In my opinion, gaining weight is inevitable. Of course a new car is going to come with new car features and luxuries in order to compete. It is going to come with a better suspension that will come at the cost of more weight. Most people don't want a barebones car with no options. For those that do, there are always kit cars you can buy such as the Cobra. They are literally nothing but a chassis and two seats. It sounds like it would suit some of you guys very well. I mean, I love my 4th gen F-body but it is raw, unrefined, and not that comfortable to drive. The 5th gen car will probably fix all of those issues and be built with quality that a 4th gen could not even imagine and still perform great.

 

Let me break out the handy-dandy calculator.....

2002 LS1 SS:
335HP/3350LBS (+)250LBS gas/driver
ET*/MPH: 12.85 @ 106.0

2010 LS3 SS:
422HP/3860LBS (+)250LBS gas/driver
ET*/MPH: 12.44 @ 109.6

*ETs quoted are for optimum gearing, traction, and shifting.

 

As long as we are making up numbers why not have it run 10's??? Wishful thinking dude.

 

You're kidding right? Please tell me you're joking.

You know, frankly I could care less which is faster. I just punched the #s into my calculator using formulas out of the "Auto Math Handbook" by John Lawlor. The formulas were derived using empirical data. If you don't know what that means, look it up.

I suggest you look at my post again. The trap speeds are VERY realistic - if anything, the 2002 SS probably traps a little higher on average. Also, and I state AGAIN, the ETs are with optimum gearing, traction, and shifting. That means the best possible gearing for the 1/4 mile, drag radials/slicks, and powershifting (or auto) at the optimum shift points. That means that there's no way in hell they pull those times from the factory on street tires with Average Joe behind the wheel.

 

Thank you! I think this subject is closed.

 

Nah, I'm betting 2002 at 13.3 and 2010 at 13.1

 

I think that's where most of "us" are coming from Charlie.

 

I think makers of sporty luxury cars would also try to keep their weight down for that sporty feel. They also have incentives to avoid higher CAFE fines, etc. Plus, they have more margin to work with, so they can afford things like aluminum suspensions, etc. So I don't buy that they aren't comparable.

I don't think it's all that different. And I'm looking at the XK-R, which has the same power and torque as the Camaro. And R&T weighed it at 3920 with A6. For what it's worth, I've never seen a test of the Jag at the 3650 number, though perhaps a base XK (at 300hp, more comparable to a Camaro V6) would actually weigh in at that.

Also, since they built it out of aluminum, they were clearly aiming for light weight. And in fact, they made a big deal out of the weight savings.

So different market doesn't matter -- they still wanted it light. At similar HP, it's really close to as heavy, even though it's built out of aluminum.

So I'm having trouble resolving your statements about this with what's out there, and I'm having trouble dismissing what's out there (the old jump off the cliff saw), because I don't think anyone's trying to make heavy cars, and I think several mfrs are trying to keep them light.


What I mean is what would it have cost.

 

Why would you want to do that. This car is gonna ROCK!!

 

Yes I have absolutely NO idea why ANYONE would want to reduce weight on a performance/track car. That's just crazy talk.

 

Naturally, I'm prejudiced.

I've been fortunate to drive a few of our IVERs --

This past week I was at Spring Mountain Motorsports Park (www.springmountainmotorsports.com) --

.....and had a Silver SS on the track to film with several other examples of our performance cars. (.....by the way - the 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo Sedan is going to surprise a few people....)......(but I digress....)

The Camaro SS that I drove is probably a 50-55% car -- meaning that it appears to be a production car -- but the chassis/powertrain/exhaust and other such items are old......the car was built in December of last year in Australia.......

Now -- I've driven a lot of 4th gens on that track......and I know this new car will be a surprise to a lot of people......but what I wasn't expecting was the performance of THIS particular car -- it happens to be an L99 with the 6speed automatic trans. It feels like a much lighter car -- and if I had to name my biggest complaint? ....harder to 'visual scan' because of the rear view mirror.......

I can say this knowing that I'm not suddenly going to disappear: There are going to be some people who are genuinely surprised when they drive this car........they may not want to admit it -- but they'll be surprised......in a good way.

Now -- take it for what it's worth........

 

Well, I've been stating the same thing about the VE Zeta to people who I thought might be interested... but it invariably falls on deaf ears. Then, to add further insult, those same disinterested people claim they've driven the G8 and weren't impressed by it's 'unweildy' behaviour. At this point, it's not worth debating the issue as (to me) they must have driven that car while towing a another car!!! That's definitely not what the G8 is like to drive.

The Camaro will be sharper than the VE Zeta, I have no doubt... but who am I to tell, those same people?

 

I'm sorry for my part.

For what it's worth, the complaints really didn't make much sense to me, but I at least now understand the reasoning behind them, even if I don't agree with it. So the thread has been worthwhile to me, even if it seems like

 

I don't think anyone disagrees that new car is going to be marginally quicker, given the numbers we've seen so far.

The issue comes down to what happens when the mod war begins (and it's GOING to happen...).

Bolting 100hp on one of them will get you further than bolting 100hp on the other.

That being said, if the new IRS is robust enough, the 100hp added to the F4 may require a new rear end, and narrow the weight margin a little... but after that, it's "Game Over". The lighter car will get more bang for the buck/pony.

 

I suspect you're referring to me, since I'm the only one who responded, when you asked if anyone had any G8 seat time. You may want to go back and review what I said, since "unweildy" seems to be YOUR manufactured term.

At any rate, I expect the Camaro to be somewhat better handling than the G8, mostly due to it's more rearward weight bias.