Growing up in Metro-Detroit, there were few cars that caused more of a ruckus in the high-school parking lot than the muscle cars from our home town. The Chevrolet Camaro, in particular, was the stuff dreams were made of. By that point, all of the affordable '60s and '70s iron had long since rusted away, leaving us to fend for '80s mullet-mobiles and early '90s Camaros with puny V6s that substitute teachers sold at the park-n-ride around the corner.
I remember these days fondly, and it all came back to the forefront of my memory as I greeted our bright yellow 2010 Camaro with a V6 engine and automatic transmission. Though perhaps not the most talked about drivetrain (most go for the V8), it still oozes aggression with its tiny greenhouse, long hood and massive wheels, all while striking a perfect balance of retro and modern styling. I had heard that GM put serious effort behind the new V6, so before I passed judgment, I had to see for myself.
2010 Chevrolet Camaro Interior" width="293" height="220" align="left" border="0" hspace="4" vspace="4" />The interior design is straight throwback to 1969, and as a classic gear head, this interior makes me feel right at home. I love the style and fit and finish, but the quality of materials inside lets me down. Aside from the steering wheel, center armrest and seats, there are few places you can touch or tap in the interior without a clunk. There’s a massive expanse of hard plastic, making the interior feel a bit sub-par in our $31,450 tester.
My sentiments are shared by other members of our web team as well. From merely sitting in the car, our Search Engine Marketing Analyst, Ellerton Whitney commented, “Better than the Rubbermaid Grand Am interiors of yesteryear, but still not up to snuff.” He went on to say that the styling is “too retro”, and was also particularly irked by the odd placement of the door lock button on the center of the dash.
Sarah Fairfield, our Web Content Specialist, agreed while adding that the interior is “so retro that it compromises some practicality.” She went on to point out that the OnStar buttons on the rearview mirror took up a lot of space considering the already limited visibility through the windshield due to the hood, and that entrance to the rear seat is difficult due to the cumbersome two-step process of moving the front seat out of the way.
While the lever on the back of the front seat folded the seatback forward, the entire seat had to be slid forward by reaching for the fore-aft adjuster on the front in-board side of the seat. As such, upon returning the seatback upright, the incoming front seat passenger would have to adjust the front seat to fit his or her legs without crushing the rear seat passenger. Buyer beware: if you carry more than yourself and one passenger, backseat access gets old on a daily basis.
Overall, I would say that GM nailed this interior. For the car, anything less would have been a disappointment. Besides, development dollars were spent in a much smarted manner elsewhere...like the electronics and powertrain.