Autoblog's #1 Most-Read Post of 2006
click above image to see complete high-resolution gallery
On this, the first day of 2007, we look back and honor the most popular post that appeared on Autoblog in 2006. To no one's surprise, it is the post in which we introduced to you the Chevrolet Camaro Concept for the first time. Titled simply "Debut of the Chevrolet Camaro Concept", this post was published originally on January 9th, 2006 during the 2006 North American International Auto Show. Since then, it has been viewed on Autoblog 364,456 times, more than any other post.
Obviously the Camaro Concept was a big hit with the public, but at the time it debuted we didn't have the ability to offer you a high-resolution gallery of official shots. Now we do, so we've assembled all the hottest Camaro Concept shots we could find in all their 1,280 pixel-wide glory. Check out the gallery here, and feel free to download the pics for your own personal use.
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
jon... 2:22PM (1/01/2007)
yeah baby! The mullet is going to make a comeback! Business up front party out back! No really I like the camaro. =)
Reply
Daniel 2:25PM (1/01/2007)
Can't wait to get the "Pony Car Wars" going again. The Mustang, the new Camaro, the Challenger Hemi need to go head to head. Next bring back a new Firebird, and a new Cougar based on their sister ship platforms. American Pony Cars with V8s - I'll be in Heaven. Gotta cruise Main Street in a Pony Car.
Reply
artie43 3:12PM (1/01/2007)
While the Japanese and Koreans are building fuel efficient and leading edge vehicles for the 21st Century, Detroit seems to want to go back to the 20th. To many these cars represented the inefficiency and waste of resources that will epitomize the American car industry. I dare say that this over self-indulgence in the past is what is leading Detroit down the paths to less market share and more rejection by the average American consumer. I guess if you are no longer the leader, you can try and live in the glories of the past. Like the starting quarterback that has to constantly relive his triumphs on the field and the adulation it brought.
Just more proof that this turnaround is stalling and has not really changed the direction GM needs to be headed. The Mustang has/will not save Ford. Trying to copy a company with serious financial problems does not seem like a successful turnaround plan to me.
Reply
JasonSK 5:04PM (1/01/2007)
What kind of "man" wants to roll out on sunday with a 50mpg stuipid econo box?
Maby for the majority of the readers here its a good idea cause they cant afford the gas, but many of us can actually afford more then one car AND afford to put gas them... yawn..
Reply
J Finz 3:33PM (1/01/2007)
artie43 so u know what kind of fuel mileage the new camaro will get? The 4th gens got 30 mpg highway and i'm not even talking v6 here. Just because people loved the styling and performance of the old muscle cars and gm is recognizing this, doesn't mean it will get bad fuel mileage.
Yeah gm don't build a truly desirable camaro, focus only on beige economy sedans pls.
Reply
Be Oh Be 3:34PM (1/01/2007)
#3
I have to disagree with the inefficiency and waste comments. I owned a 98 Camaro Z28, and it got great gas mileage considering what it was. On the highway, I consistently got 28 mpg - no shit. Once I got 30.8 mpg - I was totally astonished (I had the 4spd automatic too). With modern ignition systems these cars are all going to do just as good as that, if not better. Keep in mind too, a lot of the Japanese companies are touting high horsepower as well, just look at the new IS350 and G35 - both have over 300 hp - and I'm sure they don't get much better than mid 20s in the highway, just like my 98 Camaro did. Do some research and start reading about the LS1 and LS2 engines, they're actually quite good. This new Camaro is sweet, and I know it will get good mileage - especially if GM uses the new DOHC V6 as the base V6 motor.
Incidentally, my wife has a 2002 IS300 Sportcross, and it only gets about 25 or so on the highway, and it's not even really all that fast.
Reply
Steven T. 3:39PM (1/01/2007)
I suspect that the biggest factor in the success of the Camaro over the entire life cycle of its new platform will be whether GM can offer a clear weight advantage over the decidedly obese Mustang and Challenger. I hope that GM recognizes that with gas prices likely to be volatile, it will need to offer a V6 variant with a decent balance of performance and fuel economy.
All of the recent p.r. hype concerning the pony cars has obscured one inconvenient fact: Most potential buyers aren't interested in big-block street racers.
Indeed, the market took a nosedive in the early 70s when the Big Three made their pony cars too big, heavy, powerful and expensive. For example, the 1970-74 Challenger and Barracuda may have had some legendary top-end models, but the nameplates sold so poorly that they not have turned a profit. Folks instead flocked to the Plymouth Duster, which better matched the appeal of the original Mustang's mix of compact affordability and sportiness.
Nor do I think it was a coincidence that in the 1990s the Mustang trounced the last-generation Camaro/Firebird. The GM twins had a much more modern platform and more powerful top-end models, but the Mustang had broader appeal because it was smaller and lighter. Ironically, the new Mustang platform has bloated out, giving Camaro the opportunity to return the favor.
