I've never maintained that they were superior. All of my comments have been to point out that they are beyond adequate, and cost effective.

The 5th gen has great potential, even with the so called 'inferior' design. GM didn't feel it necessary, you are convinced that the car is lesser for it. Regardless of whether or not the basis of the design is superior, the end result is what matters.

 

whoa really back that far? wierd.

Ditto on the 2nd point.

 

Then Hot Rod must have improperly worded it. An a arm is shaped like a wishbone. Upper and lower a arms= double wishbone. If it is indeed a "MacPherson strut WITH double wishbone" it would have to have an upper and lower a arm. Plus the strut on top of the upper a arm? I don't know, that's why I was asking. If there aren't TWO a arms, it is not a DOUBLE wishbone. Am I not correct?

 

Yes you are.

 

So then Hot Rod must be incorrect?

 

It wouldnt be the first time...or the even the one hundred and first time.

 

Was he saying I was right or wrong?

 

Sounds like he was saying you were right.

And it looks like some people drank plenty of hatoraid today. Those people should actually try reading others posts and try and understand what they are saying before jumping all over someone. Hint: I'm not refering to CalicoJack

 

"whoa really back that far? wierd."


I read the details in an article when the 4th gens first came out, but I can't tell you where it was.

When I was at Barrett Jackson last month, they sold a 53 Buick (I think) and described the suspension as SALA. If you watch Speed Vision, it will pop up again.

I was pretty surprised myself!

 

Better "design"? Sure, in theory .

(before you get fired up, don't worry, I agree with everything you said )

BUT, the overall "package" leaves a lot to be desired. I also had an '81 Z28, and my Dad currently has a '73 Camaro LT. Granted, the '81 would out-handle the '73 hands down (keep in mind, Z28 vs. LT), but then the '81 didn't handle nearly as well as my '02 Z28 does.

Now, what's the major difference between the '81 and the '02? Well, they both use double wish-bone front suspension, right? The rear suspension has the most difference (leaf vs. LCA and coil spring). I don't know, does the rear suspension have that much to do with how a car handles?? (really, I don't know!!)

"IF" that's the case, then maybe the IRS in the 5th-gen will be the "missing ingredient" to making the Camaro a "world-class" handling car?? And from anything I've heard people say about 3rd-gens, with their Mac strut fronts, I've never heard any major complaints about them?

So, all things considered (cost, and "packaging") maybe the Mac struts in the 5th-gen really is the "best design" to go with (in combination with the IRS), even if on paper, a double wish-bone would "technically" be better????

Just a thought.

 

No getting fired up here, I happen to agree with everything you said too. I never stated that the 80 could handle better, just had a better front design and that it's disappointing to see the 5th take a "step back" EVENTHOUGH, I'm sure it will handle great and I am very excited to have a Camaro back in production (even if it is missing several vital Camaro elements).

 

lol, step back? leaf springs in the corvette should be phased out too huh?

 

Here's a couple more thoughts/questions ...

1) While the 1st & 2nd-gens did use a double wish-bone suspension, they still don't corner quite as well as a 4th-gen, right? Was that due more to the leaf spring rear suspension? Or was the geometry in the front not setup as well as it could have been?

2) Looking at this picture of the Zeta front clip, how do you go about lowering the car? Shorter springs??! (heck, they look like they're barely ~6 - 8" tall as it is! ) ... or is is accomplished a different way??

3) How well did 3rd-gens REALLY handle (I've never driven one, so I don't know). I'd like to get more than just "opinions" (they're too subjective ) ... anyone have actual data on them? (lateral g's, etc., compared to a 4th-gen??)

 

3rd gens handled like late 80s Vettes, which was a nice handling car.
This was a huge surprise to me upon coming back from Germany in 88.

BUT, once I moved into 4th gens.............
the 3rd gens felt like...............................
'76 Oldsmobiles 88s!

 

Like everything the devil is in the details.. If you take one design and implement it horribly, its not going to perform well at all.. Someone at one time tried to explain the details of why BMW's strut setup is superior to a usual strut setup.. I forget them.


Either way, I just hope the whole complete suspension package is well designed and tested. That means, the suspension design, geometry, springs, bars, and especially shock and strut valving is setup optimally.


And about the 3rd gen and 4th gens.. Lets not start that.. trust me. I think its fair to say, the 3rd gens were lighter, and from the factory more aggresively setup than the 4th gen. You get that rought and immediate feeling.

4th gens were heavier, and setup a bit softer, although the argument is its bcause of the double a-arm setup allowed the 4th gens to properly utilize more of its suspension travel, thus at the end of the day perform similiarly well while being more comfortable.

4th gens has the advantages of fitting bigger tires and brakes too.. and a boatload of more hp.. and a stiffer chassis. at the expense of weight.