"AM" (ap18961)
05/16/2015 at 20:40 • Filed to: None
5
33|
"AM" (ap18961)
05/16/2015 at 20:40 • Filed to: None | 5
| 33 |
For those of you who complain about visibility on every Camaro post on Jalopnik/Oppo, why? I find it’s rather annoying when every post has “but can you see out of it?” yet other cars don’t ever get shit on. Take the F-type for example, as beautiful as it is, its outward visibility is shit. It’s as 100% as bad as the Camaro yet it gets heavily praised on this site.
Am I arguing that the Camaro has good visibility? Absolutely not, it’s pretty bad. Should Chevy have fixed it for 2016? 100% yes. My point is that you guys/gals should try be more open minded and less biased when it comes to certain brands because despite visibility the 2016 Camaro is going to be one hell of a car.
And remember, it could be Pontiac Solstice Coupe worse:
Arben72
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:43 |
|
Take it as a compliment. The cars so good that's the only thing they can complain about.
HammerheadFistpunch
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:44 |
|
been in a solstice coupe...its better than a Camaro for viz. We harp on it for the same reason we would harp on any otherwise great car with a flaw that generally ruins the experience.
|
AM
> HammerheadFistpunch
05/16/2015 at 20:46 |
|
I’ve drove one for an entire week, it’s worse.. I also seen a guy driving one on Thursday and his eyes were level with the top of the window.
|
AM
> Arben72
05/16/2015 at 20:47 |
|
Fair enough :]
Just bothers me that people can be so biased and close-minded.
dogisbadob
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:48 |
|
Yup, the Solstice coupe and F-type suck, too, as does basically every new car. I do rant about them. And if the tiny Solstice can have a targa, then why no T-tops on the Camaro?
Also, consider one more thing: the Camaro is more likely to be someone’s only car than the F-type. Meaning, they have something with more visibility as a daily.
Don’t forget the car that started this stupid trend, the 300/Magnum. Too bad since it ruins the otherwise awesome Magnum SRT8.
In fact, poor visibility is so common that soon cars will require backup cameras. When they could just install actual windows you can fucking see out of.
TheHondaBro
> dogisbadob
05/16/2015 at 20:52 |
|
Preach.
|
AM
> dogisbadob
05/16/2015 at 20:53 |
|
It’s fair when you can rant about the visibility of other cars but when you only go on about the Camaro it’s just not fair to the car. Also, they don’t have T-tops because as cool as they are, they are quite the pain.
Having a Camaro as a DD means you will get used to the poor visibility. Having a car with good visibility then going to an F-Type on the weekend means you’re going to have a hard time adjusting.
As for the tiny window trend, you really can blame Chrysler. Within a few years of each other they came out with the 300, Magnum, Charger and Challenger, all which had tiny windows.
Uug
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:55 |
|
The F-Type simply is less common, so visibility issues will be voiced by far fewer people.
|
TheHondaBro
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:56 |
|
I’m not sure you can get used to poor visibility. It’s still poor visibility.
|
AM
> TheHondaBro
05/16/2015 at 20:58 |
|
Not true. If you drive a car enough you’ll learn how to drive with what you have. I drove an Alero, a car who’s ass is way up in the air and I got used to backing that into spaces without any problems.
Also, my (down the street) neighbour said he has no problem with visibility and he DDs a 2011 Camaro.
|
AM
> Uug
05/16/2015 at 20:58 |
|
Fair enough.
|
TheHondaBro
> AM
05/16/2015 at 20:59 |
|
Fair enough.
Jayhawk Jake
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:08 |
|
I’ve tried to make this argument before...
Camaro gets shit on for visibility but the Mustsng doesn’t. I drove a ‘13 Mustsng GT, visibility was awful
CammedCTSV
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:09 |
|
Funny, my 2002 Camaro SS has great visibility
|
CammedCTSV
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:10 |
|
T-tops are a pain?
|
AM
> Jayhawk Jake
05/16/2015 at 21:11 |
|
Just people trying to hate on Chevy. The new Camaro interior looks awesome and looks to be high quality but people are making comments about “frozen hands” because of the low vents. Yet, no one says anything about the “aluminum” toggle switches in the Mustang that are actually plastic.
|
AM
> CammedCTSV
05/16/2015 at 21:13 |
|
Pain in the ass to remove and store. Also, I don’t think the roof panels would fit inside the trunk so I’m not sure where they would go exactly.
|
AM
> CammedCTSV
05/16/2015 at 21:14 |
|
I’m talking specifically about the 5th/6th Gen Camaro’s.
TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:17 |
|
Been in both of them and F-type is way easier to see out of
|
AM
> TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
05/16/2015 at 21:21 |
|
Convertible’s don’t count. In that case the Camaro is good as well.
|
TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:23 |
|
never stated that in the original post. Also f type is way better in convertible. sounds much better
|
dogisbadob
> CammedCTSV
05/16/2015 at 21:27 |
|
Does it have t-tops too?
|
CammedCTSV
> dogisbadob
05/16/2015 at 21:31 |
|
They only built a dozen non T-top SS cars. A hardtop had to be special ordered. I do have the tops, and they are one of the best features of the car
|
AM
> TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
05/16/2015 at 21:35 |
|
I’m really not too fond of convertibles. I find most newer cars look awkward in convertible form unless they have a hardtop roof.
The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123
> AM
05/16/2015 at 21:38 |
|
I feel you... Posted more or less the same thing like 2 hours ago. The visibility thing is getting old.
JGrabowMSt
> dogisbadob
05/16/2015 at 21:49 |
|
As the owner of a Magnum that is normally my DD, I have to disagree. Visibility is quite good when you properly adjust the mirrors.
Never had any trouble with its visibility, even on my first test drive.
|
AM
> The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123
05/16/2015 at 21:54 |
|
Yeah I replied to your post with a long list of cars that have poor visibility! Also, now that the 2016 looks to have a high quality interior, the whole interior thing should be dead.
That being said, the only thing they'll have to complain about is visibility.
|
HammerheadFistpunch
> AM
05/16/2015 at 22:15 |
|
I think you mistaking frustration with bias and closed mindedness.
|
dogisbadob
> CammedCTSV
05/16/2015 at 22:27 |
|
Yay awesome!
|
TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
> AM
05/16/2015 at 22:44 |
|
well mustang and camaros look bad cause they werent designed as convertibles. The f type and miata were designed as convertibles so they actually look good
wafflesnfalafel
> AM
05/16/2015 at 22:53 |
|
I think it’s a bogus argument - people buy Camaros precisely because of this sort of styling, (high beltline, low seating position, tall dash, long hood.) If they wanted fabulous viability they’d buy a Sprinter van. Personally I’m still not a huge fan of the front and rear styling, but for folks that liked the previous Camaro and want a much better version, their wish has been granted.
GhostZ
> wafflesnfalafel
05/17/2015 at 12:21 |
|
I think the argument is that what people buy the car for in the first month is not what they like about it long term. Chevy built a car that is flashy and looks good, but for that reason is also a pain in the ass to deal with.
In other words, people are upset at the lack of substance they find in Chevy’s decision to continue to value styling compromises over good engineering.
bleedsblue23
> AM
05/17/2015 at 20:41 |
|
when a car looks as good as the jag, folks will ignore some stuff. IMHO there are more jag folks than bowtie folks on here