Good Monday morning and welcome back to The Autopian’s morning roundup of news from the auto industry. The flow of the century, always timeless [Editor’s Note: Apparently this is a Jay-Z lyric? -DT]. You could’ve been anywhere in the world but you’re here with us, and we appreciate that.
On today’s menu, we have a breakdown of why the next contract process between the Big Three automakers and the United Auto Workers union will be a huge, potentially future-defining affair; some news about another electric Ram; the latest on the e-fuels fight between Germany and the EU; and what really happened to the Chevrolet Camaro.
The UAW Has A New President And A New Vibe, But Not An Easy Road Ahead
Automotive union politics may not be something you follow very closely. But the UAW’s upcoming contract negotiations with the three Detroit automakers (since we’re talking workforce, yes, you can count Stellantis) is shaping up to be the most interesting battle since the bailouts.
Let’s set the stage a bit. The UAW’s leadership in recent years has been, for lack of a better term, not great. It’s been mired in corruption scandals that have sent high-ranking officials to actual prison. Down the line, the pivot to electric vehicles will very likely mean fewer assembly line jobs — something we’re actually starting to see now in Europe. The automakers are basically warning their workers now that belt-tightening lies ahead. But they’re also coming off years of record profits thanks to soaring car prices; UAW members, hit by plant closures and idlings and dealing with the rising cost of living the same as everyone else, want a bigger piece of the pie.
So it’s no wonder UAW members elected a new president, Shawn Fain, over the weekend. Fain’s a reformer and an upstart challenger who defeated incumbent Ray Curry in a very tight finish.
But this moment could be taken as a sign UAW members are about to get a lot more aggressive in their negotiations since the last contracts were settled four years ago. Some members, anyway; Automotive News says that with Fain’s razor-thin win, there is some division amongst the membership. Fain’s promising to shake things up, but he’s a newcomer to the process and may have a tough time delivering on promises. From that story:
Look at these companies — last year alone they made over $35 billion in profits. They’ve been flush with profits for over a decade. Our workers generate these profits. The bottom line is, our members have been left behind. Cost of living and job security language were suspended back in 2009. In my opinion, there is no excuse that those things weren’t reinstated, in the 2015 or 2019 bargaining. Obviously, the [union] leadership had other priorities.
The frustrating part to me is that while the corporations have enjoyed the spoils of these record profits for over a decade, a majority of our members haven’t kept up. We have to end tiers — that’s a top priority going forward. We cannot survive as a union with multiple classes of workers performing the same work. That’s not what a union is about. Everybody’s got to have an equal stake.
You can already tell this is going to be a fascinating fight. Will the union get everything it wants? No, it never does; it doesn’t work that way. (I have been through this in the world of digital media and I can tell you that from personal experience.) But with EV production and investment costs upending the industry—including everything that’s being driven by the Inflation Reduction Act—what the UAW does in the next few months will likely set the course for the business for many years to come.
Ram Shows Off Midsize EV Truck Concept
Remember in February when we first heard about another possible electric Ram, to slot in below the upcoming Ram 1500 Revolution? It’s legit, at least in concept car form. And that was shown to car dealers at an exclusive Las Vegas event this weekend. It hasn’t been revealed to civilians and the media yet, however. I wonder if we’ll see it at an auto show this year.
Apparently, the dealers were impressed, writes Automotive News:
Dealer Randy Dye had something a little more conventional in mind for a potential Ram midsize pickup, but an early concept he saw this week surpassed his expectations. What Dye viewed during a dealer meeting in Las Vegas was “the future,” he said.
Dye said the truck was an electric concept bearing an aesthetic similar to that of the 1500 Revolution concept that Ram rolled out at CES in January.
[…] “We’re going to be back in that [midsize] game,” Dye told Automotive News. “Without a doubt, it looks like a Ram. I look at some of the other midsize offerings in the market, and I’m not going to pick on the individual brands, but I don’t think they always favor their mother brand. The midsize ones have seemed to get away, and they don’t look the same. This is very much a Ram.”
