Hooniverse Asks: The 2016 Chevy Camaro- Brah! or Blah?

The all-new 2016 Chevrolet Camaro offers an all-new, fourth-generation 3.6L V-6 rated at an estimated 330 hp. It incorporates fuel-saving cylinder deactivation technology, along with direct injection, to balance performance with efficiency.
It must be tough living in the shadow of another. When Microsoft released the Zune media player, it had to endure the indignity of existing in an established iPod universe. That meant that it had to play something called Podcasts. Chevy’s Camaro suffered a similar fate, the result of the preceding Mustang’s success forever enshrining the category in which it plays as the Pony Cars.
Chevy has seemingly accepted this ignominy with both grace and a competitive spirit. For as long as the Pony Car Wars (Pow! Zoom! Hoof!) have existed, the Camaro has put up a pretty impressive fight, and now there’s a new one to do battle. The 2016 Camaro builds upon the retro styling of the last edition, albeit a little more adventurous. It still has an impressively low roofline which is great for drawing attention to the muscular fender lines, but concerning for claustrophobics. It also brings a four cylinder to the party, the first since the unlamented Iron Puke of the ’80s. That 2.0 turbocharged four pumps out 275-bhp and serves as the entry point to the Camaro’s under-hood funzone.
You’ve now had some time to get to know the Mustang’s newest bow tie-wearing competitor – it’s been all over the Web the past week – and we’re interested in your opinions about Chevy’s latest work. Have they hit one out of the park with this new pony ca…, excuse me, Camaro? Or, does the Mustang still rule the corral? What do you think about the 2016 Camaro, Brah! or Blah?
Image: GM Authority

36 Comments

  1. I say Brah. The new Camaro is a little less self-consciously retro and looks less like a parody of 1967. It’s interesting that the Mustang has also gone in the same direction and I prefer it to the Camaro, but the Chevy isn’t bad-looking at all. However, the Camaro’s beltline is still a little too high.

  2. Among the ponies, I have always preferred the Mustang (unless you twisted my arm and forced me to buy a mid-70s model — I still consider the gussied-up Mustang II properly ugly in any factory-available form).
    However, competition improves the breed, so I love it when Camaro steps up and whizzes in Mustang’s Cheerios, as with the Z28 and ZL1. Also, I think the styling tweaks really look the business on this Camaro. If it goes as good as it looks, the Mustang will have some s’plainin’ to do.

  3. It will be interesting to see how the market reacts to the majority of the pony cars being turbo-4 driven.
    Obviously we don’t know what Chevy’s production allocation will look like, but Ford has shown that they have little qualm of making a turbo-4 the volume engine.
    I think Chevy’s 4-6-8 makes more sense than Ford’s 6-4-8, but I’d also rather see the SHO or XTS-style TTV6 in both of these cars.

    1. The v6 in the Mustang was late in the game- It wasn’t going to be offered but I guess the consumer clinics showed some resistance to the 4. The 6 may not last long since Ford is marketing ecoboost out the yang.

      1. The 4 outguns the 6 in every respect — except maybe cost. I’ve no idea what the turbo 4 costs.
        What I want to know is when Ford’s going to lose their mind and port the 2.7TT and 3.5TT over to the Mustang, while leaving the 5.0GT to languish for the traditionalists who wouldn’t look think a turbodiesel unreliable but just cannot accept that a turbogas could also be long-lived.

        1. The turbo 4 is in a lot more cars.
          I don’t think Mustang would drop the V8- keep it in the Shelbys/GTs. But they’ll have to do something with CAFE and turbo 6’s and 4’s are it.

  4. It definitely looks smaller (it’s now related to the ATS, rather than the CTS), and in profile (minus the greenhouse) it reminds me of the Mustang. But yeah, the roof still looks too low. I do like the tricolor emblem on the fender. But, the instrument panel still sucks, only in a different way now.

      1. That’s some fine photoshoppin’ there. And it actually looks just fine. Doesn’t spoil the car’s looks at all.

          1. I agree. I personally think it looks better with a bit more window area, but I was
            surprised that also gives it a bit of an Asian feel, more like a GT4/FD/Genesis Coupe flavor through the midsection. In my book that’s good, but probably not something Chevy would be pleased about.

      2. I have this irrational fear of being in a vehicle with windows too small to crawl out of after a roll over. I might buy your PS but certainly not Chevy’s version.

  5. 275 HP 2.0. It’s amazing the amount of power cars are making with tiny engines these days. As for the styling, it’s pretty uninspiring. It’s like Chevy has a team of people assigned to mimic whatever Ford is doing first.

    1. I know it’s a good number (moreso in the ford), but I can’t get excited about 135 or 150 hp/liter for a turbo engine… they may have tons of low end torque and everything, but for the spec lover in me (there is a very low chance of me getting to drive these things), this numbers of turbo power are nothing to write home about.

  6. Did they make the side windows even shorter? I hate that, but the rest is certainly better than the predecessor, which I would have rated about a 3/10. So, blah for me.

    1. Agreed. I was really disappointed after listening to all the hype about it being a new generation, on a new platform, about a size reductions, and whatnot. I was expecting a whole new car, not one that looks practically the same…

  7. Brah! It’s starting to look coherent now, less a collection of cliches and pastiches from the 1st gen. Still too chunky and too high beltline. A 68 Camaro looks positively elegant alongside the 2014 car.

  8. It looks a bit to Japanese for my liking, but maybe in another angle it looks more like a Camaro and less like a Hyundai Tiburion?

  9. The Camaro, ever since it was brought back from the dead, has been Blah to me. Well, not Blah, but not Brah, either. They look like they are trying too hard. The retro Mustang looked good, to me. It was obviously a throwback to the mid-60s, but in a fresh and clean way. The Camaro is a throwback, but way overdone. It’s like it’s trying too hard. To me, it’s that 50 year old at a college bar with a leather jacket and frosted tips trying to be cool to hit on the college chicks. Nobody’s buying it, but that doesn’t stop him.

    1. On pure styling, the Challenger is the winner.
      And I even own the best looking post-Pinto Mustang ever designed!

  10. At this rate, we’re going to have door and 3/4 window glass about 2″ tall soon, like you’re sitting in a pillbox on wheels. Hella blah.

  11. Looks like a current generation facelift, nothing more. And a wrinkled one at that, the hood looks like someone dug it up under a pile of clothes. Also the windows seem to get ever smaller. Protection for the stereotypically irresponsible Camaro driver? Who knows?

    1. The kid said the S197 update from ’09 to ’10 was more of a change than between 2 generations of Camaro. Comes close.

  12. Brah! for me if Chevrolet build a right-hand drive version and Holden bring it Down Under.
    Blah if they don’t, as it will remain vastly overpriced over here.

  13. Love the new camaro ss. Awesome lighter slightly smaller more athletic design with a 455 hp v8….whets not to like….I don’t know the pricing but if I needed a four seat corvette..this would be my favorite choice.
    Stunning new design…..and I believe this will be a huge hit for gm.
    Jmo

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

The maximum upload file size: 64 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here