guionM

This notion that Camaro's poop at the track takes an issue and blows it pretty far out of proportion... actually too far out of proportion, IMO. There is no review that I've seen yet that calls Camaro's handling "Poop" or any variation or synonym of that.

There IS a unnanamous view (both in car magazines and those who have driven both) that the Mustang GT Track Pack out handles Camaro...

...HOWEVER, Camaro is no slouch on it's own and against other cars that cost more and that have higher expectations of handling.

Even though the Camaro SS lost to the Mustang GT in a Car and Driver comparison, They still said:

...grip and zip in the gymkhana.

...the Camaro SS carves nice squiggles, with tamped down body motions, taky grip, and a brake pedal so firm and responsive, we checked it for a Porsche part number.
(July 2009)

Road and Track editor Shaun Bailey loves the power "and grip" of the new Camaro.
(October 2009).

The test that more than anything would bear out the "Poop at the track" notion, is Automobile Magaizine's "Blood Feud" (September 2009), which featured race car drivers PJ Jones and David Donahue between the GT/TP and the SS. They had some harsh but honest words for the Camaro SS:


Jones:
... too much complience in Chevy's suspension; (but followed it up saying) otherwise it wouldn't be livable in the real world.

...The biggest flaw though is persistent understeer. "It wants to push just about everywhere... I even tried pitching it on the way into corners to wag the rear end out, but that just causes the front end to wash out worse- and earlier"

Donahue:
...It's a pig.

...The brakes are much better (than the Mustang's) but it just won't turn. The Mustang is alot more fun to drive.

BUT, the magazine also notes:


...it's not nervous and it doesn't want to bite you. It's a friendly car that you can get out of shape without worrying about going off the road". (Jones)

We're not here to have fun (regarding Donahue's comment that the Mustang is more fun). This is a racetrack test, and the measure of success is speed. To our surprise, and based on the lap times posted by each car, the Camaro is 0.7 seconds quicker than the Mustang...

Yes, the same article notes that the "Mustang eats Camaro alive in a corner", it also notes Camaro's better brakes and stronger mid range acceleration.


If you look at the numbers alone, Camaro SS is no so-called "poop" at the track. It can hang with much of the best of them. And that's why no one has called Camaro terrible at the track. It grips, it accelerates, and it brakes.

However, this is not to say the Camaro SS doesn't have issues. The problem with the Camaro's handling seems to always come back and centers around 3 things:

First, it's grossly under-tired up front. It uses the exact same tire make and brand Mustang GT Track Pack does. The difference is that despite being 300 pounds heavier than the Mustang, the front tires are skinnier than what the Mustang uses (245s vs the GT's 255s). The SS needs AT LEAST the same 255s as Mustang has, but I'd say 265s or 275s up front would be better (though it would likely eat up more gas via rolling resistance).

The second issue is that Camaro is tuned more for ride than ultimate track handling. If the SS had a proper Track Package, then things might get more intresting. As it stands, like the regular Mustang GT (and the Challenger R/T), the Camaro SS recognizes that 99% of it's buyers prefer a nice riding car that can handle over a hot handling car that rides like crap.

Finally, the 3rd issue is feel of the car when tossing it around. The problem is NOT weight in and of itself (there's plenty of cars at Camaro SS' weight and even heavier that can handle way better), it's the overall package. Everything from it's long 112" wheelbase (it's closer to Challenger's 116" than Mustang's 106"), to it's rock solid but isolated body structure, to it's gunslit windows, to a steering system that's more boulevard crusier than surgical instrament. Sure weight plays a factor, but engineering can counter the effects and feeling.


Of all people, I should be the one posting threads like this. Personally I'm not bowled over by the Camaro SS. It's priced a bit too high, it's interior doesn't impress me either by design or materials for a car that starts at over 32 large (now). It's interior is more cramped than my 4th gen despite being taller and having a far and away longer wheelbase.

That said, I am a huge fan of the base Camaro. It's the automotive sales equivilent to steeling, IMO. What you get for the base price is simply amazing and beyond being well worth the price.

But I won't say the Camaro SS is a disaster on a track.

I won't even say it's mediocore.

It posts good times (due as much to it's power and brakes as it's suspension) on a regular racetrack.

But it's simply not a car you'd enter into the Saturday morning Autocross competition, or try to keep up with a Mustang Track Pack on the parts of Highway 1 where there's 100 foot dropoffs.

And we aren't even talking about the new 5.0 GT.

Z28x

For "crap" it it does pretty good mopping the floor with the competition

Camaro is no Vette, I feel like people were expecting it to be. It does pretty good for the 2+2 $30K segment.

TOO Z MAXX

Go to an autox with one that is stock and you will understand. I guarantee the SS would fall to the bottom of that list. Its the great motor and big brakes that makes the camaro fast on a road course.

Chewbacca

Okay, I'll spell it out since the others weren't able to get through to you.

In this case, the car's power saves it from humiliation. However.....



How much handling is required between turns 5 and 7?

21 and 22?

25 and 1?