That’s exciting, because why should the full-size EV trucks have all the fun? Besides, Ram dealers (and customers) have been clamoring for midsize options forever and a day. The Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon, Ford Ranger and Toyota Tacoma are extremely strong sellers, as are even smaller new options like the Ford Maverick. Ram has nothing to compete there. Going electric with whatever they do would be a game-changer.
E-Fuels Win In Europe
I’ll let you read some of our recaps on the e-fuels fight in Europe here, but in brief, the EU wanted to effectively ban new internal combustion cars by 2035. They thought they had a deal until Germany raised a stink about it by saying an all-EV market would kill auto industry jobs and asked for a carve-out for synthetic e-fuels. Those fuels still generate carbon emissions but can ostensibly be produced in a carbon-neutral way.
(My take: e-fuels can be great for keeping classic cars on the road, aiding with a transition to fewer emissions and aviation, but I’m not yet sold on the idea that they’ll be the magic-bullet savior of the gas engine.)
Over the weekend, Germany and the EU officially reached a deal. The registration of new vehicles with internal combustion engines will be allowed after 2035, provided they use climate-neutral fuel only. The reactions were wide and varied, reports the Associated Press. [The FDP, by the way, is the libertarian-leaning Free Democratic Party to which Germany’s powerful transport minister belongs:]
The environmental group Greenpeace criticized the agreement sharply. “This lazy compromise undermines climate protection in transport, and it harms Europe,” the group wrote in a statement.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz “let the FDP get away with its reckless blackmailing of the EU for far too long,” Greenpeace said. “The result is a step backwards for the climate and a disservice to the European auto industry.”
In contrast, the transport policy spokesman for the FDP in the European Parliament, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, called the agreement a great success, German news agency dpa reported.
“The nonsensical blanket ban on the internal combustion engine is thus off the table,” he said. “We are keeping a cutting-edge technology and important jobs on the continent,” Oetjen added.
It definitely feels like a “whoa, whoa, whoa” moment in the EU, going from theoretical bans on ICE vehicles to looking at what that realistically means for the market. Now it’s time for the e-fuels industry, which is still in its infancy, to deliver.
You Know The Camaro Was Getting Crushed In Sales, Right?
RIP to the sixth-generation Chevrolet Camaro, the best-handling, most high-tech muscle car nobody bothered to buy. I’ve seen a lot of takes going around social media claiming GM killed the Camaro because it’s “woke” now to push EVs down our collective throats.
But there’s a reason we have a 2024 Mustang coming soon and a confirmed new electric Dodge muscle car in the works already: the Camaro was getting its ass beat in sales. The numbers over at Motrolix don’t lie:
The Gen6 Camaro, unveiled in 2015, was never a strong seller in general or against its main competition. In recent years, the Mustang alone basically outsold it two to one. The Camaro only ever outsold the much older Challenger in its first few years and then only by a few thousand cars.
The simple fact of the matter is that the two-door sporty car segment has been in decline for years, and I don’t think making the Gen6 Camaro look so similar to its predecessor (even if it was completely different under the skin) helped its chances; nor did its poor outward visibility.
I think there’s a universe where the Camaro would’ve soldiered as a heavily updated gas car for Gen7 like the Mustang is, but eventually, the model would’ve gone the EV route Dodge is taking the Challenger. We know the Camaro name will be used for something electric next; I’m excited to see what they do with it.
[Editor’s Note: For the record, I think the outgoing Camaro was the most impressive of the three, especially in ZL1 form. The thing could out-track supercars far, far out of its weight class. It was a marvel of engineering. Chevy didn’t lose the pony wars by being out-engineered — let’s make that very clear. Nor do I think folks shopping in that segment are clamoring for EVs. -DT].
Your Turn
Let’s start with something fun today. Next Chevy Camaro! What do you want to see from it?
Am I the only one who’s going to mention how appropriate it is that a guy named Shawn Fain is dealing with the fallout of the IRA??