Reply
motorman 3:44PM (1/01/2007)
artie43 the problem is that there are more people with real money to spend on these pony cars than there are with money to spend on a hybrid because most people who talk about all this fuel saving are posers,they talk but do not buy. i own a C-6 corvette,impala and a silverado and i pay more gasoline taxes every year on running these cars than a guy with a hybrid.that keeps the economy going. they even have to give tax BREAKS to get people to buy hybrids
Reply
mr poster 5:03PM (1/01/2007)
I worry about people who think 30mpg is a good level of fuel economy.
Reply
dave 5:09PM (1/01/2007)
#3, detroit is building these muscle cars because a lot of people want them. it may seem antique to you, but these cars are appealing, fun to drive, and just plain great. if you don't care for them, don't buy one. and if you think gm is stalling, put down the x-box and pay attention. #8 it's ok that you hate muscle car, but most of the asian brand cars built in america are built by rednecks, so now what are you gonna do?
Reply
the friendly grizzly 5:35PM (1/01/2007)
In folks like Artie43, you have a variation on what is said about prudes, puritans, politicians, and those who sit at the feet of people like Ralph Nader or Jerry Falwell. Somewhere, somehow, someone, in some way, is enjoying themselves, and it must be stopped.
First off, you dribble on about how the Japanese and the Koreans are building fuel-efficient and leading edge vehicles. Let's slay that fuel efficiency dragon first. Toyotas and Nissans are not any better than offerings from US manufacturers. Size for size and displacement for displacement, they are no different and in my own driving experience are often less so. As for Korean cars, I have no experience with Hyundais but do with Kias. Kias are, for a particular size of car, gas hogs. The Optima is a disgrace.
I drive pickup trucks. I have looked at the EPA stickers and have talked with owners of Tundras and Titans. Their gas mileage is dismal, despite having "advanced", "modern", drive trains. In fact I find it pathetic that a Nissan Frontier with a V6 has lower fuel mileage ratings than a Chevy V8 in a full-size truck.
As for technology: are you thinking the hybrid? So what? That's right: so what. Folks driving hybrids in real-world conditions are not finding miracle fuel economy. Folks who run the air conditioning and go down the highway keeping up with the traffic are getting good mileage, sure. But is it enough more than a standard Toyota Corolla to justify the difference in cost? I don't know how they are now, but does this gain justify the skittish handling in crosswinds and other characteristics that made the driving somewhat less than stable on the early ones?
In find myself wondering: how much to hybrid owners inflate their mileage when talking with friends? I ask this because I recall in my college days folks bragging of getting into the 40s with VW beetles. Others quoted figures in the mid-20s to low 30s. The difference was those claiming the high figures were the same ones going on and on about German engineering being so superior blah blah blah. The ones with the lower figures were the ones who bought a VW because they were cheap. The two Prius owners I know are talking mid-30s to low 40s. They bought them to drive, and to try something different, not to have bragging rights at GreenPeace conventions and Mensa parties. They both also have said their next cars will be conventional cars.
As for all the multiple valves per cylinder, seven speed transmissions and all the rest, there is a name for it: dog-lick engineering. They do it because they can, not because it provides any long-term benefit.
At least for me, what counts in the end is durability, reasonable fuel mileage for a given type of vehicle, and value received for money paid. As I see no value in dog-lick engineering that adds nothing to those three things, I avoid it.
I hope that General Motors finds the Camaro to be a raging success; that the lines run all shifts to keep up with the demand. I hope they race it like they are now doing with their Corvettes. A halo car is great; one priced in a range available to more people is even better. It gets folks into the showrooms.
It also irritates the sniveling, finger-wagging nannies our society is today so infested with.
Reply
artie43 5:52PM (1/01/2007)
Well I suspect the muscle car fad will run its' course, just like the SUV. Hope GM and DCX aren't coming to the party as it comes to an end. BUt they don't seem to know what else to do but go retro. This works some of the time, but my guess is there are only so many customers wanting rehashed models from the last century.
I guess the future will tell. Hope for GM's sake they are right. Still, their track record as of late is not the best. Let's hope someone at GM knows what they are doing finally.
Reply
jon... 5:57PM (1/01/2007)
amen friendly grizzly, that was perfict. I think the safety nazi's and the fuel economy nazi's overlap. See Car and driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/3624/columns-patrick-bedard.html
Reply
Mr_Oak 6:53PM (1/01/2007)
------>3. While the Japanese and Koreans are building fuel efficient and leading edge vehicles for the 21st Century, Detroit seems to want to go back to the 20th.
---------------------------------------------------
SHUT UP MORON. The Japanese and Europeans don't build muscle cars because they can't. Distinctly an AMERICAN thing.
Remember the AMG Hammer? who's collecting that damn kit car. The thing about American muscle, they gain in value. The hammer or the M5 of 15 years ago ain't worth doo doo today.
Judging by the number of Mustangs, Corvettes, 300Cs, CTS-Vs etc. that are sold, there is a market for them.
