Rumor: G8 = Caprice? - Page 8

*TAG UR IT* · 07-12-2009, 02:37 AM

Bring back the G8, yes.

But, don't call it a Caprice. Keep the G8 name.

stovt001 · 07-12-2009, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Remove the fake hood scoops because they are fake and that's rice?

Ironic to see that on a board full of Camaro SS owners....

I don't own an SS yet, but I equally dislike the SS's fake scoop. I think it is very rice as well. If it doesn't work, it simply shouldn't be added on with the intention of looking functional.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

Bring back the G8, yes.

But, don't call it a Caprice. Keep the G8 name.

I really don't see how G8 would fit in Chevy's naming trends. The G(X) thing didn't even work all that well for Pontiac. I'd prefer it had a real name. Besides, its not like there is a lot of equity with the G8 name. Brand awareness was not this car's strength.

binlow84 · 07-12-2009, 12:31 PM

All this "fake hood scoop" crap.... Seriously, if absolutely everything on a car was made to be functional we'd all be driving boring blobs of metal. The hood scopes do serve a purpose: they function as a means to draw the eye, give the appearance of power. You could stick a car like the Camaro into the body of my Cavalier (with obvious changes to proportions and size and such, I'm talking styling) if you really wanted to. But do you know why they don't? Because the style doesn't match the power. The reverse can be said as well, you're not going to stick the Cobalt's power train into the Camaro's body styling because they just don't match (DeLorean anyone..........?). You have to make the car LOOK as powerful as it is.

Sure hood scoops can get out of hand, but the G8 and the Camaro are perfect examples of aesthetically functional features. Just because they aren't MECHANICALLY functional and increase the performance doesn't mean they shouldn't be there.

Foster26 · 07-12-2009, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by binlow84

This may show my ignorance of Chevy history but whenever I see the word "Caprice" I think the hideous, gray tank my grandparents had when I was younger.... IMO certain names should just be let go. Give the Chevy G8 a new name.

I feel EXACTLY the same. I cannot stand the name Caprice. When I hear that name, all I can think is the ugliest boats--I mean cars ever made. There has got to be a better name out there. I would like to see Lumina or maybe even Chevelle???

Captain Awesome · 07-12-2009, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foster26

I feel EXACTLY the same. I cannot stand the name Caprice. When I hear that name, all I can think is the ugliest boats--I mean cars ever made. There has got to be a better name out there. I would like to see Lumina or maybe even Chevelle???

I feel the same way about the name "Taurus" but somehow when Ford decided that the "Five Hundred" name was way cooler, nobody bought it.

Now they call it "Taurus" again.

Foster26 · 07-12-2009, 01:05 PM

Yeah but a Taurus is still a Taurus. This new Caprice is certainly not a "Caprice."

Rhoop24 · 07-12-2009, 01:43 PM

Build these...

lsxBrian · 07-12-2009, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevydude26

why not make it the chevelle

Amen.If you called it caprice it would require whitewalls and a vinyl top.Chevelle or Nova would be much cooler.they just need to get the facias and interior right.

TheClassicCarKid · 07-12-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lsxBrian

Amen.If you called it caprice it would require whitewalls and a vinyl top.Chevelle or Nova would be much cooler.they just need to get the facias and interior right.

Chevelle and Nova shouldn't be used on a 4-door car.

Justin · 07-12-2009, 05:41 PM

There were 4-door Novas. I wouldn't mind seeing that name resurrected.

stovt001 · 07-12-2009, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheClassicCarKid

Chevelle and Nova shouldn't be used on a 4-door car.

There were 4 door Chevelles and Novas, and even the 2 door versions were still essentially sedan bodies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by binlow84

All this "fake hood scoop" crap.... Seriously, if absolutely everything on a car was made to be functional we'd all be driving boring blobs of metal. The hood scopes do serve a purpose: they function as a means to draw the eye, give the appearance of power. You could stick a car like the Camaro into the body of my Cavalier (with obvious changes to proportions and size and such, I'm talking styling) if you really wanted to. But do you know why they don't? Because the style doesn't match the power. The reverse can be said as well, you're not going to stick the Cobalt's power train into the Camaro's body styling because they just don't match (DeLorean anyone..........?). You have to make the car LOOK as powerful as it is.

