AdioSS

I have a feeling the Camaro won't be very traction limited with those tall tires, even on 20" wheels.

I hope some kind of Track Pack is available for it that offers the GXP's 3.70 gearset.

ZZtop

I have been hoping the same kind of thing. However, with the Camaro's tall tires, it really should be more like a 3.90 gear.

From what I am seeing in the numbers, I think rear gears are going to be the single best bang for your buck mod to these cars. No sugar coating, the gearing on the Camaro is downright bad.

2010_5thgen

eventhough the ss has big RIMS, the tire height shouldnt be any taller, if at all, than the 18 or 19" rims on the v6 models. you see the thing is, the side wall is smaller on a larger diameter wheel and larger on a smaller diameter rim. kinda weird huh? so the 20" rims and tires could measure about 29" tall and the 18" rims can still measure around 29" tall due to the large amount of sidewall.
thats how the car maintains the same ride height through out the various models.

ZZtop

Correct, but the Camaro's tire is just plain HUGE at 28.6" in diameter. This effectively raises the cars gearing (numerically lower). Lets take a look at the 2010 Camaro gearing versus the 2002 Camaro gearing:

MPH is based on 6600rpm for the LS3 and 6000rpm for the LS1.

2010 Camaro SS
1st 3.01 (10.38) = 54mph
2nd 2.07 (7.14) = 79mph
3rd 1.43 (4.93) = 114mph
4th 1.00 (3.45) = 163mph
5th 0.84
6th 0.57

Final Drive 3.45

275/40/20 tires = 28.6" diameter


2002 Camaro SS
1st 2.66 (9.097) = 50mph
2nd 1.78 (6.088) = 75mph
3rd 1.30 (4.446) = 103mph
4th 1.00 (3.42) = 134mph
5th 0.74
6th 0.50

Final Drive 3.45

275/40/17 tires = 25.7" diameter


What you notice when you look at these numbers is that the 2002 Camaro has higher actual gearing (tranny gear times final drive) but when tire diameter is factored in, it realistically has lower gearing than the 2010 Camaro.

You will also notice that both cars have a 25mph gap between the top of 1st and the top of 2nd. However, the 2010 Camaro has a 35mph gap between 2nd and 3rd, while the 2002 Camaro has only a 28mph gap. You will notice this even in the actual gearing. The 2002 Camaro has closer gearing than the 2010 Camaro and in fact, it is MUCH closer between 2nd and 3rd, and 3rd and 4th.

I surmise the Camaro may appear to sort of "fall on its face" after 2nd gear, much the way the new Mustang does. Hopefully the greater area under the torque curve of the LS3 is enough to make up for this gearing deficit. But then there is the added weight of the new Camaro to factor in and I believe the new cars coefficient of drag is higher and its frontal area larger (anyone have numbers on this?).

So if we look at power to weight, using a real world number for the LS1 in the Camaro:

2010 Camaro - 3860/426 = 9.06 lbs/hp
2002 Camaro - 3500/345 = 10.14 lbs/hp

So the question becomes, is the relatively small power to weight advantage of the new Camaro enough to overcome its poor gearing and likely worse aerodynamic drag than the previous car?

The new Camaro has 12's written all over it with a better rear gear, something like a 3.90, but I am becoming increasingly less convinced it is going to do much better than low 13's in stock form.



Just had a thought, one more car to take a look at: 2005 GTO

LS2 redline is 6500rpm

2005 GTO
1st 2.97 (10.276) = 48mph
2nd 2.07 (7.16) = 69mph
3rd 1.43 (4.948) = 100mph
4th 1.00 (3.46) = 144mph
5th 0.84
6th 0.57

Final Drive 3.46

245/45/17 tires = 25.7" diameter

We see that the GTO has very aggressive gearing in 1st and 2nd. However, it still has a large gap between 2nd and 3rd, and 3rd and 4th relative to the 2002 Camaro. Its effective gearing is better in every way than the new 2010 Camaro. So lets take a look at the power to weight ratio:

2010 Camaro - 3860/426 = 9.06 lbs/hp
2005 GTO - 3750/400 = 9.375 lbs/hp
2002 Camaro - 3500/345 = 10.14 lbs/hp

We see that the GTO has a power to weight ratio closer to that of the 2010 Camaro than the 2002 Camaro. Yet, it was unable to run times measurable faster than a 2002 Camaro. Basically, they were both low 13 second cars in stock form with a good driver.