I’m glad the e-fuels won the day, at least for now. I do think this could have a big impact on providing green fuels for ICE vehicles and that would be a great thing. The Germans developed the Fischer-Tropsch process during WW2, which produces hydrocarbon fuels and water from carbon monoxide and hydrogen. They were able to produce about 25% of their automobile and truck fuels using this process. Don’t sell the Germans short on technology and chemistry development.
Greenpeace isn’t interested in solutions. Greenpeace could have worked with the nuclear industry over the past several decades towards safer designs and procedures but instead used scare tactics, lies and hysteria to destroy the industry altogether. They completely ignored any progress in reactor safety and other facts which don’t support their extremist narrative.
For proof look at their stance on oceanic dumping of nuclear material. They were there protesting when the material was being dumped and they continue to claim safe disposal as a major stumbling block to nuclear power:
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/fighting-climate-chaos/issues/nuclear/
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/victories/a-ban-on-dumping-radioactive-waste-at-sea/
yet they are conspicuously silent when study after study shows no harm has been caused to the environment from even openly exposed extremely high level radioactive material at the bottom of the ocean. If there was environmental harm you can bet they’d be screaming about it yet the best they can do is hypothesize. A sunken, extensively damaged Soviet nuclear powered (and armed) submarine models the absolute worst case of oceanic disposal yet after extensive surveys the conclusion is “its no big deal”.
https://www.hi.no/en/hi/news/2019/july/researchers-discovered-leak-from-komsomolets
Response from Greenpeace? Nothing but crickets.
So thanks in part to anti-nuclear lobbying from Greenpeace power was made with fossil fuels instead which HAS caused great harm to the environment.
Thanks a lot Greenpeace >:(
TL:DR Fuck Greenpeace.
Fuck you too !
Good point on the nuclear plants, which would go a long way to helping their plan for decarbonization with electric cars. I frankly don’t know how a 100% change over would happen without it unless there’s some major battery tech breakthrough that doesn’t seem to be on the near horizon. It’s almost like they really want to return the world to a “better” old time before petroleum, which would require a massive population drop and would end up costing a lot of trees and a return to coal as well as likely warlord governments. And they aren’t the ones who’d survive the events leading up to that. People like me would be eating them before something/one else killed me off. There was a time in my life when I was literally starving to death—like craving for bugs to eat and I normally find most bugs to be disgusting to even look at—and I am pretty sure I could get to the point where human would be appetizing. I’ve read from several sources that we taste more or less like pork. Just need to avoid the nerves and brain so you don’t get that kuru prion disease.
I have had an order at a local Chevy dealership for a Camaro 2SS 1LE for almost 2 full years now. Do I think I will get it before production stops? Probably not.
Part of the issue of sales is that GM cannot make the Camaro’s people want to buy, for at least the past 2.5 years, due to supplier constraints, and competing dealer orders.
Yeah, they’re cranking out too many rental spec ones and some dealerships are still putting markups on the V8 ones. Dealerships also order ones that have pretty much every aesthetic box checked but none of the performance ones. I see ones listed locally that are spec’d out to $40-45,000 that have the 4 popper or V6. At that point you’ve lost the plot…
As long as it does donuts on your lawn, I’m good.
numbers from motrolux may not lie…but it seems remarkable that the three OEMs would all repeat same sales volume for three months in a row – quarter after quarter. i didn’t see anything on linked website saying how the numbers were derived – they do not seem credible to me.
I would rather the Camaro die an honorable death than come back as a damn crossover. I also think we are going to reach a saturation point when it comes to crossovers, especially electric ones. Every single company is putting them out right now. I get that the market is crossover crazed but there will come a point when the bubble will pop.
I think deep down we all know that GM is going to try to dig into the Mach Es market. If the name even comes back that’s what it’s going to be, and it’ll be a lousy phoned-in product because GM. GM’s lineup is like 90% phoned in twice reheated meh with a few pockets of profound brilliance. The 6th gen Camaro is simultaneously brilliant and meh.
