teal98

Manual drum brakes, manual steering, 3 on the tree, no A/C, no radio, crank window, no airbags, no safety cage, forget about roof crush standards (it would get crushed), skinny 14" wheels, etc.

That base Camaro was a car no one would want.

Outfitted with many of the modern conveniences and a nice 396, I think you'd get more like 3600-3700 pounds. Still forget about ABS, safety equipment, overdrive trannies, etc.

teal98

Sticking my nose in on this one....

You're assuming a very high level of precision in his original statement. Most people are not that precise in general. Sometimes when I ask people what time it is, they'll say something like 2 o'clock, when it's really 2:03 and 22 seconds. If I were to call them on that, they'd think I was weird.


Now, if I said something like, "I'd consider it at 3822.43, but not 3822.44 pounds", then you'd have a very strong point.
But 3750 is a pretty round number, so you need to ask if it was meant to imply what you're inferring.

jg95z28

Correct!
Yes, but even my 67 Camaro started life as "that base Camaro ... no one would want." (So somebody must've wanted it. )

teal98

Very nice. However, I'm guessing you upgraded from the manual drum brakes, no radio, 3 on the tree, base model.

I wonder how many Camaros (or any American cars) from that era were sold with no options? You could get quite a few options on the car and still have a "stripper".

teal98

Btw, I added up the weight for a Camaro with a 350, THM, dual exhaust, power windows, A/C, AM/FM radio, power disk brakes, power steering, heavy duty battery, and that nice, lithe 3070 is now 3438. And the car still doesn't have power seats or a tape/CD player, but it's up to 3438 pounds. The 350 was rated at 295 gross hp. Net would have been around 240 or so with dual exhaust.

It just goes to show what an overachiever the F4 was, since it weighs only a little more (mine at least), yet it's quite a bit better equipped, much safer, and has much more power, with bigger wheels and tires, ABS, etc.

Z284ever

Yes. There was "Kappa". Not Kappa as we know it. But "Kappa" as the working name which evolved into Alpha.

The genesis for this, I believe, was the Torana concept from afew years ago and it's conceptual architecture.

Lots of people supported a "Chevy ponycar" based off just such an architecture. Of course, it wouldn't have been financially viable for Camaro (or rather the "Chevy ponycar"), to bear the cost of a whole new architecture. And such a smaller, RWD architecture, (for cars beyond the Camaro), had powerful enemies within GM. They believed that Americans would not buy premium (whatever that means) smaller cars. Strange view if you ask me, considering the US consumers' voracious appetite for BMW 3 series, Audi A4, Infiniti G35/37, etc.

Anyway, long story short, Zeta was given the nod. Costs would be spread out over 500,000+ Zetas per year.

Ironic the way things turn out....

BigBlueCruiser

I don't think I would want an A4 sized Camaro. There is something lost in the American Muscle Car when it goes under a certain size. Then it becomes just another pocket rocket.

Z284ever

Camaro is a ponycar. I think you're looking for a Chevelle.

BigBlueCruiser

Well we all know there is no chevelle. And the today's muscle cars are the Camaro, Mustang, and Challenger.

They grew a little from their original dimensions, but they are what they are.

The Challenger grew a little too much.
And an A4/3series sized camaro would be too little.

The Mustang has it just right and on the weight too.

Is it too much to ask to build a Mustang sized Camaro that weighs 3500-3600lbs with an LS3 and TR-6060 and HD IRS that can take 600+lb-ft for $30K????

jg95z28

Upgraded? Yes. But it was a weird combination of options on a "Plain Jane" to begin with...
Base 210hp 327
3-speed Manual w/floor shifter (and console)
Vinyl Top
Front Disc Brakes (Manual, non-power)
Deluxe Interior with Buckets w/Headrests (rare)
Folddown rear seat

Now who would've upgraded to disc brakes but not ordered "power"?

jg95z28

I'm sorry but haven't all the photos of the prototypes parked next to current Mustangs indicated that the Camaro is the same size and may in fact be smaller?

Silverado C-10

At least disk brakes were an option on GM car's in 67, the trucks had to wait until '71 to get them. I had to "borrow" the front suspension off a 71 GMC for my 67 to have PDB

teal98

Michigan mentality? That's just stupid. Spend any time in coastal U.S. cities (which have a lot of people currently not buying U.S. cars), and they'd see plenty of premium smaller cars -- more than the large FWD cars that they think we all want.

But the platform you're talking about would have needed further modification/redefinition to take a V8. I don't think a Holden Torana would have wanted a V8 capability due to extra size/weight.

boxerperson

I've already addressed that in my previous post

JakeRobb

If you want to believe that the phrase "____ is a dealbreaker" doesn't impose a hard and fast limit, that's fine. Nobody is required to be right all the time.