Chevlle SS Designer Speaks!

Just had to drop you a note, I picked up the May issue of Motor Trend Magazine. They did a head to head comparison between the Mercedes CLK 55 AMG $72,000. vs GTO $33495. In there final accessment the GTO did very well delivering 85-90% of the goodness offered by Mercedes. If this doesn't speak well of the new GTO, I don't understand. I own one and it far exceeds any other car I've owned,and that's saying alot. I've owned close to 250 cars in my 40 years of driving. Many were muscle cars 1967-69-70 SS Chevelle's, 1966-67-69-70 Nova's, Max-Wedge Dodge's. All these cars were great, but they were straight line performers, the GTO not only does a respectable job in the quarter mile 13.2 but handles well on the road course. It has the entire performance package! I believe with a little work, I can get the GTO safely into the mid-12 sec quarter. Personally that is good for a street car, there's not to many in that class!!!!

I think some of the other letters are right. If you want a retro chevelle design go to the Ford guys that did the  05 Mustang. I'm sorry but if I were head of Chevrolet the whole design team would be fired! no chevy has impressed me much since the 94-96 Impala SS. Build this new "CHEVELLE" but call it what it is , a Lumina RWD. If it costs $40,000 call it a Cadillac Cimmeron! I live in rural America I only owe28,000 on my double wide my cars are paid for I got a couple of kids and it still takes two incomes to stay alive. Keep it simple make it affordable. Thats why the camaro died and mustang sales have dropped, the average guy got left behind with the technology and the ones that learned some about F.I. and computers don't really have the $$ the new stuff costs. Cars that the engine is half way under the dash or can only be taken out from the bottom are no fun to work on. Give me the old Camaro, Chevelle, V-8 Monza that I could work on. As far as an import Fighter goes give us the late 70,s Opel Manta B. A simple F.I. OHC 4 CYL rwd. Just call me old fashoined, cheap and simple(stupid).  

I hear what you are saying about the new Ford, but I just saw pictures of it at the NY Auto Show and it has more balls than anything I have seen from Chevy in a long time.  Before you go calling me a Ford lover I hate them as much as any Chevy guy and my mint 67 Chevelle convertible shows it, but at least they have something bad ass for the regular guy.  All we get is an overpriced Lumina/Cavalier. 

A note to Chevrolet: Can any of you honestly say at the end of the day when you design these Cavaliers, Luminas, Malibus, Impalas, etc. "Wow now that is a good looking car!"?  Come on where is the flare, where is the bad ass, where is the art and style that used to be Chevy?  Are all of the designers in the Vette division and all the other models are designed by rookies?  Quit building the '80's mom/pop drone vehicles without any character.  I can barely tell any of them apart.  There is no reason you cannot build a killer car that has a muscle look with the hp to go with it at an affordable price. 

Lastly, why can't you make a car that will outrun the Vette.  Why does everything you make have to be a detuned version so that the Vette has better performance?  This was never the motto and if you are paying any attention it is kiling you.  I long for the days when Chevy line had options, unfortunatley all we have is the Vette and with the price tag of both the Vette and the proposed new "Chevelle" I still don't see much of an option for the regular guy.  Hell I may even go look at the new 300 from Chryler with a Hemi... at least its not a Ford.

the ford designers definately have something going for the 05 mustang i definately agree if they made the new chevelle look even kinda like the old 70 chevelle i would praise it like no other i have a 70 chevelle i love it i work on it i have built my own engine and paid for it all myself p.s. i'm seventeen and i hate rice. we need cars like the COPO camaros, cars with 427's in them screw small blocks we need lots of cubes monster torque and a new car that i can drool over in my teens like most you guys did in yours i seriously envy you guys in your forty's and fiftys thats my perspective you wanna see great cars being built again i just wanna see great cars being built period. and as for the outrunning the vette heck yea why not? and i also agree on the 300m it starts at like 27grand you cant beat that with a stick

I agree with your statement,but the cutting edge your are referring to, that the Japanese and other foreign makes have, I don't see. The GTO 04 , I own cost me $31,000. If you look at the prices on the EVO or WRXSi , you will see prices around $29000.-$33000. So their performance models aren't exactly inexpensive. I don't see any advantage at all. The GTO is a great car. In MOTOR TREND they had an article comparing it to a $70k Mercedes. You need to read that article. DOES MY HEART GOOD!!!!!!

