a word on the (apparent) size and weight of the concept

first of all, great job by GM designers and lutz and company for bringing us a camaro concept. i've been reading a lot of positive feedback on the car, but one element seems to have been overlooked from looking at the concept: size and weight.

the last few generations of the fbody have all been too large and heavy. by definition, a sports car should be small and lightweight. much as i hate to say this ford has had the edge on us size-wise and weight-wise for the pre-2005 models.the new camaro should not be any larger than a fox body mustang and weigh no more than 3200-3300 pounds.

to it's credit, gm has taken notice and acted on the size issue with the c6 vette and that car has been a huge success. same must be done with any proposed camaro.

our 3rd and 4th gens are great cars, but had they been smaller and lighter on their feet, women and foreign markets would be much more interested in them, thus much more sales. that's one of the biggest complaints i hear from my g/f about my t/a "it's too heavy and long, too much body roll."

the concept car is stunning, but i hope gm pays attention to what is happening with the GTO. a lot of folks are dissuaded from buying the goat due to its 3900 pound weight (myself included). gm must follow the standard set by the c6 and reduce the size and weight of these cars if they want to attract a larger audience.

3rd gens sold great compared to 4th gens! Your off on the weight of the GTO--Pontiac says 3725lbs. But thats still to heavy for a new Camaro.

I wonder if thet could use the hydroforming technology to keep weight down?

I won't tie myself to an exact weight--but under 3600lbs is preferable, 3200 seems too unrealistic. How about settle for lighter then the Mustang?

GMHTP has the goat at nearly 3900 pounds, and i've seen other sources quote 3800 plus. nonetheless, there is no reason a proposed camaro should not be around 3300 max.

3 rd gens did sell better than 4th, however no fbod generation has ever surpassed the mustang. seems like until the fbod died in 2002, the smaller lighter mustang always had the sales lead. only after the fbod died did ford pork out the new stang with > 3500 pounds.

the car is smaller than a Mustang in many measurements, but don't count on a 'lightweight'....not if you want it affordable.

What people tend to forget is crashworthiness. Unless you design for a 5 star rating in front/rear/side/rollover......you will be dead in the water in terms of sales and insurance rates. That does not come cheaply.....and it means weight.

REST ASSURED that no one wants to see a light weight Camaro more than GM.......why? CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) where weight is poison to fuel economy.

Yes.....we can use exotic materials to drop weight....but it comes at a price.

If the car trounces everything near it in terms of handling on a track.......and has class leading acceleration.....????????

In other words boy's don't expect a 3300lb Camaro, that would be absurd. I expect around 3600lb when it's all said and done.

if it's smaller than a mustang that's great, however most of us have not yet seen it in person and the pics tend to make it look bigger. understood on the other points on affordability and crashworthiness, however if it can be done on a vette, then we should be able to get reasonably close in size and weight on the camaro too.

one area i've always thought that was too long in the fbodies was the rear quarter panel. chop that off by 6-8 inches and you've saved 100 pounds. make it the size of the fox body and </= 3300 pounds and we will love it (women and foreigners too). the current mustang is a poor example to follow - too heavy. this camaro must wipe the floor with everything else out there in the 20-30k class, mustang, challenger, and japanese eclipses, wrx's, 350z, etc.

Yes......it can be done on a Vette.....but look at the price of a Vette........again, the car MUST be affordable to the vast public......not just a few..........that's what would make it a Chevy.......well within most peoples' reach.

no doubt the vette is more $$, that's why i said "reasonably close." i'm not expecting the same weight at all, but within 100 or 150 pounds is acceptable. it cannot be as big and heavy as the 4th gens, you'd end up with the same slow sales. the market will be looking for smaller, more nimble vehicles in sports coupes. matter of fact, i would welcome back seats being deleted from the design in order to save weight and size.

if it's smaller than a mustang that's great, however most of us have not yet seen it in person and the pics tend to make it look bigger. understood on the other points on affordability and crashworthiness, however if it can be done on a vette, then we should be able to get reasonably close in size and weight on the camaro too.

one area i've always thought that was too long in the fbodies was the rear quarter panel. chop that off by 6-8 inches and you've saved 100 pounds. make it the size of the fox body and </= 3300 pounds and we will love it (women and foreigners too). the current mustang is a poor example to follow - too heavy. this camaro must wipe the floor with everything else out there in the 20-30k class, mustang, challenger, and japanese eclipses, wrx's, 350z, etc.
You can't compare the Camaro to the 'Vette, otherwise you'd better be prepared to pay 'Vette prices for the next Camaro :rolleyes:.

Chop 6 - 8 inches off the car?!?! :eek: :shock: And from the rear quarters at that?!!?!? :no: Step away from the crack pipe, son!!! :D Dude, seriously, those rear quarters ("hips" shall we call them?;)) are probably one of the sexiest parts of the car by far! :thumb: And if you took away that, where would the trunk and/or rear suspension and/or back seat be?! :confused:

I like your enthusiasm about waxing everything on the roads with the new Camaro, but we've gotta be realistic and accept that the Camaro won't weigh anywhere close to the 'Vette, and especially not for the price we want it to be! Ideally, I'd like it to be ~3400 - 3500 lbs, same as the 4th-gen was, but like Scott mentioned, the new stricter crash test standards are going to make the car heavy ... it's a sad fact :(. Again, not unless you want to pay as much as a 'Vette? :rolleyes:

When deciding on size just don’t forget tall people want to fit in this car too!

You can't compare the Camaro to the 'Vette, otherwise you'd better be prepared to pay 'Vette prices for the next Camaro :rolleyes:.

Chop 6 - 8 inches off the car?!?! :eek: :shock: And from the rear quarters at that?!!?!? :no: Step away from the crack pipe, son!!! :D Dude, seriously, those rear quarters ("hips" shall we call them?;)) are probably one of the sexiest parts of the car by far! :thumb: And if you took away that, where would the trunk and/or rear suspension and/or back seat be?! :confused:

I like your enthusiasm about waxing everything on the roads with the new Camaro, but we've gotta be realistic and accept that the Camaro won't weigh anywhere close to the 'Vette, and especially not for the price we want it to be! Ideally, I'd like it to be ~3400 - 3500 lbs, same as the 4th-gen was, but like Scott mentioned, the new stricter crash test standards are going to make the car heavy ... it's a sad fact :(. Again, not unless you want to pay as much as a 'Vette? :rolleyes:

i'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you and the "crack pipe son" blithering, but you have your opinion and i have mine. if ford, nissan, and mitsubishi can all make affordable sports cars smaller and lighter than the 4th gens and make money on them at reasonable prices there is no way in hell GM should not be able to do the same. the botton line is this car HAS to be smaller and lighter than the past iterations to attract a wider demographic. w eneed to look no further than the gto to see what too much weight does to sales.

3rd gens did sell better than 4th, however no fbod generation has ever surpassed the mustang.

Wrong. The later 2nd Gens outsold M*stangs 2 years IIRC and Camaros did it by themselves 5 years in the Third Gen and outsold the M*stang 8 years with combined sales.

i'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you and the "crack pipe son" blithering, but you have your opinion and i have mine.
That comment wasn't intended to be serious ... only in fun ;).

if ford, nissan, and mitsubishi can all make affordable sports cars smaller and lighter than the 4th gens and make money on them at reasonable prices there is no way in hell GM should not be able to do the same. the botton line is this car HAS to be smaller and lighter than the past iterations to attract a wider demographic. w eneed to look no further than the gto to see what too much weight does to sales.
I hear what you're saying, but I think a BIG problem with the 4th-gen wasn't actually the CAR so much as it was GM not DOING anything with it :rolleyes:. If you look at the "package" that you got with a 4th-gen, it was a helluva great package, just too bad nobody really knew about it, 'cause GM didn't market them all that well :rolleyes:. I read a good magazine comparison a couple years back (probably during '02 model year) that put an LS1 Camaro against other brands' sports coupes (Mustang GT, BMW 3-series, Integra/Civic, Toyota Celica GT, can't remember the others) and the Camaro out-performed pretty much ALL the cars in ALL categories! :bow: (acceleration, braking, handling - only matched or beat by BMW I believe?:think: ).

My point is, the Camaro is in many ways even better "bang for your buck" compared to the Mustang (way more a$$-kicking power) yet the Mustang SELLS. I don't think it had anything to do with a couple hundred pounds difference :no:.

i stand corrected, however - overall sales of mustangs FAR exceeds that of all fbodies combined. smaller, easier to handle size and weight is a principal factor in those higher sales - especially during the 80's and 90's and early 2k's.

GMHTP has the goat at nearly 3900 pounds, and i've seen other sources quote 3800 plus. nonetheless, there is no reason a proposed camaro should not be around 3300 max.

3 rd gens did sell better than 4th, however no fbod generation has ever surpassed the mustang. seems like until the fbod died in 2002, the smaller lighter mustang always had the sales lead. only after the fbod died did ford pork out the new stang with > 3500 pounds.

You should do some research, thirdgens sold FAR more than fourth gens did. In 1984 100k Z28s alone were sold, a record for the brand. 4th gen production only reached 100k TOTAL for a few years.

i'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you and the "crack pipe son" blithering, but you have your opinion and i have mine. if ford, nissan, and mitsubishi can all make affordable sports cars smaller and lighter than the 4th gens and make money on them at reasonable prices there is no way in hell GM should not be able to do the same. the botton line is this car HAS to be smaller and lighter than the past iterations to attract a wider demographic. w eneed to look no further than the gto to see what too much weight does to sales.


a couple of things.....I'm not so sure that weight had a lot to do with 4th gen sales....

.in fact, it could be argued that the 4th gen Fcar was a success....esp. the first couple of years. (add up Firebird and Camaro sales from 1993 thru 1996)

Here's a tidbit: Camaro sales from 1967 thru 2002 captured the same percentage to total passenger car market share over the 35 year history. That seems hard to believe....until you look at the passenger car market which was decimated by trucks and SUVs....

..I think the biggest detriment to the 4th gen was the lack of styling changes......same car for 10 years in a segment where Styling is the number one reason for purchase. (yup....screamed my lungs out to get funding....never happened!)

The car, as I said, will be marginally smaller than a Mustang.....but it must be able to accomodate tall people....(ask Stars1010!)

As to making money.......don't go there......it is not as simple as you think. Suffice it to say that it will be profitable.

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?

If it can do all of that, then as long as it isn't 4000 pounds we would be good to go Scott.

I'm already expecting 3600-3800lbs. But I don't care as long as you don't feel the weight, since as Scotty said, it WILL have great performance, comfort, fuel economy and safety.
But the BIG questions remains, will it have a Navigation System??:D

..... i'm not expecting the same weight at all, but within 100 or 150 pounds is acceptable........

Do you really think that's realistic?? :confused:

I'm thinking you'll be VERY dissapointed!!

I am also thinking something north of 3600lbs. For a Z28, I assume that we will see SOME light weight items, but they will be offset by larger wheels and brakes, and other suspension parts.

Weight is of huge importance with regard to how a car “feels.” I have a hard time believing that a 2 ton Camaro could feel “nimble.”

I would suppose it’s a little late, since the 5th gen will need to use the Zeta’s rear suspension, but (and feel free to call me proto-human) I would prefer a lighter and less complex live rear axle design underneath the next Camaro. I know the automotive press would have a field day with that little omission…Heaven forbid.

However, Scott’s back is to the wall. He literally has to please as many people as can be imagined. In the face of current and future (2010 rollover standards come to mind) federal safety standards, pleasing us all won’t be easy.

the market will be looking for smaller, more nimble vehicles in sports coupes. matter of fact, i would welcome back seats being deleted from the design in order to save weight and size.

Then its really not a "Camaro" (ponycar) anymore...but a true "sports car"; i.e. two seater! That base is covered by the Vette and now Solstice. Ponycars are smallish 4 psgr. coupes with great performance. I agree with the weight issue, but performance, looks, affordability, and usability (carry 4, useful trunk, and easy egress) are whats important to me, respectively. My
'01 does feel heavy, (or solid and well built) but it runs like a scalded cat, and is relatively economical (20 mpg combined), and fairly functional. So if they can do a 5th gen that is an improvement on the performance (speed and mpg) and much more user friendly, then the weight is a moot point.

Sure sounds like folks are being conditioned to expect a heavy car. My guestimation is closer to 3800 lbs.

Porker....not as porky as the Challenger perhaps, but still a porker.

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?

Yes, because if it was lighter is would have...

>Better than best in class acceleration, and would be easier on the driveline doing it.
>Better than best in class on a road course and autoX, and easier to throw around while doing it.
>Better on fuel economy, and let me tell ya, one only has to look at world politics to know where gas prices are going.
>Driver comfort is a very subjective measurement, at best. Virtually any car can claim that (regardless of weight).
>Crash worthiness....almost certainly the prime culprit in why the car will be a porker. Guess it matters a great deal, but I personally don't remember seeing anybody buy a Mustang or F-body to get a high crashworthiness.

Frankly the average car buyer doesn't give a hoot about weight of the car. Show me one real world example, not some internet enthusiast poll that says weight of the car was/would be a determining factor in the purchase.

Some are way to hung up on weight.

Frankly the average car buyer doesn't give a hoot about weight of the car. Show me one real world example, not some internet enthusiast poll that says weight of the car was/would be a determining factor in the purchase.

Some are way to hung up on weight.
I agree on that some of us are hung up on weight (including myself), and that the average car buyer doesn't give a hoot about the weight of the car. One must ask if the average Camaro buyer is the same as the average car buyer, but it is also likely that the average Camaro buyer probably doesn't care much about weight either.

That said - I'm an enthusiast (don't pretend to be anything else) and I do care. A lot. As such, my opinions/comments are formed from an enthusiast's perspective, with my own personal preferences and biases.

Given that - I stand by my comments. And btw, weight was one of the main reasons I never looked seriously at the GTO. There is one one example. :)

Bob

I agree on that some of us are hung up on weight (including myself), and that the average car buyer doesn't give a hoot about the weight of the car. One must ask if the average Camaro buyer is the same as the average car buyer, but it is also likely that the average Camaro buyer probably doesn't care much about weight either.

That said - I'm an enthusiast (don't pretend to be anything else) and I do care. A lot. As such, my opinions/comments are formed from an enthusiast's perspective, with my own personal preferences and biases.

Given that - I stand by my comments. And btw, weight was one of the main reasons I never looked seriously at the GTO. There is one one example. :)

Bob

did you ever test drive a GTO? i have, and i have talked to people that own one, along with owning a 4th gen fbody.. i can speak from experience.. it's unanimous.. the GTO feels like it handles better than a 4th gen despite it's weighing more

I'm probably your average Camaro buyer. Will probably never see strip action, possibly few mods but nothing major. Could care less about weight.

And the GTO didn't /not/ sell because of weight, and thats if you can even make the argument that it did /not/ sell in the first place? From most of what I've seen it hit projections, correct me if I'm wrong?

As long as it accelerates well, and I can throw it thru the twisties well, I'll be happy :)

But first... I need to buy it ;)

I own an 04 GTO. It handles just as well as a my buddy's 2000 transam. I couldn't tell the difference in handling other than the GTO was much more comfortable and rode nicer.

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?

That's what I've been saying for weeks now to all the "I won't buy it if it is over 3600lbs" crowd. People aren't being realistic about what they can get for a Camaro price.

Man I love this new, more open Scott, you're helping settle a lot of debates, or at least frame them in the correct context :D

>Crash worthiness....almost certainly the prime culprit in why the car will be a porker. Guess it matters a great deal, but I personally don't remember seeing anybody buy a Mustang or F-body to get a high crashworthiness.

i tell ya, i'm a single 24 year old guy here, and even i care about crash worthiness.. lets see, save a couple hundred pounds and take a chance with my life? or put that weight on the car along with a knowledge that if i do crash, i'll come out of it with as few injuries as possible

Sure sounds like folks are being conditioned to expect a heavy car. My guestimation is closer to 3800 lbs.

Porker....not as porky as the Challenger perhaps, but still a porker.



Yes, because if it was lighter is would have...

>Better than best in class acceleration, and would be easier on the driveline doing it.
>Better than best in class on a road course and autoX, and easier to throw around while doing it.
>Better on fuel economy, and let me tell ya, one only has to look at world politics to know where gas prices are going.
>Driver comfort is a very subjective measurement, at best. Virtually any car can claim that (regardless of weight).
>Crash worthiness....almost certainly the prime culprit in why the car will be a porker. Guess it matters a great deal, but I personally don't remember seeing anybody buy a Mustang or F-body to get a high crashworthiness.


I stand with Bob.

The car, as I said, will be marginally smaller than a Mustang.....but it must be able to accomodate tall people....(ask Stars1010!)



:bow: :D :metal: :thumb: :usa: :cz28: :yes:

I'm happy now!

In other words boy's don't expect a 3300lb Camaro, that would be absurd. I expect around 3600lb when it's all said and done.

I agree on that. correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't the camaro a muscle car?? all muscle car are heavy. if you want a lighter car you should buy a sports car like the vette. i think they are on different categories. Dont get me wrong a 3200-3300lb camaro would be a dream but by doing that it would be like putting that it would be like putting the camaro to compete with the base model corvette. it just my opinion.... hope to be wrong

[QUOTE=foxbat] if ford, nissan, and mitsubishi can all make affordable sports cars smaller and lighter than the 4th gens [QUOTE]

Go look up what the new Eclipse (which shares its platform with a sedan and an SUV) and what the 350 Z (which also shares its platform with sedans and an SUV) weigh. I think you will be surprised. 350Z is heavier than a Vette.

a couple of things.....I'm not so sure that weight had a lot to do with 4th gen sales....

...I think the biggest detriment to the 4th gen was the lack of styling changes......same car for 10 years in a segment where Styling is the number one reason for purchase. (yup....screamed my lungs out to get funding....never happened!)




Scott, I think you're on to something.

In addition, it's not the weight, it was two things IMHO:
1) the hump in the floor for the cat that GM wouldn't give you funding to remove even after you moved the cat out of that space.
2) the fact that you can't see the nose of the car makes it a little intimidating to drive, and probably killed a good number of sales - though I feel a lot more in control in a 4th gen than in an SN95 stang, to the avg joe an SN95 just looked easier to drive. (of course, the design of the 4th gen makes it a source of pride when you master the art of just knowing where the nose is, but that doesn't really appeal to the masses).

Most people have no idea how much their car weighs. Try asking 5 people at work today. I bet not one of them knows.

