Repair-It

The low end of the used market for these seems to be around $125-130k. I wonder when the lines will cross with the final first gen NSX

Well I would consider the first gen more desirable...

The second gen seems to be very unloved. These could actually end up being a fairly decent value at some point 5-10 years from now. They run 11.2 @ 126 and get 21 MPG combined thanks to the hybrid stuff. Also the EPA rating is 21/22. So weird. Reminds me of some old car with a 3-speed auto.

Yeah some old GM 2.8 or 3.1L V6 with a 3-speed auto was probably in that range.

Wonder what the hybrid maintenance is like 10 years in though. Mainly battery replacement I guess.

Also... I can't believe they are seriously considering shelving the Camaro again... I think if they continue the platform sharing, and make the styling an evolution from gen 6 to a little more gen 5, the sales will return. I think there are a lot of gen 5 owners that haven't made the update to the gen 6 due to the direction of the styling. Everything else is supposed to be better, so either the price or styling would be the issue to me. I just think it will be a sad day for GM to only have the Corvette for sports cars. Sure, Cadillac will probably still have some V stuff and rumors say something else, but that to me is not enough. These are way to expensive to start out.

Seems like in the past there used to me sport or performance versions to choose from for many platforms.

As I always suggest and have recently stated, let's look at a slightly broader picture than just Camaro. How about Mustang, Camaro, Challenger and I threw Corvette in there for the hell of it.

Individual sales by CALENDAR year 2008 to 2018 and then I summed them all to look at the overall trend. The trend is very clear. You could argue that GM could modify the product but that would in all likelihood not change the overall trend here. I guess the argument is we'd rather see them try than give up but then throwing good money after bad is something that they are going to be sensitive to. And yes, I understand the argument about the holistic vehicle lineup thing, not just Camaro for Camaro's sake. And now I have graphed the decline as a percentage from 2015 sales for all, including the segment. So you can see, using 2015 as a reference, how much each decline from that for 2016, 2017 and 2018. In calendar 2016 the Mustang and Corvette declined more than the segment average while the Camaro and Challenger declined less than the average. In calendar 2017, the Mustang declined substantially from itself and far above the segment average. Corvette next. Camaro and Challenger declined less than the segment average. In 2018 things mix up a little. The Corvette declines the most above the segment average, followed by the Mustang and Camaro. The Challenger completely outperformed the segment with no decline at all. In other words, it matched its calendar 2015 sales while the "segment" I have created had fallen 29% from 2015. This is a small sample set so all it really means is the Camaro, Mustang and Corvette declined year over year while the Challenger at least remained steady. I don't know that I could point out that Camaro styling has driven any significant portion of any of this but feel free to see if you can. I mean, did Camaro styling hurt Mustang and Corvette sales, too?

Looks like my analysis was pretty spot on.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/autos-s ... spartanntp

Minus points for an author probably young enough that they may not have had a license in 2010 (harsh) but...

We think "hiatus" may be a tad too optimistic, even though the Camaro went on hiatus before, between the 2003 and 2008 model years.

When the fifth-generation, '09 Camaro made its debut it shot to the top of pony-car sales, topping even the Ford Mustang. But the all-new '15 Mustang passed it again for good, outselling it that year 122,349 to 77,502. Dodge sold 66,365 Challengers in '15. Since then, with low-volume Hellcats and Demons polishing its halo, the Challenger has passed the Camaro in sales; last year the numbers were 75,482 Mustangs, 66,716 Challengers, and just 50,963 Camaros.

While the '09 Camaro borrowed interior and exterior visual cues from the 1969 Camaro

Some very interesting Mustang stuff. They are in a surprisingly similar situation as FCA. They don't have anywhere to go with the platform, and if they do, they may just continue to bleed sales so....they'll keep selling what they have through 2025!!

On the Challenger end, I did not know about the Barracuda. They were supposed to be on the Alfa Giorgio platform in 2014 but there were delays and added cost. Good thing because according to my latest C&D, the Giulia is a major POS.

And perhaps not surprisingly, the Challenger seems to have the most certain future, with a 2022 projection for the next generation. On the other hand, I consider FCA the least reliable of the big three (in more than one way) so who knows.