As this article states-it’s the best performer out of all the pony cars and it isn’t particularly close. The SS 1LE and ZL1 trims will terrorize exotics on most circuits and they’re ridiculously nice to drive. The issue is the usability, or lack thereof. The rear seats are too small to even be used in a pinch, the trunk opening is too small for anything other than groceries to fit through, you can’t see out of the damn things, and the interior is straight out of a rural Wal Mart until you get up to the highest trims.
I would literally love to see it come back as the same damn thing but with these issues addressed. The engines, chassis, transmissions, etc. are all great as is. It’s the sheet metal and laughably bad use of space that’s the issue. Increase visibility, make the trunk opening usable…which is easy, make it a damn hatch! Problem solved…but OH NO the “masculinity hanging on by a thread” crowd WILL NEVER BUY A HATCH BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT SOY BOY LIBS drive or something. Oh well…but hey it really can’t be that hard to make the backseats usable in a car with a similar footprint to a damn 4Runner. The Mustang’s are and that car is the same size.
GM could do it too. The market for a ICE pony cars remains and due to their early push for electrification they’re no where near as SOL CAFE wise as Stellantis. But, commentariat…we know they won’t. Hell I wouldn’t even mind if they made it into a sedan to fill the void the Charger is leaving. We already know the platform makes for a great sports sedan. Hell make it a lightly detuned CT4 or CT5V BW. That would be sick.
Just don’t make debase it by making it another goddamn crossover. We are at peak crossover. We don’t need more. Just leave it dead or let it hibernate for a while. If you ABSOLUTELY must maybe bring it back as a sporty EV. That’s still a better fate. But please…don’t ruin another classic car by making it into some blobby family hauler.
Next Camaro they should do Voltec on steroids, similar to the Hyundai N concept but with a gas engine instead of fuel cells. Put like 20Kwh of 800V Ultium batteries, along with a 200+ HP turbo four, that can both pump electrons in bursts of up to 600HP to the rear wheels. Having less battery will make it lighter so it can still handle, but those batteries could be positioned rearward for better weight.
Raise the greenhouse, have it look more like a 3rd gen cause 80s style is cool again, with the hatchback again for some practicality! And frickin’ T-Tops!
I still want to see more hybrid performance cars, especially more affordable ones.
What do I want to see from the Camaro? The ability to see out of it.
“What do you want to see from it?”
I “see” what you did there… answer… anything? Everything? It’d be nice to look over my shoulder and see the *outside* of the car.
ALSO, the Camaro has both Cadillac and the Corvette to deal (compete) internally with. Ford and Stellantick don’t have this same issue.
Hey, Patrick you’ve driven the Camaro – what did you think of it?
We knew that was coming 😉
Chevrolet killing off the Camaro due to low sales was their own doing. My brother-in-law had an order in for a ZL1 1LE for over a year and they wouldn’t give him a definite delivery date/year. He got sick of waiting and cancelled the order, deciding to just hold onto his Mustang GT PP2.
Don’t worry my friends… GM is going to badge engineer the the Mitsu Eclipse Cross to be their new Camaro Cross. Win Win? Amirite? Also, because it will be an EV, they’ll hook up with Nissan to get the Leaf powertrain to make this new vehicle so special.
I’m going to laugh hysterically when Chevy switches to the lame Malibu for their car style in NASCAR. It’s interesting to see what appears to be NASCAR really losing their clout here because GM really doesn’t have a Chevy car that makes sense for that racing series now. I know there’s been talk about how the Camaro could be used for two more racing seasons after this current one but then it just feels like that one zombie Challenger car that was in Xfinity for all that time. Not really a good look for Chevy imo because NASCAR isn’t going to switch to electric in any reasonable timeframe.
I wish they could have done a real redesign of the car without killing it off like they are doing now. Would have loved to see one that you could see out of and looked better that sold in small numbers. I don’t really understand what GM is up to these days. Electrification is great and I look forward to EVs but this just seems like a weird choice.