Put me in the "don't care about weight" category. In fact, I've done nothing but make my 4th Gen heavier, and I like it better than when it was stock. SFCs, STB, big heavy stereo, heck my Lloyds floormats and cargo area mats weigh at least 15 lbs! And it will get heavier still if I ever get around to ripping out the interior again and installing the Dynamat.

I am hung up on weight too.

But I want sub 3500....... I think 3400 is realistic.

I also drive a sub 2800 lb car, I am 6 ft 3, 200 lbs, my wife is 6 ft 1 and slim, and we have a 5 year old, and a baby due in April......

If the camaro is 4500 lbs, manages to be a 5 star in several categories, then then even matches the best of the competition in the other categories AND can fit my family in it for a (slightly tight) cruise to granda's house a couple times a month, then I am all over it.

If not, I'll be getting another Mustang or a BMW 330 coupe.

If my wife and kids can't fit, it's no use to me. I can't have 3 cars anymore, just not realistic, and should not be necesary.

the botton line is this car HAS to be smaller and lighter than the past iterations to attract a wider demographic..

I would argue that the car needs to seat 4 adults if GM truly wants to sell 150k copies of it. You'll need to sell to baby-boomers, who need the practicality a little more. Not to mention many baby-boomers are a little larger, i.e. wider, than they were when they were in their 20's.

I hear what you are saying about making the car lightweight; but, frankly, cars are getting heavier, not because of sloppy design or poor material choices, but due to things like airbags, side-impact beams, etc. - things that FMVSS requires. As Scott has said, you can reduce weight by using more "exotic" materials, but exotic=expensive. Would it make sense to have an ultra-lightweight Camaro? Only if there was enough price differential between it and a base 'Vette...




w eneed to look no further than the gto to see what too much weight does to sales.

Weight wasn't the reason that the '04 GTO didn't sell to expectations... combine a terrible launch, piss-poor marketing, greedy dealers, and public knowledge of the '05 improvements. The car is now selling to plan, despite no marketing to speak of.

A couple things-

If you go about it technically the F-Body has never been a "light" car. 2nd Gens weighed in at 3610lbs, 4th Gens varied, hell the fully loaded 4th gen Trans AMs were not far off of 3800lbs!

I think as long as its lighter than the Challenger it should be good.


Camaros outsold the Mustang II's thru the years they were around.
In fact the highest ever production year of the Camaro is 1979- 282,571 total Camaros were sold.

a couple of things.....I'm not so sure that weight had a lot to do with 4th gen sales....

.....

..I think the biggest detriment to the 4th gen was the lack of styling changes......same car for 10 years in a segment where Styling is the number one reason for purchase. (yup....screamed my lungs out to get funding....never happened!)

:alert: Yes!!

Everybody knows that this is the truth-- I love the F-bod, but why the hell would ANYONE blame such a minor detail like weight-- (yes-- I said minor) on the demise of the Camaro-- I mean...c'mon!

Case in point: if you didn't notice that the 2002 model looked almost exactly like the 1993 model, you're hopelessly biased towards this car, and have no objective credibility when it comes to understanding or arguing about why the car died... or, in my humble opinion, what the new generation should be.

Think about it--here is an inside man telling you what everybody already knows, yet some of you STILL think an obscure measurement like weight killed off the car.(Remember-- we're talking general buying public, not fanatics)

The car looked stale. VERY STALE. Do we love it? Hell yes. But why would a 29-year-old woman who's looking for a sporty alternative to an import buy something that looks exactly like it did when she was in frickin high-school.

The GTO is itself one of the blandest cars I've seen/not seen (I never even notice them when they show up-- The car is nice, but looks like every other Ponti out there-- again... weight is NOT the problem)

What it is is an example of GM's institutional incompetence... (A factor that we all pray is changing for the better!)


The car, as I said, will be marginally smaller than a Mustang.....but it must be able to accomodate tall people....(ask Stars1010!)

As to making money.......don't go there......it is not as simple as you think. Suffice it to say that it will be profitable.

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?

ANSWER: Weight is irrelevant!

That above car would be THE ANSWER TO OUR PRAYERS!!!


Fbodfather seems to know exactly what honest, objective customers want in this car--


It looks badass
It's not too expensive
It will be fast
It will handle well
It will be safe
It will not gulp gas
IT WILL MAKE THE MUSTANG THE ALTERNATIVE PONYCAR!!!!


Banter about pointless dreams of a supercar-caliber Camaro all day if you will. Maybe they'll make one one day and charge $70,000 for it. The rest of us will love the $27,000 car from the start, and mod it to perfection from there.

Yes, as an enthusiast myself I know how very important weight is to the dynamics of a car-- owning an 01 Corvette after my 98 Camaro taught me all about that... but be rational with your expectations, and listen to what fbodfather is saying.

It doesn't matter what the car weighs if it's tuned to it's weight and will splatter the relevant competition. Besides-- the aftermarket world will happily shave off 500 lbs for you, if you have the wallet to make it happen.

This Camaro fan is excited about what he's hearing from the people in charge of this thing (aside from the disturbingly familiar nature of Lutz's bone-headed "priorities" comment)

I believe that we have a car coming that will again give us absolute right to claim as superior to any Ford, Dodge, or import on the road.

Cheers-- no flames implied-- and long live the Camaro--

:D

Good Post. :bow:

As I stated earlier, I have my own preferences and biases. Because they may or may not agree with yours, yours, or yours, doesn't make my preferences right or wrong - it simply makes them mine. I care about weight. The majority of folks don't. That's fine be me, as I have no issues being in the minority, and don't need a bunch of folks coming on here and agreeing with me so that I'll feel big or important or vindicated or whatever.

To hit a few specifics....

did you ever test drive a GTO? i have, and i have talked to people that own one, along with owning a 4th gen fbody.. i can speak from experience.. it's unanimous.. the GTO feels like it handles better than a 4th gen despite it's weighing more
Yes I have (an 04 M6). It is a very nice car that handles well. But it is still a porker - much like my former 04 Cobra was a porker (though I knew how to easily cut weight out of that car). I'm sure many feel it handles better than the 4th Gen F-body, and it may indeed do so. However, a famous racer once said "the seat of the pants is the world's biggest liar". I tend to agree.

i tell ya, i'm a single 24 year old guy here, and even i care about crash worthiness.. lets see, save a couple hundred pounds and take a chance with my life? or put that weight on the car along with a knowledge that if i do crash, i'll come out of it with as few injuries as possible
I like to be safe too. Funny thing, I didn't feel unsafe in my 99 Cobra. Perhaps I was and just didn't know it. And it would be really interesting to hear the specifics of what it is with the 2009 Camaro that makes it so much safer than earlier cars - I certainly don't know, nor do I pretend to know.

Finally, if you really want to be safe, go by a Volvo.

...If you go about it technically the F-Body has never been a "light" car. 2nd Gens weighed in at 3610lbs, 4th Gens varied, hell the fully loaded 4th gen Trans AMs were not far off of 3800lbs! ...
I'm thinking not. My fully-loaded 99 T/A weighed 3660 lbs....with me. Take away my 185 then explain how some T/As weighed 300+ lbs more than others.

Final thought...man wasn't the 03/04 Cobra absolutely PLASTERED in some circles (including here) due to its weight?

My how things change with the lead is on the other foot.

To each their own....it matters to me. If it doesn't matter to you, ok. :)

Bob

PS....Charlie and I agree....wow! ;)

The car, as I said, will be marginally smaller than a Mustang.....but it must be able to accomodate tall people....(ask Stars1010!)


Will it also accomodate a 5'4" person with rather short legs? I only ask because that's the single reason why I don't right now have a Camaro. Four years ago I was drooling over a new 2001 navy blue base Z28 that could have been mine for just over 20K, until I sat in it and could not get a comfortable view for the life of me.

Thanks in advance.

I also didn't look at the GTO due to it's weight. For the amount of HP the LS2, or LS1 puts out in those cars, the 1/4 times are not so impressive. Much of that can be directly related to weight. Read some of the car reviews, and when handling comes into play, the weight of the GTO is mentioned many, many times.

No matter how well you band-aid weight with stiffer sway bars, stiffer springs/shocks, wider tires... it is still a bandaid. More weight puts more stress on everything. Having a 300-400 lb heavier GTO than my current Camaro just wasn't going to excite me. I think the 4th gen was already a little heavy, but not terrible. It could have been a lot worse. For me to really get excited about a car that I'm going to drive hard, sub 3500 lbs is almost required. Will I buy the next Camaro? I very well might, but if it's 3600+ lbs, then I will certainly feel like I took a step backwards in the fundimental aspects of the Camaro. The extra HP, and IRS will help I suppose, but weight is not something to take lightly.

One thing I really want in the Camaro is the ability to at least have a 275 series tire fit in the wheel well. Up to a 295 would be preferrable. That's another reason I didn't care for the GTO. It's tough to get a nice tire to fit under there.

Dan

IF this car comes in around the GTOs weight... I think most people will still be pleased, if not a wishing for a little less mass. People who are really holding out for a 3300 lb Camaro (not a chance in hell) will be walking away sorely disapointed. 3600-3700 lbs is my guess where this car will weigh in (with basic options). I'd prefer lighter but GM has to make this car affordable.

But, on the flip side to say weight is irrelavent as a few here keep suggesting is flatly ridiculous and naieve. If the car is heavy like the Challenger it WILL be thirsty and nothing short of 24th century engineering and flux-capacitors are going to hide that bulk when it comes to handling and fuel economy. GM makes great V8 powertains - the best IMO when you consider, cost, power, efficiency and total powertrain weight... but even GM cannot change the laws of physics. A heavy car requires more gas to accelarate... even in low speed stop-go driving where most energy is ultimately wasted and it will use more gas.

Handling, accelaration/breaking and fuel economy are all directly proportional to weight. END OF STORY!! So stop pretending weight doesn't matter because it's a crock to say so.

Handling, accelaration/breaking and fuel economy are all directly proportional to weight. END OF STORY!! So stop pretending weight doesn't matter because it's a crock to say so.

Okay, how about I clarify a bit: I don't think weight matters within the context of how much the next Camaro is really going to weigh. I think a 3300lb production Camaro is a pipe dream that will never happen, like my current 3700ish lb Camaro, and will have no problem if the new one comes in at the upper limit of what I predict it will weigh (a shade under 4000lbs is my bet, on the high side, my low side bet = same as 4th gen).


Yes, I've driven light cars (like an RX7 w/ more rwhp than my Z28) and they do feel more go-kart like, and yes it's fun. But I have just as much fun in my heavy cars with sporting ablities (long wheel base 7 series, big heavy 4th gen Camaro). And I enjoy the more solid, stable feel that comes with weight, and the resistance to hydroplaning. Should they make it weigh what a Bentley Flying Spur weighs? No, that's probably too much weight for a Camaro. But I'd still enjoy a Bentley Flying Spur, weight be damned :)

In any event, it's a Camaro. It must be cheaper (average price) than a Corvette, and seat twice as many people. With basically the same drivetrain in Z28 form. So something's got to give - and expensive weight saving methods are on the chopping block.

I know Scott probably can't comment on this, but I would hope that the target is somewhere close to the GTO's weight. Sure, I would love a sub-3500 car too, but to stuff all the necessary gear in there, it's not going to be possible.

This is one of those times that you have to look around at other late-model cars of the same type. Now, maybe the Mustang is a better comparison since it comes in at ~3500 now. However, how much will a 2009 Mustang weigh? That might be the better question, and I would bet that it would be at least the target weight of a 2009 Camaro.

Am I getting warm Scott? C'mon, spill... ;)

But I have just as much fun in my heavy cars with sporting ablities (long wheel base 7 series, big heavy 4th gen Camaro). And I enjoy the more solid, stable feel that comes with weight, and the resistance to hydroplaning.

See - that's my point... 4th gens are not that heavy unless you really go all out with a vert that was loaded with every power and convenience option as well as the SS bits and body extensions. A 98 Z28 with hardtop, M6 and just the basic power options without all the othe fluff could come in a under 3600lbs. The structure and engineering of the 5th gen is going to be much better than the 4th gen (which was at heart, decades old anyway); in light of that, an excessively heavy 5th gen IMO would be >3700lbs... you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

As for hydroplaning... it can still happen and tire choice is more critical... a heavy car (esp. with summer tires) can still hydroplane and more mass means more momentum and more time to slow down / more chance of a harder impact if you hit something :).

My argument was directed against those who seem to care only about a monster motor - even if it's bolted to a solid block of iron on wheels (ok exageration, but it serves it's purpose :)).

People do tickle me. Let's give it heads up display, an ejection seat and sidewinder missles while we are at it. With all due respect, unlike hamburger, the lighter the car, the more it costs, with size being equal. The lighter you try to make it, you will have to compromise on either price or size. The Camaro is NOT a sports car. If that is what you want, Chevy's got it covered in spades, its called the Corvette. The Camaro is a sporty, affordable four seat coupe that can be a firebreather if you check the right boxes on the order sheet. I just don't think most people want a Camaro that ends up being not a Camaro. Scott S. is exactly right, it needs to offer great performance and most of all style to a large number of people. The third gens sold like hot cakes despite anemic engines compared to those of today and not the best structural integrity. You know why? They were gorgeous, plain and simple. And so is the concept. Change nothing about the dimensions. Give it enough power and a good suspension and it will feel nimble. My 85 IROC is 3500 lbs and it handles like it is on rails. With only 215 HP it feels like it has a lot more thanks to a good torque curve, transmission, gearing and suspension. It's quite nimble.

The new car needs to stay true to the Camaro history. And thank goodness the powers that be seem to know that judging by the concept. Don't pick it to death guys, just beg them to build it. With 400hp and the Zeta architecture it will be killer and it will sell well. The GTO would be doing well right now if it didn't look like a two door Taurus. And the SSR might be if it were 20 grand less. The masses want affordable, STYLISH performance, and they want This Camaro. It is bad to the bone and will be whether it weighs 3200 or 3700.;)

Wow, had to back up and read the post by Scott S. If those are the targets that GM has for this car, all those best in class stats and five star crash worthiness. If it accelarates, handles, gets better gas mileage, is comfortable, and gets five stars in a crash test, I don't care if it weighs 5000 lbs. You can sign me up and I gaurantee there will be more customers than cars for a long time. By the way, the GT500 convertible is supposed to weigh well over 4000 lbs. Quit worrying about the weight guys, we've got a new Camaro coming! I'll bet it will be the best one yet!

>Better than best in class acceleration, and would be easier on the driveline doing it.
>Better than best in class on a road course and autoX, and easier to throw around while doing it.
>Better on fuel economy, and let me tell ya, one only has to look at world politics to know where gas prices are going.
>Driver comfort is a very subjective measurement, at best. Virtually any car can claim that (regardless of weight).
>Crash worthiness....almost certainly the prime culprit in why the car will be a porker. Guess it matters a great deal, but I personally don't remember seeing anybody buy a Mustang or F-body to get a high crashworthiness.

you cant be better than best. if you are, guess what you are? BEST...:rolleyes:

Im sure GM is going to do everything they can to get the weight down but there is only so much they can do and still keep it in the target market.

Maybe they can use more exotic materials on the top model (refraining from entering in my position on the z28 ss battle to avoid hijacking)

As for hydroplaning... it can still happen and tire choice is more critical... a heavy car (esp. with summer tires) can still hydroplane and more mass means more momentum and more time to slow down / more chance of a harder impact if you hit something :).

My argument was directed against those who seem to care only about a monster motor - even if it's bolted to a solid block of iron on wheels (ok exageration, but it serves it's purpose :)).

Actually, Summer tires are generally better in the rain - they're designed for optimal traction on dry and wet roads in warm temperatures. Like the Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D3. All seasons on the other hand are compromised in that they try to handle dry wet in hot and cold temps, and a little bit of snow too. Now there are some summer tires that are more oriented for dry weather only, but they are the more extreme ones and closer to a drag radial, autoX or road course tire. The heavier the car and the narrower the tires the less likely it is to hydroplane. Note that fully loaded 18 wheelers don't have much of a hydroplaning problem. But I digress....


I agree with the general point that if the car gets too heavy, it's not really a pony car anymore, it's more of a muscle car like a Pontiac 2+2, or a fast luxury car, like a Bentley Continental GT or an S-Class coupe (CL55 or CL65). And it can't get too heavy or GM Powertrain doesn't have a motor that will give it the kind of mustang smacking performance Scott is hinting at. But to smack the Stang, there's no need for it to weigh less than 3500lbs, and there's no way it's going to be 3300 or 3100.

I think so long as it's 4th gen weight, then it's fine, and it could even creep up a little bit. I guess my line in the sand is around 3999lbs. But even if it broke that, so long as it meets all the measures Scott laid out earlier in the thread, it will be fine and dandy with me.

you cant be better than best. if you are, guess what you are? BEST...:rolleyes:
I'm sorry my little play on words was lost on you. Please forgive me and continue with your diatribe.

Im sure GM is going to do everything they can to get the weight down but there is only so much they can do and still keep it in the target market.
I'm sure you're right. Am I thus not allowed to prefer something with less weight? Or perhaps different wheels? Maybe a different interior?

Maybe they can use more exotic materials on the top model (refraining from entering in my position on the z28 ss battle to avoid hijacking)
I doubt it. In the end, we'll just have to wait and see. I bet most folks will be pleased. Some will not.

clearly this discussion is split between two distinct groups: the traditionalists who care little about weight/physics, and the enthusisats who see the value in slimming things down.

from what scott is alluding to, the car will be heavier than 3300-3400. while i certainly do not speak for all, if the car ends up with a weight near 3700-3900 pounds count me out. weight and size is and has always been the enemy of high performance vehicles; regardless of classification (sports/drag/muscle/auto-x).

it's time for a change in the way this car has been made for decades: chevy has clean slate - take a chance at making this a hit - not just for the average traditionalist, but the thousands of enthusiasts out there. less is more.

When deciding on size just don’t forget tall people want to fit in this car too!

Amen brother! Preach the word!!!! :bow:

(I'm 6'8" btw)

it's time for a change in the way this car has been made for decades: chevy has clean slate - take a chance at making this a hit - not just for the average traditionalist, but the thousands of enthusiasts out there. less is more.

Again, you are correct that one way to improve all aspects of performance is to add lightness. But....This isn't the rebirth of the Lotus Elan, it's the next Camaro.

How do you propose GM build something that is as light as a Solstice or a Saturn Sky, and starts at the same price, but oh yeah also seats 4, has more cargo space, and supports a 400hp+ V8?

If you are going to do a complete break with tradition and build an MR2, Fiero, Elan, Elise, Miata, RX7, or whatever lightweight sports car, it doesn't makes sense to do so under the Camaro banner, because of the history of the name. And I really don't see there being a business case for such a thing when GM already has the Solstice, the Sky, and the Corvette in the lightweight category.