I agree with you about the design of the Chevelle, however let us not forget that the 1970 Chevelle was an intermediate body style. That same size now is called luxury size. They really don't have a good large platform to build a retro Chevelle on. The Mustang was much easier to do, because it was considered a pony car like the lost Camaro. It would be so much easier to build a retro Camaro, but Bob Lutz promised the Canadian Auto Workers that the Camaro and Firebird would not be built anywhere else than the St. Terese plant. GM does not plan on reopening that plant so as Bob Lutz put it to Wards Auto World, the Firebird's day is gone, and so goes the Camaro, both pony cars.  

I hate to bust some BBC bubbles but if you take the LS-6 being run in the Corvette, and run it against the 427 BBC '67, according to tests results the LS-6 smokes the BBC. After reading road test reports for these cars, they were great performers, but the current small blocks are putting out just as much power, and don't weigh as much. Now before I get hate mail, of course I agree nothing beats cubic inches, however I remember a 1966 Chevy II 2dr sedan ran by Grumpy Jenkins, that flat took every BBC it came up against. Folks that was a 327-350 SBC. All I'm saying for the size of cars being built by auto makers today, with the exception of big SUV's and pickups, a BBC would not work. The engine compartments are to small. GM is doing so many good things with the current small blocks, they are saying 500hp from a small block for the next ZO-6. When did you here of these numbers in any of the 70's BBC lineup?  460hp was it, and that car was only turning low 13's - high 12's. The current ZO-6 is turning low 12's with 405 hp. Mid 11's has to be in the future!!! with the 500hp engine. The only thing I hope for is put these cars on a diet!!! They ride well and handle great but weigh 300-400lbs to much. If they offer these cars in different trim levels, so if you only want performance and keep the price down, they will succeed. If you remember that was the secret of the muscle car era, power and performance, in an inexpensive package. It worked then and could work now!!!!!

Although you don't like what GM has to offer, go ahead a buy a 300 from Chrysler, the GTO will spank the 300 all the way down and around the track. You think the GTO weighs to much try adding more weight 300-400  pounds to a hemi that only puts out 340hp. If you think mid 14's is quick???? Plus the price is $33000. I bought my GTO for $31000. I don't know if you remember, don't know your age?, the first GTO was brought about by putting a big block into a mom& pop Lemans / Tempest body. There was nothing exciting about the design, but boy did it catch alot of unsuspecting car owners, taking another look at this GTO. The same thing is happening to the current GTO, no one knows what it is, until you put the hammer down. You should see the looks. You don't have to have flash to have a great car!!!!! That's what happened to the Camaro and Firebird, they performed well but had too much flash. If GM would go back to basic car with great performance , they would have a great chance to recapture what they have lost. It's always the same old story, Ford comes up with a great looking car-05 Mustang, but same old drive train. Chrysler comes up with a great new Hemi, but puts in big gun boats, how about a charger,duster,dart any smaller bodied car. GM builds great small block that out performs everyone else, but is struggling with body design. I just hope GM can develope a new line of cars that look great and out perform everything else, like back in the 60's when I was in my teens and early 20's.  

I am very dissatisfided with the new chevelle design. I belive that it should be like it once was, Big, also you need to put 4 head lights on it like the 70-71 model. It should be bigger than a caverlier and should come with a stock 454ci or optional 396ci for gas prices. I am a big fan of the chevelles but i cannot bring my self to like this new car. All the new chevelle is, is a caverlier with impala head lights and a bigger motor in it. Please GM make the chevelle look more revultionary and not a copy of another car.  