It would be better if NASCAR “Stock Car” races would just drop the pretense that their race cars are in any way related to the street cars sold at the dealership.
It’s just that their fans still believe there’s a huge connection of some sort, and it’s just too easy to continue squeezing the manufacturers for sponsorship dollars.
I bet GM wouldn’t lose more than a few thousand sales if they simply stopped participating in NASCAR and invested in racing series that actually use their vehicles.
Yep, when they no longer were not longer stock bodied, I completely ignored the sport, not that it was that much fun anyway, but still.
It’s fascinating how Greenpeace and co always shoot against cars but I’ve never heard of any criticism towards private planes. Same with the Green Party here in Germany. If you want to save the environment, why not shoot against the rich guy sitting alone on a plane blowing literally more CO2 in the atmosphere to cross the atlantic once than I use all year getting to my job and buying food? Nah, better not offend anybody *important*
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s because the rich guy owns all of the politicians they need to get laws passed. If they go after him then nothing gets accomplished.
They never offer and reasonable solutions or seem to understand much of how everything is interconnected, either, which is odd since the environment is all about interconnectedness and I’m by no means an anti-environmentalist. Like the call for 100% electrification and no compromise is likely not possible and maybe not even better for the environment in the short term of the original phaseout date. Not to mention that taking transportation off of oil for fuel (but still needed for tires, plastics, etc.) in only part of the Western world doesn’t take the carbon contribution of oil off the board. Radical changes like these in quick time leads to all kinds of other potential major issues from destabilization, ultimately including major wars (which we aren’t far from at the moment already). The environmental change is a destabilizer, but other things could be much worse and what do they think will happen to the environment in the event of a major global war and/or economic collapse? If they wanted to be useful, they’d be buying up large strategic pieces of the Amazon for preservation.
They don’t seem to have a policy on human population growth either.
It’s because they are a bunch of hippies. Or hypocrites. Or idiots.
I remember the first time I got to drive just a 1SS version of the new Camaro. It didn’t go well.
At the time, I was actively selling the 4-door version of the Camaro for Cadillac, and still to this day very much want a T-6060 ATS-V sedan. So when I was told to go across to Long Island and pick up a CTS, and that my rental was a Camaro, I thought it might be some fun.
It wasn’t.
That Camaro would’ve been magic IF ONLY YOU COULD SEE out of the goddamned thing. What idiot did the ergonomics and sightlines? I’ve seriously thought about picking up a convertible just so I could drive it and enjoy the world around me.
In any other company, Alpha chassis would’ve sold in record numbers. But because this is GM, it’s dead. The “antibodies” got to it.
As for E-fuels, I hope anyone counting on using them for their vintage SUV realizes that $50.00 per gallon isn’t outside of the question. The collector market for gas guzzlers will basically evaporate in that case.
“$50.00 per gallon isn’t outside of the question.”
Perhaps for official state-approved “carbon neutral” fuels, but ethanol will always be there. For all its faults, it is cheap and ICEs can be modified to run on it.
The trouble with making ethanol not fossil-fuel dependent is under current regs it needs to be denatured with over 10% gas or you will be selling 198 proof moonshine by the gallon and morons will be morons.
It doesn’t have to be denatured with gasoline, just anything that makes it non-drinkable, so there are lots of alternatives that don’t use fossil fuel or petroleum.
As long as gas taxes are paid, and it’s denatured, ethanol won’t have problems by the feds
The other thing about ethanol is that it can be produced at home (with varying degrees of legality).
If worst really did come to worst, my cars could be adapted to a corn-heavy diet, whether or not the government sanctions it.
I can see the anti-ICE people jumping on the e-fuel wagon. The e-fuel will probably be prohibitively expensive due to manufacturing cost and sure to come sin taxes. That means few people will be able to afford to fuel an ICE vehicle as a regular form of transport.