As a 4 time 3rd gen owner and a 1 time 2nd gen owner, this is how I see it.

If the new Camaro weighs 3600-3700lbs I would have no problem with it.
I am assuming that with the weight comes class leading structural rigidity.
Structural rigidity is very important because it brings refinement, quietness, handling and the ability to handle high HP.
If GM gives the car a strong structure then softer springs can be used.
This will benefit ride quality.
When stiffer springs are used on the performance models then there will be less harshness and the car won't turn into a creaking hulk after 5,000 miles
like all of my 3rd gens did.
A strong structure, especially in the cowl area will help with flex issues on hard launches.

I don't really see how the weight of an Asian performance coupe can be used as a comparison since it has a low torque 4 or 6 cylinder. The structure does not need to be designed to handle the loads of a high torque V-8 engine.

For those of you who want a low weight Camaro, you probably don't want a modern Camaro. You are looking for a platform to modify. The quality of the car is immaterial. It is just something for you to have fun with and make faster.

I want the next Camaro to be more refined, to have more head and legroom,
better chassis and structure, better appointments and a better image. If it ends up weighing 3600lbs+ with an IRS and aluminum LSX then so be it.
What that weight tells me is that it will be a well built, long lasting,enjoyable car to own.
And an enjoyable ownership experience is what it is all about.

If it is .2 seconds slower in the quarter than big deal. My GTO is a few tenths slower than the 4th gen. My GTO is also 4 times the car. It is the best car I have ever owned period. And I've owned a lot of Camaros.

If Chevy designs the new Camaro for the the 5-10% of guys who want to magazine race, then the car will be a failure. It will turn into another 4th gen that is 193" long and has space to comfortably fit 1 person.

Scott and his group are on the right track. They have designed a Mercedes CLK length vehicle that will move this car to the next level.

People act like this is getting away from the "Camaro of old", but didn't someone have some specs on what the 67-69's weighed? And didn't those actually weigh more than a 4th gen? Fast-forward to 2009 when front/side/head air bags will be required. Most likely On-star will be standard equipment, plus up to date crash standards... It's going to be heavier.

I don't see it as two camps with differing opinions, I see it as one camp who realizes you can't cram all these required items in there along with some modern convenience features and get a 3000lb. car and the other who wants a stripper drag car. All I can say to the latter is, I hope there's a 1LE option and you can remove the back seat, air bags, spare, sound deadener, etc. and have your stripper.

In order to sell to the masses, you're going to have to have XM Satellite radio, probably MP3 capability, yes Onstar too. You know why? Because come 2009, the competitor is going to have them in theirs. People that want the all out stripper are going to have to be handy with a wrench (and possibly a soldering iron and computer too).

I don't want a 4000lb. Camaro either, but to make a 2009 Camaro, you're going to have to have 2009's gear in it. Simply put, it's going to get heavier.

The sad thing is, it's not really up for debate. Whatever needs to be in the car will be in it, regardless of weight. I'm fairly confident that Scott and co. will do whatever they can to keep the bloat out, but it's still going to get heavier. What we should be talking about is how to make it "not so heavy" rather than "it needs to be lighter than this or that".

I would actually be more concerned with weight distribution rather than just weight. Anyone care to comment about that?

I think the point is being missed here. I am sure we would all like the lightest car possible. Crashworthiness was about last on my considerations for purchase of my 99. The important thing is that the Feds won't let the car on the road if it doesn't meet the standard. As they increase the standard, there is nothing that can be done about increased weight other than more expensive materials. I just hope they do the best job possible under the constraints that they have.

A few points.
-The current 06 mustang only gets 4 out of 5 stars for side impact saftey, and it still makes the sales numbers.
-Side curtains and all that heavy stuff could be options. Those that don't want weight probably won't care about saftey and those that care about saftey can option their car with side curtains.
-how did you add weight to the 4th gen over the 3rd while offering no extra options and using plastic panels. Whatever you did, stop!
-tube framing like a roll cage only hidden in the frame may add 150lbs but is certified for like 10sec passes at 150mph. It probably holds up fairly well in a 40mph crash too.
-is the weight really 'saftey' bars and stuff or does a lot of it come from over alsheet metal surface area of the car which is much larger then the 4th gen.

clearly this discussion is split between two distinct groups: the traditionalists who care little about weight/physics, and the enthusisats who see the value in slimming things down.



Dude-- pay attention-- EVERYONE here sees the value in weight reduction-- not just you. Those, including me, who argue that it isn't the primary concern do so not because we're too stupid to understand common sense, as you implicitly imply, but because IT ISN'T THE PRIMARY CONCERN FOR THE CAR. The things that matter MOST about the car are looks and OVERALL performance.

Keep beating your head against the "weight means everything" wall, man-- it's not going to make the reality of the required cost/manufacturing realities go away.

You're more than welcome to pass on the car if it weighs more than you want it to. I doubt it will be the ponderous whale you and a few others dread, but it's never going to be a featherweight-- Even my Corvette was considered a porker in some elitist sportscar circles-- that didn't mean that the 404RWHP didn't wax their ass everytime the quarter mile passed...

Think about that, and relax a little bro-- we're getting our car back-- we are all happy.... or at least we all should be--


Cheers

4th gen had a stiffer floorpan/structure than the 3rd gen. That is hwere the weight came from.

Rollcage will raise center of gravity and hurt handling, it will also add weight, complexity, cost and result in a loss of headroom.

Perhaps Chevy could make a aluminum hood and trunk an extra cost option.
Maybe even an aluminum roof like Mitsu did in the EVO MR.

Since I always pipe in when weight is mentioned, I'll just say what I said on Lutz' blog:
At 3200 lb. or less, I will DEFINITELY buy one.
At 3300-3400 lb., I *might* buy one.
At 3500 lb. or more, I WILL NOT buy one.

I'm not trying in any way to say what the market will do, just what *I* will do.

OK, GM, now surprise the hell out of me and make me buy this car!

Oh, I forgot to mention, just my opinion but we are enthusiasts here. Weight will not matter at all to 95% of buyers. Most won't even think about it. And I for one will enjoy smoking my share of 3400 lb, 300 hp Mustangs with my 3700 lb, 400 hp Camaro. ;)

Just don't think you'll be able to keep up with a 2300 lb., 245hp 240Z at the road course:)

I see a BIG opportunity to turn the tables on the Mustang, which used to be ~200 lb. lighter than the F-body. Let them have their 2-door Lincoln, give us a REAL pony car, not a de-contented 2-door Cadillac.

Now that just makes no sense. You won't buy a car based on weight? What, LOL?! And at only 3,500lbs?! Let me tell you that your opinion will change because cars are only gonna get heavier and 3,600lbs today is light for a car like this. No matter how much the car weighs, I'm willing to bet it will be class leading in every performance category.

I'm going to try and stick up for Scott and GM because for Camaro to be successful, which is what we inevitably want, because we are enthusiasts, it needs to--on some levels-- perform like a woman or elderly couple would like. I'm sure it's performance will set industry standards... I have no doubt. However, we, as enthusiasts are probably 99% more likely to modify our cars to suit our tastes. I like power--I'll probably mod there first. If weight is such a big deal, you buy the lighter weight parts and make YOUR Camaro as light as you want. Lighter is not necessarily better-look at the Veyron, to go as fast as it does, it weighs in over 4k. This is even with the use of exotic light weight materials.

I believe the Camaro will weigh in somewhere between 3600 and 3800.

Scott, as long as it's the best performer, it'll be in the garage ;).

The overweight, overwrought Veyron won't TOUCH a McLaren F1 at any road course.

Believe me, I'm not about to buy an overweight Fbody and spend $thousands to shave off tens of pounds. If it's heavy, I'm not buying, PERIOD. I'd *like* to buy a new car, but if no one builds what I want, I'm better off turboing a 240SX to the tune of 300hp or so.

Cars CAN be made lighter weight without adding cost. If it's made a DESIGN PRIORITY. GM *COULD* make a 3200-3300 lb. new Camaro, they definitely have the engineering talent (though I guess they did just fire some of their engineering talent...).

But of course with the masses falling over themselves insisting it *should* weigh 3600 or more, maybe they won't even try.

A LIGHTER Camaro is a BETTER Camaro.

I'm sure no one will argue that a lighter Camaro is better. I hope you and others would still be willing to pay alot more for this light Camaro though.

Again, lighter weight doesn't HAVE to imply high cost!

In fact, the general rule is that HEAVY cars cost MORE!

GOOD DESIGN is how you get reasonable weight at reasonable cost.

Hey foxbat, no offense but maybe you should count yourself out. Maybe you should look at a Solsice or Miata or an old Vega or a Fiero because it sure doesn't seem like you want a Camaro. You just might want to get used to looking at those badass fifth gen taillights.

Can't speak for foxbat, but I'm not counting myself out until I see the actual as-tested curb weight figures:)

Anyway, I fail to see how a 3200-3300 lb. modern V8 pony car would be inconsistent with Camaro ideals. Maybe some of you other guys should be looking at GTOs or CTS-V Cadillacs...

Again, lighter weight doesn't HAVE to imply high cost!

In fact, the general rule is that HEAVY cars cost MORE!

GOOD DESIGN is how you get reasonable weight at reasonable cost.


Okay, what 400hp, 4-seat, sub $30K, sub 3500 pound cars are being produced right now?

How do you think they should go about that with IRS and having to comply with new standards?

Okay, how about I clarify a bit: I don't think weight matters within the context of how much the next Camaro is really going to weigh. I think a 3300lb production Camaro is a pipe dream that will never happen, like my current 3700ish lb Camaro, and will have no problem if the new one comes in at the upper limit of what I predict it will weigh (a shade under 4000lbs is my bet, on the high side, my low side bet = same as 4th gen).


Yes, I've driven light cars (like an RX7 w/ more rwhp than my Z28) and they do feel more go-kart like, and yes it's fun. But I have just as much fun in my heavy cars with sporting ablities (long wheel base 7 series, big heavy 4th gen Camaro). And I enjoy the more solid, stable feel that comes with weight, and the resistance to hydroplaning. Should they make it weigh what a Bentley Flying Spur weighs? No, that's probably too much weight for a Camaro. But I'd still enjoy a Bentley Flying Spur, weight be damned :)

In any event, it's a Camaro. It must be cheaper (average price) than a Corvette, and seat twice as many people. With basically the same drivetrain in Z28 form. So something's got to give - and expensive weight saving methods are on the chopping block.

That's one of the best posts I've read on the forum. :bow:

Oh, what if GM made a normal weight Camaro... and a stripped Track version? That would appease the interests of the masses.

Can't speak for foxbat, but I'm not counting myself out until I see the actual as-tested curb weight figures:)

Anyway, I fail to see how a 3200-3300 lb. modern V8 pony car would be inconsistent with Camaro ideals. Maybe some of you other guys should be looking at GTOs or CTS-V Cadillacs...


Don't you find it ironic that you won't buy a Camaro weighing over 3400 lbs yet you OWN a porker of a 4th gen? :rolleyes: Seems to me like you need to practice what you preach. The camaro isn't a 240z and isn't meant to be.

Okay, what 400hp, 4-seat, sub $30K, sub 3500 pound cars are being produced right now?
None I can think of.
That doesn't anything like prove that it's not plausible. In any case, I don't require 400hp.

How do you think they should go about that with IRS and having to comply with new standards?
IRS does not add much weight. Make an IRS system that's retrofittable to a live-axle car like the 90s Mustang Cobra, give it a grossly overweight DOHC V8 that's bigger than a 460, and you could have weight issues.
Mazda Miata weighs 2450 lb. with IRS and meeting all standards. Add 250 lb for a much more powerful drivetrain, and 500 lb. for a bigger 2+2 platform and you're at 3200 lb. with normal constrution materials and techniques.

Oh, what if GM made a normal weight Camaro... and a stripped Track version? That would appease the interests of the masses.
That concept has pretty much NEVER worked. The basic platform has to be designed with keeping weight in check from the get-go. You can't really "add on" light weight. You'll spend a fortune to save only tens of pounds.

As much as you guys don't want to believe it, it IS possible to build a reasonable-weight V8 2+2. IF the will is there to make it so. I just don't understand why the idea is met with such near-hostility:confused:

I for one hope they don't take the easy way out and give us a 2-door Cadillac. Yes, I know I'm in the minority!

Don't you find it ironic that you won't buy a Camaro weighing over 3400 lbs yet you OWN a porker of a 4th gen? :rolleyes: Seems to me like you need to practice what you preach. The camaro isn't a 240z and isn't meant to be.

To be honest I was hoping to get a coupe and use it as a backup track car and daily driver. Couldn't find a nice used one, though, and the convertible I found was/is in SWEET condition, I had to buy it though I knew it'd never be a track car. Anyway, it wasn't until recently I had a chance to drive an LS1 4th-gen at the track, and that pretty much solidified what I figured all along, i.e., the car's too damn heavy, and the live-axle handling is pretty much unacceptable to me.

I don't see anywhere in any of the numerous posts I've made on Fbody weight where I might be suggesting more of a 240Z than a Camaro for the 5th gen. I wouldn't want it to be. (I did want the 350Z to be, but that's another disappointment:cry: )

3200-3300 lb. V8 2+2 pony car is NOT a 240Z by any stretch!

Cars CAN be made lighter weight without adding cost. If it's made a DESIGN PRIORITY. GM *COULD* make a 3200-3300 lb. new Camaro, they definitely have the engineering talent



Really? On what planet?

I want specifics........

I don't mean to sound trite.....but come on.......if this were the case, we'd have a bunch of light weight cars and trucks running around.

Please....and this goes for several of you.....go back and read my post.

CAFE.......let me say it again for good measure CAFE (slowly now....C o r p o r a t e A v e r a g e F u e l E c o n o m y).........

To say that GM or any other manufacturer builds heavy cars because of (insert theory here) is just preposterous.

Now.......everyone's got a right to their opinion......and they will vote with their wallets.

I know this: It's easy to make a declaration when you have nothing to lose or gain by that declaration......but lemme tell ya something......when YOU are one of the people who have to make some hard decisions knowing that you have to have a workable business case.....and you need to sell volume.....you make decisions that are going to upset a few...but make others very pleased.

You are right in that a few people probably won't buy this car based on weight......and I could probably count them on one or two hands AFTER the car hits the streets..........

Again.....I don't mean to be flaming anyone.......I guess I just read thru some of these threads and shake my head......

Final thought...man wasn't the 03/04 Cobra absolutely PLASTERED in some circles (including here) due to its weight?
Ohhh... much like the new Shelby weighing in at 3800 lbs for the coupe, but the critics are starting to die down, a pre-emmisions Shelby just spun the rollers to the tune of 498 HP and somebody with the usual basic bolt ons spun one to 638 HP.

Heh, HP = the great equalizer, get more of it and the weight will disappear!

Really? On what planet?
Earth.

I want specifics........
Specifically, Earth.


Again.....I don't mean to be flaming anyone.......I guess I just read thru some of these threads and shake my head......

Hey, I guess you can understand how I feel when I hear such acceptance and even exuberance over a 3600+ lb. 5th gen!

I think GM would've had a difficult time making a Kappa-based 2+2 coupe, with an LS2, weigh MORE than 3300 lb. Unfortunately it looks like it's gonna be a 2+2 Caddy. I still HOPE it comes in at a reasonable (to me) weight. If it doesn't, OK, you guys can have your 3600+ lb. Cadillac Camaro.

Heh, HP = the great equalizer, get more of it and the weight will disappear!

That works fine at the drag strip. It does NOT work like that at the road course, though.

I'd rather have less weight, even with worse power/weight.
Rather have a 320hp, 3200 lb. Camaro than a 500hp 3600 lb. Camaro.

But that's just me!

That concept has pretty much NEVER worked. The basic platform has to be designed with keeping weight in check from the get-go. You can't really "add on" light weight. You'll spend a fortune to save only tens of pounds.

As much as you guys don't want to believe it, it IS possible to build a reasonable-weight V8 2+2. IF the will is there to make it so. I just don't understand why the idea is met with such near-hostility:confused:

I for one hope they don't take the easy way out and give us a 2-door Cadillac. Yes, I know I'm in the minority!

What if you removed items you didn't need for the track... like electrics, some NVH materials, etc... Porsche have proven the formula is workable... and so has GM with Corvette!

I think GM would've had a difficult time making a Kappa-based 2+2 coupe, with an LS2, weigh MORE than 3300 lb.
I think you are theoretically correct on that point. However, I think the market is dictating that a car like the Camaro needs to have more interior space than what a Kappa variant could likely provide.

If GM wants to sell this thing they have to be best in class. Most HP, lightest weight, best MPG, smaller dimensions. The new Mustang is over 3500 pounds(GT). The new Camaro could and should easily beat that. My 4th gen weighs just under 3400 pounds. If the new Camaro is smaller in everyway, I dont see how and why it would be heavier than a fourth gen.

Earth.


Specifically, Earth.



Hey, I guess you can understand how I feel when I hear such acceptance and even exuberance over a 3600+ lb. 5th gen!

I think GM would've had a difficult time making a Kappa-based 2+2 coupe, with an LS2, weigh MORE than 3300 lb. Unfortunately it looks like it's gonna be a 2+2 Caddy. I still HOPE it comes in at a reasonable (to me) weight. If it doesn't, OK, you guys can have your 3600+ lb. Cadillac Camaro.


And you have the answers? Way to slip your foot right into your mouth there bud. You come out and make a statement that GM can make a car that weighs that much, Scott asks you how and you zipper up? It's ok to criticize constructively, but to make a claim like that and not be able to back it up is just sad.

My goodness. Have a different opinion on something - especially something that is critical of the undoubtably perfect Camaro Concept - and the "Keep the faith at all cost" crowd comes in and tries to crucify your OPINION.

It's really rather humorous.

I agree with one thing Scott said: I will vote with my wallet. It's only one vote, and I can guarantee neither GM nor Ford nor DCX nor any import builds specifically to my wallet. But it is mine.

I will also take his advice on another thing he said a while back - I'll wait till I see the car in person (the production version) and have a chance to see the specs, drive the car. Until then, I'll get a kick out of all the apologists telling me I "make no sense" or words to those effect, because I prefer a light car.

No matter what we say here, the car will be what it will be. It will weigh what it weighs. It will have the engine it has. It will have the styling it is given. Our discussions here won't change any of that (those that think it will have had the wool pulled over their eyes on this forum....likely more than once).

