Road and Track SS = LS3, Z28 = LSA etc.

Looked and didn't see this anywhere in here:

Worried that the Camaro is being overexposed before its launch next year, Chevrolet has gone mum with official word about the car, while going to the unusual step of testing cars without camouflage in the hopes that spy photographers and the public would tire of seeing the same cars over and over again. Fat chance.

Recently, the Camaro underwent testing at the Nürburgring and we've taken the liberty of adding some stripes and badging to the cars to give a better picture of what it will look like in production trim. Our sources tell us the sheet metal on the test cars is accurate, so what you see in terms of the car's Coke bottle-shaped body, power dome hood with a slit scoop, non-functional louvers ahead of the rear wheels and Corvette-inspired double-bubble roof treatment is what you will get.

Slideshow >>
The Nürburgring test is significant because this is the first time Holden, which has lead responsibility for the Zeta platform and therefore the Camaro, has tested at the famed German track. As a result of that learning curve, the best unofficial lap times we've been able to obtain from observers on the scene are around the 9-minute mark — certainly well off the blistering pace set by the Corvette ZR1 at 7:40 and the Nissan GT-R Spec V, which ran an unofficial 7:25. We expect to see the Camaro's lap time closer to the magical 8-minute mark by the time the car is ready for production.

The Nürburgring tests also revealed some other Camaro nuggets, such as the use of 4-piston Brembo brakes and 20-in. wheels shod with Pirelli P245/45ZR-20 tires on the SS version. Non-SS models, which will be powered by V-6s, appear to have 18-in. wheels and higher-profile tires. Both of these wheel and tire combinations, along with suspension settings, were being tested during the session in Germany.

An insider who's driven the car says the performance of the new Camaro "will take 35 years off your life."

Slideshow >>
Spy photos also revealed that the interior will be very close to the concept car that made its debut at the 2006 North American International Auto Show. The round speedometer and tach are contained in two rectangular chrome-edged bezels behind a 3-spoke steering wheel. The center stack containing the sound system and climate controls is a rounded, organic design, while below are four retro-inspired auxiliary gauges also surrounded by rectangular bezels. While the original cluster included the fuel and coolant temperature gauges, those critical readouts have been relocated to the main instrument cluster. Now, the four console-mounted gauges are for oil temperature, oil pressure, voltage and a new readout showing engine torque output.

Slated to bow in the first quarter of 2009 as an early 2010 model, it's expected that the Camaro will be offered in three trim levels — LS, LT and SS. The base LS may be powered by Chevy's 3.5-liter pushrod V-6 making about 220 bhp. The LT models would use the overhead-cam direct-injected 3.6-liter V-6 developing upward of 300 bhp, while the SS will be powered by a 6.2-liter LS3 V-8 (similar to that found in the Corvette) tuned to produce around 400–405 bhp. A year after launch, Chevy will introduce a convertible version and after that a high-performance Z28 model with a super-charged 6.2-liter sibling to the Corvette ZR1's LS9 motor known as the LSA. That engine would make somewhere in the neighborhood of 480–500 bhp and is similar to the engine used in the upcoming Cadillac CTS-V.

Slideshow >>
In light of increasing gas prices, a crash program has been initiated to study the feasibility of offering the 260-bhp turbocharged 2.0-liter four (used in the HHR SS and Cobalt SS) as a possible base engine to replace the 3.5-liter V-6. However, that engine may not be offered until the 2011–2012 model year.

The Camaro will offer a choice of 6-speed automatic or manual transmissions. While both have beefy gearchange levers with baseball-size shift knobs, in the automatic-equipped car we didn't see any provision for a sequential-shift mode on either the shift gate or on the steering wheel or column.

Slated to go up against the Dodge Challenger and Ford Mustang, the Camaro offers a fully independent suspension (like the Dodge) compared with the Ford's live rear axle. Despite the added cost of the independent rear, Chevy is looking to keep base prices in the $20,000–$30,000 bracket, while the SS model could be in the mid- to upper- $30,000 range.


Link:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=10&article_id=6814

I'm gonna call BS on the 3.5. That engine is on its way out in general. If there are two V6s I think it will be the non-DI and DI versions of the 3.6.

The Camaro will offer a choice of 6-speed automatic or manual transmissions. While both have beefy gearchange levers with baseball-size shift knobs, in the automatic-equipped car we didn't see any provision for a sequential-shift mode on either the shift gate or on the steering wheel or column.

We already know its got the paddle shifters on the back of the steering wheel.

Otherwise just more speculation by a magazine editor..

Anyone notice the SS badges in the rear?

Yeah, because it's photoshopped.

That is a better article than what MT and C&D have delivered. Seems just a bit off in engines 3.5L :no: but they seem have a good grasp of the lineup. Also why would an SS have Z/28 stripes??

Anyone notice the SS badges in the rear?

The front has them too. Notice that it says those images are "photo illustrated" (photoshopped).

It's just the black car we've seen before photoshopped to have SS trim. I highly doubt the production SS won't have a rear spoiler. And it still has the "not the real" headlights.

SS model in the mid to upper 30K range? Then later the Z28 with supercharged V8?
If true, so much for the bang for your buck heritage where your average joe could
afford one. I truly hope there is a V8 in the high 20's available. Also if true, this is a
big mistake on Chevy's part. Can you say Mustang GT? For the record I DO think it is
BS and an affordable V8 will be available.

For the love of God. If they can Photoshop strips and SS badges why cant ONE magazine out of the many putting their photoshop variation of the car, photoshop Bumblebee headlights on the thing???:mad:

I guess the G8 will still be the fastest car for under 30k.

I've got to believe they'll have a V8 offered in the high $20Ks, similar to Mustang. DI or not, it'll be a tough sell for even a 300 HP V6 against a V8 Mustang GT. The only way I see the V8 moving into the $30Ks is if that's where the GT is moving.

I like the idea of offering multiple V6s as the LS/LT trims which are consistent with other Chevys (I'll guess the badges won't appear on the car). I personally wouldn't even rule out a hybrid or increased fuel economy variant, assuming it retained performance characteristics.

One NA V6 and one non-NA V6. ;)

Interesting article. The exterior of the car looks really, really nice. Will have to wait to see the interior up closer. Jury is still out on the interior, in my mind. Will have to wait to see it in person. The oil temp gauge is a great. Knew about the torque gauge....would much prefer something useful instead. Mid-upper 30's for a V8 Camaro....that's an ouch. Hope it is wrong.

Well, they said the G8 GXP was going to be $38K and I am hearing $33K base from the dealers around here. I guess we will just have to cross our fingers.

I guess the G8 will still be the fastest car for under 30k.

Until they announce the price increase on the 2009 models. Given the speed with which the 2008 G8 GTs were snapped up, I expect a healthy adder.

SS model in the mid to upper 30K range? Then later the Z28 with supercharged V8?
If true, so much for the bang for your buck heritage where your average joe could
afford one. I truly hope there is a V8 in the high 20's available. Also if true, this is a
big mistake on Chevy's part. Can you say Mustang GT? For the record I DO think it is
BS and an affordable V8 will be available.

Not really. GM's answer to that is buy our 300HP V6, it's supposedly gonna be a great car meant to attract buyers from other segments. I really don't think the SS is gonna be high 30's though, at least I'd hope not. The Z28 should be.

The top dog Camaro, probably Z28, is going to be one bad pony, so I wouldn't expect it to be in the 30's, more likely higher. And it is going to be mean..:D But you're right in that GM will be pushing the V6 as being fairly decent hp'ed car for under 30. The Camaro isn't going to 'just' be about hp this time around, but a mixture, or addition if you will, of some of the best characteristics, hopefully adding up to more class than ever.

With prices rising, the Mustang GT will slowly climb over the $30,000 mark, along with the midlevel Camaro SS, in the coming years. Just my thoughts. :)
(Averagely speaking, I meant...lol)

At about 10k per 100 HP as a general rule (at least in the past) and the statements that the car will be priced in the Mustang's general range...that puts a base V8 with around 400 HP (as seems to be the general concensus) at somewhere in the 29 - 31 k range. That would also mean somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 HP going for low 40's....plus options. Also assuming that the assumptions are correct.:thumb:

I completely agree with you, everything we've heard from the insiders is the Camaro will be priced higher but still competively with similar Mustangs. I wonder if GM will announce pricing with the offical debut in September?

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "

Lots of people will whinge about these weights, but they're all 200-300 pounds less than the four door sedans on Zeta/Sigma with the same engines, so I say "good job!" :bow:. That's a much larger weight reduction than you normally get by trimming a few inches and two doors from a platform [Challenger/6-series/G37/CLK/Accord/etc./etc.].

Just think of the Camaro as the 2-door Chevelle SS to the G8 as 4-door Malibu SS (if it had existed), and you'll be happy.
(or GTO to LeMans, etc.)

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "


Not news to me. But disappointing to see confirmation.

A two plus ton Z/28? They can keep it. :(

But disappointing to see confirmation.

A two plus ton Z/28? They can keep it. :(

Are you freaking serious? That 520 rwhp puts it at mid 11's coming off the assembly
line. God, talk about hard to please. Go ahead and get a Mustang and make yourself
happy. :irk::shrug:

A two plus ton Z/28? They can keep it. :(

It's not aimed at you. It has a supercharger, and you've clearly stated that you're not interested in that. The SS version will be closer, and the V6 maybe yet closer. Still, it's based on a full size (modern interpretation of full size) sedan, and there's only so much you can do.

Are you freaking serious? That 520 rwhp puts it at mid 11's coming off the assembly
line. God, talk about hard to please. Go ahead and get a Mustang and make yourself
happy. :irk::shrug:

He wants a small sports car. More like an RX8. But he wants a V8 engine in it. Now that you mention it, he is hard to please. :D

Are you freaking serious? That 520 rwhp puts it at mid 11's coming off the assembly
line. God, talk about hard to please. Go ahead and get a Mustang and make yourself
happy. :irk::shrug:Mid 11's? Lot's of speculation on your part. No?

It's not aimed at you. It has a supercharger, and you've clearly stated that you're not interested in that. The SS version will be closer, and the V6 maybe yet closer. Still, it's based on a full size (modern interpretation of full size) sedan, and there's only so much you can do.
Actually, I believe that I am dead on, the target demographic for this car. Pity.

He wants a small sports car. More like an RX8. But he wants a V8 engine in it. Now that you mention it, he is hard to please. :D

Somewhere between a 2 ton coupe and an RX8 lies a Camaro. It's too bad we're getting the 2 ton coupe.

Actually, I believe that I am dead on, the target demographic for this car. Pity.

I would argue that 8Banger is, since he's more interested in the LSA than you are. In fact, anyone who is more interested in HP and less interested in low weight is much closer to the target than you are.


Somewhere between a 2 ton coupe and an RX8 lies a Camaro. It's too bad we're getting the 2 ton coupe.

I might argue that the car you want is a fantasy. You're not going to get a 400hp V8 much lighter than the Camaro. The closest to what you want would be a cut-price M3, with the M3 V8 replaced by a smallblock. I don't think the smallblock saves any weight. It makes more torque, so the driveline has to be heavier. And at the Camaro price point, you can't use so many expensive lightweight components. Sure, you could get rid of sound deadening, the A/C, power windows, etc. But you won't sell many like that, and I'm not talking about a car like that.

Starting from the other end, what would a Corvette weigh if you added two seats and targeted it for $32K and 100000/year? I'll wager 3600-3700. What happens if you get your Alpha with a V8. I'll wager 3600-3700 pounds. Price it at $50K, and you can probably lop off another hundred or two.

So yes, it's too bad we're getting the 1.95 ton coupe instead of the 1.80-1.85 ton coupe. But there are worse problems in the world.