Practically none. The ~1.75 miles of straightaways just between those turns is where GM Powertrain is able to salvage the car's lap time. That doesn't even include all of the other straights.

The tighter the course, the more mass, handling and tires come into play. Go to smaller tracks and see how the car fares. Ultimately this will culminate in an autocross course where the new car simply gets slaughtered and previous generations do not. It has been stated here many times before, a road course is not a reliable indicator of a car's handling.

Want proof?

I noticed the GT500 finished ahead of the SS. Wasn't that car roundly ridiculed by many here as being an overweight, ill handling slob before the 5th gen appeared? After reading this post, would you like to hazard a guess as to how such a car could possibly turn a quicker lap time than the Camaro?

I find fanatical hero worship's effect on perception rather interesting sometimes.

Chewbacca

Agreed. That hasn't been lost on me at all.


Exactly.

TOO Z MAXX

That is funny how the GT500 finished ahead of the Camaro. One of the last autox's I went to this guy brought out a brand new GT500 and it looked a mess on course. Let me see if I can dig up the lap times compared to other cars.

TOO Z MAXX

I found the times. 95 z28 on street tires ran a 66.3 the 2010 GT500 ran a 70.1. My car did a best of 59.1

21/16

I'm new to the forum, but is is the car's track performance REALLY that big a deal? Who races a completely stock car anyway?

whatever...

mine is a killer daily driver that my family and students LOVE. It handles crappy weather well, gets good mileage and gets photographed by people who wish they had one (happened to us again today at the Pizza Hut).

Besides, if Chevy built a perfect race car for you to buy from the dealership, there would be no point in aftermarket companies coming up with cool ways to customize it or make it better! Where's the fun in THAT?

anyway...I dig and respect the differences in the current pony cars and if I had my way I'd have an example of all three (heck...throw in a Viper and 'vette for good measure while you're at it) sitting in my garage right now. Who of you honestly wouldn't?

later,

21/16

Doug Harden

I guess I don't understand the cheerleaders....would you be upset if GM 'fixed' the Camaros 'handling?!?!

Do you honestly think it's as good as it can be?? Is 'good enough' really OK with you?? Is a cross between a Camaro and a Monte Carlo really what we wanted??

We don't "hate" the Camaro, just the opposite, we want it to be the BEST in it's segment...don't you?

King Moose SS

I like the name of corner 11..... very uhh creative.

5thgen69camaro

Maybe its just because one my pet peives is being misunderstood but I just found what seems to be, the amount of misunderstanding each other in this thread, funny.

JasonD

What I think many cannot seem to grasp is that a huge percentage of 2010 Camaros out there will never ever see a single second of track time because the owners didn't want or buy the car for that and will never know exactly what their car will do according to the stopwatch. The vast majority of the 2010 Camaro buyers are not in in way interested in racing. While it is a "performance car" it is not a "race car". It was never said to be.

Poll 1,000 2010 Camaro owners and ask them what their car did at ANY road race, autox event, or drag race event. I'd be astonished if more than 10% of the people polled will give you a solid number backed up by an actual timeslip.

However, I would be even more astonished if 50% (or more) of the remaining didn't recite a magazine test time, a ballpark number, a dyno pull number, or just a guess.

I myself would be somewhere in that last group. This doesn't make me a "wannabe" or unaware of what "mediocre" performance is. It does make me happy with what I bought the car for and I am certainly not the minority.

I fully understand where some would see that the car falls short, but as dedicated racers, they are the exception and not the rule.

Respectfully, a lot of constructive criticism of this car has come off as negative feedback and condescending from the start. The message gets lost.

Doug Harden

So you're OK with "just good enough"?

So if 1,000 of them actually took their car to a timed event...and didn't even know how it did, they need to drive something else...(you did say "thier car"...however I think you meant to say that if they were asked what 'Camaro' did in these events....)

So magazine tests that include reviews calling the car "a pig that won't turn"...get recited by 50% of them, is that a good thing?

So you added more power and changed the handling on your car because you were "happy with it" ?!?

And simply drinking the Koolaid of mediocrity and 'good enough" gets us what?

My battle with accepting mediocrity is mostly directed at the rumored SC'd Z/28 that will excacerbate the handling and weight problems while spending limited resources on adding power to an existing engine that would be a joy to drive, if it were in a car that handled as good as possible....old habits of playing follow the leader are hard to break I guess.......

SSbaby

OMG, I just saw the circuit layout... it's got heaps of curves and heaps of undulations (and off camber corners, I suspect)!

It's not all about straight line power and brakes. Suspension compliance and good road manners are very important, even if the hardcore racers cannot and will not admit it.

Want to lap faster? Change suspension setup. Problem solved.

SSbaby

You admit yourself just how irrelevant your autox individual performances can be. It's not down to the cars' relative performance, per se, it's the individual drivers' abililites that mask the real capabilities of factory cars.

You cannot tell anybody with half and ounce of intelligence that your Camaro is a good 11s quicker than a GT500! It's not an apples to apples comparison.

As Jason put it, some people here just like to take context from a magazine test and play with it... to suit their argument.