I wonder how many people won't buy it because they don't like the stereo? Or perhaps the seating position? Or the wheels? Are they equally as dumb, stupid, senseless, or whatever? Heaven help them if they don't bow down when instructed to do so.

Bob

PS...someone please shoot me if I ever start acting like a groupie on this site. Blind faith leads to half full bottles of Boones Farm.

You know it's a funny thing when you read these boards about what people want when they do not take the time to think about what they say from a buisness standpoint. For everyone of you that wants the car to be very very light and be this and that are not the ones for the most part that will buy the car. The car has to meet new government standards and alot of other things.
They can bring weight down some with other materials but no way and keep cost down to sell to the masses and if you want a camaro in the future it better sell to the masses not just a few of us. The five or ten on here thay may run theirs on a road coarse or something there are 100,000 out there that just wants it back wants it to look good, ride good , drive good on the road, and have alot of pep on the highway. The car some of you want is a over $40,000 car and they will not sell very many. I may but one at that price and so may you but the general public will not. If you want a race car buy one and strip it down or do you want everything done for you. Depending on what class you run in at a auto-X event has alot to do with it also.

You know it's a funny thing when you read these boards about what people want when they do not take the time to think about what they say from a buisness standpoint. For everyone of you that wants the car to be very very light and be this and that are not the ones for the most part that will buy the car. The car has to meet new government standards and alot of other things.
They can bring weight down some with other materials but no way and keep cost down to sell to the masses and if you want a camaro in the future it better sell to the masses not just a few of us. The five or ten on here thay may run theirs on a road coarse or something there are 100,000 out there that just wants it back wants it to look good, ride good , drive good on the road, and have alot of pep on the highway. The car some of you want is a over $40,000 car and they will not sell very many. I may but one at that price and so may you but the general public will not. If you want a race car buy one and strip it down or do you want everything done for you. Depending on what class you run in at a auto-X event has alot to do with it also.

I don't think anyone here is asking the car to be light. We're asking for it not to be a real porker. I think everyone understands that making a car lighter costs more money once you've reached a certain design threshold.

BTW, what do you quatify as light. To me, light would be sub 3300 lbs. Medium is 3500 lbs, and heavy is over 3800 lbs.

Dan

Really? On what planet?

I want specifics........

I don't mean to sound trite.....but come on.......if this were the case, we'd have a bunch of light weight cars and trucks running around.

Please....and this goes for several of you.....go back and read my post.

CAFE.......let me say it again for good measure CAFE (slowly now....C o r p o r a t e A v e r a g e F u e l E c o n o m y).........

To say that GM or any other manufacturer builds heavy cars because of (insert theory here) is just preposterous.

Now.......everyone's got a right to their opinion......and they will vote with their wallets.

I know this: It's easy to make a declaration when you have nothing to lose or gain by that declaration......but lemme tell ya something......when YOU are one of the people who have to make some hard decisions knowing that you have to have a workable business case.....and you need to sell volume.....you make decisions that are going to upset a few...but make others very pleased.

You are right in that a few people probably won't buy this car based on weight......and I could probably count them on one or two hands AFTER the car hits the streets..........

Again.....I don't mean to be flaming anyone.......I guess I just read thru some of these threads and shake my head......

Red, I know that at this point you have learned that you can't let post like that get the best of you. ;) You are trying to teach one by one how the car industry works and that's not very efficient. Most of these people that talk like that really don't get it. I can't say I get it, but I keep an open mind about it. We all know that the Camaro is in good hands of GM teams of engineers, designers, and people that truly care about the car.

I know we will have a fine product that will be very competitive with the Mustang and Challenger in sales # but that (hopefully like previous generations) will put them to shame in the road course and the 1/4 mile. We all are very excited to see that the 5th Gen Camaro is back.

Jonathan (never lost the faith!) :cool:

And you have the answers? Way to slip your foot right into your mouth there bud. You come out and make a statement that GM can make a car that weighs that much, Scott asks you how and you zipper up? It's ok to criticize constructively, but to make a claim like that and not be able to back it up is just sad.

Back it up? Tell you what, I'll contract my time to GM at the going rate and work on it for them. The lay public always seem to think that reducing weight is as easy (and expensive) as "make this out of aluminum" or "make that out of carbon fiber". The truth is more subtle. It is in the DESIGN and ENGINEERING, not in someone simply dictating material changes. Design and engineering is the difference between a part that costs $30 and weighs 15 pounds, and a part that performs the same function, with the same reliability, and is made out of the same material, using the same construction technique, but costs $25 and weighs 12 pounds.

I'm sure you can appreciate that there's NO WAY in a single post I am going to redesign every single structural part on the 5th gen!

My concern is that, if it's sharing its platform and component parts with a bigger, heavier car, the 5th-gen is going to be much heavier than it needs to be. I remain hopeful that it won't be obscenely overweight. But I won't be surprised if it is. With the majority as much as saying they don't care if it weighs 3600, 3800, or even 4000 lb., I don't see much incentive for GM to keep it reasonable. If they "out-Mustang" the new Mustang and give us a 2-door version of a luxury sedan, decontented, I think that'll be a real shame.

3 rd gens did sell better than 4th, however no fbod generation has ever surpassed the mustang. seems like until the fbod died in 2002, the smaller lighter mustang always had the sales lead. only after the fbod died did ford pork out the new stang with > 3500 pounds.


Incorrect. The thirdgen CAMARO alone outsold mustang in several of the model years. Combine firebird with camaro and it was no contest for a lot of the thirdgen run.

CAFE.......let me say it again for good measure CAFE (slowly now....C o r p o r a t e A v e r a g e F u e l E c o n o m y).........

The makers have been getting such an easy ride with CAFE standards that average CAR fuel economy has not improved since about 1987. Include trucks/SUVs, and we're getting far WORSE fuel economy than we got way back then.

I understand the automakers still see it as a tremendous "burden", but if I'm not mistaken, the 27.5mpg fleet standard for cars hasn't changed since 1990.

You know it's a funny thing when you read these boards about what people want when they do not take the time to think about what they say from a buisness standpoint. For everyone of you that wants the car to be very very light and be this and that are not the ones for the most part that will buy the car. The car has to meet new government standards and alot of other things.
They can bring weight down some with other materials but no way and keep cost down to sell to the masses and if you want a camaro in the future it better sell to the masses not just a few of us. The five or ten on here thay may run theirs on a road coarse or something there are 100,000 out there that just wants it back wants it to look good, ride good , drive good on the road, and have alot of pep on the highway. The car some of you want is a over $40,000 car and they will not sell very many. I may but one at that price and so may you but the general public will not. If you want a race car buy one and strip it down or do you want everything done for you. Depending on what class you run in at a auto-X event has alot to do with it also.

I don't pretend to understand much about the "business case" of anything - certainly not as it pertains to the manufactor of a car. I am only a consumer of performance cars. I speak from that perspective (modified by my own personal preferences and biases). The industry will build what it builds - I will either buy it, or I won't.

None of that should endure me to not express my opinion that new cars are getting too heavy, and that my purchase will be driven (in part) by factors such as weight.

Bob

PS....never done an Auto-X. I have been around a road course a few times (emphasis on "few"), have done a weeee bit of drag racing, and thoroughly enjoy driving cars that fit my preferences and biases.

this whole thread completely disgusts me!

no more than a month ago everyone was hoping to see a concept camaro, and we got exactly that, i cant understand all the pissing and moaning over what the weight of this car is and it isn't even on the damn market! Some of these people remind me of little bratty kids that do nothing but say "i want i want i want"

some people need to think about what they are actually after in a car

weight a lot of times is a tradeoff im sure gm isn't going to intentionally make the car a porker. (case in point...) gm could skimp out on rear end to make it lighter hmmmmm thats a good idea! weak rear end. Or gm could skimp on the chassis to make it lighter and turn it into a limp noodle on wheels. nother good idea eh? etc etc..

nother good idea, skimp on the things that make the car safer like side curtain airbags and weight itself which plays a major role when you get in an accident, weight is your friend when you get in an accident all you self-proclaimed physics experts should know that.

nother thing about safety, Insurance my daily driver right now is an 89 oldsmobile Eighty Eight and i pay more for liability insurance than i do for full coverage on my 94 Camaro Z28 M6 with a 20 yr old kid driving it. Why? because the oldsmobile lacks anti-lock brakes and airbags, safety features on the camaro are going to make the car cheaper to own because of less insurance costs. What do you think insurance companies look at when deciding how much to charge you among many things theres also how the car fares in crash tests, or how much it costs to fix said car after you get in an accident if you use all these exotic material that will cost more to fix guess what insurance to gonna do to you

I completely agree with everyone saying weight matters im not going to argue that but remember its not the enthusiasts that are going to make this car a success because we are the minority! The people that are going to make this car a success are the average joe consumer that cares about things such as insurance costs, and good riding, handling, and a good looking and performing car. If you want a drag/track queen that make it one. Because the average joe doesn't care how much it weighs.

8cylinders>4,

Lot's of truth to what you are saying. Us talking about weight probably isn't going to change one thing on the new Camaro.

I'm happy to see that there is a chance for the 5th gen, but am also hopeful that it fits my taste in a sporty car, whether it's a Corvette, or a Pony car. With that being said, weight of the vehicle is important to me, and plays into my buying decision. Most consumers could care less as long as the car looks great, is fast, comfortable, and gets halfway decent milage.

It's like GM coming out and saying that they are building the 5th gen, but it's going to have a 250 hp engine as the top option. That's not true, but it's the way I'll feel if the car weighs over 3800 lbs. It will be a let down.

Dan

I think they'll get the car as low as possible, like S.S. said they do not want to purposely build a heavy car.

3 rd gens did sell better than 4th, however no fbod generation has ever surpassed the mustang. seems like until the fbod died in 2002, the smaller lighter mustang always had the sales lead. only after the fbod died did ford pork out the new stang with > 3500 pounds.

i did a little research on sales/production numbers on the f-body vs mustangs.. and this is what i came up with:
http://home.comcast.net/~builder228/stuff/ponycarproduction.htm

in essense.. the f-body average yearly sales over it's lifetime is higher than the mustang

camaro alone outsold the mustang 7 out of it's 36 years.. 20% the time.. combine that with firebird, and the f-body outsold the mustang 21 of the 36 years.. 60% of the time!

basically, you couldn't be more wrong

this whole thread completely disgusts me!

no more than a month ago everyone was hoping to see a concept camaro, and we got exactly that, i cant understand all the pissing and moaning over what the weight of this car is and it isn't even on the damn market! Some of these people remind me of little bratty kids that do nothing but say "i want i want i want"



There will always be some people who will piss and moan about anything, given the high-and-mighty soapbox of the internet to stand on.

These people are a legend in their own mind, a waste of time to everyone else, and a bother to read-- which is why, once they brand themselves as such, I don't.

Interesting. Someone that doesn't like every single aspect of a Camaro - and decides to express it here - is a pissing and moaning legend in their own mind waste of time high and mighty soapboxer?

BTW...if its a bother to read, why did you? And being it was such a bother, why did you bother to respond?

To sum things up and (over)simplify, it would seem that this is the question we're being asked here:

How would you like your 5th gen?

A. Lightweight?
B. Fast?
C. Affordable?

Pick any 2.

You guys that think you want a fox-weight 5th gen need to go hang out at a body shop and watch a few get rebuilt and see how thin the metal is and how underbuilt the lil tin cans are! Seats falling through the floor, control arm mounts breaking away from the subframe floor, and the ones that arent taken well care of are just decomposing already to a point where its hard to find a useable piece. If it IS useable its because someone never got it out of the garage....

Build mine good.

Though not really germane to the discussion, I sold my Fox-body Mustang (88 Coupe, original owner) in late 2003. The seats were solid, the control arm mounts were fine, and given that mine was taken of well, it had many useable pieces. That's not to say nor imply that it had the "solid" feel of a new car, nor that it would come close to the safety standards of today (though I have no real idea what those are). Finally, it came out of the garage ALL the time. I sold it so that I could put more money into my 2004 NMRA Factory Stock campaign.

For the post above....I'll take A. & C., please. B. will take care of itself. :)

Bob

Ignoring the perpetuation of the idea that to meet even a REASONABLE weight of ~3300 lb. just HAS to cost way more $$$ for a moment, I'll agree w/ Bob's picks: A. and C. With cash still in my pocket, and the potential of a lighter weight vehicle, B. will then be easily enough achieved.

But to a large extent A. can help you improve both B. and C., and D. (fuel economy) as well!

You wont get A and C. I thought Scott said that himself. Maybe even in this thread.

A. affordable and fast....
B. Fast and light....

Either way its gonna be fast. Should it be affordable or real lightweight and expensive?

There is no reason a 3300 lb. Camaro should have to be more expensive than a 3600 lb. Camaro, given appropriate attention in the design phase. Could be cheaper, even.

And 3300 lb. is NOT "real lightweight".

Consider that the last Z28 in 2002 weighed 3400 lb., meeting all 2002 regulations, and it was basically a 20 year-old platform, with one major update 9 years prior. And that car met its price point (though they still couldn't sell 'em, go figure). So the last Z28 didn't weigh any more than the '82, despite having to meet stricter regs on the same basic platform. They held the line on weight despite inherent challenges in updating an old platform to meet newer regulations.

IMO they should be able to meet the latest safety regs at a LOWER weight, given that they're building on a new platform SPECIFICALLY with the latest regs in mind.

Just don't get why 6% weight gain should be considered a GIVEN for the 5th gen, and even a 3% reduction should be considered totally out of the question.

Talk about low (high weight) expectations...

There's nothing wrong with wanting a light car, and I'd like to have a 3200lb Camaro just as much as any racer. Heck, my car weighs ~3750 in street form, but on race day it weighs ~3375.

Anyway the fact is pony cars and muscle cars are not light. When has a Camaro (or Mustang or Challenger etc) been classified as a light car?

Design and engineering can make lighter cars. That I agree with. But it will come at a price. Yes, it is possible to make a part weigh less, costs less to make, and performs the same. BUT the overlooked fact is R&D, the brunt work behind it all. Sure the part might be just as good while being lighter and cheaper, but with the added R&D costs, it still adds to the bottom line rather than leaving it alone. There's no way that stupid amounts of R&D money will be spent just to make Camaro 200lbs lighter. Not gonna happen. It's on a shared chassis and it's gonna share parts. Doing it any other way just doesn't make sense if you want a affordable (and profitable) car.

If you're looking for a light racer car, the pony car class isn't where you should be looking. I'd say the car you're looking for then is a Soltice GXP or something like that. 260hp and <3000lbs seems to fit that description better. Personally though, I'd rather have 140 more horsepower with 600lbs more weight.

And if you think a "porky 4th Gen" doesn't handle well... come to one of my club's rentals at Road America. I'll set you up with a ride-along with one of our instructors and his BONE STOCK 3500lbs 2000 Camaro SS and you tell me that car isn't a performer. ;)

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?

If you achieved all of the above, I wouldn't care if it weighed 5000 pounds. It wouldn't matter, becaue it's best-in-class anyway. I like the way you put a spin on things, Scott.:bow:

I think it depends on what "class" Scott is referring to. The problem is, there is only one Pony car out there right now in the class of the Camaro. To be best in class, all you have to do is beat the Mustang, which isn't exactly my view of a HUGE accomplishment since GM's been doing that for years with the Camaro vs. Mustang. ;) I think Scott needs to define the other cars in the class he's comparing the Camaro to. I'm thinking the Mustang and Challenger, and maybe the Charger will be competitors of the Camaro if it comes out. The Charger and Challenger are both HEAVY.

Dan

Yes, it is possible to make a part weigh less, costs less to make, and performs the same. BUT the overlooked fact is R&D, the brunt work behind it all. Sure the part might be just as good while being lighter and cheaper, but with the added R&D costs, it still adds to the bottom line rather than leaving it alone.
My understanding is that it's the recurring costs that kill you, not so much the $$$ invested in R&D.

There's no way that stupid amounts of R&D money will be spent just to make Camaro 200lbs lighter. Not gonna happen. It's on a shared chassis and it's gonna share parts. Doing it any other way just doesn't make sense if you want a affordable (and profitable) car.
I agree. I just wish it was sharing parts with the Solstice instead of the Cadillac.

If you're looking for a light racer car, the pony car class isn't where you should be looking. I'd say the car you're looking for then is a Soltice GXP or something like that. 260hp and <3000lbs seems to fit that description better.
I need SOME utility, hopefully they'll build that Solstice Coupe...
Still, a not-obscenely-obese 2+2 V8 coupe would be preferable for daily-driver/some trackday usage.

And if you think a "porky 4th Gen" doesn't handle well... come to one of my club's rentals at Road America. I'll set you up with a ride-along with one of our instructors and his BONE STOCK 3500lbs 2000 Camaro SS and you tell me that car isn't a performer. ;)
I drove a buddy's '02 Z28 M6 (stock except for Bilstien struts) at NHIS last year. I really expected a lot better out of it, to tell you the truth. I could feel the weight and the live rear axle a lot more than I thought I would. It would sort of lurch into initial oversteer at turn-in, but then it just didn't want to make it in to the apex at all, even on Kumho DOT track tires. A lot of work to go not all that fast was my impression. It just wasn't fun to drive, and I never really felt I could trust it enough to really throw it around. Feel at the steering wheel was nonexistent despite the weight they gave it (just like my '95). The limited slip diff certainly didn't limit slip much! Even with the car pointed mostly straight up the hill between turns 3-4, the inside wheel would spin like no tomorrow. The motor was a revelation, though! In the end, not at all what I'm used to at the track, and nowhere NEAR as fast around the track as the 240Z, and not nearly as much fun to drive around the track as my stock 240SX (faster, though). After that, I wasn't so surprised that my buddy has been unable to beat the inferior power/weight 350Z in his class. Anyhoo, that experience pretty much convinced me that what I REALLY WANT in my some-track-duty daily driver is a car that handles like a 240SX, but with LS1 power:) But nobody makes that:( I was thinkin' an IRS-equipped 5th-gen, at ~3300 lb. would be a fine compromise.

Let me ask you this: IF.........the new Camaro could:

>be best in class in acceleration
>be best in class on a road course and autoX
>be best in class in fuel economy
>be best in class in driver comfort
>be best in class in terms of crashworthiness -- five stars all around...........

how important would weight be?
Not very. In fact if you could only deliver on the first two I would still be buying one. I would like to see the weight stay around 3500lbs for a coupe with a lightweight Z28 version around 3250 but like I said I will buy one regardless.

Again.....I don't mean to be flaming anyone.......I guess I just read thru some of these threads and shake my head......

