View Poll Results: What concerns YOU more on the Camaro?
Voters: 179. You may not vote on this poll
What concerns you more? Cost or weight?
06-10-2008, 05:01 PM
#31
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
I think that's the best possible attitude we (and GM) can take towards the weight issue. Every chance we get to shave an ounce off the car, take it. Before you know it, 100 pounds will be gone. 
Of course, with 100 pounds off, my guess is it would still be heavier than a 4th gen, and what would really make me happy would be a bit lighter than a 4th gen.
Of course, with 100 pounds off, my guess is it would still be heavier than a 4th gen, and what would really make me happy would be a bit lighter than a 4th gen.
06-10-2008, 05:02 PM
#32
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
I suspect that even if you used all of the weight saving strategies which you outlined, even the most radical ones, you'd still be left with the heaviest Camaro in history - just a lighter one than the one you started with.
06-10-2008, 05:30 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 208
What I'm trying to say - and you sort of proved my point - is that you can't take a grossly overweight vehicle and lighten it substantially, without cost or without altering it's useability. If the porkiness is 'baked in', as it is with Zeta, you are just plain stuck.
I suspect that even if you used all of the weight saving strategies which you outlined, even the most radical ones, you'd still be left with the heaviest Camaro in history - just a lighter one than the one you started with.
I suspect that even if you used all of the weight saving strategies which you outlined, even the most radical ones, you'd still be left with the heaviest Camaro in history - just a lighter one than the one you started with.
The problem is cost and as deltu pointed out, we don't know how much it would cost only that GM took the view that using a heavier starting base was more cost efficient than re-engineering an entire new platform.
I agree it would be better if they could lower the weight from more than a performance stand point. But I'm also intelligent enough to know that to do so would either raise the cost of the vehicle beyond the current price target, OR take entirely to long to develop and not be profitable enough.
PS: I still think your over exagerating by saying "Grossly overwieght". Look at its competition and don't use the mustang as an example it was built before SEVERAL safety standards and features where included and I PROMISE you that the 2011 refresh will be quite a bit heavier than it currently is unless it DRASTCALLY shrinks in size.
Last edited by diarmadhi; 06-10-2008 at 05:36 PM. Reason: darn spelling
06-10-2008, 05:32 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dacula, GA
Posts: 140
You can affect price quite a bit, by waiting a year and buying a low-mileage used model. Not so much to do about weight, unless you gut the interior which is not a viable option, at least for me.
I will certainly drive the car before making any decisions but if an LS3 model comes in at the rumored 3900 pounds then this is not the slam-dunk purchase I originally expected. At that weight I have a hard time believing it will have the type of crisp handling I am looking for but I could be proven wrong and certainly hope I am.
I will certainly drive the car before making any decisions but if an LS3 model comes in at the rumored 3900 pounds then this is not the slam-dunk purchase I originally expected. At that weight I have a hard time believing it will have the type of crisp handling I am looking for but I could be proven wrong and certainly hope I am.
06-10-2008, 05:41 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 208
).But a used car purchase is not an option.
06-10-2008, 05:44 PM
#36
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,479
I think that what Charlie wants is a lightweight, tossable 2+2 with a V8 and rear wheel drive. He wants it to be powerful, efficient, and fun to drive. He doesn't want it to be a monster. In fact, he's come right out and said he'd prefer a naturally aspirated engine to a supercharged one in the Z28 (which is essentially sacrificing power for in favor of keeping weight down). I certainly can't argue with any of that.
I will certainly drive the car before making any decisions but if an LS3 model comes in at the rumored 3900 pounds then this is not the slam-dunk purchase I originally expected. At that weight I have a hard time believing it will have the type of crisp handling I am looking for but I could be proven wrong and certainly hope I am.
06-10-2008, 06:03 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 208
I don't think your characterization of Charlie's "side" is accurate at all.