U.S. car companies also make fuel efficient cars.
AuraMalibu
Sebring
Caliber
FusionZephyrMilan
Cobalt
PT Cruiser
HHR
Focus
All cars I will never own. I will also never own any of the overpriced, too expensive to enjoy or maintain German gas guzzlers, which I noticed that you did not chastise. Neither will I ever again any of the wheeled appliances coming out of Asia.
To Detroit I say, build as big and as bad as you can, we, the people who actually spend money on cars, will buy them.
Reply
Daniel 6:49PM (1/01/2007)
artie43 - The reason U.S. car companies are now very close to going in the toilet is not because they don't build enough European and Asian type stuff - it is because they nearly abandoned their historic roots and traditions. The Hay Day of the American auto industry was from the mid 1950s to the end of the Muscle Car Era in 1974. During that time the Big Three built the highest performance and best styled cars in the world.
The U. S. companies did not know how to respond to the first oil crisis so they made a feeble attempt to copy some of the overseas designs and it just did not work very well. A great example is the Ford Five Hundred - FoMoCo wanted it to be viewed as an up scale Audi but what they produced was just an extremely boring car on a nice platform - yawn.
These companies need to go back to their roots, their traditions and their history. Build bold and in-your-face American Iron that pays homage to the Muscle Car Era and the Pony Car Era.
This can be done while still offering full plug-in BioDiesel hybrids that get better than 80 MPG. And, they should fully develop their small car line-ups with great FWD stuff that gets supper high mileage - in other words give people a choice.
The styling of the great 1960s Pony Cars is timeless and will work today and in the future. A Porsche 911 today looks very much like a 911 of 40 years ago - it still works. The signature styling of the Big Three Pony Cars of the '60s will surely find a welcome home today.
Reply
PaddyWagon 7:01PM (1/01/2007)
Camaro looks great.
Can cars like the new Camaro or Mustang take E85 fuel?
Reply
Cmicasa the GREAT 7:26PM (1/01/2007)
WELL WELL WELL Artie43...We meet again...
It's getting really pathetic..The Domestics have a shot...U would think U would be proud.
I mean look at the progress made in such a short time of "Revival":
Cadillac has gone from being SNOOZE-Mobiles to exciting Sports Sedans that have even BMW and Benzo looking over their shoulders. The Styling maybe questionable to some ...but at least it's unique and hardly boring.
Chevy is building Sedans that challenge the Status Quo with reliability and desirability. Trucks with amazing interiors and durability only rivaled by Ford.
U have a Sports GT car that will Blow anything under $300K away in most performance test. I mean the Vette is so good now that if they redid the interior using better materials etc...technically, based on the same equal tech and performance, could sell it for the same price as an F430.
Saturn has gone from "No Haggle" as the incentive for buying, to Gorgeous roadsters, Crossovers, and Sedans that make people break their necks to see go whizzing by.
Pontiac will be completely RWD performance in a matter of two years, and in the mean time have a BEST SELLER, G6, challenging the normal everyday cruisers like Accord, Camry, and Altima with a little more style and extremely nice performance.
Ford killed the Taurus..and made the far superior Fusion/Milan. The have the top selling truck line on the market. The Mustang is available in various trims all the way up to a 500HP Cobra. They gave us the return of a racing LEGEND...the Ford GT.
Lincoln is attempting to build more accessible vehicles that, to be honest with U (with exception to the New Navigator (WTF?)aren't bad at all. I love the Lincoln MXK...and the MKX ain't bad either.
We asked for better interiors...We got 'em
We asked for Reliability...We got it.
We asked for Quality...we have it
We asked for reduced Fleet Sales and less "Discount Events" to increase resale value ...We got those too
And now we are even getting Hybrids, despite the FACT that the companies that brought them to the market first, Honda and Toyota have said that they really "aren't the answer"...
OH and Profits are up...
What does it take to make U "NATSAYERS" happy?
Reply
paul 7:40PM (1/01/2007)
Man thats so ugly Bring on the Dodge Challenger
Reply
Cmicasa the GREAT 7:43PM (1/01/2007)
Hey folks ...Listen to Artie43 and he will have U selling the remain pieces of America for a penny on the dollar. He is a turncoat...a TORY at best, and his only goal has always been to bring AMERICAN car makers down.
Believe me. I battle with this fool for 2 and 1/2 years at the AUTOWEEK Forum..and he never let up on his Death to GM/Ford propaganda.
Artie If u are there...All of us took over the Motor Trend Forum... We miss beating up on your SICK twisted LOGIC....
and when I say ALL....I mean ALL of us...
Reply
Cmicasa the GREAT 7:54PM (1/01/2007)
Also U fellas must also remember that Artie drives a stinking RIDGELINE...an a Camry. He HATES American cars because of a 1980 Chevy Van that he never changed the oil in over 215K miles breaking down on him....in 1999. The thing was 19 years old and had never had one oil change 4GODSSAKE.
Reply