Scott, I know I'm just another camaro enthusiast out there, but i just want to say THANK YOU, for your encouragement over the years for keeping the faith, as well as continued support and posting on this website. I think some people loose sight of the fact that you are on OUR side. People need to take a step back and be more appreciative. Again, its only a small number of people take your presence here for granted as the vast majority (myself included) are very gratful you are here. I only hope that the few who bash GM, the decision making process, or anything else won't dissuade you from posting here in the future! I look forward to being able to roll my very own new camaro off the assembly line in the near future and park it right next to my '02 Z28 that i love to death.

I drove a buddy's '02 Z28 M6 (stock except for Bilstien struts) at NHIS last year. I really expected a lot better out of it, to tell you the truth. I could feel the weight and the live rear axle a lot more than I thought I would. It would sort of lurch into initial oversteer at turn-in, but then it just didn't want to make it in to the apex at all, even on Kumho DOT track tires. A lot of work to go not all that fast was my impression. It just wasn't fun to drive, and I never really felt I could trust it enough to really throw it around. Feel at the steering wheel was nonexistent despite the weight they gave it (just like my '95). The limited slip diff certainly didn't limit slip much! Even with the car pointed mostly straight up the hill between turns 3-4, the inside wheel would spin like no tomorrow. The motor was a revelation, though! In the end, not at all what I'm used to at the track, and nowhere NEAR as fast around the track as the 240Z, and not nearly as much fun to drive around the track as my stock 240SX (faster, though). After that, I wasn't so surprised that my buddy has been unable to beat the inferior power/weight 350Z in his class. Anyhoo, that experience pretty much convinced me that what I REALLY WANT in my some-track-duty daily driver is a car that handles like a 240SX, but with LS1 power:) But nobody makes that:( I was thinkin' an IRS-equipped 5th-gen, at ~3300 lb. would be a fine compromise.


well....OK....that's part of the problem....an SS is much faster on a road course than a Z28 due to chassis tuning.

Little known fact: a Camaro SS with 1LE was faster than a C5 Corvette thru model year 2000.

You can say what you want......but I'll be pleased to take you around Spring Mountain Motorsports Park in an SS.......and prove it to you.

well....OK....that's part of the problem....an SS is much faster on a road course than a Z28 due to chassis tuning.

Little known fact: a Camaro SS with 1LE was faster than a C5 Corvette thru model year 2000.

You can say what you want......but I'll be pleased to take you around Spring Mountain Motorsports Park in an SS.......and prove it to you.
You got that right Scott one of my local club boys runs all the road course races each year in his 98 SS and is running in 2nd place in the points standings so lets just say no rice is beating him on a road course.

The makers have been getting such an easy ride with CAFE standards that average CAR fuel economy has not improved since about 1987. Include trucks/SUVs, and we're getting far WORSE fuel economy than we got way back then.

I understand the automakers still see it as a tremendous "burden", but if I'm not mistaken, the 27.5mpg fleet standard for cars hasn't changed since 1990.


not so fast.....

In the United States and Canada, the public has choices of what they want to drive. CAFE has increased on passenger cars and trucks alike.....what you're missing is weighted average. Every Chevrolet Passenger car other than Corvette has one or more models within the line that meet or exceed 30mpg on the highway. Our trucks are some of the most efficient built. The problem is that the public has asked for trucks and SUVS......you and I may not like them, but someone must! (as I don't recall any manufacturer holding a gun to someone's head and threatening them if they don't buy an SUV)

All I'm saying is that you need to make sure you know what you're talking about when you make a statement that -- as I recall -- we could build a lighter car at no additional cost. When you say that, I'm assured that you've never engineered a car.

The next gen Camaro must have a 5 star crash rating in all tests....or you'll never be able to afford to insure it. Yes, you can take a $30 part that weighs 5 pounds and produce it for $25 and it weighs 4 pounds...but the question is: What happens in a high speed impact?

I'm going to say this again.........we will do everything we can to keep the weight down......not necessarily because you want it or someone else wants it -- but because it makes good business sense.

I can think of a way to reduce the weight by 30 pounds....pull out the sound insulation.......but that would take the car off of most shopping lists......and I would never support such a proposition.....and I hope you wouldn't either.

well....OK....that's part of the problem....an SS is much faster on a road course than a Z28 due to chassis tuning.
I guess I'm not as up on my SS knowledge as I thought. I'd always *assumed* it was merely:
lower restriction exhaust
lower restriction intake
bigger wheels and tires
Bilstein dampers

Based on that, I never really understood the fascination with that model. From what I've seen, the rwhp numbers are not really any better than for a regular Z28, and the other mods are easily enough accomplished.

Are there other chassis/suspension differences?

You can say what you want......but I'll be pleased to take you around Spring Mountain Motorsports Park in an SS.......and prove it to you.

Heh, heh, I would be very pleased to GO for such a ride! Unfortunately I don't make it out to Nevada very often. I'll definitely drop you a line if I do!

FYI on CAFE....27.5 mpg was set for cars in 1985, allowed to go lower in 86-89, and then reset at 27.5 mpg in 1990. It has not changed since. SOURCE (http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/template.MAXIMIZE/menuitem.d0b5a45b55bfbe582f57529cdba046a0/?javax.portlet.tpst=f2d14277f710b755fc08d51090008a 0c_ws_MX&javax.portlet.prp_f2d14277f710b755fc08d51090008a0c _viewID=detail_view&javax.portlet.begCacheTok=token&javax.portlet.endCacheTok=token&itemID=199b8facdcfa4010VgnVCM1000002c567798RCRD&viewType=standard#8)

CAFE is 21.6 mpg for MY06 light trucks, and 22.6 for MY07.

Bob

not so fast.....
In the United States and Canada, the public has choices of what they want to drive. CAFE has increased on passenger cars and trucks alike.....what you're missing is weighted average.
From 1987 - 2002, there was NO improvement in volume-weighted car or truck CAFE, beyond that, *slight* improvement in weighted CAR CAFE (28.8 to 29.3). Combined HAS FALLEN (as you say, because of increased SUV/truck sales) from a peak of 26.2 in '87, to 24.7 in 2004.

Go here: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.d0b5a45b55bfbe582f57529cdba046a0/
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/CAFE/docs/Summary-Fuel-Economy-Pref-2004.pdf

The problem is that the public has asked for trucks and SUVS......you and I may not like them, but someone must!

Yup, there's definitely no accounting for tastes...

Me, I love to drive my 240SX every day. When I'm forced to drive a truck or SUV, the experience SUCKS. People LIKE driving these things?! Big, heavy, numb, ponderous, I don't get it (but then I don't get a LOT of things...). I love to drive my '95 Z28 'vert, too, but in a different way. Love the sounds, love the LOOK of the car, just BEAUTIFUL. Ergonomics are quite good, and the interior lighting solutions are ingenious. But the actual driving sensations are less than appealing. No communication. The SX kills it in that regard.

All I'm saying is that you need to make sure you know what you're talking about when you make a statement that -- as I recall -- we could build a lighter car at no additional cost. When you say that, I'm assured that you've never engineered a car.
Only my own:D

But I have engineered on these:
http://www.ncfi.com/images/fueltank2.jpg
http://www.ae.msstate.edu/rfrl/pics/aircraft/honda/newhonda/honda9.jpg
http://www.polska-zbrojna.pl/img/artykul/1568.jpg
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/romain.g/f22-1.jpg
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/images/vectrix_scooter.jpg

The next gen Camaro must have a 5 star crash rating in all tests....or you'll never be able to afford to insure it.
How 'bout let ME worry 'bout that!

Yes, you can take a $30 part that weighs 5 pounds and produce it for $25 and it weighs 4 pounds...but the question is: What happens in a high speed impact?
Therein lies the ART of design and engineering. To minimize mass while maintaining structural integrity. Besides, heavier/stronger/stiffer is NOT always better in a high-speed impact. Just ask Dale Earnhardt. He woulda done a LOT better in a car that was lighter and LESS stiff and LESS strong.

I'm going to say this again.........we will do everything we can to keep the weight down......not necessarily because you want it or someone else wants it -- but because it makes good business sense.

A weight GAIN of 200 lb. (which seems to be the consensus, which I feverishly hope is WAY OFF!), is FAR from "keeping the weight down". Heavier than the overweight New Mustang is not what I have in mind at ALL.

I can think of a way to reduce the weight by 30 pounds....pull out the sound insulation.......but that would take the car off of most shopping lists......and I would never support such a proposition.....and I hope you wouldn't either.

I wouldn't. I mean, for me, that'd be fine, but I recognize that's not going to cut it in the market.

PROGRESS, to me, is the ability to do MORE with LESS. Somehow, our society has become FASCINATED with the idea of HYPERconsumption. MORE IS MORE! I find that I am out of step with the current state of Western Civilization. I guess it is my problem...

I love the look of the 5th-gen concept. I personally wouldn't've gone the "retro" route at all, but the result is stunning. SO much better than the somehow dulled-down and CAD-like Mustang and Challenger. It's like they took the previous versions of those cars and STERILIZED them! The 5th-gen concept is fricking SCULPTURE in comparison and it's OWN car.

But if the production car is heavy, I'm not buying. As an aero structures engineer, it's absolutely INGRAINED into my skull, light weight is BEAUTIFUL, mass is EVIL, it must be EXORCIZED!
As a track-day whore, my EXPERIENCE tells me that weight is far more important than any other single factor in a car. I've seen too many lightweight cars with poor power/weight trounce heavier, supposedly MUCH FASTER cars. And the driving experience at the track is SO much better with a lighter car. To the extent that I'm not at all interested in a daily driver/backup track car for myself that weighs more than ~3300 lb. For this Camaro, I'll bump that up to 3400. But NO MORE!

I know, not gonna happen...

Dan, the Camaro cannot be tailored strictly to your tastes. It is unfortunate, but just because you could afford to pay much higher insurance rates on a lighter Camaro that shows a mediocre performance in crash tests doesn't mean Suzie Secretary can, or would be willing to. This car has gotta sell at the base level. That means it has to be deemed safe, and as cheap as possible to insure.

Bottom line, the Camaro line cannot be engineered like a Corvette Z06. Things like comfort, accessories, etc. have to be figured into the base model, therefore figuring into every model. That's just life for a Pony Car these days, I guess....

i did a little research on sales/production numbers on the f-body vs mustangs.. and this is what i came up with:
http://home.comcast.net/~builder228/stuff/ponycarproduction.htm

in essense.. the f-body average yearly sales over it's lifetime is higher than the mustang

camaro alone outsold the mustang 7 out of it's 36 years.. 20% the time.. combine that with firebird, and the f-body outsold the mustang 21 of the 36 years.. 60% of the time!

basically, you couldn't be more wrong


ummm...you post a link to essentially a plain excel spreadsheet and expect me to belive that it's fact? mmmmmmmkayyy

props here to stereomandan, bob cosby and baldwin.

Message to Mr. Baldwin, I am just curious about your occupation and age. Looks as though you are used to working on fighter jets and the like. In these types of "structures", cost is not really as much of an issue in reducing weight. I guess if you want to reduce the weight of a part in a non mass produced 55 million dollar fighter jet, spending an extra 100 grand to do so at the "engineering phase" is no big deal. Tack 2000 bucks onto each Camaro to do the same and it could be a deal breaker for many of the potential buyers.

Mass produced cars have ALWAYS been compromises. Heck, the first gen car shared many parts with the much more utilitarian Nova. You make the car a deal breaker, the business case goes south, and the car maybe doesn't get built at all. If you don't want one, don't buy it for God's sake. But don't bash the rest of us that think the car they put at the show was great. I'm not in lock-step with GM. In fact, I've been pissed at them for a number of years because I personally did not like the 4th gen car. Didn't like the looks AT ALL, wasn't impressed with the power, and the 1999 SS I drove seemed to wallow around curves compared to my 85 IROC, BUT, I still supported the production of the car and appreciated those guys who liked and supported the 4th gen. I also hate the obsession with trucks/SUVs that they have shown for years. To me, the SSR was ridiculous and I predicted on one of these blogs before it even hit the market that it would fail and I think it has. The new car to me is gorgeous, and if produced, I WILL be buying, whether 3300 or 4000 lbs. But that's me and only my opinion.

To argue though with a front line veteran like Scott S., someone integral to the Camaro production for a number of years now, with all due respect sir, makes you look rather foolish. By the way, again, with all due respect, if you've engineered all those aircraft, it shouldn't be that difficult for you to figure out how to get LS2 level power shoehorned into your 240sx. Or, better yet, keep working on those lighter, stronger, and cheaper materials for cars, planes, etc. that you seem to think are so easy to produce, and maybe you'll have GM doing this before long :bow: and Lutz will build you your own, personal, one of a kind 3000 lb Camaro because that seems to be what you want. Good luck with that.

Wow....just picking at the above a bit...the thing that impressed me most about the 4th Gen LS1 cars WAS the power. In fact, it was the LS1 that seduced me to the F-body side of the fence.....and living with the rest of the car that convinced me to sell it after ~9 months.

The LS1 was unmatched in power, weight, and packaging.

To sum things up and (over)simplify, it would seem that this is the question we're being asked here:

How would you like your 5th gen?

A. Lightweight?
B. Fast?
C. Affordable?

Pick any 2.

A and C all day long.

The LS1 did not feel torquey enough for me. There was so much hype, I guess I expected a lot more.

As stated previously, the "seat of the pants" is the world's biggest liar. :)

I care more about Camaro than the name Camaro. It would be better to leave it under the head stone than bring it back as a porker just so we could have a "Camaro"

I can understand gaining weight because of federal regs. I can also understand losing weight by starting with a fresh design, not a 2.5 decade old floorpan. The fourth gen was growing too large and heavy, I thought the new one was supposed to be a little tidier in size? I guess we'll also be looking at a few more options.

I guess I'm thinking if my 4th gen is 3400 lbs, add some weight for the regs, and remove some weight through smaller dimensions and better engineering, it shouldn't grow that much. If the engineers are truly passionate about the Camaro, it should be close. I can see maybe even hitting 3500 lbs.

Easier (and more fun) to add power than remove weight. Once a car is engineered, most weight is lost by tossing conveniences and things I want on the car. I'll take lighter, especially since I seem to be in the minority that isn't all about drag racing. Wasn't there a bunch of people arguing over the great Z28 name here???

Without being on the engineering team it's hard to justify exactly what they're up against. We know zero specs. I'm sure many of the engineers will do their best, but will it be enough? Will GM allow them to do enough? It's not like they haven't had time! I do know I will not buy a heavy Camaro, that is all I know.

For those guys wanting a "Camaro" even if it's 3900 lbs. Well, Mustang and Camaro might be on the streets but the pony cars are officially dead! I will sorely miss them. I live in Wisconsin, I know all about fat :D

I care more about Camaro than the name Camaro. It would be better to leave it under the head stone than bring it back as a porker just so we could have a "Camaro"

I can understand gaining weight because of federal regs. I can also understand losing weight by starting with a fresh design, not a 2.5 decade old floorpan. The fourth gen was growing too large and heavy, I thought the new one was supposed to be a little tidier in size? I guess we'll also be looking at a few more options.

I guess I'm thinking if my 4th gen is 3400 lbs, add some weight for the regs, and remove some weight through smaller dimensions and better engineering, it shouldn't grow that much. If the engineers are truly passionate about the Camaro, it should be close. I can see maybe even hitting 3500 lbs.

Easier (and more fun) to add power than remove weight. Once a car is engineered, most weight is lost by tossing conveniences and things I want on the car. I'll take lighter, especially since I seem to be in the minority that isn't all about drag racing. Wasn't there a bunch of people arguing over the great Z28 name here???

Without being on the engineering team it's hard to justify exactly what they're up against. We know zero specs. I'm sure many of the engineers will do their best, but will it be enough? Will GM allow them to do enough? It's not like they haven't had time! I do know I will not buy a heavy Camaro, that is all I know.

For those guys wanting a "Camaro" even if it's 3900 lbs. Well, Mustang and Camaro might be on the streets but the pony cars are officially dead! I will sorely miss them. I live in Wisconsin, I know all about fat :D


well done...

Dan, Bob, and all the rest bitching on weight............ I'm with you bro's. :bow:

I met alot of people on the 'team' last week in Detroit. They really wanted input from us. Guess what was near the top of my bitch list and what I have followed up on this week....you guessed it, mass.

Sure, the fine Camaro engineering team is weight conscious. They'd like to decrease weight. Fair enough. But NOW....they know that WE'RE counting pounds. Yes actually counting them. And if the count comes too high...we'll be upset. Who knows, 1.6 lbs here, 3.7 lbs there.....it all adds up. The prospective consumer wanting...no...demanding... weight control is a powerful enabler to those on the inside who would really push for it.

So bitch away boys....bitch away....now is the time to do it. As for the rest of you, don't be sheep. Be bold enough to let GM know, if weight is an issue.

all this bitching over weight and nobody even knows how much this thing will weigh come production time, completely stupid if you ask me.

and you speak of talking to gm about the apparent "weight issue" scott has already acknowledged that in this very thread, they already know we want it light and so do they, but they also have lots of other things to worry about instead of petty bitching about maybe 100 lbs how many of you guys weigh under 100 lbs how many of your girlfriends weigh under 100 lbs how many of you realize gas weighs 6.8 lbs per gallon or something close to that hmm thats over a 100 lbs of gas if you have 16 gallons of gas in ur car

sure a little here and there adds up, im sure there's a few people that could lose 30 lbs or so around here maybe something to figure into the weight of the car cuz it all adds up eh?

thank god none of you guys are designing this car cuz it would be smaller than a miata, built entirely about of magnesium or titanium or some **** and would cost 1.4 million dollars but god ol'mighty it would be light! boy i'll bet that would say camaro wouldn't it??

One of the things I really enjoy about the Camaro is its excess. It's longer, lower, wider, faster, more powerful, and heavier than it "needs" to be. And has to much extra sheetmetal in the name of F-14 jet fighter style.

And that's what I love about it. It's a big long cigar shaped cigarette boat of a car. And despite the weight and size, it has enough motor and enough sway bar to wax cars half its size. That's why I drive a Camaro, and that's what makes a Camaro cool, and gives it such presence on the road. Yes it's nice that you lightweight guys want something like Bob Cosby's Fox body stang, or Dan Baldwins Datsun Z car. But that's not what the Camaro is.



To put it in Datsun terms, I don't want a stripped down track day 240 Z, I want a flashy, heavier, more powerful 280ZX Turbo :)
Or in Porsche terms - I want a 928 GTS, not a 911 Club Sport.

and you speak of talking to gm about the apparent "weight issue" scott has already acknowledged that in this very thread, they already know we want it light and so do they, but they also have lots of other things to worry about instead of petty bitching about maybe 100 lbs

Oh, Lord knows, Scott knows where I stand on this. :eek:

And if all this "petty bitching" saves "maybe 100 lbs"...that would be awesome!!!!! Don't you think?