GM is allergic to glass, and the Camaro lost its signature feature: T-TOPS!!!!!!!!! That was THE reason you bought a Camaro 😀
Camaro’s future….
Best case: It becomes a proper 2 door coupe with loads of power from an EV powertrain + outward visibility. Maybe even a back seat for people that aren’t double amputees.
Worst case: It becomes some EV CUV that revives the look and feel of a 2013 Buick Encore. a.k.a The chrome(-less) e-potato.
Likely case: The Chevrolet version of the Mach-e (not a real Mustang) SUV.
so sad, because they could’ve just made an electric Mustang. It would be fun for burnouts 😀
“Greenpeace criticized the agreement sharply. “This lazy compromise undermines climate protection in transport, and it harms Europe,”
So a fuel that would make the current vehicle fleet carbon neutral is bad? Or allowing carbon neutral vehicles to be sold in the future is bad?
Greenpeace seem to want EVs rather than carbon neutrality. I assume this is because they have trouble recruiting engineers to do their thinking for them.
Next Camaro?
Alpha 2 platform with the LT6 and the Tremec manual please and thank you.
If it has to be an EV, please let it be a small lightweight 2-Door 2+2 Sporty Car that handles and communicates like the Alpha platform, range be damned it had better be under 4,000 lbs.
Otherwise just let it die.
You understand that high power electric motors require large (and heavy) battery packs to drive them, right? A smaller, lighter battery pack at the same voltage cannot supply as much current, therefore reducing performance metrics like 0-60 time, and the weight reduction won’t make up for it.
You understand that an under 4,000 lb sporty EV is entirely possibly, right?
The 2022 Camaro ZL1 convertible is already 4,120 lbs.
I’m more of a Corolla guy than a Camaro guy, so fill me in: was light weight ever a priority with the Camaro, or is it typically judged by power-to-weight ratio and straight line performance?
You (I’m assuming purposely) picked the heaviest model by far.
A base model coupe weighs 3350 lb. A V8 coupe weighs 3685 lb.
Both of those are less than the equivalent Mustang, to say nothing of the Challenger.
Obviously most buyers are going to judge the car on straight line performance, but it’s pretty universally acknowledged as the best handler of its peers (and will humble some cars that cost a lot more).
Any enthusiast disdain for the 6th gen Camaro is wildly misplaced. It’s one of the best driver’s cars on the market and the performance it offers is insane for the price. Here’s a list of some notable cars that an SS 1LE was faster than at VIR during C&Ds Lightning Lap series:
Lexus LFA, Nissan GTR, the new Supra, a V10 Audi R8, AMG C63, Ariel Atom 3
And for fun here are some things that a ZL1 ILE bested:
Second gen Ford GT, McLaren 650 and 570, Ferrari 488 GTB. It also tied a Huracan Evo.
Is it super compromised as a daily? For sure. Does it have flaws? Yes, some of which are glaring. Is the scene around it kind of cringe? That’s subjective, but I’d say “a bit”. But it’s objectively a fantastic performer and I’m not going to hear any complaints about how it drives from anyone who hasn’t actually driven one. I’ve driven an SS and a V6 and found the chassis to be sublime.
In like 5-10 years enthusiast blogs are going to be crammed full of articles about how good it was and everyone will be complaining about how “they don’t make cars like the Camaro anymore”. Such is the circle of life. But also…you can go out today and buy a new, warrantied, RWD, V8, 6 speed manual car with 450 horsepower that runs low 12 second quarter miles stock.
And yet half of the posts on blogs are THE CAMARO IS A LAME DOUCHE CAR and/or LOL BUT YOU CAN’T SEE OUT OF IT. Sigh. We’ll miss how good we had it, folks. We really will.
Keep in mind, a more reasonable LT1 coupe – so still with a 6.2L 455HP LT1 and a 6-speed manual, weighs 500 lbs less (3619 lbs).
