Rumors of the V8's death apparently untrue, 84% of Camaros are so ordered
We would guess that General Motors didn't see this one coming, but early reports indicate that out of 6,000 Camaro orders that the automaker has already received, 84 percent are for models powered by the massive V8 engine. This is a huge surprise, given that GM went to great lengths to ensure that its pony car was both just as stylish and an excellent performer in its standard V6-powered guise. That six cylinder engine is the same powerplant that sits under the Cadillac CTS's well-creased hood and produces something just north of 300-horsepower, which is more than enough to get the modern muscle car moving.
There have been numerous people suggesting that the performance car era has officially come to an end. We're not ready to make an judgments based on 6,000 early adopters, but perhaps this just continues to prove that there will always be some number of consumers out there that are willing to pay a premium for performance. Our bet is that these numbers even themselves out over the next year and that the ratio of V6s to V8s adjusts to something more in line with what you'd expect.
[Source: Camaro5]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Doug 5:56PM (10/28/2008)
The 6000 number is a bit troubling.
GM needs new cars that will sell 150,000+ units/year. 6000 (with 84% being V8s) doesn't seem to indicate a broad interest/acceptance of purchasing this car. That might be an interesting number, but I think GM needs to be interested in making cash at this point.
Reply
tifosiotaku 6:29PM (10/28/2008)
GM is aiming for 100,000 units annually, calm the hell down.
Wise Golden 1:44PM (10/29/2008)
6000 orders on a car that does not yet exist is pretty darn good.
Snowdog 7:08PM (10/28/2008)
Come on. This is a nostalgia muscle car. I am surprised anyone went for the 6cyl.
Reply
!!D 7:34PM (10/28/2008)
Exactly. Those who buy a Camaro always pony up the cash to make it more bitchin'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwkdKfkncok
BTW, does this anti-green article belong in autobloggreen's queue? That's worthy of debate.
Noz 8:44PM (10/28/2008)
What the hell is this article doing on this blog? Why bother covering this gas guzzling POS?
No one GM is failing...the rest of the world is heading towards downsizing, efficiency, and more responsible products while these idiots want to sell "nostaglic" V8's?
Pathetic.
Reply
JDred 9:45PM (10/28/2008)
Uh Noz, while you're at you might want to tell the same to just about every other car maker out there too!
Sheesh.
Harry Ariola 9:41AM (10/29/2008)
What's pathetic is someone who thinks that a few should dictate what the masses buy. Environmental fascism is beyond the pale.
And just for the record, that "POS" with its "nostalgic V8" gets basically the same mileage as a 6 cyl Subaru Legacy, yet I don't hear an outcry about how the smaller AWD vehicle with the smaller, less powerful engine gets mileage on par with a 422HP "nostalgic V8" in a much bigger car.
And while we're at it, why doesn't Subaru illicit the same hatred as the Camaro, as very few people actually NEED AWD? I mean, if they dumped the AWD system, they could shave a lot of weight off the vehicle, not to mention less drag on the driveline, which would improve their mileage to be almost on par with equally sized GM vehicles...
Noz 1:42PM (10/30/2008)
Here we go again with the defensive posteur about "few should be dictated" crap.
Get your head out of your selfish ass and think the bigger picture for a moment. It's not all about YOU all the time.
We've got major issues to battle and the only thing these morons can come up with is the same business as usual guzzling crap?
Do any of you even have any thought for the future? If not for yourselves but perhaps for your offspring (God help us)? Oh that's right...none of gift rat's ass about your kids...that's all an act to just cover up the otherwise massive guilt you'd be feeling while knowing well you've leveraged their future for your joyrides.
Nice.
Wm Holden 7:58PM (10/06/2009)
Not everyone wants to down size and get green...sorry.
gorr 11:39PM (10/28/2008)
Well this car represent the side of car that is not based on efficiency or other reasonable wise and cautious choice. It represent sport and passion but on the cheap side, a corvette or ferrari or porsche for the poor. All and each of the previous camaro have been sh*t on wheels, very dangerous car to drive fast. Poor engine with carburators, hydraulic automatic transmission, base camshafts, bad rear axle and boncy suspention, bad brakes, over weight and im tired of enumerating all the neo-sport stuff there is. This is just an overview. Consult past necrophobic section of newspaper for witness of this situation. A light honda civic with good tires with manual transmission is better then this.
But with the choice of available sporty green car on the market, then for helping the gm employees with there costly pension plant and medicare buying this car if you live and pay tax in u.s.a,
then for the beauty of the shape of the car, it can be a good choice. Try to buy with manual transmission and learn to use compression to brake to help the cavalier brakes that have been fit to this car.
Reply
Frylock350 9:30AM (10/29/2008)
I'm sorry but that's hilarious. A Civic vs a Camaro in performance? That's like a Prius vs and F-350 in a towing competition. The Civic stands no chance. A Honda Civic 1.8 does 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, the Si in 6.5 seconds. This Camaro goes 0-60 in 4.6 seconds. Which means by the time the base civic hits 70, the Camaro is doing over triple digit speeds. It'll eclipse the Si in the 1/4 with enough distance between them for a tractor-trailer to change lanes.
When you talk handling it only gets worse for the poor little underperforming Civic. GM's Cobalt SS outperforms every single Civic in every conceivable performance metric. It doesn't just beat the Civic, it makes a mockery of it. Camaro is better than Cobalt SS, therefore significantly better than any Civic.
All automatic transmissions are hydraulic... even Honda's (please note that an automated manual ISN'T an automatic). Also every Camaro produced has had a manual standard, the auto was the option. Aside from that GMs automatic trasmissions are superb when it comes to smoothness and reliability. Why else would BMW buy them?
And poor engines? The massive appeal to Camaros has always been the fantastic engines. GM's V8s are indestructible and deliver excellent power for a very low price. Find me another 420hp vehicle for $31k. Yes the cam in a stock Camaro typically isn't overly aggressive, but it doesn't need to be. They are plenty quick in stock form.
And Cavalier brakes? The V8 Camaro SS has Brembos front and back, big ones. Brakes don't get much better than that.
The new Camaro is heavy (500lbs heavier than the F-Body it replaces) I"ll give you that. That's probably because GM built it on a full-size sedan/wagon platform instead of a smaller dedicated sports car platform like it has in the past.
JamesWB 7:41AM (10/30/2008)
Also I think 1987 was the last year for carbed Camaros. Nevermind gorr, letting facts get in the way of an argument isn't your style is it? You keep on believing that hydrogen hype though.
Mel 1:44PM (10/30/2008)
spot on!!
Noz 1:45PM (10/30/2008)
Boy oh boy! I can beat a Civic SI to 100 mom!!! I feel so endowed!
mmmmm.mmm 3:57AM (10/29/2008)
this kind of road going crap proves that Americans hate the planet we live on don't give a rats arse about its enviroment the volt will turn out to be a big fat lie like the ev1 general motors corporation are enviromental and economic criminals i feel for the people that work for them but i hope in the current economic downturn these bastards go tits up and take ford and crysler with them
Reply
tifosiotaku 9:12AM (10/29/2008)
Put down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard, and let the hot rodders have their fun...
Silly Pickle 7:27AM (10/29/2008)
Wow...now I see why I don't read Green. Bunch of haters. Yikes! You're not car guys...your enviro Nazis. This so called gas guzzling pig in either V-6 or V-8 form out does my V-6 (Ford Taurus) in mpg...so how is it then that I'd be enviromentally irresponsible buying a V-8? Shit, a Vette gets 6-8 mpg better than my car at the same speed. And I don't drive hard. Ya'all need to get your heads out of your asses about the whole gas pig thing. Such negativity. Go hug a tree...I'm sure it'll hug you back.
Reply
PeterG 10:23AM (10/29/2008)
I am not hating, but this isn't a poster child for enviro friendly cars. It is a retro-muscle car. Hardly a surprise most people go for the V8. It doesn't prove that V8s are alive and well with the general population (let alone people who actually care about gas mileage), all it indicates is that muscle car buyers still want V8s. Duhhh, hello captain obvious.
BTW According to EPA (both with auto transmission).
2009 Taurus gets 18/28
2009 Corvette gets 15/25.
The manual does a bit better, but still doesn't match the Taurus and it is more fair to compare auto to auto.
How does this translate into the Vette getting 6-8mpg more? The reason the EPA exists is to have reasonable comparison. It may not be perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than comparing someone hypermiling a Vette somewhere getting better mileage than someone doing a regular commute. Apples to Apples...
Silly Pickle 12:18AM (10/30/2008)
I'll clarify that...I drive a 2000 model year Taurus. At 110 kmh I get about 27-29 mpg...and that's Imperial gallon. So we're talking about 23 mpg US. My old 5.0 (wayyy back in 89) got mid 30's driven relatively nice, and was more fun to drive. I know a guy with a 2001-2 (can't remember exactly what year) SS z28, 320 hp, at a steady120 kmh he got 34ish or better. If I drive my car at a steady 100 kmh I barely break 30. I think I've hit 31 (I check weekly). My old 89 SHO got 36 (Imp gallon) at 120, so I'm sure it would have come closer to 40 had I backed out of it on a long trip. Our local dealer picked up a car in B.C - I'm in Manitoba - which he drove back at speed limit or a bit better through Montana etc, and he couldn't believe it when he got back - he figured his use at 34 mpg (Imp) so that's where I got the 6-8 from. Beats my car, and has 3 times the power. Can't be worse than my POS for the environment, can it? Maybe the new Taurus (500) get's better than a Vette driven in the same manner...but I doubt it, though I'd gladly volunteer to find out :-) at least with the Vette.
I like my Ford (not sure why mind you)...but they're misleading people with those EPA numbers. There's some pretty pathetic 4's and 6's out there too. Mine being one of them.