The LS1 did not feel torquey enough for me. There was so much hype, I guess I expected a lot more.

Maybe you should have run it up to redline a few times. You would have noticed the LS1 pulls really hard all the way up to it, as opposed to the L98s which just die as the RPMs climb.

Personally I think a stock L98, or a bolt on one, sucks. They still aren't that fast, and they have no punch on the high, and no top end.

So bitch away boys....bitch away....now is the time to do it. As for the rest of you, don't be sheep. Be bold enough to let GM know, if weight is an issue.

I figured I would bitch along too. I do not want an excessively heavy Camaro. It seems everyone on here has settled for 3600lbs being the likely weight for the 5th gen, and I honestly think that is too much, but I really, really, don't want to see it get any higher than that. If now is the time to bitch, then anyone at all concerned with the performance of this pony car should let it be known.

I dread to even think about how much the Camaro would have weighed had it stayed on its previous, larger platform.

Maybe you should have run it up to redline a few times. You would have noticed the LS1 pulls really hard all the way up to it, as opposed to the L98s which just die as the RPMs climb.

Personally I think a stock L98, or a bolt on one, sucks. They still aren't that fast, and they have no punch on the high, and no top end.


Well, my A4 LT1 did "feel" quicker to 60 than my M6 LS1 - but I dispelled that butt dyno misinformation by just looking at the speedo and how quickly it was climbing :)

Don't know about suck. For the time and place, the L98 was a pretty damn nice engine, and my 91 was a hell of alot of fun. Compared to todays motors, yeah they were lacking, but I still think it was good for it's day.

It seems everyone on here has settled for 3600lbs being the likely weight for the 5th gen, .


That would be extremely optimistic.

Well I'm not going to jump on the pipe-dream train and say I'm not buying a Camaro if it's over 3400 lbs (extremely unrealistic IMO), I'm really hoping it doesn't come in over 3600-3700 lbs, preferrably under 3600.

I look at it in the terms of the competition, the Mustang GT is around 3500 but underpowered. The Challenger looks likely to come in around 4000 lbs or more but have some kick in the power department, about like the current SRT8 cars. If the Camaro can come in well under the DCX cars 4000+ lbs, yet pack a 400ish hp engine it's going to kick ass, and IMO that's what's important. The GT500 weighing in around 3800-3900 lbs yet packing an underrated 475hp will be the only threat if they can squeeze the Camaro in under 3600lbs, even then it's going to need more like 450+ hp to keep up with the GT500 I fear (but then it should be significantly cheaper...

Take it step farther and include stuff like the 350Z/G35 style cars, Evo/STis, etc. Lighter but lacking in the power department.

Here's hoping, 3700 max hopefully at/under 3600 will make me pretty happy with it... I'm hoping I'm right in that the Camaro won't be heavier than the current GTO, chassis is similar, yet the car is smaller but with newer safety requirements, hopefully it doesn't balloon weight wise over the current GTO.

Course the other side is these competing cars are either out now or out sooner than the Camaro...

Don't know about suck. For the time and place, the L98 was a pretty damn nice engine, and my 91 was a hell of alot of fun. Compared to todays motors, yeah they were lacking, but I still think it was good for it's day.

Yeah, it probably wasn't very fair of me to compare a 20 year old motor with a new one, but I was no where near driving age when the 3rd gens were still new. It was probably a good motor for its day (although I think Ford's 5.0 was better).


That would be extremely optimistic.

You know, ever single time I can remember mentioning the 5th gen coming it at 3600lbs, you always posts something to this effect. As true as it may turn out, everytime I read it I get this queasy, uneasy feeling. Ughh. I really don't want it to weigh this damn much.

If you had to give a strictly hypothetical guess as to what the 5th gen's weight might be, what you would you guess?

I look at it in the terms of the competition, the Mustang GT is around 3500 but underpowered. The Challenger looks likely to come in around 4000 lbs or more but have some kick in the power department, about like the current SRT8 cars. If the Camaro can come in well under the DCX cars 4000+ lbs, yet pack a 400ish hp engine it's going to kick ass, and IMO that's what's important.

The Camaro might still be able to underweigh its lard ass competition, but that isn't going to affect the way physics is going to affect the vehicle. Even if the Camaro comes in at 3700lbs, and is a lightweight between the 3 in this class, 3700lbs is still 3700lbs.

For every person that thinks that your 4th gen handles well, but feels too heavy, try to get the chance to drive something that is around 2 tons. No matter what is done to the suspension, and how well tuned it is from the factory, you can't hide the weight of the vehicle when you are driving it. Dive into a corner, and you will feel every pound.

If you had to give a strictly hypothetical guess as to what the 5th gen's weight might be, what you would you guess?


I'm guessing....

3,650-3,850, somewhere in there for a coupe. If it could weigh as much as a current Mustang GT......boy, I'd be happy with that.

Hmmm, that is pretty much what I was expecting you to say, although I didn't want to hear it.

If the Camaro hits 3850, it will put it right next to the GT500 in terms of weight.

Hmmm, that is pretty much what I was expecting you to say, although I didn't want to hear it.

If the Camaro hits 3850, it will put it right next to the GT500 in terms of weight.

Even if it did edge up to the gt500 in weight what would be so bad about that? i mean sure it would be nice to have it lighter but we're talking about pony cars here and in this class they are between 3500-4000 lbs why would you expect anything different from the camaro, the camaro and mustang are similar in size and i expect gm is using the mustang as a benchmark and knowing in gm the camaro will be able to blow the mustang away in almost any category and be very similar in weight and hopefully lighter but thats no quarantee, the only guarantee is that it will outperform the standard gt

if you want lighter you might as well get the corvette there's no reason to stick with the camaro anymore besides the name i mean there's no more solid axle for the track so who cares, get the corvette its a smaller, tighter, and lighter car

Even if it did edge up to the gt500 in weight what would be so bad about that? i mean sure it would be nice to have it lighter but we're talking about pony cars here and in this class they are between 3500-4000 lbs why would you expect anything different from the camaro, the camaro and mustang are similar in size and i expect gm is using the mustang as a benchmark and knowing in gm the camaro will be able to blow the mustang away in almost any category and be very similar in weight and hopefully lighter but thats no quarantee, the only guarantee is that it will outperform the standard gt

Just because 3500-4000lbs will be the norm for this class of cars in the up and coming years, doesn't mean GM has to fit that criteria. They probably benchmarked the Mustang heavily, but it doesn't mean the Camaro needs to be GM's Mustang. Ford managed to get the S197 Mustang GT to weigh around 3500lbs. Like I said previously, 3800lbs is 3800lbs, regardless of what class the vehicle is in, and it is going to affect vehicle dynamics the same way.


if you want lighter you might as well get the corvette there's no reason to stick with the camaro anymore besides the name i mean there's no more solid axle for the track so who cares, get the corvette its a smaller, tighter, and lighter car

Because Corvettes aren't cheap. Otherwise I might. Even if the top Camaro came in at high 30s/low 40s, that is still cheaper than a Vette, and a top Camaro is likely to be optioned out from the factory, whereas the base Vette MSRPs for $44k, and that is not taking into account options.

i guess the point that i was trying to get across was that the corvette's weight is a reason why they are much more expensive than the camaro and t/a's were

it costs major R&D time to make a car light other than making the car dimensionally smaller which isn't a good idea (what kind of camaro would that be?)

i dont mean to be starting arguments or anything but i like the f-bodies because they combine power, looks, and most of all price i am only 20 years old so a vette isn't exactly in my price range but a v8 camaro would be a lot closer to my price range. but if they can make it lighter without screwing with affordability, dont get me wrong, im all over it.

just dont screw with my affordability i want one of these cars and if it were to cost 5k more to make it 200 lbs lighter you just lost a buyer

I understand what it takes to make a lighter car, and the limitations Camaro faces for weight issues.

I am definitely weight concious. Like I mentioned before, my car weighs ~3750 in street form, and ~3375 on race day. Why? Cuz I like to go faster. :)

I just went and looked at the door stickers on my car and it weighed 3567lbs in stock form. (4268 GVWR - 701 max load)
Honestly I'd like to see the 5th Gen come in less than that, but weight alone will not deter me from buying.

My 2002 B4C Camaro weighs in at 4,050 lbs with a full tank of gas, all the equipment and me in the car. That’s a correct number as I weighed it on a certified scale. The car still handles great and is lighting fast. It has a few power and handling additions, LS6 Heads and Cam plus the 1LE Suspension (SLP). These and a few other Mod's make's the Car very fast and agile. Believe me it will do the JOB. Yes it's a PIG in the 1/4 Mile when you conceder that it is putting 535 HP to the rear wheels. A few modifications like a clutch, 12 bolt rear end and lower gears would take care that.

The 5th Generation Camaro has a slew of Requirements and Expectations to meet from many sources. Federal and State Requirements (CA being one). There are many requirements that by Law have to be addressed before the car can be built. The Insurance company's have there ratings based on Government safety ratings, Then take in account the expected crash repair estimates. Then there is our expectations for our dream Camaro. Which seem to be based on every past generation Camaro and every car out there on the market now. The hard core Camaro Enthusiasts, Racers of all types and the average Joe or Jane all have a list a mile long.

At this rate the Camaro will end up on the trash heap of past projects gone bad. Or end up looking like the Cadillac in the Johnny Cash song. The deal is, be prepared to live with some compromises as GM can please some of the people some of the time but they can't please all the people all the time.

Using NASA and Military Leading Edge Technology and Exotic Materials to reduce weight wont get it there cost wise in my opinion. I doubt that GM would be willing to spread the additional research and development costs on to other models and divisions. Question: Are we (The Majority) willing to Waite that long for a new generation Camaro even if it could be done?

I personally believe that Scott and the GM Team are doing there best to strike a viable balance that makes good business sense and the Camaro affordable. This task has to be a monumental balancing act and stressful. There are compromises and tradeoffs that will have to be made. It has to be safe or the insurance premiums will be out of sight and offered for a reasonable price or it will not sell. Most people have to live within a realistic budget. These issues I leave in the capable hands of Scott and the GM Team with the Faith that the Camaro will be a car for all, or at least most of us. Being able to market the Camaro to the John and Jane Q Public is what will make the Camaro profitable enough to produce.

Well folks it is on the horizon right now. The new "5th Generation Camaro" the one that we all begged and pleaded for. So what do we do? Beat the weight issue to death, Cry, Bitch and Moan and make statements that if it's to heavy I wont buy it. Unless you do this for me a possible buyer of one! Get a grip on reality. Scott and the GM Team are doing there best to bring the Camaro back. If you don't want one because of your SWAG "Scientific Wild Ass Guess" of what the cars final production weight will be, then by all means exercise your rights and don’t buy one. But Dam give it a rest for Pete's sake.

Scott if it's priced right I guess I will have to buy 2 to help take up the slack, one for Play and a second for Work.

Hmmm, that is pretty much what I was expecting you to say, although I didn't want to hear it.

If the Camaro hits 3850, it will put it right next to the GT500 in terms of weight.

But with much better balance.

if you want lighter you might as well get the corvette there's no reason to stick with the camaro anymore besides the name i mean there's no more solid axle for the track so who cares, get the corvette its a smaller, tighter, and lighter car

The Corvette is more expensive and seats only two.

Of course part of the reason the Corvette is expensive is because it's lighter but there's a lot more to it. Also, the Corvette didn't gain all the fat. It used to be my f-body was a couple hundred pounds heavier than a Corvette. Now both cars will be on the road again but the Camaro is going to be 600-700 lbs heavier??? That is a HUGE gap and I will gladly take the 'Vette even if it costs three times as much (maybe this is their plan :lol: ) The Corvette was able to keep the weight down, meet regs, and come in cheaper than the old one. Why can't Camaro do this?

Price is a poor argument when Corvette has proven that the weight can be controlled while improving all aspects and keeping the price the same or lower. It did this at much lower volume and under all kinds of constraints.

The 'Vette is proof of how things can be done!

Here's another thought on Corvette, weight and cost. Some weight saving components and construction techniques on Corvette do cost more money. But not that much more money. The Vette costs what it does mainly through marketing decisions. IOW, big mark up.

For all you guys thinking that a 3800 lb Camaro wouldn't be that bad, let's put it into perspective. Here are some mid-large vehicles in GM's current line up. Think about the size of these vehicles, and still, most of them are 3500 lbs or less.

2005 Buick Lacrosse - 3495 lbs
2005 Buick Century - 3342 lbs
2005 Pontiac Grand Prix - 3477 lbs
2005 Cadillac CTS - 3568 lbs
2006 Monte Carlo - 3460 lbs
2006 Cadillac STS - 3857 lbs

I don't want a Camaro that weighs as much as a full size Cadillac. I mean, come on guys. 3800 lbs is HEAVY. If the Camaro comes out at that weight, it will just loose more ground to the competition. The competition is NOT just the Mustang, Challenger, and Charger. The Camaro will be classed with them, but there is a lot of other competition out there. You can always add more power, but it's much harder to loose 300-400 lbs after you've bought a car. It has to be designed in. 4th gens were very competitive in Auto-X, and on the road coarse, but weight was still their enemy and to a great extent, their limiting factor. It was made up for with TQ, but that only goes so far. I gaurantee you that any current Auto-X or road racer will absolutely cringe at the thought of having to add 300-400 lbs to their vehicle. It's a huge handicap, especially when the little AWD cars are staying light weight and continiously coming out with more HP.

Don't think that weight only is an issue on a road coarse either. Plain ol' fun driving is hampered big time by weight just tossing the car around, or in a straight line. I can tell a BIG difference in my Z28 when I have a couple of adult passengers in the car.(one being demoted to the back seat). That's what having a 3800+ Camaro will be like, ALL THE TIME.

Dan

The Corvette is more expensive and seats only two.

Of course part of the reason the Corvette is expensive is because it's lighter but there's a lot more to it. Also, the Corvette didn't gain all the fat. It used to be my f-body was a couple hundred pounds heavier than a Corvette. Now both cars will be on the road again but the Camaro is going to be 600-700 lbs heavier??? That is a HUGE gap and I will gladly take the 'Vette even if it costs three times as much (maybe this is their plan :lol: ) The Corvette was able to keep the weight down, meet regs, and come in cheaper than the old one. Why can't Camaro do this?

Price is a poor argument when Corvette has proven that the weight can be controlled while improving all aspects and keeping the price the same or lower. It did this at much lower volume and under all kinds of constraints.

The 'Vette is proof of how things can be done!
600-700 lbs heavier? who knows how much heavier its going to be you are talking like its going to be as heavy as the challenger its similar in size and even a hair smaller than the mustang so what makes you think its not going to be similar in weight to the mustang

instead of all this meaningless speculation, we have gotten our idea across that we want this thing as light as possible while keeping it reasonable in cost, but how bout we just wait and see now, the damn engineers dont even know how much this thing is going to weigh in production form nor are they going to guess so why dont we just leave it at that

instead of all this meaningless speculation...
Up until a few days ago, wasn't the whole purpose of this forum for speculation? Even now, there is still plenty to speculate about. Given that, what makes your speculation better than anyone else's?

BTW...the 2006 Corvette has a listed weight of 3179 lbs. It is quite possible that the Camaro will indeed by 600-700 lbs heavier. I hope I'm wrong (by a lot), but it is easily within the realm of possibility.

Of course, I'm just speculating...and it could be meaningless.

Bob

the damn engineers dont even know how much this thing is going to weigh in production form nor are they going to guess so why dont we just leave it at that

The engineers better damn well have a target spec in mind. It doesn't sound like you know a whole lot about engineering, and if you're not an engineer that's fine.

This whole forum was specifically made to discuss speculation! Some of us are trying to voice our desires. Sitting around being quiet and then bitching after something is in production is not very productive at all. We want to be part of the VOC.

The 'Vette is under 3200 lbs. Plenty of people here are saying 3800 lbs. is acceptable and expected. That right there is over 600 lbs. and it's a gigantic, huge, enormous, totally unacceptable difference in my eyes.

I'm with Bob and some others. The new Camaro better not be 4,000 lbs.

I don't expect it to weigh <3,500 but hopefully it won't weigh much more than that. I would be very happy with a 3,500 weight total (trying to be realistic here). If it comes out at 3,700 lbs. it wouldn't surprise me but I would be a little bit disapointed. If the weight ends up approaching the 4k mark I would have serious issues with that. It may keep me from buying one, even though I love the powertrain, suspension and looks (for the most part).

The engineers better damn well have a target spec in mind. It doesn't sound like you know a whole lot about engineering, and if you're not an engineer that's fine.

This whole forum was specifically made to discuss speculation! Some of us are trying to voice our desires. Sitting around being quiet and then bitching after something is in production is not very productive at all.

The 'Vette is under 3200 lbs. Plenty of people here are saying 3800 lbs. is acceptable and expected. That right there is over 600 lbs. and it's a gigantic, huge, enormous, totally unacceptable difference in my eyes.

im not saying im an engineer but i happen to know a few things, im in college on my way to a bachelor in mechanical engineering. and also a minor in industrial technology with a basis on manufacturing

of course the engineers have a target they want to keep close to but the reality about mass produced parts is that they can very well be different than a pre-production in terms of weight, this can be due to one off parts in a concept vehicle and what happens when it comes to production when they are cast for mass production

and even two seamingly identical cars with the same options can weigh slightly different why do you think there is such a huge spread of weight with f-bodies some cars come in at 3400 lbs or so and others are damn near 3800 lbs my car in particular is fully optioned except for leather and it weighed in about about 3550

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. I think the Camaro will be based on the same chassis that the Holden Commodore is on. Just for reference, the Curb wieght of that vehicle equipped with the 350 HP V8 is around 3640 lbs. Take that for what it's worth, but at least there is a vehicle on that chassis already that makes it under 3700 lbs. I hope they can tweak it and get the weight under 3500 lbs for the base V8.

Dan

im in college on my way to a bachelor in mechanical engineering. and also a minor in industrial technology with a basis on manufacturing

of course the engineers have a target they want to keep close to but the reality about mass produced parts is that they can very well be different than a pre-production in terms of weight, this can be due to one off parts in a concept vehicle and what happens when it comes to production when they are cast for mass production

As an ME student you're going to learn a whole lot about measurements, tolerances, stackup, uncertainties, confidences, prob & stats., etc. You're gonna LOVE it! ;) :D

8cylinders>4,

As a Mechanical Engineer myself (a previous GM engineer designing powertrain components), I can tell you that you are going into the right field. ME is a very diverse field, and you have a lot of options out there in front of you. I can tell you though, the automotive field is a tough one to work in, as is aerospace. Aerospace is so hit or miss with funding, and the auto industry is just massive and everything is about spending practically no money but expecting world class performance. It's fun, but I'm glad I moved to the Chemical industry.

