This edition of VAR centers on Chevy’s Camaro SS.
http://www.chevrolet.com/vehicles/2010/camaro/overview.do?seo=goo_|_IMG_2009_Chevy_Camaro_|_IMG_2009_Chevy_Camaro_|_Exact_Match_Chevy_Camaro_|_camaro
6.2 liter V8, 6 speed manual, red exterior with black racing stripes, black interior with gauges galore.
Tons of torque: I puuled smoothly away from a standing stop in second gear and didn’t even know it.
And the motor had the right muscle growl to it.
All I know is that it is ugly as sin, even if I limit the comparison to the “classic” Camaro look.
YMMV - and with a 6.2 liter engine, I bet the mileage is low anyway.
I think they look cool (can’t link to that site, but assume it is like the yellow one that was featured in Transformers).
If I had endless cash, a mid-life crisis focused more on cars than guitars and no carbon footprint guilt, I would be very interested…after I bought a few Porsche’s and a real '68…
The price is right and they did their homework. Considering how many attempts Ford went through to recapture the original Mustang look I think Chevy did well (the silver version on their website blows). I would have gone with a narrower front grill reminiscent of the hidden headlight look but that’s my personal preference.
Ford should offer 3 engines with a supercharged version as part of the GT package and not that overpriced Shelby freak show. I’d like a turbocharged version but there is just no room with the 4.6L heads to route the tubing (yes it’s “possible” but REALLY a tight fit).
It looks really, really nice. But since I can’t afford one as a spare car there’s absoultely no way it could be my primary ride. Rear wheel drive in the snow just ain’t happening.