All these pics are sure to leave us disappointed with the first one that roles off the production line. Why, oh why do they do this to us?

Reply

↓↑report

It's interesting the question you pose. It's true that many manufacturers make their 'concept cars' too extravegant. They do this to get your blood moving. The production car 'could' look like this.. but would you spend 60,000 on a camaro? The bright side is that they are becoming less extravegant, and like the Saturn Sky, Aura, Pontiac Solstice and so forth, making a real effort in minimizing the changes from concept to production. There will come a day when the autoshow concept will be 99% production reality.. we just are there yet.

Reply

↓↑report

Why is there not even ONE shot of the rear ?!?!?

Reply

↓↑report

aren't // I meant aren't

Reply

↓↑report

Very cool car-!!

However GM must realize if they intend to make money they should produce cars not release pictures of cars.

Reply

↓↑report

.....droool

Reply

↓↑report

meh .. agree with #1.

After seeing how they destroyed the Saturn Aura concept when bringing it to production, i have no faith in GM in bringing this to market in its current form (or even close to it). And whats up with those tinny side mirrors?

We will be disappointed again.

Reply

↓↑report

I dunno, these new muscle cars seem overpriced to me. It's like my Dad always told me, (about his 72 Z28, 79 TransAm) those cars were great because they were cheap fun (especially in a straight line), which means they were crude, and handled poorly. The newer ones seek to sell solely on their nostalgia, which is alright, but it definitely won't help the company in the long term.

And believe it or not, I have hard feelings towards GM because I actually care about their products, and would like to see them return to selling great cars to America.

Reply

↓↑report

Damn. I've spent most of my life disliking everything the Camaro stands for. But that's a hell of good looking piece of metal - way better than the Corvette, IMO.

(Something weird is happening, because now that I've had a chance to check out the Lucerne, I confess that I like it, too. And it's a friggin' Buick for gawd's sake!)

Reply

↓↑report

# 3
I'm right there with you. I want a rear shot too.

Honestly, when I first saw pics of the rear, I didn't like it. But when I saw the red one in person at the Houston Auto Show, I changed my mind, it looks better in person.

The more pics I see of this Camaro, the more I like it. My prediction for the production version: smaller wheels (perhaps standard 17s with 18s or 19s as an option) and maybe a little less exageration (sp?) on the front and rear. Oh, and it will have door handles that are probably similar to the grab outward and pull style (like the Mustang, Impala, most Toyotas,etc...).
I'll bet it will be pretty cool. This car is too important for GM to mess up.

Reply

↓↑report

Beautiful! GM's heritage can be one of their biggest assets. Nobody collects '69 Toyotas.

Reply

↓↑report

If the next-production Camaro winds up looking this good, ( and Chevy prices it at a lot less than $60,000 ), Ford had better put the Mustang on a diet. In other words, keep the styling of the present model, just make the 'stang look less chunky. A full-fastback design would help as well. And while we're on this subject, why can't the new Shelby Mustang convertible weigh less than 4,000 pounds?

Reply

↓↑report

Here I found more pictures with this car: http://www.auto-power-girl.com/photo_gallery/chevrolet/chevrolet_camaro_2006_car_concept-18

Reply

↓↑report

Am I the only person that thinks the front end looks like a face? I mean, this could be in Pixar's upcoming Cars movie and not need too much CGI...

Reply

↓↑report

#8, I drive a Lucerne (it's a company car) and it is a great ride. The fit and finish is precision-quality. GM got it right with the Lucerne; they got it right with the Solstice and I'm counting on them to get it right with the Camaro.

Reply

↓↑report

#12 - yes, i agree, it looks like a face. but i think that's what helps distinguish it from other cars. it has a very aggressive expression on it's face. i'm a ford guy by ownership (2 Taurus's in my 7 years of driving, those're my only vehicles), but this is a very intriguing auto. i'm curious to see how much of this actually makes it into production. i don't know what to think about what they did in the engine bay...why cover everything up? most people who actually do more than take their car to a shop every time they hear something click or see a light come on that they don't normally see will rip that out right away so they aren't frustrated with removing it every time they poke their head under the hood. i would get pretty angry if i had to go through some multi-step process to check my oil/transmission fluid on a regular basis (i check my fluids every time i fill up).

Reply

↓↑report

Am i the only one who thinks cadillac when i see this car despite the chevy bowtie.

Reply

↓↑report

Looks like they took those pics in Dallas.

Weird.

Reply

↓↑report

I see angel eyes... Bavarians only, please.

Reply

↓↑report

Enough pictures, just build it, (get your internal Manhattan Project in gear) build it quick, get it in the showroom and on the streets in a year to 18 months. Demand quality from the start, slap a great warranty on it, give it the power right from the start, make the large engine a "delete" option only.

Push your suppliers, machine tool makers, everyone to the breaking limit, lets see how fast you can turn when your against the wall.

What better car and way to showcase the "New GM" use that "heritage"

Repeat, enough pictures, stop teasing and build it.

Reply

↓↑report