I think that what Charlie wants is a lightweight, tossable 2+2 with a V8 and rear wheel drive. He wants it to be powerful, efficient, and fun to drive. He doesn't want it to be a monster. In fact, he's come right out and said he'd prefer a naturally aspirated engine to a supercharged one in the Z28 (which is essentially sacrificing power for in favor of keeping weight down). I certainly can't argue with any of that.
Ok then I guess I was wrong (like I sort of guessed). But there is a premium price tag associated with that type of car just due to the limited market it attracts and the materials needed. The camaro can't limit itself to that market(by price not by want) to be a success.
IIRC, Ford has said that the next Mustang will be quite a bit lighter than the current one. I don't know if it's getting smaller in order to accomplish that, but I wouldn't go assuming that the 2011 Mustang is going to be a porker.
GM called jenny craig too didn't they.. yet here we are cussing and discussing
I think that what Charlie wants is a lightweight, tossable 2+2 with a V8 and rear wheel drive. He wants it to be powerful, efficient, and fun to drive. He doesn't want it to be a monster. In fact, he's come right out and said he'd prefer a naturally aspirated engine to a supercharged one in the Z28 (which is essentially sacrificing power for in favor of keeping weight down). I certainly can't argue with any of that.
Ok then I guess I was wrong (like I sort of guessed). But there is a premium price tag associated with that type of car just due to the limited market it attracts and the materials needed. The camaro can't limit itself to that market(by price not by want) to be a success.
IIRC, Ford has said that the next Mustang will be quite a bit lighter than the current one. I don't know if it's getting smaller in order to accomplish that, but I wouldn't go assuming that the 2011 Mustang is going to be a porker.
GM called jenny craig too didn't they.. yet here we are cussing and discussing
I still stand that the camaro will be the best in its class regardless of its downfalls.
06-10-2008, 06:34 PM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: arizona
Posts: 145
I don't know how much weight you're really gonna get out of a modern car. I don't worry too much about price , i think i've got a fair idea where it is. and i doubt ill get any weight out of it.
06-10-2008, 06:47 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Commerce, mi, USA
Posts: 2,139
Outrageous cost could kill it. But heavy curb weight would not kill it. Camaros are by definition, value-oriented 2+2 RWD coupes... the public understands that and also the long march automotive curb weights have been taking in recent decades.
06-10-2008, 07:21 PM
#41
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Since it's the necessity to share a platform that creates this car's weight, and since we wouldn't have any Camaro to argue about without platform sharing, I'd like to ask that those of you whining about weight simply be quiet and wait until production versions hit the showroom.
When all is said and done, Camaro essentially comes in, just as heavy as those cancelled sedans, with no other product to share costs with. Okay, maybe the DTS replacement might happen on Zeta, but that's it.
The result: Camaro is left holding about a quarter ton of excess baggage because it was yoked to a dead/dying large sedan architecture - a large sedan architecture, now with no sedans.
The money spent on Zeta, could have given Camaro it very own ponycar appropriate architecture. In fact, they might have even spun off a 'sensible for the times', fun-to-drive sedan or two from that. Hmmm. Something to think about.
I seriously doubt at this particular point in time, if a Zeta based Camaro is even all that economical to build for GM. Certainly, nowhere near the economies of scale projected for it. So, although GM no longer has the cost advantages of platform-sharing for Camaro, it does end up carrying the burden of all that weight as it's legacy.
Last edited by Z284ever; 06-11-2008 at 01:22 AM.
06-10-2008, 07:50 PM
#42
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
).The larger concern though, is how viable a 2+ ton, ...ermm.....'ponycar' is in our current environment? And don't think for a minute that GM isn't thinking/concerning/talking about it. They are.
The weight that would have made me happy, would have made lots of people happy. Lemme see...there's me, there's the Camaro Team, there's the GM Board of Directors, there's the enthusiast community at large, there's the workers at Oshawa, there's Bob Cosby, there's "Jenny the receptionist", ( and everyone like her, looking for a sporty fuel sipping car), hell, I betcha even you jg.
The crappiest part about this whole deal is, that I really got the feeling that the 'Camaro Team' really wanted to bring out the best Camaro ever. It's too bad that Zeta couldn't lose the weight.
