Interesting topic about Tesla and batteries. I have a Camaro friend in California. His nephew has a couple of cars, one being a Tesla. He was storing the Tesla in some extra garage space for his nephew. Car was not being driven (I honestly don't know if it was hooked up for charging). He was in the garage one day and heard the Tesla making an audible beep. Contacted Tesla and was told the battery has an issue. He was given instructions on how to access a plug he can pull to disengage the battery and prevent any further harm or discharge of the battery. Tesla service then has to pick up the car and take it to their location to see if they can resurrect the battery. Otherwise, I think he said a replacement battery was like $20k!!! I am going to guess this has been close to 4-6 months now. Took a couple of months before the car was retrieved! That story right there incredibly bothers me. At least with your 4t65 example, usually $1k-$2k and you are back in action. For $20k, I can buy a list of different cars to replace that Tesla!

I know some people who feel EVs have no future. I am NOT one of those people. They certainly have a future. A great example, look at today's Tesla and compare it to electric car attempts from say 15-30 years ago. There are a LOT of differences! I enjoy the YouTube series Mighty Car Mods in Australia. They did an episode resurrecting an old electric car. A neat watch.

Right now, I feel EVs have some niche uses (like "I commute to an from work and charge the car over night"). Until the EV answers how to take a family road trip without huge delays due to charging needs, they still have a limitation combustion does not. And they need a better answer on cost to replace the battery system (and recycling of the old battery system).

 

I was thinking more for a non DIY kinda person. Get something like the HPS1 triple edge trans thats $2500 + shipping both ways + shop labor to R&R + taxes, fluids etc. Ive seen people end up at $4-5k out the door. And now the $7k GXP (pre covid of course) is lucky to be worth $1k until its fixed. Or you can scrap it and get something different (perhaps a lower trim W body) but either way you're suddenly coming out of pocket for a big sum of money with no good plan B.

I agree. There are certainly tasks they excel at. Also with how trendy they are and with gas prices exploding, it'll continue to drive people that direction.

The thing that worries me is how many companies are jumping on this 'all electric by xx'. I get none of them want to be left in the dust on innovation, but as someone that still leans heavily in the gas direction I worry that new options will be limited and that innovation will grind to a snails pace as the focus shifts away from ICE.

Personally I think there's still big enough challenges to overcome that theres likely going to be some back pedaling / delays before so many of these companies go all in at roughly the same time.

 

If it wasn't mentioned, I'd also love to see a larger wheel base for a new MC and a stronger subframe since the rear seems to rust out so easily.

Cadillac performance is still top tier so I could imagine a Turbo Blackwing V8 powering a new MC too. Would RWD fix the trans issue, or is it just too much power coming from being a FWD?

 

I agree. Id love to see it on a bit bigger 'grand touring' size body. GM has plenty of options to choose from in terms of the underbody used over the last several years. Alpha and Zeta both accommodated 4 door body styles, so I think they'd be a good fit for a longer 2 door.

IMO that engine is dead. Massive amount of R&D dollars spent for what only came down to maybe a year and half worth of production used in a few vehicles.

Personally I'd prefer to see an LT in there. Theyve got size / power options that span the whole spectrum (plus of course you get the usual SBC aftermarket options).

It would have to go RWD if you're talking blackwing level power. IIRC that thing was like 500 hp / 575 ft lbs, theres no way to get that much power down from the factory through FWD. Even the LS4 cars struggle to hook 1st on new OEM tires, and they're down a full 200+ on both metrics.

RWD would work great though - theyve got the 10L trans that would bolt up and fits the aforementioned platforms. Plus it would appease the muscle car enthusiasts if they didn't totally screw up the body work and had it tie somehow to the older generations.

Bad thing IMO is it ends up back with the original concept posted. An Alpha platform car with a limited run black wing, 10L, all of the parts to support that power, plus one off model sheet metal for everything above the underbody. You're probably talking a $75k car, especially if you add a few luxury touches to stay true to the original roots. Its just so far out of the price point of what a normal family can afford that sales would be abysmal.

 

This is the part I dislike the most; it always falls short when you flesh this car out completely. I know that Corvette and Camaro are their "pony" vehicles so they dont want to bring the MC back to make the Camaro sales fluctuate. I've never seen them as competitive--there are enthusiasts on both side of that coin which is still chevy, and more money in their pockets.

I have nothing against the Camaro because I too am a fan. Those cars are GORGEOUS! I even like the most recent iteration of the 70/SS they put together. I hope the MC has some future glory and doesn't continue to be a warehouse garage shop pipe dream of memories down memory lane.

