your freakout has clouded your math skills, 3500/345hp is 10.14hp per lb, the new one is only 9.28lbs per hp. how is it worse? and several people have told you the old EPA ratings are alot different then the new ones, the LS1 gets the same mileage as the new one using the new EPA ratings, calm down, you get almost 100 more hp, less lbs per hp and the same mileage.

 

1. I'm sure GM would look really great in the public posting High fuel economy estimates and the EPA later (using the measurement that actually counts) grades them much lower.

2. Before you start complaining that weight kills MPG, you should look at the fact that this motor churns out 400 horsepower.... and gets 23 mpg. That much horsepower isn't free.


Aaron, what's going on? You usually are a bit more up on things!

EPA ratings have changed since the 2002 F-bodies. Cars are rated lower today. Also, I'd expect you as much as anyone to realize that coming up with fuel economy figures that are higher than EPA's is pretty much a high speed way to incenerate your credibility.

Get a grip dude. Seeing you going off the deep end like this is like seeing Harvey Dent become Two-Face in the new Batman movie.

 

He did WHAT?!?! YOU RUINED IT!!!

 

Weight over hp. A smaller result is better.

 

 

How exactly is 13.35 a huge performance increase over 13.50?

I took a 4th gen automatic at 345fwhp, 3470lbs+50lbs gas and 150lb driver = 13.50

I took a 5th gen automatic which i was planning to buy at 400fwhp, 3913lbs+50lbs gas and 150lb driver= 13.35...........

link to calculator: http://robrobinette.com/et.htm

It takes less horsepower to move a lighter car for the same ET increase. So once mods start the gap narrows quickly same mod for mod. THe 4th gens were definetly underatted especially the early LS1`s. 305fwhp and many I witnessed dynoing 295-300 at the tire. You can`t underestimate under the new rules. So barring a blown version (which likely isn`t going to be built) this car to me at least is a huge disapointment.

I`m seriously considering buying a nice 01-02 TA, putting it on a diet, rpm stage 5 tranny, stall, procharger, and 12 bolt.

1.5 years of waiting for this? What the hell happened to "We called Jenny Craig"?

 

To answer the original post, I dig it.

-The styling is great, nice taut lines all around, and damn close to the concept.

-The interior materials look very good, and the ambient lighting effect is gonna be a hit with alot of buyers I think. People tend to go gaga over things like this, as was seen when Mustang's gauges could be different colors.

-300hp V6 base model engine. Very nice.

-Of course at first glance the weight is disappointing. But then again, the Feds want more and more and more safety features in cars so they could withstand a head on collision from a locomotive so its not unexpected. This is probably something we're gonna have to get used to. Look at all the weight saving materials on the Z06 and its not even below 3k lbs. At very least the Camaro should nab a great safety rating and thats not a bad thing.

-The V6 gas mileage is livable. Pretty much right on par with current mustang/camaro v6 mpg while having 90 more hp

-[rant mode on]As for the SS mileage, like Guy said. 420hp isnt cheap, neither are the materials needed to withstand that much torque and stress and holdup to a 100k mile powertrain warranty. And if you are looking to buy a V8 powered sports car fuel economy, while important SHOULD NOT be at the top of your list. [/rant mode off]

 

i wouldnt go as far as calling it a sports car. And it better damn well in the crash ratings, the civic is able to get 5 stars all around except for side frontal, which it got 4 stars while weighing 1000 lbs less.

 

Technically you're right. The Mustang nor the Camaro are sports cars. The Mazda Miata (and Pontiac Solstice now) fit the true definition

 

You beat me to it. They sure as hell didn't stick to their diet. When you think of how much smaller the dimensions of this car is compared to the 4th gen, it really makes you wonder how it can weigh that much. This is by no means a big car.. but its as dense as Paris Hilton.

 

I'm a little dissappointed in the MPG, but thats not a big deal. Besides it could still come up before its on the lot. With it being a 3rd car, I'm not worried about it. I was hoping that we would get more detail on options but so far so good. Still not warming to Onstar nav,
but I'm digging the audio description.

The interior looks great and the exterior will look super with a few old school Camaro details added. I'm looking forward to slapping some silver 2000 SS badges on that Patriot Red '10. I'm thinking that the 6M is the way to go......

 

Thanks to blue79, guion and jg for clearing up Aaron's mistakes. As well as verifying that it is possible to under estimate hp and mpg (check on how some manufacturers were affected by the new rules more than others). And more importantly the LS1's were rated differently. I feel like it is useless to even validate the facts to some people because they are more concerned with bashing the car and GM regardless of what the facts say.

Also can I just throw something out there, do you think GM wants this car to weigh more than enthusiasts would like? OBVIOUSLY NO. This car needed to receive 5 star crash ratings in order to compete in the market. It's not like they hid 100lbs worth of lead in the trunk just to **** you off. I'm sorry but all of this complaining just has me baffled. I am all for discussion of facts and differing view points but for the love of God this is an amazing vehicle that a lot of fantastic people put their hearts and brilliant minds into producing and some dense folks are ruining it for everybody else.

 

the civic gets 5 star crash ratings while weighing 1000 lbs less. you cant blame the weight on the crash rating.

and with the SAE certifications, there is no more "underrating" by GM or any other manufacturer that chooses to certify their car by SAE.

 

The Civic also has 260 less hp to put on the ground. Safety certainly doesn't explain every pound but in my opinion GM did what they could in balancing safety, comfort, performance, and styling.

You are correct that SAE ratings level the playing field and there is no underrating or overrating. However I do not believe the numbers given were SAE certified (I could be wrong). I am not saying the Camaro numbers are underrated but it is certainly possible for a manufacturer to do so and that was the point of our debate.

 

Didn't they say on the concept that it would put down 30mpg highway w/ the LS2? Dam, I hope the final fuel figures are better than what we've seen so far. But even if they're not, I have hope because my '08 gets noticably better mileage that what it's rated at.