And no, it’s not at all straight line performance – the Alpha platform is one of the best handling RWD platforms out there. The sixth gen Camaro handles extremely well. It’s just a bit hard to see out of (honestly, I didn’t find it that bad when I drove one – you get used to it) and for the first few years – prior to the LT-spec, but V8 powered, LT1 trim level – it was expensive once you got to the V8 level.
And then toss in the fact that Dodge will sell/lease a Challenger to anyone with a pulse and that doesn’t help.
Having driven mustangs and camaros, never owning either though, the camaro could be the superior car, but with the ridiculous visibility out every side, I would never feel comfortable pushing it because I have no idea what’s going on outside. You could hide a freight train in its blind spots and I absolutely hated every minute behind the wheel because of it. I can see out of the mustang, so it wins. I can swap suspensions, I can add power or upgrade the brakes. I can’t cut half the door off so I can see what’s driving next to me.
I’ll agree with DT’s addendum to the Camaro story, except to say that track-time represents a small fraction of Camaro — or ponycar-in-general — use. The Sixth-gen car was a bit of a pain on the street, with a cramped interior, limited outward vision and styling that was begging for a refresh.
In this day of SUV/CUV domination, I doubt GM wants to spend a lot of money and effort replacing a car that, while about as good as it gets engineering-wise, has a severely limited market. I wish they would, anyway. The changes the Camaro needs are simple, virtually all cosmetic, but fitting it into a lineup of increasingly electrified and be-touch-screened four-door bloated wagons is not.
Yeah, I agree with DT too. The last Camaro was never a bad car. In many ways it was the best of the three. It never deserved the sales numbers it got.
Actually sales numbers are the only true honest metric of any car. Using other measurables like HP, Torque, whatever is like using stats instead of the score to decide who won a ballgame. The goal is sales and profit. You fail there you failed. TBH the auto manufacturers arent trying to build cars for us, they are trying to design them for the largest section of the buying public.
This is true.
But remember that back in the wild and woolly 1960s, the first Mustangs, Camaros and the then-Plymouth Barracuda were largely parts-bin creations, using a lot of existing mass-production hardware underneath their jazzy skins. I guess the demise of Real Cars has ended that.
Not sure I would want a Camaro that used a Trailblazer as a base, or an Escape platform under a Mustang.
Obviously, modern pony cars aren’t going to sell in the quantities enjoyed by their forebears, which is why I “wished” for a renaissance, neither demanding nor expecting it.
I totally agree with fans of the Camaro’s engineering. I love the engine, the suspension, the sound. To me it was the most serious looking of the three though, and that’s not what I would look for. I would gravitate towards the mustang, which visually feels lighter and more “fun” in a lighthearted way. The challenger seemed more “fun” in a childish (not a bad thing, this is supposed to be fun!) way. With the tiny windows, high beltline, hard creases, it just seemed to look too serious. Not to mention you feel a little cramped and serious inside with the high beltline.
The E-Fuels are a concept I am interested in, with one nearly antique car and other ICEs I want to keep on the road. From what I understand, it is a slight mod to use them.
As for the Camaro. I would like to see it become an EV pony car but we know it will end up as a Crossover using the same name. I am looking at you Ford with Mustang Mach-E.
As sad as it is…that’s what sells.
If I recall, the Mach-E outsells the regular Mustang.
People are going to have all kinds of answers to the Camaro question, but to keep it as broad as possible, I just want something that is sustainable even in the face of lower sales vs the Mustang. 25,000 sales isn’t a lot, but it should be possible to profitably sell something at that level.
Sporty coupes are dropping like flies. Whatever form the powertrain or styling takes, as long as it’s a 2 door with sporting pretensions, I will support it.
It is interesting that People like Fain focus on the dollar amount of the profit versus percentage of sales. It would be interesting to know how what percent of overall sales amount 35 billion is in the automotive grand scheme of things.
Investors demand large percentages, 30% Profit is the norm for most publicly traded entities. I would be interested to know which brands actually hit that number. I suppose also it would be interesting to know how much the year over year losses on EV’s currently effect this negotiation.