 

The hard part is that a brand can only have so many halo type cars (which the c8 certainly is at this point as could be the high trim Camaros - ZL1, etc). Adding a very high end Monte into the mix would probably never fly with shareholders. The hope with halo cars is to drive brand excitement to get people in, and even though the average Joe won't buy one - at least it gets them in the door where you can then sell them on a Malibu or Traverse or some other higher volume car that is actually usable for a normal family.

Thats why I think if theres any chance at all of a monte return - it won't be as an ultra high end Cadillac platform based, black wing powered beast - itll be a much cheaper FWD to go after sales #s to justify the R&D / tooling.

The other tough part with returning to its roots as a blend of power and luxury is that Chevy has focused so much on cheapness the last few decades and has let the other brands carry the luxury piece that it doesnt really fit in with the Chevy image anymore. Thats another reason I think any redo of the monte would lean more towards what was done on the 5th + 6th gen - average Chevy interior + amenities, tending towards the cheap end of the overall car spectrum to help drive sales #s.

 

The bad thing for a big corporate car brand like Chevy is that enthusiasts don't really matter outside of the Corvette sub brand. They just dont buy enough cars to justify marketing towards them (hence the enormous selection of bland SUVs) as they can't sustain a model on their own.

Camaro is a good example - it has a far larger brand presence than Monte Carlo, yet it can't sell enough across all of its trim levels to even stay alive. Even today, its already below the sales volume it had back in 2001 when it was cut last time and has been on a steep downward spiral for awhile.

The bad thing is that enthusiasts like to claim theyd buy a car if it had X, Y, and Z - yet when they actually build something like that at the price tag it costs to actually make it, its crickets when it comes to sales. The average Joe realizes he can't spend his entire household annual income on a toy (and his wife won't let him buy it as a daily driver because they need something more practical 'for the kids').

Certainly each has its own faults in execution - but look at cars like the GTO, G8, SSR, SS, etc. Unfortunately thats not what the public as a whole wants, and as a shareholder driven volume sales company, marketing to the masses is the requirement.

 

You are totally right that the company (GM in this case) has to make and sell cars that people buy. It's not about enthusiast demand, it is about overall demand.

As for the Camaro, I have my own gripes. One, lack of T-Tops (yet Trans Am Depot who converts the Camaro into a modern-day Trans Am is doing T-Tops for these cars). Second, after you hit the mid-gen restyle of the 5th gen Camaro, they all blur together to me. You could show me a 6th gen and I it looks like a late 5th to my eye. Ford did the same with the Mustang since 2005. Both flag ship cars for their brands are "stuck" in the 60's retro, almost like the manufacturer is afraid to actually innovate again! I suspect that is part of what is hurting Camaro sales (some people take note of the performance difference, but a greater majority look at the appearance and it looks like nothing has changed).

 

I agree with this 1000%. I see they keep playing with details here and there, but the overall look is so similar through the years.

I'm with you on that. Its a very capable car, but as with most sporty cars these days, they're well beyond the capability of the average driver (and beyond what you can regularly push the limits of on a regular road anyways). So a 10% increase in grip or power is something few people will get major benefit out of (and the people that do are likely going to be modifying it anyways to push that limit further).

To your point - appearance is the thing thats always apparent regardless how you use the car or what trim level you bought.

 

And for some people, having a new sports car is a form of a status symbol or feeling of self accomplishment. What good is it to feel you bought a new one that looks 90% like the last one. The 3rd gen Camaro (82-92) made VERY small appearance changes. But I don't believe they had sales issues. That gen was overall pretty solid on it's appearance. The 4th gen Camaro/Firebird, from 93-2002, they had a mid-gen restyle and the changes were pretty pronounced. Your early 4th gen looks like a rounded 3rd gen (but again, distinct visual changes). Then the mid-gen restyle, a lot more individual personality. But the 5th-6th, once you hit the mid-gen restyle in the 5th gen, I feel it is all lack luster to the untrained eye. I commented on that at the GM Nationals at Carlisle.

Both Ford and GM did great with the retro attempts. They got people who wanted that classic iconic look on a modern muscle car. It got the older people who say "I had a car like that when I was a teenager" or "I always wanted one but never could get one" and now they might have a few extra bucks to spend because their kids are grown and out of the house. And you get some younger people who like the iconic look but want the modern features and/or who "dad had a car like this when I was growing up".

But, that nostalgia won't last forever. I feel it is to the point of being boring. I often said, if GM did a retro 3rd gen Camaro, I might have to buy one new! Give me that big hatch and t-tops in a modern car that brings ME the nostalgia I want. Heck, before the 6th gen Camaro was released, I was getting excited, the new logo looked retro 3rd gen and some other things had me hoping. And then..... Not what I had hoped for.

The car manufactures are missing the idea that you are at a point where nostalgia can be a card played more than once, just unlock the right ideas OR evolve, get past the nostalgia and innovate and be creative again!