Sorry to take this off topic. Back to the weight issue. What platform is the Camaro based on? Is it the same one shared by the current Holden Commodore? Just want to verify.

Dan

For all you guys thinking that a 3800 lb Camaro wouldn't be that bad, let's put it into perspective. Here are some mid-large vehicles in GM's current line up. Think about the size of these vehicles, and still, most of them are 3500 lbs or less.

2005 Buick Lacrosse - 3495 lbs
2005 Buick Century - 3342 lbs
2005 Pontiac Grand Prix - 3477 lbs
2005 Cadillac CTS - 3568 lbs
2006 Monte Carlo - 3460 lbs
2006 Cadillac STS - 3857 lbs

Dan

Actually no.
All the weights you quoted are for cars with V6s.

The 2006 Cadillac STS with the Northstar weighs closer to 4000lbs.
The 2003 CTS with 5 speed weighed 3568 lbs, but the '04 and laters with the 3.6L and true dual exhausts and auto weigh almost 3700lbs.
The CTS-V weighs 3850lbs.

I don't see any scenario where the new 184" long Camaro weighs 3800lbs.
That would be 400lbs heavier than the '84 Z28 with an iron block and heads.
It just isn't going to weigh 3800lbs.
I am guessing 3600-3700 on the high side.

Also I would think a long wheelbase and width would be a greater enemy to Auto-Xing.
Thankfully the days of the 101" wheelbase are gone and we will be getting a car that 4 full size adults can ride in for more than 20 minutes.
Much like the current GTO(although getting into the backseat is near impossible). LOL.

Message to Mr. Baldwin, I am just curious about your occupation and age.
You're not gonna ask me out, are you?
Structures engineer, 38 yrs old, FWIW.

Looks as though you are used to working on fighter jets and the like.
Of late, I've been working on an electric motor scooter, of all things (see bottom pic in my previous post). Not as fast as an F22, but on this one I'm pretty much in charge of overall vehicle design and for all structural design and analysis. Does it have to be cheap to produce? Hell yes it does, price is absolutely critical. Part of my job is to ensure that cost AND mass are minimized, with structural integrity maintained for the life of the vehicle. Even on a small vehicle like this, there are hundreds of places where weight AND cost can both be reduced with design improvements.

The new car to me is gorgeous, and if produced, I WILL be buying, whether 3300 or 4000 lbs. But that's me and only my opinion.
And this is the place to express it!

To argue though with a front line veteran like Scott S., someone integral to the Camaro production for a number of years now, with all due respect sir, makes you look rather foolish.
If I feel I have a point, I'm going to try to make it. If I'm proved wrong, I'll readily admit it. If I look foolish, so be it. I care not, life has crushed my pride into dust by now anyway!

By the way, again, with all due respect, if you've engineered all those aircraft, it shouldn't be that difficult for you to figure out how to get LS2 level power shoehorned into your 240sx.
Not difficult at all to figure out how to do it. I'm thinking I'll turbo the KA24DE that's in it now to the tune of about 10psi and see if she holds together. There are folks getting 350 to the wheels on stock bottom-ends. And all I need is about 280.

Or, better yet, keep working on those lighter, stronger, and cheaper materials for cars, planes, etc. that you seem to think are so easy to produce,
Again, the idea that for something to be lighter it has to be made out of a different material. I've NEVER suggested exotic materials for the 5th-gen. GOOD STRUCTURAL DESIGN is how you get the MOST out of the material you're using. This is how you MINIMIZE mass, and actually reduce part cost at the same time.
And GM has the talent to do this, in spades, I'm not *really* suggesting they don't DO this in the design phase. But here's what I think the PROBLEM is: Just like the grossly-overweight 350Z and the somewhat-overweight New Mustang, the 5th-gen is going to be a 4-door luxury-sedan platform with a coupe body. So the question is whether or not GM is planning to hold the line on weight or reduce it for this midrange rwd platform, aiming it at the G35 maybe, or if they're going to follow Chrysler's example and build a TANK. Judging from the *speculations* on weight I'm seeing here, it looks like it's gonna be the TANK option:(

and maybe you'll have GM doing this before long :bow: and Lutz will build you your own, personal, one of a kind 3000 lb Camaro because that seems to be what you want.
Yeah, that'd be pretty damn cool! If they'd been able to go the Kappa route, making it a longer wheelbase 2+2, and eliminating the convertible top, I've no doubt they could've easily brought it in at 3300 or LESS. Too bad that turned out to be unworkable...

But hey, hope springs eternal, I look forward to seeing how it turns out. If it doesn't meet my weight goal, OK, at least a lot of you will be happy with it. Just remember to beware of little red Datsuns at NHIS, Lime Rock, Watkins Glen, etc:D

No, I'm not gonna ask you out:confused: , I'm not that way.........NOT THAT THERE"S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT! I was just curious as to your background as you kept talking about engineering, engineering , engineering without backing it up with anything but babble (no offense). Your last post sounded a lot more down to earth and humble (the admission of the whole scooter thing), and I can appreciate that since life also ground my pride to dust a long time ago. Anyway, I have read a lot over the years about the history of vehicles, concept to production, specifically the Camaro and Mustang. In each case and with each generation, these have been very political processes that have resulted in many compromises. When you have knucklehead bean counters to deal with that try their best to make designers and engineers swallow incredibly stupid compromises for the sake of saving a few dollars, its a wonder we ever get anything good. So, I guess it is frustrating to me to hear people bash the car when we don't even have any production specs yet. I do know this too. Guys like Scott Settlemire and the designers and engineers that have worked on this project have done an incredible job, are enthusiasts themselves, and I'm sure they want to get the best possible car to us. I just think they deserve a lot of praise and recognition for the car existing at all because I never thought it would. Soooo.... I just hope all the critics will give it a rest and lets have some faith in Settlemire, Lutz, and the other integral players and see what they give us. I'm hoping the powers at GM have finally learned some good lessons from past and current product failures, and will get this one RIGHT. I've been looking at the Mustang specs and it is actually larger in all dimensions except width (and the Camaro is wider only because of those stunningly good looking haunches and not over the entire length of the car) and the Mustang is under 3500 in base form. The Camaro may well be the same. So get behind this thing and use that engineering expertise to make yours light enough for your liking after you take delivery! And, above all else, build the best damn scooter you can man!;) If gas keeps going up, we may all be riding scooters and just taking our Camaros out on the weekends anyway. AHH, but how glorious those weekends will be in that rolling sex machine that is the Camaro.

Oh and I forget sometimes that this is a place to express opinions, all opinions, so that is duly noted and I am served in this regard, owned, or whatever the current jargon is. Thank you.

Nah, Dan seems like a good guy, even if his borderline obesessive opinions on weight make Mr. Atkins look like a hedonist :D

if ford, nissan, and mitsubishi can all make affordable sports cars smaller and lighter than the 4th gens and make money on them at reasonable prices there is no way in hell GM should not be able to do the same.

Where do you come up with this?

First of all, comparing a Camaro with a Corvette (previous posts). You add two seats and subtract $20000. Both are going to add weight. Maybe a $50000 four seat Corvette could come in at 3300 pounds . . . .

Then, have you actually checked the weight of the Nissan four seat coupe (Infiniti G35) or the latest Mitsubishi Eclipse? They're both over 3500 pounds, with a V6 in the 270 range for HP and torque, not a V8 in the 400hp range.

Asking for 3200 pounds and a reasonable price is completely unrealistic. 3300 is also; just slightly less so. In fact, given the needs for good crash protection (GM has to worry about public image and the do-gooders who'd love to rake it over the coals for making an "unsafe" 400hp car), 400hp, an independent suspension and driveline (transmission, differential, etc.) that won't explode on the first dragstrip run of a slightly uprated aftermarket car, I don't see how it could be as light as the 2002 model.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if the typical RWD 6 cylinder $30-$40K sedan and coupes are all in the 3450-3600 pound range, I expect the Camaro to be 3600 at least. Not because GM wants it to be, but because that's how much something that meets all the requirements will weigh.

If it turns a 1/4 mile in 12.9, has great handling, and really hits 30mpg on the highway (is that at 75mph or 55mph Scott?), I won't really care.

Not difficult at all to figure out how to do it. I'm thinking I'll turbo the KA24DE that's in it now to the tune of about 10psi and see if she holds together. There are folks getting 350 to the wheels on stock bottom-ends. And all I need is about 280.


Again, the idea that for something to be lighter it has to be made out of a different material. I've NEVER suggested exotic materials for the 5th-gen. GOOD STRUCTURAL DESIGN is how you get the MOST out of the material you're using. This is how you MINIMIZE mass, and actually reduce part cost at the same time.
And GM has the talent to do this, in spades, I'm not *really* suggesting they don't DO this in the design phase. But here's what I think the PROBLEM is: Just like the grossly-overweight 350Z and the somewhat-overweight New Mustang, the 5th-gen is going to be a 4-door luxury-sedan platform with a coupe body. So the question is whether or not GM is planning to hold the line on weight or reduce it for this midrange rwd platform, aiming it at the G35 maybe, or if they're going to follow Chrysler's example and build a TANK. Judging from the *speculations* on weight I'm seeing here, it looks like it's gonna be the TANK option:(


Yeah, that'd be pretty damn cool! If they'd been able to go the Kappa route, making it a longer wheelbase 2+2, and eliminating the convertible top, I've no doubt they could've easily brought it in at 3300 or LESS. Too bad that turned out to be unworkable...

But hey, hope springs eternal, I look forward to seeing how it turns out. If it doesn't meet my weight goal, OK, at least a lot of you will be happy with it. Just remember to beware of little red Datsuns at NHIS, Lime Rock, Watkins Glen, etc:D

Well I don't think these little red Datsuns would meet 2009 safety or emission standards; nor would they meet comfort and convenience expectations of the TYPICAL buyer of a new car. Might as well be comparing the weight and performance of a Camaro with an airplane for the relevance.

Similarly with your Nissan. Emissions, 3/36 warranty + a 10/120 emission warranty, etc.

Also, the V8 Impala weighs more like 3700 pounds and is FWD, which saves a bit of weight. It's also down 100HP and 75lbft of torque, apparently because the powertrain can't handle it. Convert the Impala (or Monte Carlo) to RWD with IRS and add a little more heft to handle 400/400, and you're probably at least at 3900 pounds and probably more like 4000. Which is probably what the lightest Chrysler 300 or Charger hemis would weigh with an aluminum-block hemi.

Very good, realistic points teal98.

Thanks for the kind words, willz, 91Z28350! Nah, I'm not Satan or anything. I'm just a big fan of calling things as I see 'em, rather than simply toeing the party line.

Speaking of the G35, the coupe is 3450 lb., 300hp. And it's a LUXURY car. Anyway, this points to what is likely to be the culprit for a hugely overweight Caddy luxo-sedan-based 5th-gen. Consider, the 4-door G35 weighs in at 3520 lb. The V6 CTS is 260 lb. heavier, at 3780. IMO, GM should make an effort to bring the next CTS down to G35 and 3-series BMW fighting weight. A Camaro based on THAT would have a realistic shot at 3400 lb.

Figure, CTS-V weighs only 70 lb. more than the V6, at 3850 lb. Add that to the G35 sedan weight and you're at 3590 lb. (and that's probably pessimistic, I bet Nissan's VQ motor weighs close to what an LS2 weighs). Decontented and downsized to Camaro-appropriate accoutrements and proportions, and I don't see 3400-3450 lb. as being a problem.

A Camaro based on Kappa (which is apparently not feasible due to design details of that platform), would've had a shot at the 3200-3300 lb range, EASY.

My point is, if we end up with an overweight Camaro, it is NOT because a much lighter weight V8 2+2 Coupe meeting all regs and price requirements is impossible.
Here's hoping they DO get then next-gen CTS down to G35 mass, that would give the Camaro a shot at being considerably lighter than the 3600+ lb. porker that most here seem to have resigned themselves to.

I've no' given up yet!

A and C all day long.

Check into a Miata.

For all you guys thinking that a 3800 lb Camaro wouldn't be that bad, let's put it into perspective. Here are some mid-large vehicles in GM's current line up. Think about the size of these vehicles, and still, most of them are 3500 lbs or less.

2005 Buick Lacrosse - 3495 lbs
2005 Buick Century - 3342 lbs
2005 Pontiac Grand Prix - 3477 lbs
2005 Cadillac CTS - 3568 lbs
2006 Monte Carlo - 3460 lbs
2006 Cadillac STS - 3857 lbs

I don't want a Camaro that weighs as much as a full size Cadillac. I mean, come on guys. 3800 lbs is HEAVY. If the Camaro comes out at that weight, it will just loose more ground to the competition. The competition is NOT just the Mustang, Challenger, and Charger. The Camaro will be classed with them, but there is a lot of other competition out there. You can always add more power, but it's much harder to loose 300-400 lbs after you've bought a car. It has to be designed in. 4th gens were very competitive in Auto-X, and on the road coarse, but weight was still their enemy and to a great extent, their limiting factor. It was made up for with TQ, but that only goes so far. I gaurantee you that any current Auto-X or road racer will absolutely cringe at the thought of having to add 300-400 lbs to their vehicle. It's a huge handicap, especially when the little AWD cars are staying light weight and continiously coming out with more HP.

Don't think that weight only is an issue on a road coarse either. Plain ol' fun driving is hampered big time by weight just tossing the car around, or in a straight line. I can tell a BIG difference in my Z28 when I have a couple of adult passengers in the car.(one being demoted to the back seat). That's what having a 3800+ Camaro will be like, ALL THE TIME.

Dan

1. Lets use cars with V8s for weight figures instead of base or V6 models:

2005 Pontiac Grand Prix - 3630 lbs
2005 Cadillac CTS - 3847 lbs
2006 Monte Carlo - 3549 lbs
2006 Cadillac STS - 4026 lbs (4295 STS-V)

2. No one has pegged the Camaro's weight yet, so I don't know where this 3800 pound figure came from (though even convertible Mustang Cobras were pushing 3800 pounds). IRS weighs more than live axles, and a car 79" wide is likely to weigh more than one just 73" wide. Finally, not having a B pillar is likely going to make the car heavier than one with. The V8 powered Mustang GT weighs 3425, while GTO with a heavier suspension, far more heavy electronic gadgets, and lighter drivetrain weighs 3725. I'd peg the 5th gen Camaro somewhere between the 2.

3. A well designed suspension, well chosen tires, and chassis balence is far more important than weight alone to a point. A hundred or two pounds isn't going to make or break a car's handling. If you think weight is the only factor in autocross, I'll gladly take you for a spin in my 3800 pound, IRS, 255 tired, '89 Thunderbird SC. ;)

Check into a Miata.

Good idea! I hope Camaro uses some of the same methods that Mazda used on the Miata to keep weight down. It's a good read:


WEIGHT REDUCTION AS THE TOP PRIORITY

Mazda’s “Gram Strategy” - The Ultimate Weight-Saving Imperative

There’s a natural tendency for curb weight to rise when car manufacturers respond to market demands for more comfort, greater occupant protection, and better environmental responsibility. Realizing that this is contrary to the JInba Ittai goal and that extra weight has a dramatically negative influence on driving, cornering, and braking performance, Mazda engineers made every gram count. (In the English measurement system used in the US and elsewhere, one pound equals 454 grams.) Their “gram strategy” assessed weight in the smallest possible increments. For example, simplifying the rear-view mirror’s design trimmed 84 grams (0.19 lb). But applying this strategy throughout every nook and cranny of the MX-5’s design proved to be a very effective means of building a very light sports car that met all of its market demands.

Targets were set for the total vehicle’s weight—at 1,128 kg or 2,487 lb for the base MX-5—and also for the weight of individual parts and systems. All 16 Product Module Teams (PMTs) then set about designing the components they were responsible for with their weight targets firmly in mind. Major opportunities for saving weight by changing the decklid from steel to aluminum and the engine block from iron to aluminum were naturally accounted for in the initial targets. Only then, in order to close the gap between each PMT’s weight target and the weight of the components they were responsible for, was the gram strategy employed.

Mechanical prototypes were carefully scrutinized for every possible weight savings opportunity. More than 100 PMT engineers also examined three-dimensional models of the upper body and interior components in search of excess weight. Later, when completed running prototypes became available, they too were studied part-by-part, detail-by-detail for ways to trim weight one gram at a time.

Notebooks compiled list a total of 573 ideas representing a total of 43.589 kg (96 lb) that were considered as weight savings measures. Of course many were rejected as unsuitable from strength, reliability, or crash-performance standpoints. But a lot of ideas—like trimming metal flanges, eliminating excess quantities of lubricant and shortening the length of fasteners—were employed to achieve the MX-5’s ambitious weight target.

Well before the gram strategy was employed as a final measure to reach the weight target, the basic unibody was designed using high-strength, low-weight materials capable of delivering the desired rigidity and the lowest practical weight. Three fundamental weight-saving policies were: to use thin material in large cross-section structures within the wheelbase in the interests of high rigidity; to use the minimal amount of sheet metal in overhang areas; and to incorporate as much ultra-high-strength steel in the thinnest possible gauge to meet crashworthiness goals.

High-strength steel comprises 46-percent of the new MX-5’s body structure by weight. Twelve percent of the unibody is made of ultra-high-strength steel which has nearly three times the yield strength of ordinary steel. The net savings attributable to this approach is approximately 10 kg (22 lb). The complete body-in-white weighs 247.5 kg (546 lb) which is 1.6 kg (3.5 lb) less than the previous MX-5 in spite of major reinforcements added to improve crashworthiness and dimensional increases necessary to accommodate larger-stature occupants.

Use of aluminum for the hood, deck lid, power plant frame, front suspension control arms, rear hub carriers, rear brake calipers, and rear suspension spring seats trimmed additional grams. Furthermore, the new engine’s intake manifold and cam shaft cover are molded of lightweight composite-plastic materials. The block of the previous 1.8-liter engine was cast-iron while the new 2.0-liter engine has an aluminum block with thin cast-iron cylinder liners. With accessories added, the net weight savings attributable to the engine alone is a substantial 19.1 kg (42.1 lb).

