[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / n / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]

/o/ - Auto

"Watching Initial D is basically track time right?"

Catalog

8chan Bitcoin address: 1NpQaXqmCBji6gfX8UgaQEmEstvVY7U32C
The next generation of Infinity is here (discussion) (contribute)
This just in: if you ignored my previous warnings about Hola, a remote execution bug was found. If you still have Hola installed, any website you visit can install arbitrary programs on your PC to steal data or spy on you. (technical details)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 4 per post.


File: 1431828464181-0.jpg (185.29 KB, 1500x884, 375:221, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-01.jpg)

File: 1431828464182-1.jpg (127.92 KB, 1500x810, 50:27, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-02.jpg)

9ae557 No.4084

'16 Camaro is live

9ae557 No.4085

File: 1431828510114-0.jpg (332.47 KB, 1500x1000, 3:2, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-03.jpg)

File: 1431828510115-1.jpg (321.06 KB, 1500x1000, 3:2, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-04.jpg)


9ae557 No.4086

File: 1431828526259-0.jpg (292.69 KB, 1500x1000, 3:2, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-05.jpg)

File: 1431828526260-1.jpg (248.63 KB, 1500x830, 150:83, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-06.jpg)


9ae557 No.4087

File: 1431828554532-0.jpg (252.45 KB, 1500x1000, 3:2, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-07.jpg)

File: 1431828554532-1.jpg (200.13 KB, 1500x752, 375:188, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-08.jpg)


9ae557 No.4088

File: 1431828616616-0.jpg (216.25 KB, 1500x876, 125:73, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-09.jpg)

File: 1431828616644-1.jpg (180.2 KB, 1500x780, 25:13, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-10.jpg)


9ae557 No.4089

File: 1431828638729-0.jpg (329.7 KB, 1500x774, 250:129, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-0….jpg)

File: 1431828638729-1.jpg (245.19 KB, 1500x830, 150:83, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-0….jpg)


9ae557 No.4090

File: 1431828704365-0.jpg (156.58 KB, 1280x713, 1280:713, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-0….jpg)

File: 1431828704366-1.jpg (231.88 KB, 1500x764, 375:191, 2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-0….jpg)


faec45 No.4091

Looks like a refreshed 5th gen, but with better proportions.

Let's see how it stacks up to the Mustang with that 90 kg reduction


9cc3e3 No.4092

There are parts of the interior I like, specifically the lower center console but that doesn't even begin to make up for the rest of it.


6cb2f2 No.4097

File: 1431849740975.png (1.02 MB, 1500x780, 25:13, why.png)

Wow. I've been shitting on the Camaro for years now. This will sadly continue.

That first shot actually makes it look great. Not Camaro-great, but sort of best-of-00's-sportscar great by foreshortening the body in relation to the glasshouse. It also makes the front look really predatory.

>>4085

As seen in side profile though, the ratio of glasshouse to body is still fucked.

>>4090

That sort of falls through when you look at the rest. The rear is bizarre, hell the rest is bizarre, but I'll start at the rear. I don't understand why the license plate cutout is now this huge rhombus; there's too much ugly flat space even when there's a plate there! Then immediately above that area is this small lip. Why is this here? Well, we know why, to give the rhombus an upper edge since it's SO FUCKING BIG. Why not merge both and have the greater lip of the lower 'bumper' bow out a bit in the middle for that 90's look? The next thing that pops out at me is that the SS badging is on the rear bumper. Who thought this was a good idea? The upper center light bar is silly too, I don't like it at all. Move it elsewhere. As for the spoiler, I don't think it does anything for the car, but it doesn't do anything against it either. There are better spoiler designs they could have leveraged and they didn't. The center pillar bothers me about it.

If the dual lip was resolved, the numberplate cutout was fixed (this would leave more room for the badging above the bumper) and the upper light was moved away, it'd be a pretty nice rear though. I don't really have a meaningful complaint about anything below the numberplate area.

>>4089

As for the front, I also don't like the hood. The lines don't make any sense without the vents there, and they should have made two damn hoods for it instead of just going with it. Also, the edge of the hood (on the side) should be further in. It COMPLETELY ruins the visual purity of the thin curve it's situated in. The staggered grills is fucking retarded too. It confuses the eye and ruins visual flow, and I'd say the fan pattern it's in doesn't make any sense in relation to the rest of the car, except the car is a complete mess of lines already so I'd be lying.

The dipped roof is also an unwelcome change. Pointless. Why is it there?

It… kind of sort of looks like the new Mustang in general shape though.

>>4086

As for the interior, my first thought is that it's like a gamer PC (it'd be better with a more neutral color set, but not much). Way too fucking flashy and not classic enough and, like the exterior, a complete mess of lines. I like the general shape of the dash though. That large ellipse could have been quite fun and frames the two side vents perfectly. The massive promotory on the Josh's side to fit all the gauges is absolutely disgusting though and spoils it all though. Given where the gauges sit too, I'm hard pressed to justify why it's so fucking tall, too. Pic related.

