So you had a preconceived notion, then only consider evidence that could in be interpreted to support it, and ignore any and all scientific evidence that does not, and then "decide" you were right all along? This is not a valid way to evaluate the subject, though most lay-people on either "side" of this issue (seems like 90% of the populace just HAS to "take sides" rather than keep an open mind) form their opinions this way.

You NEVER could trust politics. SCIENCE, on the other hand, is *generally* pretty honest and aboveboard. Scientists who make unsubstaintiated outlandish claims do so at their own peril. If you actually read scientific papers on the subject of anthropogenic climate change, you wouldn't find hysterics or political agendas. You would find sober and conservative analysis that suggests we are likely having an impact on the global climate. I don't buy into politicized or emotional arguments on the subject, from either "side".

My suggestion was that they might have delayed introduction of the Solstice in order to have the Solstice and Camaro share a platform. I'm aware that in the rush to production of the Solstice they pretty much made a platform that couldn't be expanded at a reasonable cost.

Road loads drive the structural requirements more than powerplant loads. Wouldn't take much beefing-up for Solstice structure to handle LS2 loads.

*ASSUMING* for the moment there would have been a cost penalty for a Camaro on a hypothetical Solstice/Camaro platform, I for one would pay a few grand more for several hundred pounds less weight. And that "couple mpg" *could* wind up being the difference between having a Camaro into the future and only having it for a few years.

But, I think that the smaller/lighter Camaro *could* have been cheaper than the Cadillac Camaro. Smaller lighter cars are generally cheaper to produce.

Every year we have better design tools, better materials, better production methods, etc. etc. It *is* possible to meet high safety standards without ridiculous weight gain. This is called PROGRESS.

As an aside, I'm not against revising safety standards to allow for lighter-weight/more-efficient vehicles. But I know that ain gon happen any time soon...

These add no weight. Some years ago Porsche made a "lightweight" version of the 911, and used the electric window lifts because that system was LIGHTER than the wind-ups!

I've never suggested deleting these. They are necessary for today's market, no question.

I've never suggested this either. What I HAVE suggested (from WAY back) is that light weight MUST be designed in from the start. It *is* possible to make lighter-weight cars, with normal materials, with all necessary amenities, yadda yadda yadda. It has to be a PRIORITY from the outset, though.

When you start with a luxury sedan, any hope of keeping weight down is lost. Ford has gotten away with it with the Mustang because their timing wasn't bad. Ditto the 350z. The Cadillac Camaro's timing is going to be a lot worse, given that there are likely to be CAFE increases and increases in fuel prices. The window of opportunity for a car like the '05 Mustang is closing, and may well be completely shut by the time the new Camaro gets to market.

They would've done a lot better not building it out of a Cadillac.

I would *hope* that they'd be working NOW on a Solstice/Sky successor, with weight a driving design priority (target = MX-5 Miata), and with the stipulation that the platform also be the basis for a NEW new Camaro.

Judging from Lutz' comments, though, they're just gonna give up.

 

Because scientists seem to blindly follow THIER preconcieved ideas too. The FACT that Mars is undergoing Global Warming to a greater degree than Earth is, should say that the problem is THE SUN, and not man. But apparently that fact isn't obvious enough to fit thier agenda.

 

Why, so that we could hear from everybody what an overweight pig the Solstice is? People already complain that the Kappa cars are a bit heavy for what they are. Directly sharing Kappa with Camaro might result in the 3200 pound Camaro you seek, along with a 3200 pound 4-cylinder Solstice. What's the purpose of Solstice/Sky at that point? And in the end, we don't know how much better of a car Camaro would be, weight aside.

Let's not jump to conclusions about Camaro's fate beyond the 5th Gen for crying out loud. To do so would also cause you to speculate about the future of Mustang....is Ford going to give up too? Not likely.

And please, it is not a "Cadillac" Camaro.

 

It is amazing that out of all of the scientists in the world, none of them caught on to the sun thing besides you. Look, there is more CO2 in our atmosphere then there was 100 years ago. The question is how much that is going to unnaturally affect the planet in the coming century. We can't control the sun. If the sun decides to make this planet a hell hole to live on, we can't do much about it. However, we can control CO2 output, if it is indeed the problem.

This is a very, very complex subject, and you don't strike me as someone who knows what they are talking about. Science is numbers and facts, not irrational claims.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192

This link seems to suggest that saying Mars is undergoing global warming is a faulty statement to being with. I don't put my total faith in this link, but looks like the jury is still out on what might be causing it.