Mounting the power steering pump and the air-conditioning compressor directly to the engine block eliminated separate brackets weighing 3.2 kg (7 lb). Using a hollow tube instead of a solid rod for the front anti-roll bar trimmed another 2.4 kg (5 lb). Use of aluminum pipe and optimization of fixed structures in the steering system achieved another 0.6 kg weight saving.

High-strength steel has also been specified for seat backs and cushion side frames yielding a net savings of 4.8 kg (10.6 lb).

The gram strategy also met success in brake and steering systems.

In final form, the new MX-5 is larger, more powerful, more capable, more comfortable, and more useful. It offers several new features and greatly improved occupant protection from collision injury. Yet, thanks to Kansei Engineering and Mazda’s gram strategy, the MX-5’s base curb weight is only increased by approximately 10 kg (22 lb).

Good idea! I hope Camaro uses some of the same methods that Mazda used on the Miata to keep weight down. It's a good read:

a good read indeed.. but all that stuff adds cost, research and development, personel, training, etc

a good read indeed.. but all that stuff adds cost, research and development, personel, training, etc

There's nothing there which is really exotic or all that expensive....just the will to reduce weight.

Let me just add this, especially to all of those guys who aren't bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds. You guys are not helping the cause. No sir, not one bit. Why would GM even bother going through the same low cost, weight saving effort as Mazda did with the Miata...if they don't feel that consumers expect it.

BTW, all that "exotic" weight saving engineering done on the Miata, was for a car that sells in base form at $20,995......probably LESS than what a base Camaro will sell for.

I rest my case.

I will be happy if the Camaro weights are about the same as "compareable" ( hehe ;) ) Mustangs. Any weight reduction beyond that is up to me once I get mine :D .

David

Speaking of the G35, the coupe is 3450 lb., 300hp. And it's a LUXURY car. Anyway, this points to what is likely to be the culprit for a hugely overweight Caddy luxo-sedan-based 5th-gen. Consider, the 4-door G35 weighs in at 3520 lb. The V6 CTS is 260 lb. heavier, at 3780. IMO, GM should make an effort to bring the next CTS down to G35 and 3-series BMW fighting weight. A Camaro based on THAT would have a realistic shot at 3400 lb.

Figure, CTS-V weighs only 70 lb. more than the V6, at 3850 lb. Add that to the G35 sedan weight and you're at 3590 lb. (and that's probably pessimistic, I bet Nissan's VQ motor weighs close to what an LS2 weighs). Decontented and downsized to Camaro-appropriate accoutrements and proportions, and I don't see 3400-3450 lb. as being a problem.


I don't know where you get your numbers. Numbers I've seen for the G35 coupe have it heavier than that. The Infiniti webside lists the 6MT model at 3524. But I don't like using manafacturer numbers, because when I read the tests done by magazines that actually weigh their cars, the weights are often a fair bit different, but not in any predictable way. They are almost always higher and never lower -- sometimes quite a bit higher.

So measured weights I've seen for the V6 CTS are around 3700 pounds, whereas the CTS-V is really close to 4000.

A V8 G35 would likely be around 3900 pounds, if it fit, which it wouldn't, unless Nissan was lying back in '02 when they announced the XVL concept. Btw, what do you think an M45 is anyway? They come in right around 4000 pounds. I believe a lot of the extra size in the M45 is to fit the larger engine (there may be an inch or two more in the passenger compartment or trunk).


A Camaro based on Kappa (which is apparently not feasible due to design details of that platform), would've had a shot at the 3200-3300 lb range, EASY.

My point is, if we end up with an overweight Camaro, it is NOT because a much lighter weight V8 2+2 Coupe meeting all regs and price requirements is impossible.
Here's hoping they DO get then next-gen CTS down to G35 mass, that would give the Camaro a shot at being considerably lighter than the 3600+ lb. porker that most here seem to have resigned themselves to.


Given how far off some of the data is that you're using for your conclusions, forgive me if I don't take your word for it. I'm not saying it's not possible (while still meeting cost constraints), only that no other manufacturer seems to come close. I think it more likely that your lack of understanding all the requirements and constraints causes you to underestimate minimum potential weight.

There's nothing there which is really exotic or all that expensive....just the will to reduce weight.

Let me just add this, especially to all of those guys who aren't bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds. You guys are not helping the cause. No sir, not one bit. Why would GM even bother going through the same low cost, weight saving effort as Mazda did with the Miata...if they don't feel that consumers expect it.

BTW, all that "exotic" weight saving engineering done on the Miata, was for a car that sells in base form at $20,995......probably LESS than what a base Camaro will sell for.

I rest my case.

So all it takes is will. And we can help GM get it by being bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds?

Okay, I'm convinced. Fbodfather, if you're still reading this, I am bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds, so please get the will to cut them out. Oh, and after you get the will, please tell me where I can get some, as I think I could use some to solve some of my problems.

So all it takes is will. And we can help GM get it by being bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds?

Okay, I'm convinced. Fbodfather, if you're still reading this, I am bothered by an extra 100 or 200 pounds, so please get the will to cut them out. Oh, and after you get the will, please tell me where I can get some, as I think I could use some to solve some of my problems.

Somehow you just don't sound convincing......

Now try again, and this time put some heart into it.

I'll check back later.

Somehow you just don't sound convincing......

Now try again, and this time put some heart into it.

I'll check back later.

Sorry, I think that's the best I can do :D

Seriously, though, the work on the latest Miata is surely evidence that you can take weight out of a vehicle. I would love to know how much Mazda spent doing that, how much the car would have weighed if they'd put the same amount into weight reduction as they do on a mainstream model like the Three, and how much it costs on a per-vehicle basis.

The regular Mazda models aren't especially light. In fact, the weights I've seen for the Three are around 2800-2900 pounds, which is on the heavy side in its class, if anything. Why wouldn't Mazda go to this effort on every model? I can only think that it's due to cost. The benefit of losing a pound is probably greater on a two seat roadster than on an economy car. It's the same with the Corvette.

Now, how much more would people be willing to pay for a 3500 pound Camaro versus a 3650 pound model? And I don't mean just you but all people. If it meant an extra $2000 each for that weight reduction, would that make it uncompetitive with the Mustang? You go to a Mustang store where there's a $20000 3400 pound V6 Mustang. Then you go to the Camaro store, and it's $23000 for the V6 Camaro. ($1000 for the IRS and $2000 for the "lightness"). The salesman says it's worth the extra $3000 for the IRS and the 75 pounds less weight (it starts out 75 pounds heavier for the IRS).

It might be a tough sell, not to you, but to the average buyer. Get it wrong, and this nice new Ponycar is labeled a "failure". I'd love to see a lightweight new Camaro, but I really don't have much on the line if it doesn't work in the market. So I'm trying to be realistic.

Look at the poor RX-8 -- a critical success but not selling in the volumes that Mazda wanted. Maybe instead of a 3000 pound rotary, they would have been better served by a 3400 pound V6 (though Ford probably has just about the worst V6 on the market at this time)?

3rd gens sold great compared to 4th gens! Your off on the weight of the GTO--Pontiac says 3725lbs. But thats still to heavy for a new Camaro.

I wonder if thet could use the hydroforming technology to keep weight down?

I won't tie myself to an exact weight--but under 3600lbs is preferable, 3200 seems too unrealistic. How about settle for lighter then the Mustang?

i dont see why not, it uses less steel or aluminum... in any event it should be cheaper and stronger, also would probably score better in crash test ratings, another priceless award

Now, how much more would people be willing to pay for a 3500 pound Camaro versus a 3650 pound model? And I don't mean just you but all people. If it meant an extra $2000 each for that weight reduction, would that make it uncompetitive with the Mustang? You go to a Mustang store where there's a $20000 3400 pound V6 Mustang. Then you go to the Camaro store, and it's $23000 for the V6 Camaro. ($1000 for the IRS and $2000 for the "lightness"). The salesman says it's worth the extra $3000 for the IRS and the 75 pounds less weight (it starts out 75 pounds heavier for the IRS).

It might be a tough sell, not to you, but to the average buyer. Get it wrong, and this nice new Ponycar is labeled a "failure". I'd love to see a lightweight new Camaro, but I really don't have much on the line if it doesn't work in the market. So I'm trying to be realistic.



Apparently, if we believe Bob Lutz, it seems that a base Camaro will be priced slighty above Mustang anyway. How much would it cost to use the Mazda Miata approach to shave off that last 96 lbs or whatever....I don't know. Certainly not the $3,000 you used as an example. Maybe amortized over the 10 or 12 year life span of the platform...that slight, extra, initial engineering may end up costing VERY little....in fact, in the long run, maybe actually create a profitable return in CAFE credits, marketing and performance.

I don't know where you get your numbers. Numbers I've seen for the G35 coupe have it heavier than that.
FWIW, I never go by manufacturer claimed weight, either, though they aren't QUITE as optimistic as motorcycles, where a 370 lb. claimed dry weight means a ~410 lb. motorcycle, empty of fuel!

The 3520 for the G35 sedan and 3780 for the V6 CTS came from a R&T comparison test last year. The 3450 for the Coupe is an older number, it may have gained a few over the last couple of years (in fact, I seem to recall at their introduction the coupe and sedan weighed the same). FWIW, Nissan's weight numbers generally agree pretty well with magazine test numbers.

So measured weights I've seen for the V6 CTS are around 3700 pounds, whereas the CTS-V is really close to 4000.

I'll stick with the magazine test numbers, from the same comparison test that I've got for the V6 G35 and V6 CTS, 3520 lb. and 3780 lb.

A V8 G35 would likely be around 3900 pounds

Totally ridiculous, for one thing I bet the LS2 doesn't weigh much if any more than the VQ35, for another, the V6 g35 is simply a MUCH LIGHTER CAR (on the order of 250 lb. lighter) than the V6 CTS, it stands to reason that an LS2 G35 would be MUCH LIGHTER than a CTS-V.

[QUOTE]Btw, what do you think an M45 is anyway?[QUOTE]

The M45 is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT CAR. It's not a V8 G35 any more than an STS is a V8 CTS.

I can understand that you guys don't care if the Camaro is a 3600+ lb. porker. What I don't understand is why you feel the need to justify it by suggesting that a lighter-weight F5 is all but impossible. A solstice-based V8 camaro could've been 3200-3300 lb. A G35-weight-CTS-based Camaro could be 3400, 3500 max. A 3850-pound CTS-V Camaro is gonna weight 3650-3700. Only in the sense that it has been (apparently?) decided that it's going to be based on an already overweight-for-its class Cadillac is it inevitable that the 5th-gen Camaro will be significantly heavier than the 4th-gen.

1. Lets use cars with V8s for weight figures instead of base or V6 models:

2005 Pontiac Grand Prix - 3630 lbs
2005 Cadillac CTS - 3847 lbs
2006 Monte Carlo - 3549 lbs
2006 Cadillac STS - 4026 lbs (4295 STS-V)

2. No one has pegged the Camaro's weight yet, so I don't know where this 3800 pound figure came from (though even convertible Mustang Cobras were pushing 3800 pounds). IRS weighs more than live axles, and a car 79" wide is likely to weigh more than one just 73" wide. Finally, not having a B pillar is likely going to make the car heavier than one with. The V8 powered Mustang GT weighs 3425, while GTO with a heavier suspension, far more heavy electronic gadgets, and lighter drivetrain weighs 3725. I'd peg the 5th gen Camaro somewhere between the 2.

3. A well designed suspension, well chosen tires, and chassis balence is far more important than weight alone to a point. A hundred or two pounds isn't going to make or break a car's handling. If you think weight is the only factor in autocross, I'll gladly take you for a spin in my 3800 pound, IRS, 255 tired, '89 Thunderbird SC. ;)


1) I don't think I got my point across clearly, and that's my fault. That's fine to include the V8 weights. What I was eluding to is the fact that those are all largish vehicles. It puts into perspective what a 3600-3800 lb car looks like. Then you picture the Camaro, and I cringe to imagine it as large as those other vehicles. Also, how heavy is the LS2 compared to a typical V6 in those cars? Those vehicles don't have the LS2 as the V8 model do they?

2) I hope it's towards the lower end of your estimate.

3) Like I said, the limiting factor in autocross and road racing has largely been the weight of the Camaro. I completely agree that propper suspension, tires and chassis tuning are essential, but after that, weight is a HUGE limiting factor. Most guys who autox and road race are not on a stock setup. The already have tuned up the suspension and tires, so weight limits them greatly after that.

Dan

Apparently, if we believe Bob Lutz, it seems that a base Camaro will be priced slighty above Mustang anyway. How much would it cost to use the Mazda Miata approach to shave off that last 96 lbs or whatever....I don't know. Certainly not the $3,000 you used as an example. Maybe amortized over the 10 or 12 year life span of the platform...that slight, extra, initial engineering may end up costing VERY little....in fact, in the long run, maybe actually create a profitable return in CAFE credits, marketing and performance.

Actually I used $2000. I figure the Camaro has a 75 pound and $1000 price disadvantage relative to the Mustang because of the IRS.

I don't know how you know that it's less than $2000 or $3000 or whatever it is. You also need to realize that price and cost are two different things. Also, I think a 10 to 12 year life span is optimistic.

Bottom line is that it seems that you're making a lot of assumptions about what can be done and how hard it would be. And you might be erroring on the side of getting what you want.

FWIW, I never go by manufacturer claimed weight, either, though they aren't QUITE as optimistic as motorcycles, where a 370 lb. claimed dry weight means a ~410 lb. motorcycle, empty of fuel!

The 3520 for the G35 sedan and 3780 for the V6 CTS came from a R&T comparison test last year. The 3450 for the Coupe is an older number, it may have gained a few over the last couple of years (in fact, I seem to recall at their introduction the coupe and sedan weighed the same). FWIW, Nissan's weight numbers generally agree pretty well with magazine test numbers.

I'll stick with the magazine test numbers, from the same comparison test that I've got for the V6 G35 and V6 CTS, 3520 lb. and 3780 lb.


The numbers also depend on equipment like optional wheels and tires and nav systems, etc.



Totally ridiculous, for one thing I bet the LS2 doesn't weigh much if any more than the VQ35, for another, the V6 g35 is simply a MUCH LIGHTER CAR (on the order of 250 lb. lighter) than the V6 CTS, it stands to reason that an LS2 G35 would be MUCH LIGHTER than a CTS-V.

[QUOTE]Btw, what do you think an M45 is anyway?[QUOTE]

The M45 is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT CAR. It's not a V8 G35 any more than an STS is a V8 CTS.


It's the same platform. A V8 won't fit in a G35. You'd need more space and perhaps greater width under the hood. Probably also a stronger differential and transmission to handle V8 torque.


I can understand that you guys don't care if the Camaro is a 3600+ lb. porker. What I don't understand is why you feel the need to justify it by suggesting that a lighter-weight F5 is all but impossible.

No one has suggested that it is impossible. What I've suggested is that it's not possible based on the price point. Fbodfather said as much. You think that it is. I don't think you know as much as you think you do.

Now perhaps you are brilliant and could save GM a few hundred pounds of weight on this car at no additional cost and without sacrificing features that in needs in the market. In that case, they should hire you!

Bottom line is that it seems that you're making a lot of assumptions about what can be done and how hard it would be. And you might be erroring on the side of getting what you want.


I think it's fair to say that we're both making assumptions....about what can be done and what cannot be done.

IMO, I like my assumptions better. :)

The numbers also depend on equipment like optional wheels and tires and nav systems, etc.

FWIW, I'm all for the new Camaro V8 being available with lightweight 16 or 17" wheels, and having the 18+ sizes available optionally.

It's the same platform.

So is the 4370 lb. FX45, which, like the M45, is a DIFFERENT CAR from the G35.


A V8 won't fit in a G35. You'd need more space and perhaps greater width under the hood.

I'd bet money an LS2 would easily fit in a G35's engine bay.

No one has suggested that it is impossible. What I've suggested is that it's not possible based on the price point. Fbodfather said as much. You think that it is. I don't think you know as much as you think you do.

I'm pretty sure that what those in the know MEAN when/if they say it can't be done at a price point, is that they can't exorcize enough from the platform they've already chosen, which is apparently the overweight (relative to G35 and BMW 3-series) CTS. Of course if you base the 5th gen on a piggish mid-size luxury/sport sedan, you end up with an overweight 5th gen as well, and it'd cost $$$ to get rid of the excess mass. Like I said before, if the 5th-gen IS going to be a 2-door version of the next CTS, here's hoping they get the next CTS down to G35/3-series weight (3450-3520 lb.). If it's another 3780/3850 lb. car, then there isn't much hope...

Now perhaps you are brilliant and could save GM a few hundred pounds of weight on this car at no additional cost and without sacrificing features that in needs in the market. In that case, they should hire you!

They probably should. I don't wanna move to Detroit, though. I don't think GM's hiring engineers these days anyway...

FWIW, I'm all for the new Camaro V8 being available with lightweight 16 or 17" wheels, and having the 18+ sizes available optionally.


So would I. I think 16" wheels are just fine. Yet the trend today seems to be towards 20s. Heavy, expensive to replace (tires or wheels), poor ride, vulnerable to road hazards. But it looks like you don't have a tire!


I'd bet money an LS2 would easily fit in a G35's engine bay.


And meet production standards? If it does, that means that when Nissan said it was optimized for a V6 (maximum passenger space for length of platform), they weren't being truthful. If they were being truthful, then the LS2 would be too long.


I'm pretty sure that what those in the know MEAN when/if they say it can't be done at a price point, is that they can't exorcize enough from the platform they've already chosen, which is apparently the overweight (relative to G35 and BMW 3-series) CTS. Of course if you base the 5th gen on a piggish mid-size luxury/sport sedan, you end up with an overweight 5th gen as well, and it'd cost $$$ to get rid of the excess mass. Like I said before, if the 5th-gen IS going to be a 2-door version of the next CTS, here's hoping they get the next CTS down to G35/3-series weight (3450-3520 lb.). If it's another 3780/3850 lb. car, then there isn't much hope...


If GM brings the next CTS down to 3-series size, I would expect it to be close to the 3 Series weight. I agree that the current one is heavier than I'd like, but that's because it's bigger than I'd like. It's about the size of the 5-series/E-class/S-type/A6/GS300/M35, and its weight is in the same ballpark as those.

I think it's fair to say that we're both making assumptions....about what can be done and what cannot be done.

IMO, I like my assumptions better. :)

My assumption is that the Camaro will be competitive in terms of weight with other vehicles of similar size, power, equipment, and era.

You assume it can be made lighter than the similar vehicles without increasing cost significantly. I like your assumptions too -- they're quite rosy. I'll be thrilled if you're right (whether GM or someone else proves you right).