I would argue that 8Banger is, since he's more interested in the LSA than you are. In fact, anyone who is more interested in HP and less interested in low weight is much closer to the target than you are.

Because he's interested in the LSA doesn't necessarily make him the target demographic. Most 14 year old boys are interested in the Corvette. Doubt that Chevy targets them though.



I might argue that the car you want is a fantasy.


So we've come to this. We've come to the point where a two ton Camaro is not only not unacceptable, but in fact, it is now 'fantasy' to expect anything better.


PS

3600 pounds is better than 4100.

Because he's interested in the LSA doesn't necessarily make him the target demographic. Most 14 year old boys are interested in the Corvette. Doubt that Chevy targets them though.

Ignoring the strawman, you're clearly not the target demographic. You want a as small a platform as possible (smaller than possible?) stuffed with a NA V8. That's not what it is.




So we've come to this. We've come to the point where a two ton Camaro is not only not unacceptable, but in fact, it is now 'fantasy' to expect anything better.


PS

3600 pounds is better than 4100.

Another strawman. Two actually. At least reply to my comments rather than to a silly point that I didn't make.

What I think unlikely, and probably a fantasy, is putting a V8 into an Alpha. Unless they can design two variants of the platform. But then I don't see how they could market the low volume V8 version for a reasonable price. So maybe it's only a fantasy if you want a relatively low price (low 30s in today's money).

But we shall see.

You want a as small a platform as possible (smaller than possible?) stuffed with a NA V8. That's not what it is.


Apparently not.....

Apparently not.....

I'll give you this much. If Holden knew where the price of oil were going, the Zeta would likely be smaller and a hundred or two pounds lighter, and then you'd be happier. Of course, the back seat would be smaller, and there'd likely be some other sacrifice (simpler lighter IRS, less rigid platform, ???) but if you're building a Camaro, who cares (maybe)! So in that context, a 3700 pound 400hp V8 Camaro would better be described as the road not taken, rather than a fantasy.

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "

Thankfully SOMEONE around here is actually giving us some information! If that's correct it's incredible, but it is a heavy car.

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "


I'd say the weight is slightly more shocking than the power. If true it's about 200 lbs over what I'd thought we'd get. But on the plus side the Z28 is a bit more powerful than I thought. I was thinking more 3800 lbs with 500hp. But those are huge numbers on both counts and if true the gas mileage on premium $5 gas will be very interesting ~ gas guzzler tax for sure.

The Z28 with a blown LSA reminds me of the Terminator Cobra and Condor GT500 it will be a drag strip darling off the showroom floor! 520hp pushing 4000 lbs could pull upper 11's stock but the IRS will really be under stress. And I hope GM stiffens up any non-forged internals on the LSA (yes pistons too) as it will be put to the test more in the Camaro than CTS-V.

SS sounds like a better buy but even still that 3900 lbs is alarming even with 430hp. Interesting news.

SS sounds like a better buy but even still that 3900 lbs is alarming even with 430hp. Interesting news.

Just remember that this is about 200 pounds lighter than the G8 GXP, which is actually a significant weight reduction. The Challenger drops less than 100 pounds from the Charger.

I'm sure the Camaro team worked hard to drop that weight.

By the way, combining this with the focus group thread...

LS3

3877 with the manual.
3914 with the auto.

Of course, this could all just be garbage in, garbage out.

Just remember that this is about 200 pounds lighter than the G8 GXP, which is actually a significant weight reduction. The Challenger drops less than 100 pounds from the Charger.

I'm sure the Camaro team worked hard to drop that weight.

Well I'm sure they did but I would've thought in the re-engineering of Zeta to a 2dr sport coupe more weight would have been cut. I was under the impression that Chrysler didn't do as much re-engineering for the Challenger from the Charger as GM did on Zeta for the Camaro.

I'll have to look for the G8 GXP's expected curb weight. I thought the G8 GT was listed at 3995 lbs. An LS3 sawp shouldn't raise the engine weight. But bigger wheels and tires or brakes and different body panels probably would.

I guess I'm a bit :eek: to see the potential for a 4000 lb Camaro. It's just certain numbers look so much worse. Like a recent trip to the pump and $4.09 gas recently make me do a double take. Even if there is nothing that can be done still seeing the big number in black and white just causes the eyes to get wide.

Well I'm sure they did but I would've thought in the re-engineering of Zeta to a 2dr sport coupe more weight would have been cut. I was under the impression that Chrysler didn't do as much re-engineering for the Challenger from the Charger as GM did on Zeta for the Camaro.

This subject has been gone over several times on the website, so I'll give you the executive summary: It really doesn't save weight losing the two doors. Just look at other cars that have both sedan and coupe versions. In some cases (G35/G37) weight is actually higher on the two-door model.



I'll have to look for the G8 GXP's expected curb weight. I thought the G8 GT was listed at 3995 lbs. An LS3 sawp shouldn't raise the engine weight. But bigger wheels and tires or brakes and different body panels probably would.

It's actually 4050 for the G8 GXP with A6. So more like 136 pounds, assuming we can trust numbers that I've inferred from rumors (i.e. don't be surprised if they're wrong). But we don't know how equipment will compare.

The weight is a little disappointing. I was hoping the SS would come in around the 3700-3800 lb. range, with the Z/28 at 3900 lbs.

That being said, removing a few unnecessary items from the car should bring the weight down.

I don't know if the Z/28 will hit mid-11's - at the power levels we're talking about, with an IRS, traction will be a serious issue.

Not news to me. But disappointing to see confirmation.

A two plus ton Z/28? They can keep it. :(

You are not the only one disappointed by this. Over two tons??? That is absurd. When is anyone going to tap into 520rwhp on a regular basis? Whenever you drive the car, take a turn, hit the brakes, fill up with gas, etc, you are going to feel its lard ass in action however.

I wonder if the Mustang guys were this upset about the GT500's weight...

I wonder if the Mustang guys were this upset about the GT500's weight...

They should have been and so should the people on here. But then again, like most Mustang owners, there are many on here who love it simply because of the name on it and others who can be bought off by high horsepower numbers.

I'll give you this much. If Holden knew where the price of oil were going, the Zeta would likely be smaller and a hundred or two pounds lighter, and then you'd be happier. Of course, the back seat would be smaller, and there'd likely be some other sacrifice (simpler lighter IRS, less rigid platform, ???) but if you're building a Camaro, who cares (maybe)! So in that context, a 3700 pound 400hp V8 Camaro would better be described as the road not taken, rather than a fantasy.

Of course there was a road not taken. But this road was taken for a number of reasons. I've ranted about it in the past already - what's done is done. I'm sure if GM's product planners were given a "re-do" on this, they'd approach it differently.

I just hope that this car is a sales success during what I expect to be, a very attenuated life-cycle. I doubt more and more if I'll end up buying one, but I hope you do, and I hope lots of other people do as well.

Mid 11's? Lot's of speculation on your part. No?


Actually, I believe that I am dead on, the target demographic for this car. Pity.



Somewhere between a 2 ton coupe and an RX8 lies a Camaro. It's too bad we're getting the 2 ton coupe.

I think mid to upper 11's is certainly possible. Now that I know what your looking for a Solstice with an LS2 conversion would be SWEET, expensive, but SWEET!

I think mid to upper 11's is certainly possible. Now that I know what your looking for a Solstice with an LS2 conversion would be SWEET, expensive, but SWEET!

Mid 11's would require extremely good traction and a warranty-able drivetrain. Don't hold your breathe.

I'm not looking for a Solstice at all. I was hoping for a Camaro.

At 4k #'s, it's still pretty heavy considering my SUV weighs only 800#'s more.

Then again, my SUV has run a 12.2@110mph :) ~ so I won't complain if the new "super" Camaro weighs 400#'s more than the 4th gens, yet has another 200rwhp on tap. It may run similar times as what I run now, due to the IRS.......but it'll be much more fun getting there ;)

At 4k #'s, it's still pretty heavy considering my SUV weighs only 800#'s more.

Then again, my SUV has run a 12.2@110mph :) ~ so I won't complain if the new "super" Camaro weighs 400#'s more than the 4th gens, yet has another 200rwhp on tap. It may run similar times as what I run now, due to the IRS.......but it'll be much more fun getting there ;)

If the new super Camaro comes in at 4000+lbs, it will be almost 600lbs heavier than a v8 4th gen. That is pretty crazy. A 2 ton supercharged Camaro is going to get pretty horrible fuel economy too. Good thing this will be a low production car, because it isn't going to be very CAFE friendly.

I'm sure glad it's got a great SLA front suspension to help the handling with all that weight, oh wait, er, nevermind...

Mid 11's would require extremely good traction and a warranty-able drivetrain. Don't hold your breathe.

I'm not looking for a Solstice at all. I was hoping for a Camaro.
Don't worry, I am sure it will have loads of torque management to help keep the drivetrain intact.

To get back to something argued about earlier in the thread I suppose the target for the super-Camaro would really be a middle-aged or up Camaro fan that can spend about $40,000 on a new Camaro. Don't really think it gets anymore specific than that. The problem is that these Camaro enthusiasts probably care first about bragging rights (horsepower numbers) and straightline performance second. I would be that GM rightly believes the numbers of people that would buy a focused Camaro with hardly any more power than the SS, even if it had significantly better performance numbers, is much smaller than the group that would rather have the obscenely powerful, if overweight and overthirsty, Camaro that they can say has 100HP more than "everyone else's" V8.

I don't know if the GT500 is the vehicle to use to make the case for an overweight but overpowerful Camaro. I think there is a strong Mustang fanbase that cuts through all sorts of demographics and probably they could find buyers for a premium Mustang no matter which direction it takes.

I personally would rather see Z284ever's version of the super-Camaro, maybe something analogous to the C5 Z06 versus a base C5. But that probably isn't going to happen until perhaps after fuel prices are so high that huge horsepower with horrid fuel consumption is less attractive than weight reduction for the same premium.

Maybe I am completely wrong and the stereotype of the American performance buyer will live on as someone that just wants more horsepower than the other guy and straightline performance.

This subject has been gone over several times on the website, so I'll give you the executive summary: It really doesn't save weight losing the two doors. Just look at other cars that have both sedan and coupe versions. In some cases (G35/G37) weight is actually higher on the two-door model.

Well I wasn't really posing that response as a question but more of an inquisitive statement. I know GM did far more work on the Zeta for the Camaro from its roots at Holden/G8 than just removing 2 doors. Those more extensive changes are the reason why the Camaro is going on sale until Q1 2009 as opposed to the Challenger's 2008 release. That was their chance to make a go at Zeta again and correct some shortcomings. I have no doubt that the Camaro will be a better car overall but I think they should have gone further on the weight reduction side. That is IF these numbers are true, and we won't know that until the unveil.

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "


is this like 100% legit? how did u find all of this out?

I personally would rather see Z284ever's version of the super-Camaro, maybe something analogous to the C5 Z06 versus a base C5. But that probably isn't going to happen until perhaps after fuel prices are so high that huge horsepower with horrid fuel consumption is less attractive than weight reduction for the same premium.

Maybe there is still some hope for a 1LE 5th gen Camaro. Obviously there are going to be no stripper 5th gen cars, but a low content car with handling and weight reduction equipment would be nice to see, since the Z28 could very well be a land monster.

if it indeed is, very nice!

It looks like that call to Jenny Craig may have gone unanswered. I tried to temper my expectations but 3900 lbs for the garden-variety V8 is really pushing it.

Here's what I heard today....

"Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing. "

If true, this is disturbing and deeply, deeply disappointing. The overweight thing is not unexpected but I never dreamed it would reach two flipping tons.

I hope all of you weight-doesn't-matter-as-long-as-it-says-Camaro-on-the-fender guys snap up every one made. Really, I'm serious. Put your money where your mouth is.

That may be the only way I'll get the car I want in 2014 or so.


It's a shame....I've really been looking forward to this car since about the late 90's. Never been a Corvette guy but I guess I better start looking for a low mileage ZO6. No sense in putting off my next car purchase any longer.

Can't believe that after waiting this long, I'll have to buy a used car to get a fun to drive, sub $60K V8 that doesn't weigh two tons.......

Lots of people will whine about these weights, but they're all 200-300 pounds less than the four door sedans on Zeta/Sigma with the same engines, so I say "good job!" :bow:. That's a much larger weight reduction than you normally get by trimming a few inches and two doors from a platform [Challenger/6-series/G37/CLK/Accord/etc./etc.].

and there we have it.

:cool:

all I can say is dont bench race it. drive it. then if you dont like it, you walked away making an informed decision.

is this like 100% legit? how did u find all of this out?

I'm not 100% for certain... But it's interesting info none-the-less.

It's just a "I know somebody who knows somebody" kinda deal.

PS - new ZR1 w/ the LS9 puts down 560rwhp :)

all I can say is dont bench race it. drive it. then if you dont like it, you walked away making an informed decision.


Well, let me ask you this, if you can answer. I recently drove a G8 GT with the 19" wheel sport package. Nice car. But I could feel every last ounce of it's two tons whenever I would steer, brake or accelerate. And that's okay for what the G8 is. But, unless the Camaro has a completely different dynamic feel, (and why would it?), for me it'll be a failure as a "ponycar".

So is the sportiest G8 available, a good indicator of what the Camaro feels like?

Well, let me ask you this, if you can answer. I recently drove a G8 GT with the 19" wheel sport package. Nice car. But I could feel every last ounce of it's two tons whenever I would steer, brake or accelerate. And that's okay for what the G8 is. But, unless the Camaro has a completely different dynamic feel, (and why would it?), for me it'll be a failure as a "ponycar".

So is the sportiest G8 available, a good indicator of what the Camaro feels like?Be fair though. You knew the G8 GT was a two ton car before you drove it. Don't you think this knowledge may have preconditioned you beforehand? In other words, had you not known its weight, would you have been just as judgemental?

you know after reading all of your opinions on the weight of the car, it sounds as if alot of you are/were expecting to essentially have a near-corvette quality car for half the price...i mean come on...the corvette coupe is what, 3200-3300lbs? and you guys were expecting the camaro to be what, 3600-3700? come on...as important as this car is to chevy and GM as a whole, they will not make a car that can outperform the vette. what would be the point of buying a vette for 50k when u can get better performance from a 36k camaro? use some common sense guys....:(

and there we have it.

:cool:

all I can say is dont bench race it. drive it. then if you dont like it, you walked away making an informed decision.

This is good advice, although I am not preparing to be blown away. The 5 series is a good handling vehicle with a lot of weight, but you can still feel it's weight in everyday driving, especially cutting a hard turn.

It is nice that GM knocked off 200-300lbs of the Zeta sedans, but ultimately two tons is two tons.

Well, let me ask you this, if you can answer. I recently drove a G8 GT with the 19" wheel sport package. Nice car. But I could feel every last ounce of it's two tons whenever I would steer, brake or accelerate. And that's okay for what the G8 is. But, unless the Camaro has a completely different dynamic feel, (and why would it?), for me it'll be a failure as a "ponycar".

So is the sportiest G8 available, a good indicator of what the Camaro feels like?

I couldn't say since I've yet to drive a G8 GT. That being said, the G8 didnt see Nurburging.

Of course there was a road not taken. But this road was taken for a number of reasons. I've ranted about it in the past already - what's done is done. I'm sure if GM's product planners were given a "re-do" on this, they'd approach it differently.

I just hope that this car is a sales success during what I expect to be, a very attenuated life-cycle. I doubt more and more if I'll end up buying one, but I hope you do, and I hope lots of other people do as well.

I'll wait for details. I'm thinking of a G8 -- either GT or GXP -- instead. Two more doors, larger greenhouse, big trunk and back seats for only 136 pounds, or whatever it turns out to be. For the same reason, I'd buy a Charger over a Challenger or a 3-series sedan over a 3-series coupe, etc.

Given the lack of RWD platform options at GM, I too understand why they chose Zeta. It was the best fit.

When you talk about "a very attenuated life-cycle", what's that based on? Desire, rumor, inside info? The Camaro is heavy compared to what people wanted, but it's not heavy compared to the rest of the market, ignoring the Mustang. Looking at other 350-450hp V8 cars out there, the new Camaro seems to be in the lighter 50%, actually.

Well I can say I am disappointed.. I was expecting somewhere in the neighbor hood of 3700lbs for the base v8.

That said it is still not detracting me from probably purchasing one as long as its priced in the high 20's.

For all you "its a camaro and the camaro fan boy will buy regardless of weight" people (and you know who you are). I'm not a camaro fan boy, personally until I saw the 5th gen, the camaro was in my mind a piece of @#$#, and gens 1-4 will continue to never be on my purchase list, I don't care about history, heritage, badging, etc.

For the "they screwed up because of the weight" crowd, give me a link to a brand new sub 30k, RWD, 400+HP V8, 2 door, 4 seater that is under 3900lbs. I will go test drive it today. Until then this is still the best one (can you say best in class) you will be able to buy in 09.

So in closing, yea it seems like GM hit one out of the park, regardless of the disappointments (current and those to come).

That may be the only way I'll get the car I want in 2014 or so.



You may not have to wait that long.... "ASAP" is what I've been told.



When you talk about "a very attenuated life-cycle", what's that based on? Desire, rumor, inside info?

It's based on more than just speculation.

Honestly I don't follow the 5th gen area here too much, but let's face it. Everyone was upset when production stopped and demmanded there be a revival. This is what you're getting. The fourth gen died for several reasons and GM is trying to adress those reasons and step back into this market with the Camaro. I don't think you're going to see a camaro have it's own platform ever again so you'll have to deal with the weight restrictions and hope they can compensate elsewhere. It's either that or this isn't the car for you. Me I'll wait and see what offerings are actually out there before I get up in arms and absolutely write off any ponycar.

My word I hope that 3900 lbs is incorrect (though ChrisL's response seems to suggest that is at least quite close). And 2 tons plus for the Z28? OUCH! The GT500 is an absolute pig at 3920 lbs. This particular Mustang guy wouldn't even consider that car - despite its HP. We better HOPE that it makes 520 RWHP (can GM still get away with 'underrating' a car with the new system?) - its going to need every bit of it to even stand a chance of getting into the 11's (stock) with any regularity and with anyone short of an Evan Smith type of driver.

Personally, I don't give a flying flip how much they might have cut off of the G8. The G8 is a very nice car for what it is. I have no issues there. But Camaro? Man.....I hope this stuff is wrong.

Bummer. Major bummer.

Bob :(

It is what it is. Physics is physics, right. Weight was more or less a done deal once Zeta was selected.

It is what it is. Physics is physics, right. Weight was more or less a done deal once Zeta was selected.


Can you tell us what the general consensus was with the disciples at the recent Camaro summit when curb weight was discussed? I'm not asking for any inside info from GM or anything that you can't say. Just the general reaction from the group on this issue.

For the "they screwed up because of the weight" crowd, give me a link to a brand new sub 30k, RWD, 400+HP V8, 2 door, 4 seater that is under 3900lbs. I will go test drive it today. Until then this is still the best one (can you say best in class) you will be able to buy in 09.


BMW 550i 3946 with manual, 3968 with automatic.
BMW 650i 3814 with manual (don't know auto)

BMW put some effort into weight reduction with the 650i, and both have a fair amount of aluminum in the suspension and other strategic points. These cars have 360hp -- so the LS3 Camaro will have at least another 50hp -- and probably more like 75 -- to go with its extra 60 pounds. For all the disappointment, the Camaro (and the G8) is actually competitive with other modern designs.

For any of you like me that got your Car & Driver in the mail yesterday and read the Mustang Bullit vs. Challenger SRT comparo, I'm sure you noticed the Mustang's roughly 3700 lb weight. Kind of throws out the "you can't make a car with decent weight at a decent price" argument doesn't it? So Camaro wil be more expensive than the Mustang, yet will weigh more (almost as much as the nearly 4200 lb, much larger Challenger SRT.

For any of you like me that got your Car & Driver in the mail yesterday and read the Mustang Bullit vs. Challenger SRT comparo, I'm sure you noticed the Mustang's roughly 3700 lb weight.
I'm looking at the issue right now. The Bullitt is listed as 3536 lbs.

Was IRS really worth the weight gain?

this was probably posted somewhere but I'm to lazy to read. :p
edit:well good then nm lol

So this new camaro with all plastic panels, aluminum block, composite intake, foam bumpers manages to weigh 350lbs more then my 80TA which is made out of cast iron and heavy duty thick metal panels. LOL and here I was thinking what a pig my 80 is. But hell now I can surmise with it's 450HP it's actually going to be faster then a car triple it's price and almost 3 decades of technology newer.


The 3rdgen to me still remains the epitomy of lightweight+nice looks+good handling.
Just add and LSx and you have it all. Oh wait I did ;)

To bad they don't make 91/92 firebirds with LSA's in them these days from the factory.

Oh well GM did what all their competition did. They made a retro muscle (like everyone else) car with lots of HP (like everyone else), lots of weight (like everyone else) and a similar price (like everyone else)
I'm not mad, just disappointed. They certainly didn't do anything worse then their competition. In fact the engine will surely be better then the competition.
I guess I'm just disappointed their goal was simply to be equal to the competition, to copy whatever one else is doing these days.
That's ok, it's the safe bet. I get that. It's par for the course from Chrysler and Ford, I guess I just imagined GM was better then everyone else. That they could do things not imaginable with the other guys. To make something so incredible that even a die hard ford or mopar fan couldn't help but be so overly impressed with it.
My standards are set pretty high though and things like that come along but maybe once in a generation. But I happen to have each one of those glimers from each one of those generations. Just look at my fquick page (http://fquick.com/aaron91rs). Someday i'll probably have a 5thgen, just not right away.

this was probably posted somewhere but I'm to lazy to read. :p

It was posted in this thread.

"The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing."


So here is the crux of it. LS3 = no blower and related components at 3900 lbs to a comparable setup on the Mustang at 3600 and a lower price. Now, with the SS's extra horsepower, I'll concede the price issue, but again it kind of makes the "you can't build a 3600 lb car at a decent price" argument rather weak.

Weight was more or less a done deal once Zeta was selected.

There are truth in these words. Once Zeta was selected as the Camaro's architecture, it's fate was sealed.

I just hope that there are enough buyers of a two ton Camaro around, to keep the brand alive until it can be put on a more appropriate architecture.

Was IRS really worth the weight gain?
Certainly it's not your contention that IRS added 400 - 500 lbs to the car. Is it?

Certainly it's not your contention that IRS added 400 - 500 lbs to the car. Is it?

Not in its entirety, but part of that total weight yes (probably 100-200lbs of it).

I just hope that there are enough buyers of a two ton Camaro around, to keep the brand alive until it can be put on a more appropriate architecture.

Well, if this car fails, which I seriously doubt, it won't be because of the weight.
Majority of buyers won't care or even have a clue what it weighs. Car enthusiasts compared to overall buyers are a small part of the population.

(probably 100-200lbs of it).
Nonsense.

The car is heavy because:

1) It is based on a large car. For a given car, the engineers can't scale a big chassis down and get to the same weight as they could if they stretched a smaller one.

2) Increasingly stringent crash and safety regs. These require more componentry. For example, I'm sure the car's big platform roots and weight hurt it in the rollover tests. End result, more structure to pass the test.

3) The inexplicable demand put forth by the majority of customers that every car model should be available with every bell and whistle the manufacturer can throw at it.

4) The equally inexplicable notion that the car simply must have eleventy-billion hp or its not worth driving.

5) It is based on a large car.


To point at that evil new-fangled IRS and blame it for half the weight gain is just silly.

Not in its entirety, but part of that total weight yes (probably 100-200lbs of it).

We've been through this before - and you can take this to the bank: 25-50 pounds over a well engineered live axle.

Majority of buyers won't care or even have a clue what it weighs.

Then why aren't they still buying SUV's? They may not know exactly what it weighs, but they know the effect it has at the gas pump.

We've been through this before - and you can take this to the bank: 25-50 pounds over a well engineered live axle.

Not that I doubt you but where is the research and proofs for this, I would love to read them. (not sarcastic, i am genuinely interested)

I'm not blaming IRS for the weight, I understand that its based off a large car platform and all of the other reasons, but to say that IRS is not a part of that weight increase is ignorant.

Not that I doubt you but where is the research and proofs for this, I would love to read them. (not sarcastic, i am genuinely interested)



I got that directly from an auto industry engineer, who's job it is to package such things. Actually, it was pretty in depth conversation, but that figure was the bottom line.

Then why aren't they still buying SUV's? They may not know exactly what it weighs, but they know the effect it has at the gas pump.

That will all hinge on the V6 gas mileage. People buying V8's
don't have gas mileage as one of their top priorities. I know I don't. We'll
see where the V6's come in at on gas mileage. If they all suck, then I guess
GM can cut production down to enough to feed the enthusiast's. I suspect
the car will evolve over time and better gas mileage Camaro's will be available.

We've been through this before - and you can take this to the bank: 25-50 pounds over a well engineered live axle.

I also thought it was around 100-200LBS added. Regardless though, I never thought this would be an around 4,000LBS vehicle. I remember watching it go around the track in that video thinking it just looked heavy, not as nimble as it could be. I think we're pretty much all taken back by recent posted numbers, they are disappointing for sure. It's supposed to be a sport coupe but instead weighs as much as a full-size sedan, more than the GTO's which got critisized for weight constantly.

Wow,

It's a porker for sure if those numbers are correct. Power output is exciting, still think the SC car should have been a SS, this is about as far from a Z28 as it gets.

The best handling, best braking, most exotic engined car is nowhere near far from a Z28, and it's a small block. Time to change your sig, we won. ;)

For any of you like me that got your Car & Driver in the mail yesterday and read the Mustang Bullit vs. Challenger SRT comparo, I'm sure you noticed the Mustang's roughly 3700 lb weight. Kind of throws out the "you can't make a car with decent weight at a decent price" argument doesn't it? So Camaro wil be more expensive than the Mustang, yet will weigh more (almost as much as the nearly 4200 lb, much larger Challenger SRT.

For starters, the Mustang has a solid axle. Secondly, it's only 315hp, versus over 400 for the (if rumor is correct) 3900 lb Camaro.

By the way, in the latest Motor Trend, there's a comparison test between the Challenger and the Mustang GT500. In that test, they mention that the Challenger felt more solid than the Mustang, and it seemed higher quality. Making the car more solid adds weight. The Zeta is a solid car also, I believe.

I happened to be reading an older 2003 Car and Driver today that had a long term test of a 2001 BMW M3. It weighed 3532 pounds.

I'll put this forth now. If Charlie gets his wish, and GM builds a "Super Alpha" V8 Camaro as light as they can on a budget, I'll bet the thing still weighs at least 3600 pounds, and likely quite a bit more than that. Now if they add expensive lightweight parts that increase the price, or build a lightweight model with minimum content, sound deadening, etc., then who knows?

Nonsense.

The car is heavy because:

1) It is based on a large car. For a given car, the engineers can't scale a big chassis down and get to the same weight as they could if they stretched a smaller one.

2) Increasingly stringent crash and safety regs. These require more componentry. For example, I'm sure the car's big platform roots and weight hurt it in the rollover tests. End result, more structure to pass the test.

3) The inexplicable demand put forth by the majority of customers that every car model should be available with every bell and whistle the manufacturer can throw at it.

4) The equally inexplicable notion that the car simply must have eleventy-billion hp or its not worth driving.

5) It is based on a large car.


To point at that evil new-fangled IRS and blame it for half the weight gain is just silly.

It's certainly part of it -- though not half. The G8 has half a dozen airbags, traction control, and stability control. Each of those systems adds weight. The Camaro will likely have similar equipment.

By the way, NHTSA is revising roof strength standards. Expect changes to the regs, requiring stronger roofs.

Oh yeah, the tire pressure monitoring systems require a sensor in each wheel to monitor the air pressure, and wiring to relay the readings to a central computer. All this ... "stuff" ... adds weight.

I'll put this forth now. If Charlie gets his wish, and GM builds a "Super Alpha" V8 Camaro as light as they can on a budget, I'll bet the thing still weighs at least 3600 pounds, and likely quite a bit more than that. Now if they add expensive lightweight parts that increase the price, or build a lightweight model with minimum content, sound deadening, etc., then who knows?

That wouldn't surprise me one bit. But like I said earlier,3600 pounds is far more palatable than 4100, (which is NOT palatable at ALL to me), for the top Camaro.

Mustang guys balk at the weight of the GT500 as well. Nothing new there.
Most love it still and mod the hell outta them (or keep the stock and just ENJOY it)
I'm sure you guys will too. (wrt the Z28 and SS for that matter)

I don't think weight will kill so much of the sales, I agree regular people won't care about the weight so much as the price.

If it's too expensive...it won't matter if its 3000lbs or 4500lbs

we won. ;)

That may be true, but many, many, many people will ALWAYS think of the SS
as the top model and that will never change. No matter, both models are
gonna be kickin!!! :)

That wouldn't surprise me one bit. But like I said earlier,3600 pounds is far more palatable than 4100, (which is NOT palatable at ALL to me), for the top Camaro.

I don't think the weight of the heaviest Camaro matters. Let's say you could get your lightweight model at 3600 with a 330hp V6, and then you could get a 550hp S/C monster with 4100 pounds, you probably wouldn't care.

I consider the 3900 pound 430hp LS3 model the top one (as far as what I'd consider buying).

I don't think the weight of the heaviest Camaro matters. Let's say you could get your lightweight model at 3600 with a 330hp V6, and then you could get a 550hp S/C monster with 4100 pounds, you probably wouldn't care.

I consider the 3900 pound 430hp LS3 model the top one (as far as what I'd consider buying).


I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying. Well, whatever. 3900 pounds. 4100 pounds. What's the difference? They should just call this sucker a Caprice coupe.

I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying. Well, whatever. 3900 pounds. 4100 pounds. What's the difference? They should just call this sucker a Caprice coupe.

I agree with you, or they should have come up with a new name, because of all the history (the good, the bad, and the mullet ugly) so many people attach to the name. That way the camaro could stay dead and those of us who care more about what the car offers instead of what its trying to live up to. To me this car isn't a camaro iteration, its a new car with a different audience than the previous incarnations of the name.

GM will make this 2 door, 4 seat, RWD V8, under 30k car perform better than anything new of the same model year on the street with the same combination. Thats more than enough for me.

I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying. Well, whatever. 3900 pounds. 4100 pounds. What's the difference? They should just call this sucker a Caprice coupe.
What if they called it a Camaro.....annnnnnd, everyone liked it just the same? 3900lbs or not?:think:

3900lbs is heavy (if that's the real deal). Don't get me wrong...I expected a little lighter (being realistic; anything less than 3800lbs. worth of SS), but if they do it right, if they really focus on delivering a world-class car (which from everything we've been told to date; they are)...I have no doubts that the weight isn't going to be as big a deal as it seems right now. That's just my .02 on the whole weight issue....

Cars have gotten heavier and maybe the Zeta roots were probably better off staying under a sedan. That being said this car will be fully worthy of it's Camaro name. I've got no doubt that GM will make it that way. Certainly the style is 100% Camaro.
But the curb weight at 3900 or 4000 isn't the end of the world. It just that for many of us we didn't want to see the Camaro rise to the 4K number. And past other well known "heavy" vehicles; GTO, GT-R, 03-04 Cobra, and GT500. The one good thing is that in all of these cases good balance and/or big power delivers the numbers but the question always remains "what if" they were lighter. Not a question I wanted to ask on the Camaro.

I'm not really sure I understand what you're saying. Well, whatever. 3900 pounds. 4100 pounds. What's the difference? They should just call this sucker a Caprice coupe.

What I'm saying is that it shouldn't matter to you what the supercharged model weighs, since you'd want an N/A model.

What if they called it a Camaro.....annnnnnd, everyone liked it just the same? 3900lbs or not?:think:

I hope that people LOVE IT. I hope that people go crazy over it and buy it in huge numbers. Considering that the car I've been holding out for - for like 10 years now - will weigh EVEN MORE than that, my disappointment is staggering and mass-wise, it is completely unacceptable to me. But for the good of the marque, I hope it sells well.

Cars have gotten heavier and maybe the Zeta roots were probably better off staying under a sedan. That being said this car will be fully worthy of it's Camaro name. I've got no doubt that GM will make it that way. Certainly the style is 100% Camaro.
But the curb weight at 3900 or 4000 isn't the end of the world. It just that for many of us we didn't want to see the Camaro rise to the 4K number. And past other well known "heavy" vehicles; GTO, GT-R, 03-04 Cobra, and GT500. The one good thing is that in all of these cases good balance and/or big power delivers the numbers but the question always remains "what if" they were lighter. Not a question I wanted to ask on the Camaro.We've been ruthlessly ridiculing those cars you've mentioned for years. The Z/28 will out-weigh them all. Yes, it will EVEN out-weigh the GT500. It sickens me actually. It even closely approaches the SRT8 Challenger in weight. I'm sure it'll pull down the numbers, but something is lost in the translation. And I agree, things started going down the crapper when Zeta was selected to underpin the Camaro. Like Bob said, huge bummer.

I was thinking last night about how this car (IMO) has jumped the tracks and lost its way.

Allow me to put the following out there for no reason other than discussion. I tried to use "reputable" internet sources but obviously can't verify the accuracy, so I rounded to the nearest hundred pounds. I also used info for base, non big block, non special models.


1968 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1968 Camaro - 3200 lbs

1978 Corvette - 3600 lbs
1978 Camaro - 3600 lbs

1988 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1988 Camaro - 3200 lbs

1998 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1998 Camaro - 3400 lbs

2008 Corvette - 3200 lbs
"2008" Camaro - 3900 lbs

Honestly, this only confirmed what I already knew. I was, however, surprised by the weights of the '70s cars.

Sure does widen the gap from the Corvette huh...

4th gens did a hell of a job making C5 guys wonder what happened, now the Z28 could have trouble holding off the base Vette, not a chance in the world for the SS.


I ain't no chubby chaser :(

I was thinking last night about how this car (IMO) has jumped the tracks and lost its way.

Allow me to put the following out there for no reason other than discussion. I tried to use "reputable" internet sources but obviously can't verify the accuracy, so I rounded to the nearest hundred pounds. I also used info for base, non big block, non special models.


1968 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1968 Camaro - 3200 lbs

1978 Corvette - 3600 lbs
1978 Camaro - 3600 lbs

1988 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1988 Camaro - 3200 lbs

1998 Corvette - 3200 lbs
1998 Camaro - 3400 lbs

2008 Corvette - 3200 lbs
"2008" Camaro - 3900 lbs

Honestly, this only confirmed what I already knew. I was, however, surprised by the weights of the '70s cars.

I don't think the weights for the 60s models are very accurate. But back then, weight depended even more on equipment levels than it does now. Remember that base cars had a 6 cyl with about 110hp or so (in modern net ratings), a three speed manual, manual drum brakes, manual steering, etc.

Equipped as close as possible to a modern car (still missing a significant amount of safety and convenience equipment) and with an engine that produced 250+ net horsepower, weights were close to 4000 pounds for most muscle cars. Maybe the Camaro was more like 3600-3700 back then, being based on the Nova.

We've been ruthlessly ridiculing those cars you've mentioned for years. The Z/28 will out-weigh them all. Yes, it will EVEN out-weigh the GT500. It sickens me actually. It even closely approaches the SRT8 Challenger in weight. I'm sure it'll pull down the numbers, but something is lost in the translation. And I agree, things started going down the crapper when Zeta was selected to underpin the Camaro. Like Bob said, huge bummer.

But the Z/28 will have a 550+hp S/C engine, right?

Why single out that model?

The LS3 version will be under 4000 pounds.

I don't think the weights for the 60s models are very accurate. But back then, weight depended even more on equipment levels than it does now. Remember that base cars had a 6 cyl with about 110hp or so (in modern net ratings), a three speed manual, manual drum brakes, manual steering, etc. Equipped as close as possible to a modern car (still missing a significant amount of safety and convenience equipment) and with an engine that produced 250+ net horsepower, weights were close to 4000 pounds for most muscle cars. Maybe the Camaro was more like 3600-3700 back then, being based on the Nova. Most first gen Camaros were lighter than that. There really wasn't much to the more mundane versions of those cars. Perhaps I should have been more clear, I looked at the numbers for non special, base V8 cars.

During my brief research I saw ranges from about 3000 lbs for a stripper V6 to 3700 for a big block convertible.

I actually had a '68. It was a no frills sport coupe V8 car. Just going from memory I seem to recall that it was about 3200 lbs, so the numbers really didn't surprise me (if anything, I was surprised the Corvette was that heavy). I still have the owners manual from that car. Unfortunately it gives no curb weight ranges.

*EDIT* - I was able to dig up a 10 year old C&D road test on a restored-down-to-the-correct-tires RS package equipped 1967 Z/28. 3271 lbs

But the Z/28 will have a 550+hp S/C engine, right?

Why single out that model?

The LS3 version will be under 4000 pounds.

Well if we are going off of the 3900lb SS and 4000lb Z28 as found in the post on this thread. Even the 430hp LS3 SS at 3900lb's is heavier than the GTO, GTR, 03-04 Cobra and about even with the 500 hp GT500.

Well if we are going off of the 3900lb SS and 4000lb Z28 as found in the post on this thread. Even the 430hp LS3 SS at 3900lb's is heavier than the GTO, GTR, 03-04 Cobra and about even with the 500 hp GT500.

I know. I just don't think it's all that bad. The Camaro doesn't compete with the GTR. The GTO and old Cobras are no longer available. That leaves the GT500. Yes, you get another 70hp with that, but you give up IRS, and possibly also some chassis rigidity (based on offhand comments in MT comparo with Challenger).

It's based on Zeta. When the Zeta Commodore was released in August 2006, there were articles in the Australian press about how much weight it had gained. Several items were listed. Among them was a more sophisticated IRS (about 25kg, or 55 pounds, IIRC). You'll also have stability control, more airbags, etc., in the Camaro (Mustang has only front). Maybe you don't care about that (I don't). But these items are becoming commonplace, and it would be hard to imagine a brand new 2010 Camaro without them.

So all this is a fairly long-winded justification for the weight.

Charlie's desired Alpha V8 may have sliced a couple of hundred pounds from the total, but I really doubt you'd save more than that without expensive lightweight materials or leaving off features that the mass market demands. Plus, the resulting car would be smaller -- probably with a tiny backseat, small trunk, etc. Maybe if you never actually want to carry adults in the back seat (adults do fit in my '02 Camaro for short rides), that would be better.

But I really don't think the Camaro is miss for the target market. You might argue that with today's $4.45 premium unleaded that they should be targeting the compact market featuring I4s and V6s. But you probably won't, since you're on this website. :)

We've been through this before - and you can take this to the bank: 25-50 pounds over a well engineered live axle.

Not that I doubt you but where is the research and proofs for this, I would love to read them. (not sarcastic, i am genuinely interested)

I'm not blaming IRS for the weight, I understand that its based off a large car platform and all of the other reasons, but to say that IRS is not a part of that weight increase is ignorant.

I got that directly from an auto industry engineer, who's job it is to package such things. Actually, it was pretty in depth conversation, but that figure was the bottom line.

So here's the thing. When the VE Commodore was introduced, Holden said that the new IRS added about 55 pounds to the weight of the car versus the simpler IRS in the previous version. In order for '25-50' to be true, the old VT-VZ IRS would have to be lighter than a solid axle. And you did assert this in the previous discussions.

But I'd have an easier time accepting that with something to back that up. I've seen others assert 100+ pounds for a strong, steel IRS. Even the old IRS had more parts than a solid axle, so I have a hard time seeing how it could be lighter.

Not that it matters in the end, since any Zeta-based Camaro would have the Zeta IRS, and the VE needed an IRS to be competitive in today's market, just like it needs to be quiet, have good safety features for both crash avoidance and survivability, etc.

more birdie talking here......

Z/28 posted up an 11.9@123mph. Then ran an 11.2@ undisclosed mph w/ a pulley and exhaust.

Also there's a "new" GN in the works. Still a V6 w/ a turbo. It might be a lightweight ;)

more birdie talking here......

Z/28 posted up an 11.9@123mph. Then ran an 11.2@ undisclosed mph w/ a pulley and exhaust.

Also there's a "new" GN in the works. Still a V6 w/ a turbo. It might be a lightweight ;)

I wonder what the Z/28 would run with traction, assuming nothing broke due to the power and weight of the car.

I'll believe the GN when I see it.

So all this is a fairly long-winded justification for the weight.

Charlie's desired Alpha V8 may have sliced a couple of hundred pounds from the total, but I really doubt you'd save more than that without expensive lightweight materials or leaving off features that the mass market demands. Plus, the resulting car would be smaller -- probably with a tiny backseat, small trunk, etc. Maybe if you never actually want to carry adults in the back seat (adults do fit in my '02 Camaro for short rides), that would be better.


You don't know how many pounds a different architecture would save and neither do I. It's all speculation.

I'm not a vehicle architect. I'm just a guy on the internet who wanted to spend money on a Camaro or two. Whatever confluence of events brought us here - here we be. We could argue about rear seat room or the weight of the VZ IRS vs Zeta's. Whatever.
What this all boils down to for me is, that a two ton Camaro is not a product I'm in the market for.

BTW, the new '09 Mazda6 is larger than the previous car and IIRC is about 70 pounds lighter. So arguments that weight CANNOT be controlled affordably in today's environment are moot.

And Mazda's weight saving techniques are only the tip of the iceberg when compared to what we're about to see.

Here's what Peter Horbury had to say in AN today:

"We have a car which I think is more suitable for the times than the Challenger and the Camaro," said Peter Horbury, Ford Motor's North American design director. "Especially the Challenger--it is a huge car when you see it on the road."

Here's what Peter Horbury had to say in AN today:

I don't have a subscription to read that article. But did he said anything about actually lowering weight on the Mustang? Or just about making it LOOK smaller. 'cause I read a larger excerpt somewhere else that implied they were just working on appearances.

As for the Mazda6...what? (I noted the IIRC...so it's not an attack.)


Super-sizing the Mazda 6 means more weight, of course. In this case, the Mazda 6 with the four-cylinder engine packs an extra 141 pounds, while the V6 model adds 169 pounds. That adds up to 3,547 pounds with the V6 in place — about average for the class
http://http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=126392/pageNumber=1

I don't have a subscription to read that article. But did he said anything about actually lowering weight on the Mustang? Or just about making it LOOK smaller. 'cause I read a larger excerpt somewhere else that implied they were just working on appearances.

As for the Mazda6...what? (I noted the IIRC...so it's not an attack.)

I'm at work now so I'll look up that Mazda6 stuff when I get some time.

As far as Horbury's comments, he was talking about even the appearance of a big bulky car, implies a 'gas guzzler' to the consumer. And of course the current MCE'd '10 Mustang will be several hundred pound lighter than the Camaro.

EDIT: Here's a quick one...

While the Mazda6 is larger than the previous model, weight has been reduced, further improving efficiency.

http://www.jdpower.com/autos/articles/2009-Mazda6-Preview

Until they announce the price increase on the 2009 models. Given the speed with which the 2008 G8 GTs were snapped up, I expect a healthy adder.

No offense to the G8, but my Mustang Bullitt was under 30k, and it considerably faster than the G8, something to the tune of 13.26 @ 105- stock... The guy I work with that has a G8 let me drive his... It's fun, but just not what I was expecting. The GXP on the other hand sounds like a winner in the performance segment, however they seem to also carry a hefty price tag.

I know. I just don't think it's all that bad. The Camaro doesn't compete with the GTR. The GTO and old Cobras are no longer available. That leaves the GT500. Yes, you get another 70hp with that, but you give up IRS, and possibly also some chassis rigidity (based on offhand comments in MT comparo with Challenger).

Well I listed those cars because they are recent performance vehicles in our time that have been called porky. And if the rumor is true the Camaro will handly trump them all. I had an idea that the new Camaro would be heavier as cars are getting heavier because we all want our cake and eat it too. But I was thinking 3700-3800 or the weight of a 03-04 Cobra vert with similar power would be acceptable. Having driven one of those I felt it was heavy but had enough power and chassis tuning to make it work. As it stands now for all the extra grunt the LS3 has over the LS1 it will be just enough to pull a 3900lb Camaro to what a 3500lb '02 LS1 Camaro was doing 7 years prior. Not to mention all those close runs between LS1 Vettes and Camaros will probably be a thing of the past. I'll have a hard time believing a 3900lb LS3 Camaro will run close with a 3300lb LS3 Vette.


But I really don't think the Camaro is miss for the target market. You might argue that with today's $4.45 premium unleaded that they should be targeting the compact market featuring I4s and V6s. But you probably won't, since you're on this website. :)

No I agree and I think the Camaro will be a hit in todays market. From the reaction of the focus group with the V6 manual it's gaoing to be a nice option in that market. I just get the feeling that in GM's eyes the V6 is now the leader and while great overall for the car the weight, cost, and fuel economy on the V8 has made it harder on us enthusiasts. For all 4 Camaro generations prior the V8 model was the one to have. That may change in the 5th Gen.

For all 4 Camaro generations prior the V8 model was the one to have. That may change in the 5th Gen.

Tell me honestly, Is that a bad thing? :)

They're tuning the exhaust on the V6 so even it has a great sound, and whether or not one agrees, 300hp is a lot of power. If they make this V6 the poster-child of this generation of Camaro, it will ensure the longevity of the car as a whole.:bow:

Hell, give it a few years, and I'll bet they end up putting in a DI Turbo 6 making 400hp, and 28mpg. ;).....I can live with that.




Oh, btw...I still want the V8.:D

more birdie talking here......

Z/28 posted up an 11.9@123mph. Then ran an 11.2@ undisclosed mph w/ a pulley and exhaust.

Also there's a "new" GN in the works. Still a V6 w/ a turbo. It might be a lightweight ;)

Any hint on where this is coming from? I just can't see GM testing a Z28 in any other form than OEM stock.

I just can't see GM testing a Z28 in any other form than OEM stock.
Unless they're testing components for the 2010 GMPP catalog. You've seen the huge book of parts available for the Ecotec haven't you?

I can't divulge my source. Well, I could... But I won't ;) .

From what I understand there is video as well. But I don't think anyone outside of a "tight circle" will have access to that for the next few months.

more birdie talking here......

Z/28 posted up an 11.9@123mph. Then ran an 11.2@ undisclosed mph w/ a pulley and exhaust.

Also there's a "new" GN in the works. Still a V6 w/ a turbo. It might be a lightweight ;)

Nice! In two posts you've given us more information than all of the insiders combined in the last year LOL.

I can't divulge my source. Well, I could... But I won't ;) .

From what I understand there is video as well. But I don't think anyone outside of a "tight circle" will have access to that for the next few months.

Well good info either way if true. And if such video we're to pop up on Youtube or something don't hesitate to pop in a thread and tell us to do a search for it. I'd love to see it even after all the beans have been spilled on the car later this summer.

No offense to the G8, but my Mustang Bullitt was under 30k, and it considerably faster than the G8, something to the tune of 13.26 @ 105- stock... The guy I work with that has a G8 let me drive his... It's fun, but just not what I was expecting. The GXP on the other hand sounds like a winner in the performance segment, however they seem to also carry a hefty price tag.

C&D has recently tested both. Two different G8s in May (or was it April) and June and the Bullitt in July. Performance is pretty close. I don't have the articles at the moment, but there was not a lot of difference. They were both mid 7s on the 0-100 minus 0-60 time -- a decent measure of power at the wheels.

They're both neat cars.

You don't know how many pounds a different architecture would save and neither do I. It's all speculation.

But informed speculation. You can see what other manufacturers build. The M3 V8 weighs 3600 pounds. The Mustang is about 3550. Both have around 300 lb ft of torque. Mustang has a solid axle. M3 has a lot of aluminum. These are the lightest four seat V8s out there.

I have a hard time seeing how GM produces a 400 lb ft torque four seat coupe even for the low 30s, equipped the way the average such car is equipped, without it weighing more than both of them. Yes, I'm not a designer, but I can see what several different designers have come up with and suggest that 3700 seems like a reasonable minimum number if you could design a platform completely optimized for what you want.


I'm not a vehicle architect. I'm just a guy on the internet who wanted to spend money on a Camaro or two. Whatever confluence of events brought us here - here we be. We could argue about rear seat room or the weight of the VZ IRS vs Zeta's. Whatever.
What this all boils down to for me is, that a two ton Camaro is not a product I'm in the market for.

And do you think your expectations for the car were realistic?


BTW, the new '09 Mazda6 is larger than the previous car and IIRC is about 70 pounds lighter. So arguments that weight CANNOT be controlled affordably in today's environment are moot.

And Mazda's weight saving techniques are only the tip of the iceberg when compared to what we're about to see.


Nope. The new U.S. Mazda 6 is heavier than the old one, by a couple of hundred pounds. The listed weight for the new V6 model is over 3500 pounds. But it has 50 more horsepower, and lots more room inside. And I think this proves my point.

I think people get little tidbits of (mis)information that then lead to unrealistic expectations. Many new cars I've read about that were supposed to be lighter actually turned out not to be lighter when the production models were actually put on the scales.

Another prime example is the Jaguar XK, which is another four seat V8 coupe that was supposed to be so much lighter with its new aluminum body. Problem is, the cars that the journalists have actually tested and weighed turn out to be quite a bit heavier. The supercharged model (which is the one that compares most closely to the LS3 Camaro) is close to as heavy as the reported Camaro numbers. With an aluminum body and chassis.

If this thing really ends up being this heavy, I'm just going to get a Corvette... It's just like the Challenger: I love the way it looks, but I'm not going to drive a pig around just because it looks nice.

But informed speculation. You can see what other manufacturers build. The M3 V8 weighs 3600 pounds. The Mustang is about 3550. Both have around 300 lb ft of torque. Mustang has a solid axle. M3 has a lot of aluminum. These are the lightest four seat V8s out there.

I have a hard time seeing how GM produces a 400 lb ft torque four seat coupe even for the low 30s, equipped the way the average such car is equipped, without it weighing more than both of them. Yes, I'm not a designer, but I can see what several different designers have come up with and suggest that 3700 seems like a reasonable minimum number if you could design a platform completely optimized for what you want.


Sorry, I don't get your logic. You mention the 3550-3600 pound Mustang GT and M3 as a reason for me to accept a 4100 pound Camaro (which BTW will go for a HELLUVA LOT more than low $30's). Then you say I shouldn't consider the 4100 pound version because it's supercharged and I should be happy with the 3900 pound version, eventhough you say that 3700 pounds is a reasonable limit. When I say that I'm not in the market for a 2 ton Camaro and mention that I hope you'll buy one, you tell me you'd rather have the equally heavy G8 sedan instead. :shrug:

Really, you should just let it be. Under no circumstances would I consider a 2 ton Camaro. Under no circumstances would I accept one.

Sorry, I don't get your logic. You mention the 3550-3600 pound Mustang GT and M3 as a reason for me to accept a 4100 pound Camaro (which BTW will go for a HELLUVA LOT more than low $30's). Then you say I shouldn't consider the 4100 pound version because it's supercharged and I should be happy with the 3900 pound version, eventhough you say that 3700 pounds is a reasonable limit. When I say that I'm not in the market for a 2 ton Camaro and mention that I hope you'll buy one, you tell me you'd rather have the equally heavy G8 sedan instead. :shrug:

I'm afraid you did too much distillation in your summary.

The reference to the Mustang and M3 was in relation to what the lightest 400hp V8 Camaro could be on your Alpha V8. I'm speculating 3700 pounds.

You're going on about a 4100 pound Camaro. That's for a 550+ hp supercharged version. You've previously stated you'd like a lighter weight 400hp car. So focus on that one. It's 3900 pounds. It might be a little heavier than it could be -- at most 200 pounds. But at least you're getting something for that, in a more useable backseat and more space.

What I would buy is really a separate topic.


Really, you should just let it be. Under no circumstances would I consider a 2 ton Camaro. Under no circumstances would I accept one.

And there will be plenty of Camaros available under 2 tons, even with more than 400hp, so why go on about 2+ ton versions.

The car you've asked for in other threads is an Alpha based Camaro -- some time in 2013 or so. You want a V8. You should not expect it to be much lighter that the new one (200 pounds at most), unless you give up the V8.

So where a 3900 pound LS3 is completely unacceptable, hopefully a 3700 pound Alpha LS-whatever would be the cat's meow for you. If not, then you're dreaming (back to a much earlier post). Of course, then I have to ask why one would get so worked up over 200 pounds, but that's another topic.

Really, you should just let it be. Under no circumstances would I consider a 2 ton Camaro. Under no circumstances would I accept one.
That sounds like Green Eggs and Ham. Here or there? On a boat? On a train? ;)

You mean, that even if you go test-drive it (which I assume you'll at least do that, right?) and it puts a big-a$$ smile on your face, you couldn't find a way to just swallow that pet peeve of yours?

You're going on about a 4100 pound Camaro. That's for a 550+ hp supercharged version. You've previously stated you'd like a lighter weight 400hp car. So focus on that one. It's 3900 pounds. It might be a little heavier than it could be -- at most 200 pounds. But at least you're getting something for that, in a more useable backseat and more space.



The Camaro I'd want to buy is the Z/28.

Are you a car salesman by chance? The reason I ask, is that this conversation reminds me of an encounter I had with Cadillac salesman. I said I'd have to order my CTS because it wouldn't be something he could locate, since I wanted a black on black, M6, 3.6 with the Y87 18" wheel performance package. He said, lets go look at this gold with casmere interior, automatic, with luxury pkg - because it sounded to him that this was EXACTLY what I was looking for. :)

You mean, that even if you go test-drive it (which I assume you'll at least do that, right?) and it puts a big-a$$ smile on your face, you couldn't find a way to just swallow that pet peeve of yours?

Pet peeve? Hardly. Pet peeve is not liking the trim on the door handle or thinking that the "torque gauge" is stupid, (which it is). Your ponycar coming in a quarter of a ton too heavy is more like the wheels-came-off-the-bus-catastrophic-failure.

Do you think that I won't 'feel' that excess pork? I sure felt it on the G8 GT I drove. That was a nice car, but nothing anywhere near what I'd want a Camaro to drive like. Don't get me wrong, it was a pleasant, nicely balanced car - sort of in the vein of a 21st century '94-'96 Impy SS. But I could feel every last pound of it. My CTS felt like a race car when I left.

Pet peeve? Hardly. Pet peeve is not liking the trim on the door handle or thinking that the "torque gauge" is stupid, (which it is). Your ponycar coming in a quarter of a ton too heavy is more like the wheels-came-off-the-bus-catastrophic-failure.

Do you think that I won't 'feel' that excess pork? I sure felt it on the G8 GT I drove. That was a nice car, but nothing anywhere near what I'd want a Camaro to drive like. Don't get me wrong, it was a pleasant, nicely balanced car - sort of in the vein of a 21st century '94-'96 Impy SS. But I could feel every last pound of it. My CTS felt like a race car when I left.

Poor choice of words. My bad.
Are you at least open to the slim possibility that this car impresses you?

I don't see why the debate over 3900lbs or 4000lbs. They are practically even and both are just a bit too heavy. 400hp or 430hp or 550hp doesn't change that. It just means the brakes need to be that much larger and more powerful to have the capablity to slow down almost 2 tons of mass from a greater speed.

I'm sure this car will impress and I still can't wait to see it but at these weights it's not going to be a slam dunk purchase.

Poor choice of words. My bad.
Are you at least open to the slim possibility that this car impresses you?

I'll check it out, but my expectations aren't very high. I'm sure it'll be a very nice car - but not necessarily for me.

This is gonna sound strange I think...because it's typed....(you've been forwarned! :lol:)
I'll check it out, but my expectations aren't very high. I'm sure it'll be a very nice car - but not necessarily for me.
That sucks for you, then. (see what I meant?) But, like it's been said all along...they weren't going to win everybody with this car -- it just sucks for the few people who couldn't be won.:(

The Camaro I'd want to buy is the Z/28.

Because of the name Z/28 or because of what it has?
I.e., If the SS or RS or whatever model were lighter and more in line with what you want, would that be acceptable, or do want Z/28 badge?
At least that would explain why you're focusing on the S/C version. I wouldn't want that one either.


Are you a car salesman by chance? The reason I ask, is that this conversation reminds me of an encounter I had with Cadillac salesman. I said I'd have to order my CTS because it wouldn't be something he could locate, since I wanted a black on black, M6, 3.6 with the Y87 18" wheel performance package. He said, lets go look at this gold with casmere interior, automatic, with luxury pkg - because it sounded to him that this was EXACTLY what I was looking for. :)

No. Engineer. Hint: look up Santa Clara on the map :)

I don't care about Z/28 versus SS versus LT or XR or whatever, so I didn't think about the issue with the name, though I suppose the name Z284ever should have been a hint.

Jeezus, will the people constantly bitching about weight please make another thread and get out of this one? It's becoming almost comical the amount of whining going on. When you get T-boned in an intersection you'll be glad you had all the weight you are constantly bitching about. If you want a 3200lb V8 get a Vette! There is a member on here telling us their is the possibility that in testing an SS ran a 12.7 and the Z28 ran a 11.9 and instead of talking about that I have to go thru page after page of crying. I want to know more about the engines in the title of the thread, I want to know more about the pulley and exhaust test mule laying down an 11.2 quarter mile. This is almost as bad as hot girl threads that end up fighting over if the girl is fat or not.

This is gonna sound strange I think...because it's typed....(you've been forwarned! :lol:)

That sucks for you, then. (see what I meant?) But, like it's been said all along...they weren't going to win everybody with this car -- it just sucks for the few people who couldn't be won.:(

Well Joe, it sucks for me and alot of other people. I know of afew people who were going to buy one, but won't at two tons. It sucks for them.

Alot of fine people at GM, who have worked on the Camaro, who knew they'd never get Zeta down to the Camaro's target weight. It sucks for them.

GM, which spent $1 billion on Zeta, and all it gets for that investment is a 2 ton Camaro, with a short life-cycle and an underused plant. It sucks for them too.

For CAFE. Sucks.

For gas prices. Sucks.

There is plenty of suckage to go around.

So when are you buying yours?

I completely agree that the Camaro has lost it's way at the moment. I applaud all of those who fought so hard to make it happen, but this car, be it 3900 or 4000 lbs is not what a Camaro is supposed to be. I'm sure the new car will be impressive, but so was the Caprice based Impala SS...

Oh, one more thing. Every pound of extra weight on the car be it a base V6 or a Z will adversely affect MPG anf therefore in today's climate adversely affect the Camaro's chance of living a long life so when you ask what difference does 100 or 200 lbs make, well tha answer is it could mean alot...

If this thing really ends up being this heavy, I'm just going to get a Corvette... It's just like the Challenger: I love the way it looks, but I'm not going to drive a pig around just because it looks nice.


O


M


G


I agree with BF.


I feel faint. :bang:

O


M


G


I agree with BF.


I feel faint. :bang:

Get used to that feeling. :)

So when are you buying yours?

;) ~2 years. That's the soonest I'll be able to. I WILL have it. I honestly have no problems with 3900lbs...or 3899 :shrug: There's a few people making it seem (from their posts) that this car is the anti-Camaro all because of a few hundred pounds. I'd disagree; but, respectfully, it's fallen on deaf ears up to this point -- me saying anything won't sway opinions.

I just don't see the issue, I guess.

so...tell me again...why is the Z/28 the top of the line above an SS now?

Anyone who denies that a 3900 - 4100 pound Camaro is heavy is not dealing with reality. I've lusted after this car for awhile, and owned Camaros, and Firebirds. I may or may not still buy a 2010 Camaro.

The 3rd gens were universally reviewed as too heavy at 3400lbs.

The reality is, they used to be dedicated F-bodies. Now the Camaro is a 2-door restyled G8, and the G8 is a family Camaro. The G8 is a great family sized car, but no review forgets to mention how heavy it is, and how well it handles its excess weight.

On the other hand, the auto magazines love the Challenger, and the Mustang GT500KR, excess weight and all. The Camaro will definitely be the best in this class, but we wanted a world-beater. Not just a two ton class beater.

GM has spent too much time and money refining pick-up trucks and SUV's for the last twenty years. Now it's hitting the fan, again. (Anyone here remember the early 1970's?, not GM ,Ford or Chrysler.) So now we have new cars with many compromises, because they were conceived when trucks were GM's cash cow. The cow died.

So now I need to decide...Wait at least 10 months to buy a Camaro, or go buy a Corvette, Infiniti G37S, or BMW 335i. The sad part is I love the new Camaro, but I'm just not as motivated to wait 10 months when I wanted to buy a new sports car months ago.

Well Joe, it sucks for me and alot of other people. I know of afew people who were going to buy one, but won't at two tons. It sucks for them.

Alot of fine people at GM, who have worked on the Camaro, who knew they'd never get Zeta down to the Camaro's target weight. It sucks for them.

GM, which spent $1 billion on Zeta, and all it gets for that investment is a 2 ton Camaro, with a short life-cycle and an underused plant. It sucks for them too.

For CAFE. Sucks.

For gas prices. Sucks.

There is plenty of suckage to go around.

So when are you buying yours?

I will be buying mine the end of 09 as long as its competitively priced with the mustang. If a Base V8 M6 with low to average options tops out over 30kish then I will start shopping something else and see what my options are then. Weight is farther down on my list of things to check than others like price, options, modability, etc..

I will be buying mine the end of 09 as long as its competitively priced with the mustang. If a Base V8 M6 with low to average options tops out over 30kish then I will start shopping something else and see what my options are then.

Some insiders now act like we're un-intelligent to be surprised by the Camaro's weight - simple physics, ZETA sealed the weight fate, etc.

Well Zeta also shows the future on pricing too. GM has been quoted saying the G8 GXP will cost "just under $40,000". The 2009 G8 GT's are more than $33,000 with premium and sports packs now that they raised the '09 price $1365.

Road & Track guesses the SS will be mid to upper $30,000's. So G8 GXP = Zeta w/ LS3, 6 speed Tremec, Brembos, tighter FE3 suspension. That means a Camaro SS comparibly equipped, could be "just under $40,000". That would be the final nail...Or are we hoping for some kind of magic, like we did for a tolerable weight of 3600 -3800lbs. ?

I sure hope I'm wrong...

Well Joe, it sucks for me and alot of other people. I know of afew people who were going to buy one, but won't at two tons. It sucks for them.

Alot of fine people at GM, who have worked on the Camaro, who knew they'd never get Zeta down to the Camaro's target weight. It sucks for them.

GM, which spent $1 billion on Zeta, and all it gets for that investment is a 2 ton Camaro, with a short life-cycle and an underused plant. It sucks for them too.

For CAFE. Sucks.

For gas prices. Sucks.

There is plenty of suckage to go around.


So reality sucks, then. The fantasy world where you take a 3400 pound gen3 and add 100 hp, more airbags, stability control, stronger chassis, IRS, for no weight gain doesn't suck. It's what everyone wants.

The Camaro I'd want to buy is the Z/28.




So you didn't answer my question. Why a Z/28 if that's the heaviest one?

Road & Track guesses the SS will be mid to upper $30,000's. So G8 GXP = Zeta w/ LS3, 6 speed Tremec, Brembos, tighter FE3 suspension. That means a Camaro SS comparibly equipped, could be "just under $40,000".
Not if it wants to compete with the Mustang.

I think the fate will depend a lot on if the MCE Mustang is anything like what the optimists say it will be... a 3500lb car with 400HP.

I think the fate will depend a lot on if the MCE Mustang is anything like what the optimists say it will be... a 3500lb car with 400HP.

Isn't that what the optimists said this would be? Bottom line is that we're a very small segment and weight won't be an issue with most buyers. It'll still sell.

For Jason or any of the others....we've heard a lot about the V-6 car (or rather it's impressions), but not a whole lot about the performance of the V-8. I'd be curious to hear how that car stacks up against the V-6 in performance all around. That might take some of the focus off of the weight issue, or at least remove some of the anxiety that some of us have about the V-8 not handling / performing well.

I think the fate will depend a lot on if the MCE Mustang is anything like what the optimists say it will be... a 3500lb car with 400HP.

Isn't that what the optimists said this would be? Bottom line is that we're a very small segment and weight won't be an issue with most buyers. It'll still sell.


The measured weights I've seen for the current Mustang are in the range of 3550 to 3600. Maybe if you get a base GT, it would come in at the 3500 number. The '10 model will have the same 4.6 that they use now, according to the thread on svtperformance. Then they go to the 5.0 in '11. Assuming the 5.0 weighs the same as the 4.6, torque is only going up from around 325 to 360, so there should be minimal added weight to handle that. But it will still have a solid axle, again according to svtperformance. If the solid axle is good enough (or preferred), and you're weight conscious for whatever reason, the Mustang will be the better choice.

If you go back through the archives on this site, you'll see some familiar names begging for an IRS. Those people will not be interested in the MCE Mustang, even if it has the weight they wanted in the '10 Camaro.

Btw, one advantage of getting horsepower from revs instead of capacity is that you don't need to design for more torque. That's how a four seat RX8 comes in a just over 3000 pounds -- it only has ~160 lb ft of torque and only 232 hp.

So reality sucks, then. The fantasy world where you take a 3400 pound gen3 and add 100 hp, more airbags, stability control, stronger chassis, IRS, for no weight gain doesn't suck. It's what everyone wants.

Fantasy? Huh. You have no idea how close you are to the Camaro team's target. Except add another 100 hp to that. Using the Zeta architecture however, was a disabler here.

So you didn't answer my question. Why a Z/28 if that's the heaviest one?

Yeah, and what is wrong with this picture? Wouldn't you think that Z/28 would be more like the lightest one - sort of like what the Z06 is to rest of the Corvette line?

Fantasy? Huh. You have no idea how close you are to the Camaro team's target. Except add another 100 hp to that. Using the Zeta architecture however, was a disabler here.

Engineering targets are often not based in reality. They should be aggressive. On occasion, you can actually meet them. I'm in favor of aggressive targets. But one should not *expect* that they will all be met. So the target was 500hp and 3500 pounds? I like that. Not surprised they didn't hit it (and I don't it's possible at the Camaro price point -- whether Zeta, Alpha, or Kappa). I'd be happy to be proved wrong though :D



Yeah, and what is wrong with this picture? Wouldn't you think that Z/28 would be more like the lightest one - sort of like what the Z06 is to rest of the Corvette line?

Okay. Followup question. If they came out with a ZO5 that was a lightweight, and the Z/28 was the S/C heavyweight, would you be mildly annoyed and buy the ZO5, or would you be greatly annoyed and not buy it?

I can see the point about the heritage of the Z/28, which never had a big block back in the day, but is getting the modern equivalent.

Okay. Followup question. If they came out with a ZO5 that was a lightweight, and the Z/28 was the S/C heavyweight, would you be mildly annoyed and buy the ZO5, or would you be greatly annoyed and not buy it?

I can see the point about the heritage of the Z/28, which never had a big block back in the day, but is getting the modern equivalent.

I think that's all semantics. I have a very focused view of what the Z/28 should be. Myself and many others have expended great energy over the years, to revive, restore and protect the "Z/28 Brand". Z/28 is what pushes my personal buttons.


So with that preface, a 4100 pound Z/28 is a total abomination to me. It is simply an obscene presentation of the Z/28's essence. It is so far off the track of what my mind's eye sees as appropriate - I barely have words to describe it. GM isn't happy about that weight either, and needed to go with a SC'd engine to achieve it's power to weight goals - adding even more weight in the process. What a vicious circle.

Awhile ago, I was joking with my cousin about his '79, T/A 6.6 Trans Am. I said, wouldn't it be something if the 5th gen Z/28 made your big, honkin' 2nd gen look like a featherweight? Well, it's no longer a joke.

I'm sure they'll sell every one. But I wouldn't drop my $40K(+) on one.

so...tell me again...why is the Z/28 the top of the line above an SS now?

Because that's the way it was for many years. You can't go off of the last 6 years of 4th gen production.

Back on topic.

As I've mentioned before, the problem of weight can be handled by the owner and the aftermarket. Unnecessary parts (like rear seats) can be removed, and lighter body pieces can be installed. It's unfortunate that the 5th gen is so heavy, but at least it can be somewhat fixed.

Everytime I read these threads I think of this and laugh
http://bryce.milton.com/eecblog/miscellany/WhatTheUserWanted.gif

Because that's the way it was for many years. You can't go off of the last 6 years of 4th gen production.

Back on topic.

As I've mentioned before, the problem of weight can be handled by the owner and the aftermarket. Unnecessary parts (like rear seats) can be removed, and lighter body pieces can be installed. It's unfortunate that the 5th gen is so heavy, but at least it can be somewhat fixed.

I would really like to see GM offer some lightweight kit for the car: Carbon fiber hood, CF body panels, maybe Carbon Brakes from the ZR-1. These would be really expensive but if you could piece it together over time you could make some pretty good cuts into the weight. It would probably never be worth it to most people though. Also the design of the car can't really be changed and that is where most of the weight is. It would probably cost 5-10K to shave a few hundred pounds off.

I would really like to see GM offer some lightweight kit for the car: Carbon fiber hood, CF body panels, maybe Carbon Brakes from the ZR-1. These would be really expensive but if you could piece it together over time you could make some pretty good cuts into the weight. It would probably never be worth it to most people though. Also the design of the car can't really be changed and that is where most of the weight is. It would probably cost 5-10K to shave a few hundred pounds off.

I'm not sure if it really even matters. It seems as if this car will be morbidly obese and that's that. I don't know who would want to spend $5-$10,000 to get it down to say...4000 pounds or so.

It is, what it is, and people will choose to buy or not buy it.

I would really like to see GM offer some lightweight kit for the car: Carbon fiber hood, CF body panels, maybe Carbon Brakes from the ZR-1. These would be really expensive but if you could piece it together over time you could make some pretty good cuts into the weight. It would probably never be worth it to most people though. Also the design of the car can't really be changed and that is where most of the weight is. It would probably cost 5-10K to shave a few hundred pounds off.

I'd be willing to bet you can shave about 200 lbs. off the weight of the car for FAR less than $5K.

Page 11 and still nothing new to add other than "it's a whale, I'm not going to buy one" or Z28 vs SS for the umptenth time. Can we have a new thread dedicated to complaining about weight so we can get back to the topic of powerplants and track times?

Okay.

The track times would be even better and the powerplants even more stunning if the car was lighter.

Page 11 and still nothing new to add other than "it's a whale, I'm not going to buy one" or Z28 vs SS for the umptenth time. Can we have a new thread dedicated to complaining about weight so we can get back to the topic of powerplants and track times?

Hey, I think that you're doing a pretty good job of keeping this thread alive. ;)

Okay.

The track times would be even better and the powerplants even more stunning if the car was lighter.

And also....

It would get better mpg, be CAFE positive, and be more fun to drive if it were 500 pounds lighter.

But, that car is alittle ways off......

Hypothetical question:
Sales have been great the past two years, up in the record 500,000 yearly units range :p:lol:
But, GM decides to move the car to Alpha, and the Z28 ends up weighing ~3600lbs and sporting a brand-new 450hp Twin-Turbo V6....
;) Would you take it? Just havin' a little fun:p

It would get better mpg, be CAFE positive.
It would undoubtedly get better mpg...but would it really be more CAFE friendly?
How does this wheelbase-footprint thing effect mpg requirements? It's an honest question; supposedly smaller-wheelbase cars need to meet higher standards than their larger-wheelbase counterparts...I remember reading something about Porche being screwed becuase their teeny little cars would have to adhere to a ~40mpg standard. So would it make more sense to make a larger Camaro more effecient, instead of a smaller one?

And also....

It would get better mpg, be CAFE positive, and be more fun to drive if it were 500 pounds lighter.

But, that car is alittle ways off......And also it would be nice if we could get back to the poster about 5 pages ago that posted test mules have gone 12.7 and 11.9 with the LS3 and Supercharged 6.2, I would like some more info on that since this is the Powertrain Section.

I think that's all semantics. I have a very focused view of what the Z/28 should be. Myself and many others have expended great energy over the years, to revive, restore and protect the "Z/28 Brand". Z/28 is what pushes my personal buttons.


So with that preface, a 4100 pound Z/28 is a total abomination to me. It is simply an obscene presentation of the Z/28's essence. It is so far off the track of what my mind's eye sees as appropriate - I barely have words to describe it. GM isn't happy about that weight either, and needed to go with a SC'd engine to achieve it's power to weight goals - adding even more weight in the process. What a vicious circle.

Awhile ago, I was joking with my cousin about his '79, T/A 6.6 Trans Am. I said, wouldn't it be something if the 5th gen Z/28 made your big, honkin' 2nd gen look like a featherweight? Well, it's no longer a joke.

I'm sure they'll sell every one. But I wouldn't drop my $40K(+) on one.

Thanks. I understand your position much better now.

They are gonna have a lot more problems than weight if they don't offer a V8 below
$30,000.

And also it would be nice if we could get back to the poster about 5 pages ago that posted test mules have gone 12.7 and 11.9 with the LS3 and Supercharged 6.2, I would like some more info on that since this is the Powertrain Section.

Well there is nothing stopping anyone from talking about the info given. This is all the news in two posts:
Z28/LSA Dyno Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LSA:


Quote:
The Z28 will also have 550+ HP that's underated. The dyno chart showed 520 RWHP 492 RWTQ. Changing a pulley and adding a tune & exhaust the thing had 615 RWHP and 602 RWTQ. They said that that was with a mid size pulley. They have smaller ones.

On the downside the car will weight at or over 4000lbs.

The SS is still going to be 430hp from a LS3 (3900lbs). It's gone 12.7@113 in testing."

more birdie talking here......

Z/28 posted up an 11.9@123mph. Then ran an 11.2@ undisclosed mph w/ a pulley and exhaust.

Also there's a "new" GN in the works. Still a V6 w/ a turbo. It might be a lightweight

Go back and re-read to see that I did ask for more about this info and to get more but you know how that goes. I don't know what else can be said.

Great numbers and big power from the Z28. Looks like the SS is running well too. What is your views?

A little birdie dropped off a note today regarding the '10 Camaro Z28 with supercharged (1.9 TVS) 6.2L/LAS:


Not saying I'm skeptical, but isn't the supercharged Z28 going to be a 2011 MY vehicle. :p

It would undoubtedly get better mpg...but would it really be more CAFE friendly?
How does this wheelbase-footprint thing effect mpg requirements? It's an honest question; supposedly smaller-wheelbase cars need to meet higher standards than their larger-wheelbase counterparts...I remember reading something about Porche being screwed becuase their teeny little cars would have to adhere to a ~40mpg standard. So would it make more sense to make a larger Camaro more effecient, instead of a smaller one?

There was a good explaination on what effects a"footprint" would have on CAFE ratings on C&G afew weeks ago. I'm no expert on it, but it seems to me that large footprint cars, still need to increase MPG, just not as much as small cars.

Anyway, a smaller, lighter Camaro, might not necessarily have a much smaller footprint either, since the footprint is calculated by wheelbase and track.

As far as making the 5th gen more efficient, GM is on it. I wonder if there is much of a market for a two ton, 4 cylinder, Camaro though.

3900 lbs? :cry:

They are gonna have a lot more problems than weight if they don't offer a V8 below
$30,000.


Isnt that the truth. The way gas prices are and everything else you wonder if its not DOA. Im really disappointed with the weight. This thing is a fatty. One of the reliable sources on the mustang boards have been saying what we were told in this thread for quite a while. I must say they were very accurate. Im not going to be the first inline anyway to be raped by a dealer so Ill just hang tight until the 11 mustang shows up and see what they have. So much for a 3600 lb car.

Isnt that the truth. The way gas prices are and everything else you wonder if its not DOA. Im really disappointed with the weight. This thing is a fatty. One of the reliable sources on the mustang boards have been saying what we were told in this thread for quite a while. I must say they were very accurate. Im not going to be the first inline anyway to be raped by a dealer so Ill just hang tight until the 11 mustang shows up and see what they have. So much for a 3600 lb car.

3600 pounds never sounded believeable. I don't know why so many thought that would be the number. Wishful thinking, I guess.

But it's not fat, it just has big Zeta bones.

But it's not fat, it just has big Zeta bones.

Yeah, the Camaro and Eric Cartman. :cry:

3600 pounds never sounded believeable. I don't know why so many thought that would be the number. Wishful thinking, I guess.



Early on, the Camaro team felt that they could re-engineer Zeta for Camaro, to come under that. That was the plan. I seriously doubt that GM would have gone with Zeta for the Camaro, if they knew it would come in at two tons. At least I'd like to think so.

3600 pounds never sounded believeable. I don't know why so many thought that would be the number. Wishful thinking, I guess.

But it's not fat, it just has big Zeta bones.

3600 never seemed realistic to me either but a lot of the people drinking the gm kool aid kicked the number around a lot. I understand the problem with weight being built on the Zeta platform. Were there any other choices? These pony cars are just getting to big. The challenger is huge. I do hope Ford learns something from this. It would not bother me a bit to see a slightly smaller stang. I love the ls3 but Im going to look around when the time comes.

Were there any other choices? .

Yes. But politics killed an Alpha-like architecture 3 years ago. Remember the Torana?

Yes. But politics killed an Alpha-like architecture 3 years ago. Remember the Torana?

Never heard of it. From Australia maybe? Its a shame politics killed it.

Yes. But politics killed an Alpha-like architecture 3 years ago. Remember the Torana?

At the time, they said V6 only for the Torana, though it was a TTV6. I presume that was just misdirection?

At the time, they said V6 only for the Torana, though it was a TTV6. I presume that was just misdirection?


Had they moved forward with that architecture, there wasn't even the thought that a Camaro based version wouldn't be V8 capable.

Had they moved forward with that architecture, there wasn't even the thought that a Camaro based version wouldn't be V8 capable.


Killing the Torana ranks up as one of the dumbest things GM's done in the last 5 years.

[If i remember correctly, didn't the Torana concept vehicle only have like a 3 gallon fuel tank? It was a styling concept and an idea for a possible future platform, so it would have taken a lot of development to turn into a production model. They couldn't just approve it for production after it was shown at the auto shows.

[If i remember correctly, didn't the Torana concept vehicle only have like a 3 gallon fuel tank? It was a styling concept and an idea for a possible future platform, so it would have taken a lot of development to turn into a production model. They couldn't just approve it for production after it was shown at the auto shows.
The Torana was as cobbled together as any other concept.

And yes, it's architecture would have needed to be developed.

Can you imagine how 'Johnny on the spot' GM would look like, had they developed that architecture then and were selling it now?

What about a stretched Kappa? The Kappa based cars are now around 2900-3000, V8 capable and I know they are going to a stretched Kappa as the base for another vehicle.

What about a stretched Kappa? The Kappa based cars are now around 2900-3000, V8 capable and I know they are going to a stretched Kappa as the base for another vehicle.

Kappa won't stretch. They considered that.

I was thinking they were also talking about the opposite at one point - a shrunken Alpha for the next generation Solstice and Sky.

I was thinking they were also talking about the opposite at one point - a shrunken Alpha for the next generation Solstice and Sky.

Yeah, there's talk like that. But who knows.

Kappa won't stretch.

I don't understand comments like this. Do they mean that it's not financially viable to do the engineering work that would be required to stretch it? If that's the case, shouldn't they say "stretching Kappa would be too expensive"? Or, better yet, "stretching Kappa would be more expensive than engineering a whole new platform"?

I don't understand comments like this. Do they mean that it's not financially viable to do the engineering work that would be required to stretch it? If that's the case, shouldn't they say "stretching Kappa would be too expensive"? Or, better yet, "stretching Kappa would be more expensive than engineering a whole new platform"?

No, it simply won't stretch. This was explained to me on two seperate occasions by two different engineers afew years ago. Let me see if I can remember.

The issue(s) IIRC, has to do with the way the lower dominant structure relates to that structural hoop which joins the two rails. The hoop CANNOT be moved (ie., to make room for a back seat), and if you move it, you essentially have to sh!tcan the whole deal and start from scratch. Kappa and the Y-car architectures are one trick ponies.

I scanned the article from the magazine:
http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/830/f8a6408291648.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/f8a6408291648) http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/830/55e7638291650.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/55e7638291650) http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/830/1e1d5c8291651.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/1e1d5c8291651) http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/830/4db6a58291652.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/4db6a58291652) http://thumbnails7.imagebam.com/830/c128268291653.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/c128268291653)