2010 Chevrolet Camaro: Best Not To Look Back
February 13, 2010
We've noted a few times that the new Camaro doesn't seem Camaro enough. Kurt wrote that it's less than the sum of its parts. Magrath met a service advisor who said it wasn't a real Camaro. Heck, I even wrote that the Camaro was missing personality back in October.
But I parked next to red Camaro a couple days ago and devoted a few moments brain power to some retro thinking. Maybe time has warmed our collective memory of the F-Body, but if you accurately think back to the late 1990s or early 2000s, you will likely remember that, oh hey, these things were pretty terrible.
Live rear axle. Big and bulky on the outside but cramped on the inside. Poor outward visibility. Cheap interior materials. Shoddy build quality. Uncomfortable front seats. Unusable rear seats. OK, sure, with the V8, they were fun to drive in short doses. But would I actually want to own one? Heck no. There's a reason GM stopped making these things after 2002.
The new Camaro is a huge improvement. Of course, with eight more years of automotive advancement, it should be. And yes, one can make a strong case for buying a Mustang or Challenger instead of a Camaro. But rose-tinted Camaro glasses only disguise many of the new car's merits. It still has issues, but this time around I think the Camaro is actually a competitive vehicle for somebody wanting to spend $20,000 to $30,000 on a performance car.
Brent Romans, Senior Automotive Editor