So with only a slightly better power to weight ratio, but worse gearing than the LS2 GTO, the new Camaro has its work cutout for it to break GM out of the low 13 second rut for a $30k performance vehicle.

christianjax

Great info. I'll bet gear swaps will be on the Mod list for most of us then. Even a 3.73 would be better. But I wonder how it would compare to the 2.93 on my 99 Trans Am?

2010_5thgen

soooo, your saying just throw some new gears in like 4:10 or 3:93 and it will be much quicker acceleration? what about top end? how will that be affected by new gearing? i never really understood gearing too much. its all pretty complicated to me.

ZZtop

Your 1999 Trans Am
1st 2.66 (7.794) = 59mph
2nd 1.78 (5.215) = 88mph
3rd 1.30 (3.809) = 120mph
4th 1.00 (2.93) = 156mph
5th 0.74
6th 0.50

Final Drive 2.93

275/40/17 tires = 25.7" diameter

Looks like you are really hurting in 1st and 2nd gear compared to the 2010 Camaro.

ZZtop

Yes, gears will likely be the best bang for your buck mod on this car in my opinion.

As for top end, how fast do you really need to go? If you track the car, you might be able to hit 140-150mph on some tracks with generous straightaways and a lower rear gear should not prevent you from hitting these speeds in fifth gear on the 2010 Camaro. On the street you should have no need to go that fast.

1997FormulaBird

I got a chevy email today that confirms an expected 4.7 second 0 to 60.

It also says that pre-ordering ends Mar. 15th

AdioSS

I ran those numbers also (I used f-body.org/gears) but I didn't want to post them. I also emailed the people who run that site to try to convince them to add the gear ratios, etc for the new Camaro. It would be nice if they do that.

There are times when changing the rear gearing to a lower gear (numerically higher) can actually increase your top speed. The LT1 Impala SS was capable of 140mph with 3.08 gears. Switching to 3.73s brings top speed up to about 150 because it puts the engine closer to where it can make more power. That is with a big car with a large frontal area, but a cD of about .36 and an engine that makes peak power at about 5100RPM.

I don't know the cD or frontal area of the new Camaro yet, but the additional 140-160 horsepower should allow a much higher top speed.

Bob Cosby

0-60 times are a virtual waste of a measurement of a street car on street tires on the street. Way too many variables to be a meaningful stat, in my opinion.

However, it is the holy grail of automotive magazine test numbers, so we see a lot of it.

christianjax

Thanks for the info. I know that I'm 300lbs lighter, but something doesn't add up. I have a few mods. Ram Air hood, air box & lid, SLP MAF sensor, flowmaster exhaust. And my car will sprint to 60 in around 4.6-4.7 seconds. And that is with the worst gears that Trans Am had in 99.
Here's a video of my T/A 0-60. I clock it at around 4.65. and 0-90 in 9.38
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKbHlBQAwYI

So my question is, with MUCH better gears like the 2010 has, and 426hp shouldn't it muscle past the 300lbs disadvantage?

2010_5thgen

im sure i will not be going over 150 but i plan on taking it to the track ,yes. not drag strip track. what gears would you recommend putting in?
does GMPP sell gears that could be still concidered under warranty?

ZZtop

I can not watch the video (at work) but something does sound odd. You said you have a 2.93 rear gear but I though the only stock gear ratios were 2.73, 3.23, and 3.42????

Do you have sticky tires where you are able to launch at a higher rpm than you would be on stock tires?

Also, remember that the hardest thing for the new Camaro to do, will be to get started. This is where its weight hurts it the most.

Bob Cosby

Clocking with a stop watch and a speedometer is fun, but shouldn't be compared with clocking with a proper 5th-wheel setup (which I ASSUME is done by the car maker and most mags).