Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

  1. #1
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    A restored '69 Camaro (not a Z-28 perhaps) canbe purchased for around $30k. This is also probably about what you'd pay for the pending '09 Camaro coupe.

    Which would you rather have?

    For me, it's a no-brainer. The old car has everything the new car won't have - curb appeal, history and enduring value. The new Camaro may be fun to drive and more reliable, etc. But within a few years it will be just another used car; your $30k "investment" will have become a $12k (if that) trade-in.

    I wishGM well, but I predict the car will flop. It's one thing to spend $30-$40k on a classic car; another thing entirely to spend it on a modern (and ersatz) imitation. People looking to spend that kind of coin on a new car are going to buy Beemers and Acuras - not teenage boy-looking modern muscle cars. And the teenage boys of 2009 can't afford the thing.

    Bet you $20 I'm right about this!

  2. #2
    mrblanche
    Guest

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    You can buy all the parts to build a "new" '69 Camaro, you know. It would be more than $30,000, but not a lot more.

  3. #3
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mrblanche
    You can buy all the parts to build a "new" '69 Camaro, you know. It would be more than $30,000, but not a lot more.
    Yes, true.

    But even if one built a "1969" Camaro entirely from repro parts, it'd still have the same curb appeal as a "real" '69 Camaro ... the new one won't.

    I maintain that modernity and the muscle car concept are fundamentally incompatible...

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,934

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric

    I maintain that modernity and the muscle car concept are fundamentally incompatible...
    I never understood 'muscle cars'. They remind me of Country and Western music, mostly.

    If you want to go fast, ride a bike.

    That said, many young people around here buy turbo Subarus and Mitsis.... misguided as young people are.

    And I currently drive a very quiet LS1 GM.... true to my middle-aged male faded-glory.

  5. #5
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Part of the attraction is the excess and wildness of the machinery; muscle cars are brash hooligans - uncouth and obnoxious, even.
    Hence the appeal to young guys!


  6. #6
    Staff
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    3,126

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    A restored '69 Camaro (not a Z-28 perhaps) canbe purchased for around $30k. This is also probably about what you'd pay for the pending '09 Camaro coupe.

    Which would you rather have?

    For me, it's a no-brainer. The old car has everything the new car won't have - curb appeal, history and enduring value. The new Camaro may be fun to drive and more reliable, etc. But within a few years it will be just another used car; your $30k "investment" will have become a $12k (if that) trade-in.

    I wishGM well, but I predict the car will flop. It's one thing to spend $30-$40k on a classic car; another thing entirely to spend it on a modern (and ersatz) imitation. People looking to spend that kind of coin on a new car are going to buy Beemers and Acuras - not teenage boy-looking modern muscle cars. And the teenage boys of 2009 can't afford the thing.

    Bet you $20 I'm right about this!
    I think it will flop as well. Teenage kids today are into IPODs, MySpace and souped up rice. Hell, a teenager can't afford a V6 Mustang. Damned things cost $23,000.

  7. #7
    TC
    Guest

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    Part of the attraction is the excess and wildness of the machinery; muscle cars are brash hooligans - uncouth and obnoxious, even.
    Hence the appeal to young guys!

    I don't think muscle cars appeal to anyone but the people who used to aspire to having one when they were too young to afford to buy one.
    I don't see anyone rushing out to buy the rear wheel drive cars that now are produced.
    Few people know the difference anyway.

  8. #8
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    "I don't think muscle cars appeal to anyone but the people who used to aspire to having one when they were too young to afford to buy one.
    I don't see anyone rushing out to buy the rear wheel drive cars that now are produced.
    Few people know the difference anyway."

    I think you nailed it!

    Baby Boomer (and evn some Genx X) nostalgia isn't enough to build a market on for these latter-day muscle cars. Even sales of the Mustang - which isn't "just" a muscle car - are slipping...

  9. #9
    mrblanche
    Guest

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    The very concept of a "muscle car"--a stripped down, overpowered version of a standard-sized car--is foreign to todays kids. And who knows, maybe they're right. It takes a lot less to make a 2000 pound Honda fast than to make a 4,000 lb Charger fast.

    "Radio delete? So where will I plug in my ipod?"

    "Can't we do something to quiet down that motor? I can't hear my ipod OR my cell phone!"

    Although I do note a lot to police departments are now using the new Charger.

  10. #10
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    " It takes a lot less to make a 2000 pound Honda fast than to make a 4,000 lb Charger fast."


    This is a key point, I think. The cars (FWD imports) are much cheaper to buy and insure; the aftermarket is also awash in parts for these things. Kids can't afford a $30k GTO. Or even a $26K mustang GT.

    "Although I do note a lot to police departments are now using the new Charger."

    Yes, but it's a sedan and so therefore by definition not a muscle car!

  11. #11
    mrblanche
    Guest

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    Yes, but it's a sedan and so therefore by definition not a muscle car!
    I already noted that some of the problem at Chrysler is the mentality that would allow them to produce a four-door Charger.

    Saw some '68 Chargers at the Autorama in Dallas this weekend. Man, I wanted one of those when I was a junior in high school! I had a girlfriend in college whose brother had one, with a 440.

  12. #12
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mrblanche
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    Yes, but it's a sedan and so therefore by definition not a muscle car!
    I already noted that some of the problem at Chrysler is the mentality that would allow them to produce a four-door Charger.

    Saw some '68 Chargers at the Autorama in Dallas this weekend. Man, I wanted one of those when I was a junior in high school! I had a girlfriend in college whose brother had one, with a 440.
    Yes, they were wicked rides!

