Hopefully Chevy Understands the New Camaro Design is More Important than a 0.5 Second Faster 1/4 Mile

[PDXSSCE]

"Chevrolet greenlit the 2028 Camaro with a V8 and a manual, but real fans in a major enthusiast group are pushing back hard on the horsepower obsession, and what they want instead reveals the exact mistake that killed the last Camaro."

https://www.torquenews.com/1/i-hope...sign-more-important-05-seconds-faster-14-mile

 

[Joshinator99]

"Chevrolet greenlit the 2028 Camaro with a V8 and a manual, but real fans in a major enthusiast group are pushing back hard on the horsepower obsession, and what they want instead reveals the exact mistake that killed the last Camaro."

https://www.torquenews.com/1/i-hope...sign-more-important-05-seconds-faster-14-mile

“Chasing horsepower records”…pure BS. The Camaro made less power than both the Mustang and Challenger…!

I do agree usability needs to improve with the new model if they want to sell them.

 

[Ruby1LE]

I've been screaming FORM & FUNCTION for years! If some want to buy a Camaro for a collection that rarely gets driven, they are by far in the minority, most people buy cars they can afford and can drive daily. That means: yeah it can look "exotic", like A/C temp controls built into the rings around the lowest vents ever placed on a center console, but if it leaves you no surface for objects like a cell phone or worse, has a little crevice under those vents that SD cards or coins slide into, customers are not happy. Same for controls, like the fan speed. Why does Chevy insist on using a SMALL push button switch instead of the old reliable turn knob that doesn't even require you to look for it in order to turn it up or down?? The fact that Camaro shared and will share the platform with Cadillac and now Buick, there should be some ideas for a good looking interior, that serves the driver & passengers as well as their more "family friendly" options. And don't even get me started on the door windows' HIGH belt line, talk about low visibility...

 

[Stonehauler]

Usability yes. This means an interior and exterior that is functional for the user (driver) of the vehicle.
That means controls in good interior with the appropriate physical switches, and easy to navigate secondary digital interfaces. All digital interfaces are bad when you have to take your eyes off the road to interact with them. Physical controls with real switches/dials can be reached and adjusted with touch providing the localization your body needs to identify the correct switch/dial to manipulate. Digital interfaces themselves are not bad, as they can provide more depth of control when performing vehicle setup/standing still adjustment, but even then, the UI needs to be intuitive.

Second, the exterior needs to be designed in such a way that it does not impede the driver. It can be the best looking car in the world, but if you can't see what is around you because of that design, the design does not work. Establish minimums for sightlines, etc. for people, and then test to ensure those minimums are achievable for both short and tall people, not just the "average Joe/Jane"

Only then, design that beautiful car, but remember that nostalgia for a particular year's car is only going to be for certain generations of people. Once you get too far out of that range, they will have nostalgia for a different car...