http://jalopnik.com/5146198/first-photos-of-pre+production-camaros-coming-off-assembly-line



[Edited on February 5, 2009 at 12:07 AM. Reason : thanks]

2/4/2009 11:49:45 PM

your picture you are trying to display is a website....not a pic

looks pretty close to the concept pics minus the side mirrors

2/4/2009 11:52:00 PM

there was a hold up because one supplier went bankrupt. once a company is in bankruptcy tools can not leave that shop..thus they couldn't make any cars.

yesterday we got a shit load of orders for parts for the camaro starting in march'ish..so they are def starting to make some

[Edited on February 5, 2009 at 7:52 AM. Reason : and by tools i mean injection mold tools, think $100's of thousands of dollars]

2/5/2009 7:51:55 AM

The front looks nothing like the old dart that I remember from before.

2/5/2009 9:22:03 AM

I think its pretty sweet that they all have an independent rear suspension, and that the base, least powerful engine is a 306hp V6. Given that it'll rough up even a Mustang GT. Unfortunately the starting price is significantly higher than a Mustang V6 and its also a heavy motherfucker.

2/5/2009 12:10:09 PM

does it transform into an autobot too?

2/5/2009 12:35:09 PM

jesus titty fucking christ. The gas milage on the v8 of this piece of shit is worse than a Z06?

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?year=2010&make=Chevrolet&model=Camaro&trimid=-1

23 mpg hwy...

That can't be right, can it?

2/5/2009 6:32:51 PM

uh

corvettes are a bit more aerodynamic and lighter.

this isn't rocket science

2/5/2009 6:42:41 PM

could be the auto mileage, 4th gen camaros with the 6 speed got 6 or 7 mpg better hwy than the autos.

2/5/2009 8:19:23 PM

wow, what earth shattering late breaking news this thread is.

^^exactly. vettes are roughly 800lbs. lighter and go through the air better. makes perfect sense. in the real world, c5/c6 6 speed vettes can bring down a legit 28-30mpg highway. hell, even my stalled, rowdy cammed, full bolt on, 3.42 geared, etc. c5 still gets 25mpg highway if i'm nice.

^yup. iirc, when it was stock my 94 4th gen 6 speed got 25-26. i had a friend with an auto and it could only manage low 20's.

2/6/2009 12:55:28 AM

Camaros are supposed to be a crappy steel version of a Corvette. That's their entire purpose in the product line. I'd imagine the production costs are almost identical.

2/6/2009 1:04:35 AM

^oooh, that reminds me! hey guys, did you hear the new zr1 is actually coming??? CRAAAZY!

2/6/2009 1:47:32 AM

^^seriously man? Was that a serious comment? They're built on an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT freaking platform.

Dunce cap for you, now off to the corner you go.

2/6/2009 1:08:30 PM

I meant in the minds of consumers. The platform is irrelevant, they all cost the same to develop. If they built the corvette in the same numbers that they build the camaro, they could sell it just as cheaply. But that wouldn't make half as much money. It'd be alright with me if they went straight from Cobalts to Corvettes, priced based on engine package.

2/6/2009 1:52:49 PM

Quote :

"I meant in the minds of consumers. The platform is irrelevant, they all cost the same to develop. "

Dude, I'm in the automotive manufacturing industry (robots and automation) and been on enough development teams to tell you with absolute confidence that your statement in bold is asinine on many different levels.

2/6/2009 2:15:44 PM

Think like an accountant for a second. It's all about allocating cost across product lines over a given time period of development. For purposes of understanding costs, compare the new Camaro to the Dodge Challenger and the Corvette to the Dodge Viper.

A really quick examination of the Challenger tells us that it shares parts and sheetmetal with the Magnum (I think this was just killed though), the 300, and the Charger. That's a lot of different models to share parts with, and from an accounting perspective we can divide the total cost by 4 for the purposes of this discussion. In our simplified model, let's say total development cost is $10 million dollars (obviously it's way higher than that). $10 / 4 = 2.5 million for the Challenger in development.

The GM equivalent, the Camaro, is sharing parts with the Pontiac G8 and some equivalent Holden models I think. So let's give them $10 million in development costs and divide it by 2 or 3. On both the Challenger and the Camaro you can spread that cost out (from an accounting perspective) among a couple models and thus overall development is cheaper on the books.

The Viper shares parts too--just not on the same scale as the Challenger. It's V10 engine is based on the V10 truck engines that Chrysler sells, and there's probably a number of other things I'm not aware of. But what's a hypothetical $10 million divided by 1? $10 million.

The Corvette is the same deal. It's still sharing a bunch of parts across models. Yet it's sufficiently differentiated from the rest of the fleet (unlike the Camaro) that you can't divide its own hypothetical $10 million in development by any number other than 1. $10 million divided by 1 is $10 million.

