing'

No kidding.  I'm amazed that people struggle with that.  Is there a $50k car with a worse interior than the Camaro?  There are sub-$20k cars with better, so the cost of doing it decently well can't be astronomical.

Don't worry GM fans - Day 3 is coming and I'm sure we'll hear about what an ass-kicking performer it is.

Jaeger

[Blueprint]

And yet the Camaro outsells the Mustang. Go figure. Not everyone is turned off by the "tupperware."

...in the US.  I hardly see any Camaros around Montreal, but Mustangs are everywhere (but not in winter  ).

[Snowman]

People these days want everything for nothing and even rant about fuel consumption when they look at performance or sport cars. I'm am amazed how people struggle with this.

50K isn't exactly 'nothing'

It is what it is and the price of admission to get into a 400 hp MT convertible. If a person wants a nicer interior, more features, and different styling to go along with that then I invite them to look at the alternatives. Happy car shopping.

If GM follows this attitude, it deserves to go under.

The offering from Ford has all that AND a nice interior ALL at $7,000 less.

The sales fugues don't lie. Perhaps GM understands their market more then the posters on this site and have determined that the price premium is justified. Don't get me wrong I have owned both Mustangs and Camaros and I would go for a Mustang today but I will not discount the Camaro SS on an intangible such as interior styling.

[Erik]

And yet the Camaro outsells the Mustang. Go figure. Not everyone is turned off by the "tupperware."


I'm with Snowy on this one. The interior could certainly be better, absolutely. But, for the price, there aren't too many other options out there for a 12 second car with a manual tranny. That's the point.

Exactly!
The problem is that the Camaro shares the interior with it's $27K sibling. Not an unusual situation, where the base model offers a ton more value than the top of the line. All the pony cars, and as stated a lot of other performance cars, share the same issue.

[whaddaiknow]

The sales fugues don't lie. Perhaps GM understands their market more then the posters on this site and have determined that the price premium is justified. Don't get me wrong I have owned both Mustangs and Camaros and I would go for a Mustang today but I will not discount the Camaro SS on an intangible such as interior styling.

The issue is not with styling but primarily the quality of materials.

And also, please don't forget that the Camaro is riding on the novelty factor. It's only been a year since it was re-introduced. While the Mustang in its latest re-incarnation has been around since 2005 (with some updates and modifications). The fact that after 6 years it can stay close to the Camaro on the sales charts shows consistency.

Also, there are plenty of used Mustangs on the market today, and people who might have otherwise bought new, choose to buy used to save a coin.

[Snowman]

And yet the Camaro outsells the Mustang. Go figure. Not everyone is turned off by the "tupperware."


I'm with Snowy on this one. The interior could certainly be better, absolutely. But, for the price, there aren't too many other options out there for a 12 second car with a manual tranny. That's the point.

Exactly!
The problem is that the Camaro shares the interior with it's $27K sibling. Not an unusual situation, where the base model offers a ton more value than the top of the line. All the pony cars, and as stated a lot of other performance cars, share the same issue.

Yes, the origin of the species back in the 60's. Take the base model of a model line, stuff the biggest engine in it, and add a stripe.

[dirtyjeffer]

And yet the Camaro outsells the Mustang. Go figure. Not everyone is turned off by the "tupperware."


I'm with Snowy on this one. The interior could certainly be better, absolutely. But, for the price, there aren't too many other options out there for a 12 second car with a manual tranny. That's the point.

Exactly!
The problem is that the Camaro shares the interior with it's $27K sibling. Not an unusual situation, where the base model offers a ton more value than the top of the line. All the pony cars, and as stated a lot of other performance cars, share the same issue.

Yes, the origin of the species back in the 60's. Take the base model of a model line, stuff the biggest engine in it, and add a stripe.

that might make sense if that were the case here though, but it isn't...the V8 engine is not a $20k "option"...if the base model is $27k, and all they did was stuff in a big V8, the car would likely be $35k tops (including a mild upgrade to suspension and brakes if needed)...it reminds me of the Mits EVO...fast, AWD, etc, but still a $20k Lancer inside.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

that might make sense if that were the case here though, but it isn't...the V8 engine is not a $20k "option"...if the base model is $27k, and all they did was stuff in a big V8, the car would likely be $35k tops (including a mild upgrade to suspension and brakes if needed)...it reminds me of the Mits EVO...fast, AWD, etc, but still a $20k Lancer inside.

That's not how pricing works. Cars are priced based on what the market will bear, not on how much it cost to build.

In the original muscle cars, just ordering the top engine could easily double the price of the car over the base engine. It would still have dog dish hubcaps, vinyl seats and very little in the way of creature comforts.

The Camaro pricing only has to compete with that of the Mustang and Challenger. The Mustang being a bit cheaper, the Challenger a bit more. The equivalent German or Asian cars  (RWD coupe, 400+hp) are priced well above this price point.

When I drove one, the only thing I noticed ergonomically was the poor rear visibility. The interior never stood out one way or another. Based on sales figures, I'm not sure very many others really care either.

[Erik]

And yet the Camaro outsells the Mustang. Go figure. Not everyone is turned off by the "tupperware."


I'm with Snowy on this one. The interior could certainly be better, absolutely. But, for the price, there aren't too many other options out there for a 12 second car with a manual tranny. That's the point.

Exactly!
The problem is that the Camaro shares the interior with it's $27K sibling. Not an unusual situation, where the base model offers a ton more value than the top of the line. All the pony cars, and as stated a lot of other performance cars, share the same issue.

Yes, the origin of the species back in the 60's. Take the base model of a model line, stuff the biggest engine in it, and add a stripe.

that might make sense if that were the case here though, but it isn't...the V8 engine is not a $20k "option"...if the base model is $27k, and all they did was stuff in a big V8, the car would likely be $35k tops (including a mild upgrade to suspension and brakes if needed)...it reminds me of the Mits EVO...fast, AWD, etc, but still a $20k Lancer inside.

But here we have two steps up. The V8 option with that suspension, and then the convertible option.

Plus a good bit of profit, if GM is smart.

[dirtyjeffer]

Plus a good bit of profit, if GM is smart.

there's your answer right there.

[dirtyjeffer]

It is what it is and the price of admission to get into a 400 hp MT convertible. If a person wants a nicer interior, more features, and different styling to go along with that then I invite them to look at the alternatives. Happy car shopping.

$50k will also get you a BMW 135i convertible...handling is there, 0-60 in about 4.5 seconds and a standing quarter mile in about 13...but i know, that isn't a "pony car"...either way, $50k puts it up there in terms of "other considerations", and while other brands might still be more, the gap isn't as large as one would think...also, as was already mentioned, the Mustang gives you everything here, plus a better interior, with less weight and for less money...it's not that the car is no good, but i just don't see the value in it, when it's chief competitor beats it in almost every way, and is a fair amount less expensive.