    I had a friend in High School who got '71 GTX (440 4-barrel) circa 1986... he got himself killed in the thing. I drove it many times - and though fast as hell, it handled like scheisse... terrible brakes, too.

    In many ways, a real POS...

  13. #13
    mrblanche
    Guest

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Those muscle cars suffered from insufficient brakes, steering, and tires, although they were "state of the art" at the time.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,934

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric
    Quote Originally Posted by mrblanche


    Saw some '68 Chargers at the Autorama in Dallas this weekend. Man, I wanted one of those when I was a junior in high school! I had a girlfriend in college whose brother had one, with a 440.
    Yes, they were wicked rides!

    I had a friend in High School who got '71 GTX (440 4-barrel) circa 1986... he got himself killed in the thing. I drove it many times - and though fast as hell, it handled like scheisse... terrible brakes, too.

    In many ways, a real POS...
    When I left scholol in '68 we saw very few US cars down here in NZ. The few we DID see were muscle cars, owned by US servicemen and suchfrom Mcmurdo in Antarctica. I recall seing 2-door V8s which were very impressive and fast, but we could but dream. All our trade, well, over 90%, was with Britain. So we had Britcars, and Britbikes...
    By 1969-70 I got to drive newish 3.3 litre GM Vauxhall 6-cylinder cars, built locally from CKD packets from Britain, and they were like lots of other cars available including Jags and Minis and Hillmans etc. Pretty much hand-built on short production lines.

    In a way, it was nice. We never got a taste for 455cu in engines! And our bikes could blow them away anyway....

  15. #15
    Senior Member Kwozzie1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sunshine Coast, QLD, Australia
    Posts
    2,072

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by robmcg


    When I left scholol in '68 we saw very few US cars down here in NZ. The few we DID see were muscle cars, owned by US servicemen and suchfrom Mcmurdo in Antarctica. I recall seing 2-door V8s which were very impressive and fast, but we could but dream.
    Or owned by rich US sugar daddies...... a couple used to come into the Ford dealership where I worked in their Thunderbird... He ....late 70's 0r 80's She 40ish
    I do remember the sequential rear indicators..
    Rex
    On the Sunshine Coast, in the Sunshine State Queensland (QLD), Australia

  16. #16
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    "In a way, it was nice. We never got a taste for 455cu in engines! And our bikes could blow them away anyway.... "

    The TA is good for high 12s/low 13s... so a stock Z1 would beat her, but not badly!

    And though I have never tried it, I am pretty sure that with the OD transmission, the Pontiac's top end is higher than the bike's. A stock Z1/Kz900 could get to around 130-something.. if you had the balls to risk the head shake. I'm skeered to attempt it, but I have no doubt my Trans-Am could go faster than that.... .

    Now, my ZRX will walk away from the Trans-Am (and the old bikes). 10 second quarters.... but I will tell you this. A new Corvette Z06 would be on my ass within half a mile - and past me at the end of it. That car is brutal. At 140-plus, it is still pulling as hard as some fast bikes are pulling at 80. You know, if you ride, that on even the fastest of bikes, you start to run into a wall around 150. Some may be able to edge up a little more on the dial, but you need time and room to do it. But the superior aerodynamics of the 'Vette mean it's just getting rolling at 140... you can be at 160-plus by the end of a mile, with a "running start." I know, I have done it.

    That car is damn fast!

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    1,429

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by mrblanche
    Those muscle cars suffered from insufficient brakes, steering, and tires, although they were "state of the art" at the time.
    My 428 SCJ (1969 Fairlane) handled just awful above 100 mph. The front end floated. Also the drum brakes were poor.

    They were a great concept.

    OTOH, many new cars go fasted and safer. Once, I have my 2004 Volvo S80-T6 upto 120 mph - no problems - handling great, I believe the car could do 160.

  18. #18
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Edentulites
    Posts
    22,731

    Re: A 2009 Camaro.. or an '09 Camaro?

    Quote Originally Posted by dBrong
    Quote Originally Posted by mrblanche
    Those muscle cars suffered from insufficient brakes, steering, and tires, although they were "state of the art" at the time.
    My 428 SCJ (1969 Fairlane) handled just awful above 100 mph. The front end floated. Also the drum brakes were poor.

    They were a great concept.

    OTOH, many new cars go fasted and safer. Once, I have my 2004 Volvo S80-T6 upto 120 mph - no problems - handling great, I believe the car could do 160.
    No question!

    My 455 Trans-Am has the power to get to 140-plus... but I have yet to push it beyond 110, because the chassis/suspension/brakes and the rest of its '60s-era technology is not confidence inspiring at triple digit speeds.

    On the other hand, doing 150 in a new Corvette is almost uneventful. It doesn't even "feel fast" at 120. (Just ask my wife!)

    The old muscle cars were great for 1/4 mile barnstorming - andburnouts and just looking bad-ass.

    But you took your life in your hands - literally - if you ventured into the land of triple digits in one...

Similar Threads

  1. There will be no 2009 Camaro
    By Eric in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 04-30-2008, 08:39 AM
  2. Would you buy a new Camaro?
    By Eric in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 09:09 AM
  3. new camaro
    By brackman65 in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-08-2007, 04:51 PM
  4. 2009 Camaro debuts
    By Eric in forum Automotive News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-05-2007, 08:59 PM
  5. 2009 Camaro - cheers or jeers?
    By Eric in forum Classic Car Corner
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-10-2006, 02:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •