Good god guys get a grip!!!!
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
I think people should take a deep breath and remember that this is the ONLY place on the web where semi-intelligent people can "debate" matters Camaro.....that being said, I don't want this place to turn into a cheerleader's paradise either.
Dan, Charlie, Bob and others have very valid points as they relate to what the Camaro "could" have been.......but that being said, now that we know what the Camaro "is" we need to concentrate our energy on what possibly can be done, either OEM or aftermarket to make the car into something more of what we, individually want from it.
I'd like nothing more than to get into a serious discussion with people like Doug Houlihan and other platform engineers as to what they would have done, given more of a budget or less of a cost constraint.
Whenever someone mentions making something lighter, the end cost is always brought up.....while that is true, it's also true that 'some of us' (true Z/28 zealots) would be willing to pay a premium for a car that is lighter and therefore would perform better even without a different engine.....of course part of the premium has to be for better suspension pieces....nothing comes free
That's why I asked on one of these threads (can't remember which at the moment...I'm old ya' know) ....If the SC'd LSA engine and it's accompanying reinforcements might add a $15k premium to an SS Package........then what say we take $5k of that for even better suspension pieces and the remaining $10k be spent on lightening efforts...i.e. more uses of aluminum in suspension control arms, IRS and engine cradles, Titanium mufflers and of course de-contenting might help to offset some of the costs.....
If we could get our minds together and come up with a list of ideas and questions, I'll see that we get them to those who might have a response......even if it's a dead end street.
Now, let's get past the p*ssin' contest before everyone gets wet and move onto something 'constructive'.
Dan, Charlie, Bob and others have very valid points as they relate to what the Camaro "could" have been.......but that being said, now that we know what the Camaro "is" we need to concentrate our energy on what possibly can be done, either OEM or aftermarket to make the car into something more of what we, individually want from it.
I'd like nothing more than to get into a serious discussion with people like Doug Houlihan and other platform engineers as to what they would have done, given more of a budget or less of a cost constraint.
Whenever someone mentions making something lighter, the end cost is always brought up.....while that is true, it's also true that 'some of us' (true Z/28 zealots) would be willing to pay a premium for a car that is lighter and therefore would perform better even without a different engine.....of course part of the premium has to be for better suspension pieces....nothing comes free
That's why I asked on one of these threads (can't remember which at the moment...I'm old ya' know) ....If the SC'd LSA engine and it's accompanying reinforcements might add a $15k premium to an SS Package........then what say we take $5k of that for even better suspension pieces and the remaining $10k be spent on lightening efforts...i.e. more uses of aluminum in suspension control arms, IRS and engine cradles, Titanium mufflers and of course de-contenting might help to offset some of the costs.....
If we could get our minds together and come up with a list of ideas and questions, I'll see that we get them to those who might have a response......even if it's a dead end street.
Now, let's get past the p*ssin' contest before everyone gets wet and move onto something 'constructive'.
I do like the idea of a premium model where the extra $$ goes toward weight removal for the serious driver, and if some of that could carry to the base models, so much the better. I also agree that's more in keeping with the Z/28 heritage from the '60s and early '70s. But I could also understand if the ROI was low enough that it would not make business sense.
My question would be how much weight could be saved with 18" or 19" wheels and tires, and would handling suffer. It was only a few years ago that I recall people saying that there was no practical advantage to going bigger than 17s. So I'm wondering if the 20s really do drive better, or are they there for styling only.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
(Sadly)I have to side with Z284ever (and others) on this. I look at it as a lost opportunity for GM. The new Camaro is really nice. But it could have been so much more. It could have (should have!) been ahead of the curve on so many levels. Maybe my hopes (expectations?) for the next gen f-Body were too high. All I know is that after waiting for almost a decade I am noot satisfied with what I see. 
I am soo happy the F-Body lives on. But it is not the car for me.
I am soo happy the F-Body lives on. But it is not the car for me.Also, there should be a distinction drawn between hope and expectation. Hope doesn't have to limited to reality. Expectation should be.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
I think people are overlooking how many expectations were met perfectly too. The styling is totally true to the concept, the engine options are as good as anyone wanted, and the interior looks like its best in class. If it wasn't for weight, there would be nothing to complain about 
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
I think people are overlooking how many expectations were met perfectly too. The styling is totally true to the concept, the engine options are as good as anyone wanted, and the interior looks like its best in class. If it wasn't for weight, there would be nothing to complain about
I'd sort of set myself on a G8, but now that I see the Camaro A6 is about 100 pounds lighter than a G8 while also having another 40 horsepower and promised handling improvements, I'm just going to have to wait a bit longer and see for myself.
The G8 GXP is off the table
My GM card should be maxed out early next year....
I wouldnt say that everyones expectations were met perfectly but extreamly close for the majority. 
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Exactly. And the kicker is that the weight is actually competitive with other cars of the same power and size on the market! It's not the lightest, but it's not the heaviest either. It's in the middle. It's getting dinged for not being lighter than everything else.
I'd sort of set myself on a G8, but now that I see the Camaro A6 is about 100 pounds lighter than a G8 while also having another 40 horsepower and promised handling improvements, I'm just going to have to wait a bit longer and see for myself.
The G8 GXP is off the table
My GM card should be maxed out early next year....
I'd sort of set myself on a G8, but now that I see the Camaro A6 is about 100 pounds lighter than a G8 while also having another 40 horsepower and promised handling improvements, I'm just going to have to wait a bit longer and see for myself.
The G8 GXP is off the table
My GM card should be maxed out early next year....
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,507
From: Okemos, MI
You are so fixed on the autocross world that you continue to miss the fact that this anecdote came from a road coarse. I'm assuming that you already know that higher top speeds, fewer low-speed turns, and generally fewer technical elements (like slaloms) make road courses entirely different from autocrosses. That's not to mention that while most autocross events occur in mediocre parking lots where IRS really helps, while most road courses are nice and smooth so that a solid rear axle isn't as much of a disadvantage.
I respectfully point out that he didn't say it was.
Going forward, I think we can complete overhauls every 4-6 years on almost all car models on the market. The days of an entire decade with only minor tweaks are gone.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
To bad I say, you barely get to know the car before the new kid shows up, but it is what it is I guess and everybody wants the BBD
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,139
From: Commerce, mi, USA
Well said.
I do like the idea of a premium model where the extra $$ goes toward weight removal for the serious driver, and if some of that could carry to the base models, so much the better. I also agree that's more in keeping with the Z/28 heritage from the '60s and early '70s. But I could also understand if the ROI was low enough that it would not make business sense.
My question would be how much weight could be saved with 18" or 19" wheels and tires, and would handling suffer. It was only a few years ago that I recall people saying that there was no practical advantage to going bigger than 17s. So I'm wondering if the 20s really do drive better, or are they there for styling only.
I do like the idea of a premium model where the extra $$ goes toward weight removal for the serious driver, and if some of that could carry to the base models, so much the better. I also agree that's more in keeping with the Z/28 heritage from the '60s and early '70s. But I could also understand if the ROI was low enough that it would not make business sense.
My question would be how much weight could be saved with 18" or 19" wheels and tires, and would handling suffer. It was only a few years ago that I recall people saying that there was no practical advantage to going bigger than 17s. So I'm wondering if the 20s really do drive better, or are they there for styling only.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
That's why I asked on one of these threads (can't remember which at the moment...I'm old ya' know) ....If the SC'd LSA engine and it's accompanying reinforcements might add a $15k premium to an SS Package........then what say we take $5k of that for even better suspension pieces and the remaining $10k be spent on lightening efforts...i.e. more uses of aluminum in suspension control arms, IRS and engine cradles, Titanium mufflers and of course de-contenting might help to offset some of the costs.....
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,139
From: Commerce, mi, USA
I'm certainly no engineer, but I too would LOVE to know what the cost of things like the magnesium engine cradle, aluminum suspension pieces, etc. would add up to and how much weight would be saved. Putting together a package like this for the Z28, in this day and age, is the only logical step for the ultimate Camaro. I wouldn't get too far into things like removing sound deadening materials or premium stereos unless necessary. I think the point would be to give the big dollar buyers the best all-around performing car without removing stuff they'd easily notice.
One thing folks should consider in all this - insurance cost. The exotic alloys being so cheerfully named herein not only increase a car's initial cost - they also boost maintenance and insurance cost. Insurance for a Z28 will be far higher if it contains a lot of fancy metals like titanium mufflers and the like. Partly due to the cost of crash claims and parts... but also partly due to "scrappers":
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...374/1409/METRO
In Brighton, thieves are chopping catalytic converters off parked cars in broad daylight; unwitting shoppers don't even realize the devices are gone until they turn the key and hear the engine's unmistakable roar.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Or you can buy a Corvette, Solstice, Sky, Miata, S2000, or Z4. If you're willing to dip into the used car market, you can do any of those at a the same price point as a new Camaro (or less).
Go drive an LS1 4th gen and then a G8 GT, back to back. I've done it (the G8 I drove was a V6, though). It's an astonishing and impressive difference. Since the 5th gen is a few hundred pounds lighter than a G8 GT and boasts about 60 more horsepower, the difference between the 4th gen and the 5th gen should be even better.
You are so fixed on the autocross world that you continue to miss the fact that this anecdote came from a road coarse. I'm assuming that you already know that higher top speeds, fewer low-speed turns, and generally fewer technical elements (like slaloms) make road courses entirely different from autocrosses. That's not to mention that while most autocross events occur in mediocre parking lots where IRS really helps, while most road courses are nice and smooth so that a solid rear axle isn't as much of a disadvantage.
I respectfully point out that he didn't say it was.
Actually, it was eleven and ten years, respectively.
Going forward, I think we can complete overhauls every 4-6 years on almost all car models on the market. The days of an entire decade with only minor tweaks are gone.
Go drive an LS1 4th gen and then a G8 GT, back to back. I've done it (the G8 I drove was a V6, though). It's an astonishing and impressive difference. Since the 5th gen is a few hundred pounds lighter than a G8 GT and boasts about 60 more horsepower, the difference between the 4th gen and the 5th gen should be even better.
You are so fixed on the autocross world that you continue to miss the fact that this anecdote came from a road coarse. I'm assuming that you already know that higher top speeds, fewer low-speed turns, and generally fewer technical elements (like slaloms) make road courses entirely different from autocrosses. That's not to mention that while most autocross events occur in mediocre parking lots where IRS really helps, while most road courses are nice and smooth so that a solid rear axle isn't as much of a disadvantage.
I respectfully point out that he didn't say it was.
Actually, it was eleven and ten years, respectively.
Going forward, I think we can complete overhauls every 4-6 years on almost all car models on the market. The days of an entire decade with only minor tweaks are gone.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
40 hp looks big on paper, but its not a big difference between the G8 and the camaro, being that they are pretty much the same motor besides one being a mere .2 L different. The biggest difference is The G8 is programmed to use 87 octane vs. premium for the camaro. The extra 80 lbs may be worth it if your looking for 2 more doors and the questionable look of the interior of the camaro doesnt cut it.
Also, the G8 tested by Motor Trend in the August 2008 issue was noticeably slower than the previous one. They said they'd look into it. Most of the info we have is on pre-production cars.
So I wouldn't be surprised if the A6 Camaro SS actually ended up a few tenths and 4-5mph faster. Not that I really need the extra speed, but....
Then again, the 2010 G8 may have the L99....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 954
From: Shelton, WA
My question would be how much weight could be saved with 18" or 19" wheels and tires, and would handling suffer. It was only a few years ago that I recall people saying that there was no practical advantage to going bigger than 17s. So I'm wondering if the 20s really do drive better, or are they there for styling only.
Unfortunately, using a wheel/tire combination similar to that of some trucks has ill side effects to such things as unsprung weight and aerodynamics. Given equal rubber compounds, any way you can make your wheel/tire combination lighter without sacrificing tire contact patch area with the road would be beneficial to ride and handling.
Also, it's a styling issue since the wheel wells of the car were designed to handle a nearly 29" tall tire (275/40R20 = 28.66" tall), so you'd have to use something like a 55 series tire on a 17" wheel to maintain stockish tire height. That might turn out to be "too much rubber/not enough wheel" for some in terms of looks/styling.
Last edited by onebadponcho; Jul 27, 2008 at 11:54 AM.