Sure hood scoops can get out of hand, but the G8 and the Camaro are perfect examples of aesthetically functional features. Just because they aren't MECHANICALLY functional and increase the performance doesn't mean they shouldn't be there.

You betray your argument with a false dilemma. The absence of fake indicators of power does not mean that legitimate design details can't make good styling and/or suggest power. Strip the Camaro of the fake hood scoop and it certainly doesn't look like a Cobalt or Cavelier. It still looks every bit as fast and powerful. Fake scoops pretend to be something they're not. They even include plastic panels with a semi-mesh impression stamped in them. That would be like adding rudder surfaces to 50s era Cadillac vertical fins. Fake hood scoops are designed to suggest "air goes in here" when it very clearly does not. Why not add a jet nozzle to the back? That would suggest power would it not? Why not add missile launch points? That would suggest aggression. Or you can let real style subtly suggest these features without resorting to loud tacky pieces just tacked on.

BlownChevy · 07-12-2009, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevydude26

the g8 was ugly too...i would hope that the caprice looks better once they bring it over here...here is a chance to make something outstanding gm....

Wow, that is the first I have heard of someone not liking the G8 look......I personally like mine.....

Camaro Lives On · 07-12-2009, 07:33 PM

If the Caprice were to look exactly like this, then ME WANT!!!

SS 376 · 07-12-2009, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhoop24

Build these...

It looks like that HSV front fascia would bolt right up to the G8 front...

07-12-2009, 01:43 PM	#105
Rhoop24 Drives: 1993 Z28 Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Indiana Posts: 20	Build these... __________________

07-12-2009, 05:41 PM	#108
Justin Camaro5's Cell Phone Geek Drives: '02 V6 Camaro. 5 speed manual. Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 406	There were 4-door Novas. I wouldn't mind seeing that name resurrected. __________________ 2SS RJT with black rally stripes, RS package, sunroof, painted engine block cover. It's either that or a damned similar 'vert in a few years.

07-12-2009, 02:37 AM	#99
TAG UR IT www.Camaro5store.com Drives: 2014 ZL1 #705 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: SA, Texas Posts: 26,544 View My Garage	Bring back the G8, yes. But, don't call it a Caprice. Keep the G8 name.

07-12-2009, 12:31 PM	#101
binlow84 Drives: '10 Camaro, IBM 2LT/RS Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: St. Louis metro, Illinois Posts: 350 View My Garage	All this "fake hood scoop" crap.... Seriously, if absolutely everything on a car was made to be functional we'd all be driving boring blobs of metal. The hood scopes do serve a purpose: they function as a means to draw the eye, give the appearance of power. You could stick a car like the Camaro into the body of my Cavalier (with obvious changes to proportions and size and such, I'm talking styling) if you really wanted to. But do you know why they don't? Because the style doesn't match the power. The reverse can be said as well, you're not going to stick the Cobalt's power train into the Camaro's body styling because they just don't match (DeLorean anyone..........?). You have to make the car LOOK as powerful as it is. Sure hood scoops can get out of hand, but the G8 and the Camaro are perfect examples of aesthetically functional features. Just because they aren't MECHANICALLY functional and increase the performance doesn't mean they shouldn't be there.

07-12-2009, 01:05 PM	#104
Foster26 Drives: 2SS/RS IOM 6SP CGRS #9761 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuttle, OK Posts: 295	Yeah but a Taurus is still a Taurus. This new Caprice is certainly not a "Caprice."

07-12-2009, 07:33 PM	#111
Camaro Lives On Force RECON Drives: 2005 Saab 9-5 2.3T Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Terre Haute, IN Posts: 1,687 View My Garage	If the Caprice were to look exactly like this, then ME WANT!!!