I was under the impression that they weren't deficiencies per se, but in fact compromises that were required to give it a more comfortable ride for the majority of buyers. If that is in fact true, then why not make improved handling package an option, that those of us who want it could spend the extra money to order if we so choose to?

 

In all honesty, why should it cost extra money to have a "perforamance car" that handles well? I'm not talking about super stiff, all-out no-compromises handling, but I don't feel like asking for a performance car that actually turns and doesn't plow through corners is asking too much.

And no offense, but blaming ride comfort for the lack of handling sounds like an easy excuse. Ford gets it done with Mustang.

 

Yes, we saw how well "Ford gets it done with the Mustang" in the track times at VIR and Laguna Seca.
Clyde

 

Haha, over 100 more horsepower and Brembo brakes will do that. It doesn't have anything to do with the Mustang handling well and riding well at the same time.

 

I agree. Especially when you consider that the Camaro has a fairly sophisticated double pivot front suspension and multilink IRS. That sure gives you lots of leeway to get both ride and handling right.

 

I drove a V6 model that a colleague rented, and it seemed fine to me. Another colleague also drove it, and he didn't complain about the steering. Granted, I was not thinking about it at the time, but it didn't jump out at me as being as bad as you say, Charlie. The car did not remind me of an RX8, but I didn't go in expecting that.

 

Maybe you had lower expectations than me.

Does the Camaro have electric steering like the G6 did? Plenty of people didn't complain about that either.

I'll tell you something which sort of shocked me. I was in mid-turn, and the steering went completely numb for a second, like it wasn't connected to anything (kind of like a PS3). The feel came back a split second later, but I found it disconcerting. If I had no issues with the car's mass, weird interior, or poor visibility - that alone would have been enough to give me second thoughts on purchasing one.

 

No.

 

I'd buy that argument on a Corvette, however not for Camaro. While there have been performance versions of Camaro for years, the bread and butter Camaros that make up the majority of Camaros purchased are not the "top dogs" or all out "performance cars".

The 2010 Camaro still out handles many in its class and I'm sure handles better than an Impala or a Malibu, however to satisfy the overwhelming majority of Camaro buyers, compromises were made. If you want to turn it into a "track car" or simply improve the handling, the aftermarket has several options available. All I am suggesting is that GM offer similar packages from the factory or as dealer installed add-ons.

Is it perfect? Of course not, but when is the first version of any new vehicle perfect? Will GM make improvements to it? They'd be stupid not to. However there are some here that were preconditioned to loath the car before it hit the street just because of a reported weight issue, and any flaws they find in the vehicle will be magnified by that fact. Even if GM were to fix all of the so-called "issues" and the 2011 Camaro SS were to slay the 2011 Mustang GT across the board in every performance category, they still find flaws in it because to them it would still be a "fat pig". Most of them won't be happy until there's a smaller 6th generation Camaro, and even a few of them will still be complaining that one isn't perfect either.

As for me, I'm happy there's a Camaro in Chevrolet's line-up again.

 

Then you describe a 'weighting' problem, not steering accuracy, yes?

 

Well it obviously didn't perform it's "handling well" quite enough to post better lap times, looking at those two tracks I don't see where the "100 more horsepower" would make up that much for deficits in handling, the Brembos....
what can I say, if you got em, use em!
Clyde

 

Go back and read my post.

The opera ain't over!

 

Then by dint of your reasoning the GT500 was a better handling car compared to the F5 SS (Nevermind the 100 pound weight deficit, 700 pounds of S/C'd 5.4 sitting on the front axle and a truck like 57/43 (IIRC) f/r weight distribution)?

Or consider the F5 SS murdered the last Elise they tested (a supercharged variant) by about 4 seconds (IIRC), a car known for its excellent handling.

V.I.R is a fast track and power is just as important as handling there.

 

I did Scott. I'm looking forward to what the fat lady has to offer?

 

Could one give a rough idea of when the fat lady might start bursting light bulbs!?!

Not a date, but maybe a season?

With the Camaro lapping 4 seconds faster than the 2010 GT Track Pack in the latest Lighting Lap and already hitting 12.6's bone stock, a "handling package" is going to really give the Mustang boys some shrinkage. It's almost not fair. After all, they finally got a a real powertrain, a nice one at that.

Please tell me this "handling package" is going to include some rear gears. Although that could be a completely separate option too. Aftermarket gears are just annoying so many times. We need a good factory option.

Seeing as gearing is one of the Camaro's biggest defecits to the Mustang, that would really help the Camaro stay on top.