2010 Chevrolet Camaro: Best Not To Look Back

Actually, I remember the old Camaro getting decent reviews, but the sentiment was "it's such a decent car, why couldn't GM jazz up the friggin interior, fix the seats, etc." It's a shame it took Ford to at least have vision to fix the Mustang.

I remember driving a buddy's F-body Camaro. He had at both an 90's style and the last generation style. They were both the same. I hated the seating position and could never get comfortable in either. Both were manuals and I am short, but not too short and I still had trouble getting the clutch in all the way. I'm 5'7 and I felt like I was hyper-extending my leg to get the clutch in while still maintaining a decent distance from the steering wheel. And if I reclined the seat to move me away from the wheel, I couldn't see out the windshield. I would never have been able to own one just because I would never have been able to see out of it comfortably.

Yes, they had great motors. One of the best drivetrains I feel out there. But the casing around those drivetrains was your typical GM plastic garbage of the day. Nothing on those cars felt solid. Everything you touched felt cheap and like it was going to fall apart if you dared tried to use it. They truly were terrible cars.

I would own the new one in an instant. Good build quality, I can actually see out of them (sort of - at least I can get a good seating position and still be able to engage the clutch fully). Actually seeing out of them is still in question since in the new one I would never have to use the sun visor because the top of the windshield is actually at my eye level. But at least I can see over the hood and out the side windows now. And it sill has a rocking drivetrain...

The F-bodies were really not very good cars. But saying that the current camaro is better than the F-body really does damn it with faint praise...and I think that's really the whole idea. If the camaro can only be better than its decade-old forebear (which was already way behind its contemporaries), that's not any reason to cut it any slack here and now...in fact, quite the opposite.

@mikeolan

That was in 2002. And they still can't get the interior in a Vette right in 2010. Seriously, how hard is it to get "seats" right?

Its just two different personalities. The old one was a rought, gruff, cheap speed mobile, whereas the new one is a buttoned down stylish grand tourer. They'll appeal to different people, and the new one will win more praise by most measures but obviously won't leave the same feeling.

I think it is a lot like going from my 1970 Oldsmobile to a new compact car. The Olds sure had character. It was loud, bright, and really stood out. Owning it was an adventure. A great day was when it fired right up with the first key turn. A good day was when it started in under 60 seconds. Bad days were more common. Sometimes the speedo would stop working. No joke, a smart thump on the top of the dash with a closed fist would fix it 8 times out of 10. It wasn't particularly fast by taday's standards and handled like the land yacht it was, but it was fun. Now by most standards my new car is a better vehicle. It starts every time, is so refined that I notice (and fret over) the smallest change in noise, is almost as fast and infinitely easy to drive, especially when it comes to handling. Still, there are times when I miss my adventures with the old car.

I've no experience with the F-body, but I have tried the current Camaro SS. I can't believe it's based on the G8 chassis. That car felt so agile and alert, a feeling completely absent in the Camaro. That's really the problem. The Camaro is a car for people who care more about how it's perceived than how it drives. Quick, yeah, but dull when you're foot's not on the floorboards. The 370Z was so much more poised, I couldn't fathom how anyone could compare the two.

The new car has a lot in common with the old one.

Both seem like the engineers stopped before they were done. The 90's version were about 70% done and the new ones are about 80% done. Both have great points that are let down by simple details that should have been addressed but I guess they ran out of time.

Lucky the imports have nothing to compete in this class right now so good enough is good enough.

I'll tell you one thing, the old LT1 and LS1 powered F-bodies sounded sweet. One of my favorite stock exhaust sounds. I miss burning rubber all of the way through 1st gear and half way through 2nd. They weren't good cars but they had a nice presence. Nice sound. T-tops off during warm summer days. Mullet blowing in the wind. JK on the mullet part. They were lackluster but compared with the domestic competition, the underpowered Mustang GT and Cobra, for instance, they weren't that bad.

The F-bodies were cheap to buy, cheap to maintain, did powerslides, and were faster than anything else in that price range.

And with regards to the new Camaro, I thought this was a pretty comprehensive analysis of its strengths and drawbacks: http://www.motortrend.com/av/features/112_0908_2010_chevrolet_camaro_ss_laguna_seca_hot_lap/index.html

Thanks for the video Wrinklebumb. I read the article, which was way more negative than the video. The driver's opinion sounds a lot like what I read on the Camaro5 forums. The primary dynamic problem is the understeer. Chevrolet clearly went conservative on the balance trying to keep people out of trouble, but they really killed the dynamics. However, they did it in such a way that it can be fairly easily fixed with small changes. I've heard that simply going from a staggered to uniform wheel/tire combo size at all corners alone does a world of good. Remember this car is riding on the Zeta chassis that was praised for how well it handled in G8 form. Shouldn't be hard to recapture that magic with the Camaro. GM just needs to be more bold.

The dynamic conservatism of the car is a dealbreaker for track rats, but I can certainly see why GM did what it did. It's a well-sorted coupe, methinks, and a bargain despite its drawbacks. For $27k, you get crazy looks, a slick 304 horses, 19 inchers, a pretty nice 9-speaker system, and leather. For $3k more, you get the LS3, 20 inchers, and Brembos. It's a good deal even if all you ever want to do is wood it on highway on-ramps. Which, incidentally, is all 90% of Camaro buyers are ever gonna do.

It's certainly a competitive package compared to the other pony cars and the Genesis Coupe. The 3.8 in that car is nice, but competes on pricing with the snarling V8 in the SS. I can't imagine a scenario where I'd prefer the former.

"Both have great points that are let down by simple details that should have been addressed but I guess they ran out of time."

I think its funny that people are reading an obituary for the 2010 model after 8 months on the market. The F body had been around for years in 2002 and certain shortcomings were still glaring. The 2010 Camaro hasn't even been on the market for ONE year. MAYBE, just maybe they will improve the car over time. I know its hard to fathom but I wouldn't write the car off after one model year. To be perfectly honest GM took so much heat for showing the camaro years before it was on sale that they would have been fools to hold the car for another 6-12 months to tweak the handling and interior. That stuff can be improved in future model years and I suspect it will be.

1487 - You're right that the Camaro will probably get better, but why hasn't the Corvette's interior, especially the seats, (which have been made fun for generations now) not gotten better?

I don't think GM will ignore complaints, but if they are going to do mid-life improvements, why not do it with the Corvette, C4, C5 or C6? Or the old F-body?

fuhteng, I was speaking with a decently high level GM exec, and I asked point blank about the Corvette seats. I surprisingly got the pretty straight answer that most Corvette buyers are older American males who prefer wide flat soft seats to sport seats. Read between the lines on that one and you basically get the whole "Americans are too fat to fit into a proper sports car seat, so why alienate the majority of buyers to please a few enthusiasts?" Given the Corvette's success, kinda hard to fault GM on that one, especially since seats are so easy for an enthusiast to replace.

I don't quite understand why there are so many negative comments on the last-gen f-bodies. I own a 2002 Trans Am WS.6 and love it (Just rolled over 60,100 miles). The interior is simple, and has stood up very well. Luckily, the seats in the T/A offered power adjustable side bolsters and lumbar, so they are very comfortable. And running costs for a 345hp V8 coupe are almost nil. Change the oil every 3,000 miles, tires every 20,000, and that's it. Nothing else. And there isn't a better looking car than the Ram Air series WS.6 T/A. Only complaint I have is that it doesn't quite make the noise of the mustangs, but that's easily fixable with a Flowmaster 40 series exhaust. The new Camaro though, I've considered. It's comfortable, smooth, powerful, but does have faults. It doesn't have the rambunctious nature the old f-bodies has, isn't as tossable and fun. And it's grown too large and heavy. Still not fully convinced to step up to the 2010. (or would it be a step down, haven't decided)

foxgtr, I agree with you. My old boss babied a T/A with the WS.6 package and I thought it was really enjoyable, even predictable, a 9/10ths. You always know you're going to lose the rears with even the slightest provocation of the throttle; sideways heroics follow.

Certainly faster than anything else for the money. About 80% of popular opinion on those cars is directed toward the types of dudes that wrapped them around oak trees after 18 PBRs. They went fast fast fast and were cheap cheap cheap.

I believe it was the Summer of '99, one very nice day I took 2 test drives, one in a 4-cyl. Audi TT coupe FWD, and one in a V8 Camaro SS. Hands down the most fun to drive car was the Camaro. The Audi was all style and little substance, with an old Golf chassis that felt a bit floppy and less than well-coordinated, anything but sporty. Plus it was just about dog slow. I guess the shame of it was, if the Camaro had a nicer interior I would have bought one, but I give GM credit for its sharp steering, rigid chassis, and great exhaust note. It was one of the few memorable test drives in my life. In the end, I bought neither one.

The author seems to of a typical west coast journalist's mindset to find any excuse to write off GM's cars. I guess we can at least be thankful he didn't mention mullets, the sure sign of a hack.

"1487 - You're right that the Camaro will probably get better, but why hasn't the Corvette's interior, especially the seats, (which have been made fun for generations now) not gotten better?"

You feel the C6 interior is no better than that of the C5? seriously? The C6s interior is MUCH better than the C5 interior and they upgraded it with cut and sew leather dash materials about 3 years ago. To suggest the Corvette's interior has not improved or evolved over time is to blatantly ignore the facts. As for mid life improvements the Vette has gotten 3 new engines, new wheels, new colors, new interior trim, new automatic trans, etc. since it debuted in 2004. I would expect the Camaro to see similar changes over the next few years.

stov:

Elsewhere I read there are no existing Recaro seats that would fit within the space available in the corvette and they are not going to re-engineer the car or get special seats at this stage in the car's lifecycle. The seats are not ready for track duty but they are probably fine for 95% of driving situations AND they will fit someone who is more than 175lbs as you noted.

I miss my 1995 Z28. The new one doesn't feel as violent off of the line even though it's quicker... and it felt a lot heavier and understeered noticeably when I drove it. The ride is much nicer however as is the interior (minus the steering wheel).

I didn't have many problems with my 1995 until the headgasket started to leak at around 125k miles. It was still quicker than the majority of cars on the road even in 2009. I traded it in under C4C last year.