I'm not sure why the two huge handle braces on the doors are in plastichrome. Bit strange. It's like they've added this angular teardrop shape there twice in the door, thought to highlight it in chrome and just stopped in the middle of the big one. Why do it in the first place then if you can't commit? Does Chevy know that you don't need to highlight everything that's modestly important in plastichrome?

I also am brought to ask why Chevy thought it'd be appropriate to highlight two triangles on the steering wheel with fake plastichrome. It looks bad and isn't what you want to draw the Josh's eyes to. I admit this is worsened by the photo highlighting them specifically, but it's still retarded.

More generally, the GPS should be flush with the dash, and the vents below the GPS should be square and not nearly as visible. These aren't feature points to look at and should be styled to complement what they're mounted in, not the other way around, as they've done with the ones on top of the dash (or, indeed, the two on the dash themselves).

That's pretty much it. It's overall disappointing. I would drive one given a chance, but I wouldn't own it. Not a look I love or even like. The Challenger is still the king of the retro look and making it work in the modern day (the interior is simple, well framed and Josh oriented, and the exterior is sure of what it wants to do and has little design uncertainty). The Mustang and Camaro are wrestling with their identity now and it's really showing. GM and Ford owes the model the respect of keeping bad designers away from them, because this could have been a significantly prettier and nicer car.


6cb2f2 No.4098

>>4086

On a plus note, the lip on the top of the trunk is actually good this generation. I like that.


87d14d No.4101

File: 1431857731785-0.gif (951.73 KB, 350x197, 350:197, 1419552221149.gif)

File: 1431857731785-1.png (11.52 KB, 432x245, 432:245, Screenshot_1.png)

>american design by committee sports cars

Can't argue with a $23k entry price but the options are fucking retarded


9ae557 No.4109

>>4097

It's got some iffy points for sure, but it still looks leagues better than the mustang, both inside and out.

Also, those two vents below the nav screen are round because their trim rings are the temperature dials. It might not make sense, but at least there's a reason behind it.

Honestly the thing that bothers me the most about it isn't the looks, it's the electric parking brake.


6cb2f2 No.4111

>>4109

I know why they're round, it's just dumb and over designed with no thought for the overall look.

And it looks bad.


15dbbf No.4138

I'd fuck it.


638710 No.4146

>>4089

Okay, seriously. The hood looks like a un-ironed shirt.


9cab00 No.4147

>>4097

Fuck off outta my board, commie.


6cb2f2 No.4149

>>4147

>commie

>implying I don't just want a better muscle car that looks like it used to and not like a clusterfuck

>implying having an eye for design is communism


35ff4c No.4158

File: 1432152791156.webm (522.86 KB, 480x360, 4:3, FULL METAL JACKET WHAT TH….webm)

>>4101

Oh

OHHH

Oh I can feel it coming, it's coming For that price you could have gotten a Scion FR-SAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Also, the hell is going on with the design. Like I'm not expecting miracles but the fuck is going on there. Can't just have one line or crease over an area, it needs to be accompanied by a friend. or two.


9cab00 No.4182

>>4149

Fuck off, communist.


87d14d No.4185

>>4158

Honestly I never liked that car, I like the concept of it but the way its designed is fucking woeful


4be1a7 No.4186

the windows are thin slits, the headlights are thin slits, the rear lights are thin slits, there are thin slits on the hood, and then there are all the ridges on the hood and roof. the rear end looks like it once had a giant expanse of smooth plastic that looked boring and terrible, so the designers gave it some zazz and made it look worse.

Maybe it'll look better in person but in the photos it's a busy mess.

>>4158

why get a GT86 when the ND is right around the corner?


15dbbf No.4187

>>4097

>pic

That's where they put all those little lights that tell you to give the dealership more money.


35ff4c No.4210

>>4185

It's just a flip on the halfchan shitpost wars BMW vs. Mustang. I kinda like the looks of the FRS and it's derivatives but the concept rubs me the wrong way. It's meant to be a successor to the old 86's but those were just souped up versions of the Corolla, not a purpose built sports car. They missed the point, kinda like the Chevy SS but to a bigger degree. But they couldn't really soup up the current Corolla and have something that would appeal to enthusiasts.

>>4186

What's the ND?


c0e421 No.4211

>>4210

Mk4 MX5


35ff4c No.4213

>>4211

Ah thanks. To be frank the FR-S wasn't all that good a contender anyways. It's needlessly unique Seriously why the fuck does it have a boxer engine, let alone NA and the price might be low but still in nearly 30K or should be before the price get's jacked up. It was a good Idea If a bit wrong from the start but involving Subaru for no reason other then an engine that isn't needed and to off load some costs just caused it become mediocre.

Though it did sell well didn't it? So maybe Toyota will do one by themselves properly this time.


0683f3 No.4227

>>4213

I'm not sure about sales in Japan and Europe, but in NA, they've sold just over 60K since launch, with about 3 FR-S to every one BRZ. They do sell much better than the MX-5 or 370Z, though.

Maybe next time it will be a Toyota Celica, with an upmarket tarboed trim named Supra.


9bbebc No.4259

The backend looks like a crossbreed between an earlier cama ro and a modern family car




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / n / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]