Hey, I agree with you completely on this.  My 300C comment was more sarcasm than action.  I do however find it hard to buy a GM because of the motor.  The bodies look lousy.   I know that the mom/pop Lemanns wasn't all that exciting, but look what they did with the GTO after the original year.  I just don' t buy the fact that the current model lines is the best that GM designers can do.  Chrysler may not be winning drag races with the 300, but at least it looks good.  In the mid sized sedan section the only thing close is the BMW 545 and it costs 2-3 times as much.  Ford has gone retro,  Chrysler has several new design platforms that are catching many eyes and  Chevy, well they are.... as you can read from the 50 some threads they are not impressing many of us.   Luckily, its still a concept and I can go polish my real Chevelle.  Heres hoping it never gets built as originally pictured.  Cheers.  

There were 2 things I was aiming at one you touched nicely, keep it simple and keep the cost down. The other was an attempt to avoid the "me too" syndrome of just a rebadged GTO cum Holden.

For example; if the NASCAR guys can run a V8 rear wheel drive MonteCarlo, then why can't the factory build something like that for the little  guy. I really don't care if the GTO can hang in the turns with a Beemer, this is America, we hunt down curvy roads and straighten them.

Guess I looking for a replacement for the Camaro/Firebird, with a big block option at a cost even a young guy can afford, I'm at the opposite end of this, I'm not young and can afford almost anything, but I remember when and it was good.

Bogie 

You are right, they need to start thinking about the everyday Joe. Not everyone can afford 30-40 thousand dollar cars. According to articles I've read lately, GM plans to have over 75% of their car designs to include rear wheel drive with V-8 optional power. Whether this comes to pass, we will see. I agree with the Monte Carlo idea, but have you seen the price of the current Monte SS. My god it's not to far from what I paid for my GTO. The list of one I looked at was almost 30K. I would assume that if they put the same technology in the rear wheel drive Monte that it will have a 32-35K price tag. What GM is missing is having several levels of trim for these cars. Not everyone wants a loaded out vehicle. I purchased a new 2001 Camaro SS, in 01, I had one of 2 build by SLP that had no power equipment and cloth interior. The only options on my car was SS package, rear window defogger, and am-fm-cd player. This was a modern day COPO, I paid 22K for this car. The loaded SS's were going for 32k. This why I say they need to let people build their own cars, like back in the 50's and 60's. If they would take some of the fluff out of the GTO it could be purchased for around 25-27K. Who needs leather, and power everything?   

A-Men chevy266.  I am a 20 year old marine who makes under 20k a year. Resently Pa passed a smog law which we have to pass each year.  That  put a hurt on me and my old camaro, and did so on a lot of old muscle in the erea.  I would love a rice stomper, and all i need is a seat and steering wheel, a radio would be nice.  but it better have lots of balls and a six speed would be nice, also I have always liked solid rear axle, lose some of your ride comfort but the hell with it.  I think a solid axle would also help with the price drop.  don't worry about making it flashy sometimes having a sleeper is better than flash and no balls. if it earns the name call it Chevelle but if not come up with something else.

thunderbud

I didn't know anything about the 300 till the other day, on my way to work. I was doing my same old routine when I went by one of the same old motels and low and behold there was a car in the parking lot that caught my eye. I had to turn around and take a look! I just did a drive by in the parking lot. It looked cool. I had to get back on the road so I didn't even get to find out what it was. But low and behold there it was in brand X magazine  in their next issue. Thats the kind of design team GM and more specificly Chevrolet needs. Who knows they probably do but can't get past the bean counters.  

Hey oldBogie remember that comment i made about a month ago about the 383. you came back with the no substuit for cubic inch right?  well I did some looking on this very page and just take a look at what i found. I think its something sb lovers and big CI lovers can agree on. strip the monte of everything but seats and a turn wheel and reinforce the go pedal cause thats all we need.  well guys sorry but i can't find how to give you a direct link to it but listen.  On the CHP home page click on shop for parts (on the left) than twards the top Click on Engine Shop and than you may have to look for it.  trust me a 454 small block w/ over 600 HP should catch your eye.

thunderbud