Last edited by Z284ever; 06-11-2008 at 01:20 AM.
06-10-2008, 08:01 PM
#43
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 3,252
I'll wait and see what it's EPA rated and then complain. Or not.
There is no chance that talking about it now will change the weight.
And? Shall we only talk about things we like, and ignore things we don't?
As soon as the decision that made this car possible was made- the decision to modify an existing platform- and that decision was modified by selecting a target price point the Camaro's weight was "determined".
Maybe, if you'd kicked hard and screamed two years ago, GM might have decided to drop a couple of pounds from the base chassis. Unlikely, but it's possible.
At this point, when focus groups are looking at near-production cars, GM isn't going to go back to the drawing boards and redesign the window regulators to save 5 pounds.
No matter how much you kick and scream about it, the base Camaro is never going to recieve a purpose built light-weight chassis and parts. That means that your time would be better spent discussing something that can change- gear ratios, options packages, drivetrain selections, etc.
What you ask for is your personal nirvanna.
No matter what you say on cz28.com GM is not going to spend millions of dollars to lighten the chassis of a mass produced product so you can get an extra .2 out of it at Lime Rock.
I know what dictates that.
I also know that GM is not going to price the Camaro out of its target market or spend capital to lighten a chassis to satisfy >10% of it's market.
I also know that GM is not going to price the Camaro out of its target market or spend capital to lighten a chassis to satisfy >10% of it's market.
As it sits the new Camaro will be extremely competitive with any coupe in it's price range.
Internet rantings demanding they spend millions of dollars modifying an existing platform so you can get a little extra speed or one more MPG are pointless.
Bob
06-11-2008, 01:43 AM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Annapolis MD
Posts: 2,802
The sad, sad, irony here, is that GM dictated that Camaro share an architecture with fullsized sedans in order to spread cost over several hundred thousand cars per year. But those sedans were cancelled, mainly because their heft would have adversly affected GM's CAFE numbers and consumer acceptance.
When all is said and done, Camaro essentially comes in, just as heavy as those cancelled sedans, with no other product to share costs with. Okay, maybe the DTS replacement might happen on Zeta, but that's it.
The result: Camaro is left holding about a quarter ton of excess baggage because it was yoked to a dead/dying large sedan architecture - a large sedan architecture, now with no sedans.
The money spent on Zeta, could have given Camaro it very own ponycar appropriate architecture. In fact, they might have even spun off a 'sensible for the times', fun-to-drive sedan or two from that. Hmmm. Something to think about.
I seriously doubt at this particular point in time, if a Zeta based Camaro is even all that economical to build for GM. Certainly, nowhere near the economies of scale projected for it. So, although GM no longer has the cost advantages of platform-sharing for Camaro, it does end up carrying the burden of all that weight as it's legacy.
When all is said and done, Camaro essentially comes in, just as heavy as those cancelled sedans, with no other product to share costs with. Okay, maybe the DTS replacement might happen on Zeta, but that's it.
The result: Camaro is left holding about a quarter ton of excess baggage because it was yoked to a dead/dying large sedan architecture - a large sedan architecture, now with no sedans.
The money spent on Zeta, could have given Camaro it very own ponycar appropriate architecture. In fact, they might have even spun off a 'sensible for the times', fun-to-drive sedan or two from that. Hmmm. Something to think about.
I seriously doubt at this particular point in time, if a Zeta based Camaro is even all that economical to build for GM. Certainly, nowhere near the economies of scale projected for it. So, although GM no longer has the cost advantages of platform-sharing for Camaro, it does end up carrying the burden of all that weight as it's legacy.
06-11-2008, 09:27 AM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 574
Half the people who picked weight have hedged by saying they believe Chevy will already deliver an affordable car. That is not what the poll is asking.
What the poll is really asking is whether you would take a 3600lb $35K V8 Camaro or a 3900lb $30K V8 Camaro. Make that poll and the results will 80-20 PRICE.