Posted on 03/17/2009 4:27:46 PM PDT by Daffynition
29 miles per gallon. Let me say that again… 29 miles per gallon. That’s what the Environmental Protection Agency says 2010 Chevrolet Camaros will achieve on the highway, provided their drivers opt for the base V-6 engine and a judicious right foot. For those wondering why I sound so excited, consider that this base V-6 Camaro LS still comes with power equipment like windows, locks and cruise control, still comes with safety equipment like anti-lock brakes, stability control and enough airbags to float the Titanic, still comes with a fully-independent suspension, 18-inch wheels and a six-speed manual transmission, and best of all, still packs 304 horsepower.
Actually, I lied just then. Best of all is the price, which checks in at $22,900 for the exact car I just described. I’ll take mine in black with red rally stripes, please.
What we have here then is a potential game changer in the newly-revitalized muscle car wars of Motown, and it hasn’t been this exciting since the days of Purple Haze. In the Blue Oval corner, there is of course the Ford Mustang, the only true survivor from the original muscle car era, having not missed a single year of production since it first appeared in 1964. In Shelby GT500 guise, the 2010 Mustang is the undisputed performance champion, out muscling both Chevrolet and Chrysler by over 100 horsepower. Of course, that power also comes at a significant price bump--$46,325 to be exact. By comparison, that’s $4000 more than a Dodge Challenger SRT8, and a whopping $12,000 more than a Camaro SS.
Dodge of course has the Challenger, which has taken the retro pony-car world by storm with its looks and traditional Hemi V-8 power. As with the Mustang, the Challenger still tops out well over the top-of-the-line Camaro SS in price, with an MSRP of $42,600 for an SRT8 that offers 425 horsepower, nearly identical to the SS ‘maro.
But this piece didn’t start out talking about high-end cars, so let me get back to why the 2010 Camaro LS is going to be a game changer.
The only reason the Mustang survived unbroken was because it had scores of V-6 buyers supporting the relative few who opted for V-8-powered GTs or SVT Cobras. When GM retired its F-body line of Camaros and Firebirds in 2002, V-6 Mustang sales alone were more than the General’s entire F-body lineup combined. With figures like that, it’s hard to deny the appeal of lower-priced pony cars; they seldom get the glory, but these bread-and-butter editions are why cars like the Shelby, SS and SRT editions exist. Ford had the formula pretty good with the last-generation Mustang, but GM is about to rewrite that formula because nothing—and I mean nothing—from Ford or Chrysler’s entry-level lineup will be able to touch the raw power of the Camaro V-6. To find a true performance comparison from Ford you need to jump up to the Mustang GT, which only gives you an extra 11 horsepower from its V-8 while costing $5000 more. The Challenger SE V-6 is a bit better at 250 horsepower, but it still sees Camaro taillights on a regular basis. And then there’s the phenomenal fuel mileage of 29 miles per gallon on the highway, which also dominates the domestic competition. Performance enthusiasts generally won’t admit this, but having something with cahones that also saves money at the pump is an ego booster as well. Just ask the six-speed ‘vette guys.
Low price of admission, retro-good looks, Hollywood fame (how many Camaro buyers do you suppose are going to name their car Bumblebee?), class-busting fuel economy and class-obliterating performance; add it all up and you come to a pretty convincing conclusion. Halo cars like the Camaro SS, Shelby GT500 and Challenger SRT8 bring the people into showrooms, but their entry-level siblings pay the bills and GM is looking to turn this segment into a one-trick pony. Don’t take my word for it though; according to General Motors, 14,000 pre-orders have already been taken for the 2010 Camaro and yes, most of them are for the V-6.
As I said… black with red rally stripes, please.
Shwing.
Our 1994 Pontiac Trans Am with a LT1 V-8 gets 24-25 on the highway, the later LS1 V-8s get as high as 29-30.
I wish they would quit talking and start shipping, they have been promising a new Camaro for years, and it is always, just a year away.
If I needed a new car right now, the Camaro would be very tempting.
...I have a `83 Oldsmobile. You know, big, heavy... it gets in excess of 35mpg. (It’s also a diesel... but that’s beside the point.)
Why is a 2010 car getting LESS MPG with supposedly superior tech? Especially considering the vehicle itself is quite probably hundreds of pounds LIGHTER.
My all time favorite car is a 1968 Camaro.
Have wanted one ever since I was a teenager in the early ‘70s.
Yes, and the new Buick La Crosse will be a nice car as well.
Too bad I won’t own one since they are built by ZERO loving union thugs and slugs.
Do you think this will this muscle in on the ‘vette mystique?
Shwing and cha-ching.
Dunno, but I do know that I’ve always loved the ‘68 Camaro, ever since I was a kid.
Someday.....
“Do you think this will this muscle in on the ‘vette mystique?”
Nope.
Corvette is a true sports car.
Camaro is a muscle car.
Owned both.
GMTA (see my post #10)
Add a turbo charger to that V6 and you would have some serious performance with milage to boot.
I agree with the 68 Camaro.
Now this is just my opinion ........That Chevy Camaro is a very cool ride yet the EPA is full of *t most of the time ! They promote mpg that is always higher than actual. Even my old 84 Vette got 26 mpg on the highway at 70mph. 25 years later and we see “only” 3 more mpg from a chevy performance car ?!?!?!?
Lame GM ....lame !
Girl Friday has a pee us errr prius that was supposed to get EPA est of 60 mpg and has never got better than 45 mpg.
Only rig I have seen come very close or exceed it’s epa est mpg was the diesel vw jetta with a manual transmission.
/johnny
Great minds think alike!!!!
I loved the ‘68 when it came. Although the ‘67 is the first year, I liked the ‘68 because of the sidelight lamps.
The ‘69 was a one year body style, but I didn’t like it. Then in 1970 it turned into something radically different and ugly, until the ‘82, which really was a work of art for its time.
Went to buy one when I was a junior in college for a whole $ 750.00 but it was sold to someone else after I test drove it.
Wound up with a ‘67 Cougar XR-7—that was a great car. Had vacuum operate dheadlight covers—you know the ones clunked closed, one at a time! But it had sequential tailights—that was really cool.
Had a 1969 Camaro Coupe with a 307 V-8. Bought it when I got my DL at 17. Next car was a 1969 Dodge Dart slant six. Sold them both to finance school. Wish I still had them.
Imagine if Ford had had the damn sense to do this when they resurrected the Thunderbird a few years ago...
Now if they had said 29 city, with a V-8 and not a six, I would have been more impressed
I know the feeling. Had to sell The ‘67 Cougar XR-7 (with racing stripe!) when son #1 came along—to pay the doctor’s bill.
Was stuck driving my wife’s ‘73 Maverick. :(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.