Not sure how much credibility this article has but it is certainly a perspective.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/4-reaso ... ro-thrive/

The idea that GM had to wait until the actual launch of the C8 to, what, decide to continue with the 7th gen? Or is that even what they are claiming? I would say GM was well aware what the C8 was going to be and could have made any necessary product planning decisions prior to the launch if they involved any of the logic that this article references. Of course the article has a point, which is pretty much what Bill has been saying. The issue is I don't think it acknowledges the reality of the market (sales of everything seem to be declining). On the other hand, if GM waits until public availability of the C8 and watches sales bloom, maybe they would announce a 7th gen Camaro? I just really don't see the linkage. I don't think people cross shop them and that's not because the Camaro isn't good to drive (obviously).

And while I know it has been said that, especially in the past, that the Corvette is on a pedestal within the GM hierarchy that nothing is allowed to touch (that was confirmed in the 80s but not sure if it held beyond that era - once the C4 ZR-1 was introduced for MY90 there was no looking back), I never really know how much that firmly drives product decisions. For example:

Cannibalism within a lineup—losing sales of higher-margin vehicles to cheaper but similarly performing cars—is a concern for automakers. A problem for the C7 Z06 was the equally powerful but Stingray-expensive Camaro ZL1. Fitted with the 1LE package, it turns into a legitimate track record hunter for a smidge over $70,000. With that firepower, at that price, it likely stole more than a few Corvette customers. Now that the mid-engine revolution has commenced, risk of cannibalism is diminished, and there's newfound room for the Camaro.

Sure, it may be fun to say "hey look, the Camaro was better than the Corvette!" Yes and no. Better car to drive hard, I will actually give you that, because the (ahem, Cadillac platform) Alpha was and is really good. But, the rumor was always about performance. And regardless of getting an LT4 powered Camaro for Stingray money, physics is still on the Corvette's side. A gen 6 ZL1 1LE ran 2:45.7 on the C&D LL, in 2018. A great time. But the C7 Z06 ran a 2:44.6 a whole 3 years earlier in 2015. Now if I'm honest, I would actually pick the Camaro to drive over the C7 Z06 if I wanted this kind of track machine. I would give up a second for the much better manners and behavior of the Alpha car. But the point is, and maybe I am missing the point a little somehow, I don't really see an upset here, at least in classical terms like everyone was talking about in the 80s with the GN ("it's FASTER than the Corvette!! Amazeballs!"). Side note: it was only 0-60 that the GN was faster and only after carefully brake torqueing the Buick...there was nowhere near as much emphasis over holistic performance in those days because people were happy to have any kind of performance back.

And if you continue to pull the string, the regular ZL1 which still has the exact same LT4, ran a 2:50.7, a full 6 seconds off. And this is the actual ZL1 that you'd buy because the 1LE really is closer to the old Z/28 than anything for the street.

And to continue along the lines of bebunking the idea that the Camaro somehow outperforms the Corvette when they have the same engine (my point is it never happens), the 2014 Stingray ran 2:53.8. 3 whole years later, a 2017 Camaro SS 1LE (not a regular SS mind you) ran a 2:54.8.

The time phase of all of this is extremely relevant. At most, I could conceed that cars like the Camaro may in fact someone spoil sales of the Corvette when it is ~3 years into a model/trim cycle. But it is logically impossible for a 2017 Camaro to spoil sales of a 2014, 2015 or 2016 Corvette...and just when that 3 year mark passes, the Corvette is already on the next trim level up, which takes another ~3 years before anything even equivalent (but still lower performing) is released at the Camaro level...maybe that is the point I really should be making here. I do not think GM needs to change Camaro plans due to anything related to the Corvette.

And just so we're not bickering too much...

The 2017 ZL1 (not 1LE) was 0.1 second faster than the 2017 NSX. That's right. But as impressive as that is, then you look at a 2017 Corvette Grand Sport which has the same regular LT1 as a 2014 Stingray (or 2016+ Camaro SS) and it ran a 2:47.1 which is just incredible, especially for a car with only 460 hp. It takes a 650 hp Camaro ZL1 1LE to beat it. Unlike what I said before, I'd take a C7 Grand Sport over a ZL1 1LE all day. Regular ZL1, we'd have to discuss what the objectives are...