 

Here's your new avatar Dan!

 

How light do you really want the camaro to be? When I drive my girl's 2,600 pound corolla on the interstate a strong wind or a semi truck haulin *** will make the car feel like it's going to swerve or blow off the road. The best fuel mileage we get with the car is 36 mpg hwy. People claim to get 30 with the old gen 6 speed camaro's. My roommate in college had a 2000 TA that he swore got 31 highway with the WS6.

I personally don't want a superlight camaro. I want a car with some meat on it's bones and the ***** to back it up. If I wanted good fuel mileage, I'll get the V6, but I want foot stomping HP and Torque, so I'll get the V-8.

The other thing to consider, what good is a high HP motor if the car is too light to put the power to the ground. According to Motor Trend GM is currently trying to figure out how to get the power to the ground without the wheels breaking loose for project Blue Devil.

It's all about a balance of the power/weight ratio. You want a lot of power, the car should be a little "meatier."

GM shouldn't have a "serious" concern over fuel mileage for the camaro. It's meant to be a fun to drive car, and will be relatively low volume in sales compared to GM's overall line-up.

GM SHOULD be concentrating on getting fuel mileage from their high volume SUV and truck sales and getting a 40 PLUS mpg "small car lineup."

That's my take

 

I have never experienced beyond tossed around on the highway by wind in a Corolla. I would prefer a Camaro as light as they can make it, but know it is going to come in much heavier than desired. It is something I don't even bother arguing about, because even a light 5th gen is going to be pretty hefty.

 

The speed limits here are 70 on the interstate meaning you need to run 75 or get run over. On a really windy day or when a semi passes you going 85 the car can feel a bit unstable

Don't get me wrong, I don't want a super heavy camaro either, but if she has to weigh a few hundred more pounds to make it look good and functional, that's ok. My Z71 weighs in at 5300 pounds!!!

 

GM doesnt want competition for the Corvette from within GM, so a 3200 pound LS1 based Camaro on a Solstice platform will NEVER happen. When the new V8 Camaro comes in at about 3750 pounds, learn to deal with it.
If it comes down that the UAW contract is contributing to making GM uncompetitive, would GM break the union to save the company?

 

That's also why we won't be seeing the Firebird return

GM has ENOUGH internal competition. They have the small, sporty solstice (and sky) and the light, powerful, fast, high priced corvette. The Camaro will be smack in the middle. If the Camaro was built on the same platform as the sky and solstice, why have the sky and solstice? They fill a nitche market. The camaro will fill in the midsize "affordable" sports car market.

 

Kind of an arrogant statement if you ask me.

As consumers, we have this thing called choice. Many will "learn to deal with it" as they buy something else.

 

Fat, skinny, tall, short...I just want a Camaro. Gm is not going to let us down, there's too much riding on all the hype they've put out there on this car.

When it finally hits showrooms, we will be pleased.



Everyone be happy.

 

There are PLENTY of scientists out there that support what I said. But they don't get coverage from the LIBERAL media because they don't support the hidden agenda behind Global Warming. And wasn't it a "scientist" that tried to pass off a bogus, madeup skull to support the evolution agenda?
The Earth has always gone through climate changes throughout its history. Why the alarm now? I'm all for controling CO2, but not to satisfy the alarmists out there trying to use it as leverage for THEIR agenda. Why is it only LIBERALS that push the global warming thing? Think about THAT.

 

Well, I don't think you have any evidence whatsoever to support your plenty of scientists claim, so I will ignore your point completely, much like you probably ignored my link. I don't think it is a liberal only thing. I think guys like you try to push it off as a liberal only thing. So what if Gore made a movie? He is a democrat, big deal. Evidence for global warming has continuously been found long before Gore's movie. Long before. The Earth has always gone through changes, true. The question is how much are human beings abnormally effecting an otherwise normal climate change in the here and now.

Mother Nature doesn't give a sh*t about conservatives or liberals. If global warming is really happening do to human interference, it is going to happen regardless of the political ramifications involved. Not everything is part of some "agenda". Evolution agenda? Don't recall a scientist making up a skull to prove anything, but I am not saying it didn't happen either. There are certainly enough skulls that have been found linking human beings to the ancestors that one made up skull doesn't make much of a difference anyway.

 

This is a very worthy question to pose and discuss in a different thread, Jack!

Nice to hear from you again.

--drb