Chewbacca

And I think you missed the part where I pointed out that the faster car was designed nearly twenty years ago with a good chunk of the design being even older as it was done almost thirty years ago.

How many times have we heard on this board that "modern technology" and horsepower will more than compensate for the additional weight?

How many times have those who mentioned the inescapable nature of physics been shouted down and told to leave the board?

Sure, the car may move fairly well (*for its bulk). I acknowledge that. However, can you acknowledge that it doesn't matter because there are no asterisks in the final race results indicating that so and so's car weighed 500 lbs more than the winning car?


And if you think 150hp doesn't make a big difference on course, you're crazy. I do agree with you though that it cannot compensate for the car's bulk, however once again I've / we've been told here before that I'm / we're wrong about that.


Lastly, the Shelby GT pretty much became the car to have in F Stock right out of the box as soon as it appeared. Draw your own conclusions and comparisons with that fact and your claim that the 5th gen needs to be "gotten used to".

I admit that one anecdote does not make the case but I am quite sure that we will be hearing more of these stories. Unfortunate and sad IMO.

JakeRobb

Indeed, I can. However, there are also no asterisks in the final race results indicating that so and so's car had 100hp less than the winning car, had a stiffer chassis, wider tires, different suspension tuning, better steering feedback, or anything else you care to mention that's different between the 5th gen and the 4th gen (or the SGT).

The point is that all of the cars currently competing in Fstock are massively different, and the extra weight is far from the only difference at play.

Fair enough, but the 2007 SGT had a lot more in common with other cars that Fstock guys already knew how to drive fast (i.e. the 2005 and 2006 Mustang GT), and so I imagine that it was a shorter learning curve. Just a guess.

Chewbacca

I'm not sure I see your point here..... care to clarify?

Huh? Once again some clarity might help here...

Are you referring to ALL of the cars listed on page 160 of this year's rule book? Then yes, that list is fairly diverse.

Or are you referring to only those cars that have a legitimate chance of being competitive in the class and therefore are the ones that actually show up at a big event to compete? Because those are all the same type of car and are most definitely NOT "massively different".

In fact, I just looked though the results for all of the Nat Tour stops this year and every car in F Stock was either a Camaro (pre 5th), Firebird or Mustang. Overwhelmingly Mustangs FWIW.

JakeRobb

There's always going to be a car that's dominant in a class; maybe two in some classes. Fact of SCCA life.

However, there will generally also be other cars right on its tail. Such is the case with the SGT, followed by other GTs and 4th gens. The SGT and regular GT are pretty similar, but aside from rough weight and basic layout (front-engine, rear-drive coupe), the cars couldn't be more different.

Add the 5th gen into the mix, and you get yet another set of differences.

Considering all of those differences, I think it's pretty amazing that there is only a one-second difference in lap times.

Chewbacca

Numerous questions and potential disagreements about your statements here but since your point eludes me once again, I guess I'll just let it drop.

Congratulations. You've baffled / confused me to the point of shutting up.

TOO Z MAXX

In autox 1 second is huge. I race with a lot of the same guys every weekend the top guys in ESP are always within a .5 seconds of each other. At the last divisional we had 4 guys within .3 tenths of winning.
I will agree though their is a learning curve with this car and I am sure the gap will close.

Z28Wilson

Sure, I can buy the fact that after a lot of seat time they'll be able to trim a tenth here and there....

....But the sad fact remains that I don't see the 5th Gen Camaro being a serious car-of-choice on the circuit. Whether it's because of weight, or suspension tuning, or tire, or because Camaros don't like running on cloudy days -- who cares. It doesn't appear to be a great choice right now.

TOO Z MAXX

I agree, I dont think the new Camaro will be a class leader in FS or ESP, even compared to a 4th gen, but with a good alignment and seat time their is a half a second easy.

graham

Just wait til they get the inertia planting the tires instead of sliding the tires

But it is refreshing to see our 5th gen has made the 4th gen a "light" car lmao

OutsiderIROC-Z

You make a great point.

1fastdog

Congrats to the 4th gen driver!

I'm not sure there's enough to go on to determine how good or not good a fifth gen handles or is capable of handling based on this report.

I have been told nothing about the two drivers. Nothing about skill level nor experience. Were both drivers equally underdriving, driving, overdriving?

I doubt an LT1 4th gen is riding on original equipment tires and shocks. It well might be, but I'm doubtful.

Nothing is wrong with making judgements about cars vicariously.

I would hope that Camaro fans would actually take an opportunity to drive a new one and then draw a more personal conclusion.

Time will likely tell what driving style, alignment tweaks, etc. will get the best results for AutoX. I will offer that there is nothing much one can do to adjust toe and camber on a solid rear.

Until that point, congrats to the 4th gen driver! And...Congrats to the 5th gen driver for having some fun with his ride and choosing not to go the vicarious route.

JeremyNYR

NOOO!!! THIS ONE EVENT PROVIDES THE DEFINITIVE PROOF!!! THE 5th GEN IS A WHALE!!!! TOLD YA TOLD YA TOLD YA!!!

Big Als Z

I still think that the Camaro's problem is not its weight per say, but where its placed. A car smaller then a Cobalt, the M3, is 3700lbs, but is nimble and the benchmark of sevearl cars in several classes.
Its weight is lower and spread out, even if its a heavy car for its size.
Camaro's weight is most likely up higher, unlike the third/4th gens which place it very low.
On an AutoX course, the car's higher center of gravity hurts it. On a track, where it can make full use of its suspension and power, it will beat out a stock LS1 or LT1 Camaro.
Thats Big Al's .02.

Chewbacca

Sometimes I really have to wonder where you guys come up with some of this stuff.....

M3 coupe
Length - 181.8"
Width - 77.8"
Height - 55.6"
Wheelbase - 108.7"
EPA class - subcompact

Cobalt Coupe
Length - 180.5"
Width - 67.9"
Height - 55.5"
Wheelbase - 103.3"
EPA class - subcompact

HAZ-Matt

He was deceived by the countless posts in the hundreds of threads about the 5th Gen's weight where certain people bring up the example of the M3 as a similarly powered RWD coupe and claim that the reason it is light is because it is "the size of a Cobalt" and it is super expensive.