Even if the Camaro and the Corvette had the exact same cost spent on its development (or the platform's development), cost allocation makes the Camaro cheaper, especially when you consider it is being developed alongside a couple models which will all have a useful life of at least 3 or 4 years. So the savings could be compounded over time depending on how GM does its cost calculations.

[Edited on February 6, 2009 at 8:08 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2009 8:04:19 PM

Quote :

" It's V10 engine is based on the V10 truck engines that Chrysler sells,"

cold hard fact? i thought it to be the other way, unless they held the truck engine back from production for a couple years?


viper concept in 89, then production in 92... ram v10 in 94

2/6/2009 8:25:45 PM

I think I first read about it in Lee Iacocca's book (which I flipped through while putting off a paper in the library), the one from the 90's where he pats himself on the back for saving Chrysler.

all I've got for you off hand is a Wikipedia citation though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Viper

Quote :

"The centerpiece of the car was its engine. It was based on the Chrysler LA design, which was a truck engine. The original configuration made it too heavy for sports car use, so Lamborghini, then owned by Chrysler Corporation, revamped Dodge's cast-iron block V10 for the Viper by recasting the block and head in aluminum alloy. Some within Chrysler felt the pushrod two-valve design, while adequate for the truck application, was unsuitable for a performance car and suggested a more comprehensive redesign which would have included four valves per cylinder. Chrysler, however, was uncertain about the Viper's production costs and sales potential and so declined to provide the budget for the modification."

[Edited on February 6, 2009 at 8:43 PM. Reason : .]

2/6/2009 8:41:28 PM

heh, the more you know

2/6/2009 8:56:51 PM

Yeah, they'd been talking about a more modular development of the LA platform for quite a while. Really started with the advent of the 3.9 V6.

The whole concept was parts and manufacturing homologation, but if you look at a breakdown of the V10, there are damn few parts it shares with the 360 or 318.

2/7/2009 11:36:54 AM

the british are coming

oh, yeah, that happened 250 years ago too

[Edited on February 7, 2009 at 1:52 PM. Reason : ^ it not like a damn 4.3/5.7 thats for sure]

2/7/2009 1:51:56 PM

anybody gonna get one?

2/15/2009 10:46:04 PM

Quote :

"anybody gonna get one?"

Oh yeah!

2/16/2009 7:35:20 AM

they looked pretty cool on the track last night, are the tail lights really a yellowish color

2/16/2009 10:55:53 AM

Camaro
vs
Corvette...

It doesn't take that much money to go fast.
vs
It takes a hell of a lot of money to go very fast and have world class handling.

The sports car market is hella competitive right now. I'm sure Chevrolet dumped a ton of money on R&D to stay competitive with the much more expensive cars against which it is competing. Divide that cost by the low number of cars they're going to be able to sell and each car is going to carry a premium. If you don't want to pay you don't get to play.

[Edited on February 16, 2009 at 12:22 PM. Reason : l]

2/16/2009 12:21:04 PM

I think over the next few years we will see the sports car/performance car field thin a bit. I remember reading recently that the new NSX was killed, and so was some upcoming Toyota RWD sports coupe, as well as a Nissan 240sx replacement. With the fate of Chrysler in doubt, who knows how long the Challenger will be around.

2/16/2009 2:49:20 PM

i saw one at the fairgrounds car show this weekend. it's hotttttttttt.

2/16/2009 7:34:11 PM

no, you're hot

2/16/2009 10:34:18 PM

lawlz

no e-game in the garage

2/17/2009 7:57:07 AM

Quote :

"Lee Iacocca's book"

hell yeah I did a presentation for this book in some class or another

2/17/2009 1:38:36 PM

Quote :

"who knows how long the Challenger will be around"

well knowing chrysler likes to change things for the worst, i give it 5 years

2/17/2009 1:45:08 PM

okay, i just actually read the last few posts in here and it sounds like some of you might be a little confused in your terminology. there is the LX PLATFORM and the LA ENGINE.

the LX platform was chrysler's superchild for parts integration across multiple models, and so far it's execution has been pretty impressive imo. it's able to be configured into a variety of models, engines, drivetrain layouts, etc. at a minimal cost. currently, the LX includes the challenger, charger, 300, and magnum. engines range from the v6 to 3 different v8's. they can be had in rwd or awd. fwd could even be easily accomplished if the need arose. chrysler first experimented with this idea on the previous LH platform, but the LX brought a lot more quality and versatility.

now, the LA small block was the engine that came after the A block in the 60's. the LA family includes the 239, 273, 318, 340, and 360. in the early 90's, the magnum engines were introduced. while heavily based on the LA, technically they are different motors. certain parts will interchange, but many will not.

the v10 began development in the 80's as a truck engine. a magnum 360 was used as the prototype, and two additional cylinders were added. as arghx said. it was then passed off to lambo to be cast into aluminum for the viper. in effect, the viper v10 is the last hold over to the LA era. oddly enough, ALL of the current chrysler engines pay homage all the way back the original wedge headed plymouth motors of the 50's though.

2/17/2009 2:00:12 PM