It's a question of semantics I guess. The coupe is lighter, but they both started from the same place. Apparently, it is a flexible platform like the Nissan FM, which is used from the 370Z to the M56 and even on the FX SUV. Hyundai insists that the Coupe front end does not have enough room for their V8, so that's one significant change.

Yeah. Time to leave retro behind again.

 

LOL!!!

I know exactly what you mean, and yet that is something that I too think is as important - maybe moreso - than the eye-appeal from the curb. I have GOT to feel like I can see out of a car to drive it safely. If there are too many obstructions (headrests and opillar trims) or the view is not open enough, it's only a matter of time before you clip something or back over something.

As for the "jellybean" comments... well, they ARE aerodynamic aren't they? Could it be that we actually want a slick car that works in the wind instead of a Mustang that is speed limited to keep the hood from ripping off? Slickness also translates into fuel economy over the long haul too.

Styling is always subjective and no design will please everyone, but for me, this car is rockin'. Ben looking at it for over a week now and it still looks good in my eyes. I'd buy one... plain and simple.

I'd HAVE to have the V8, but could you imagine this car dropping some front end weight by swapping an ecoboosted V6 or even the 4 into it?!?!

Why couldn't Ford just bring one of these cars to the NAIAS with a steering wheel and pedals glued to the RHS and see how the crowd reacts? How much would it cost for such an experiment and what would the findings be wroth to Ford?

 

Trubo'd 6 would be fun. I love V8's but this car would be sweet with the Ecoboost. Good gas mileage mixed with good power that can be driven everyday for any event. Count me in.

 

I agree. There are two things I don't like about the G8. One is that the A-pillar is so think that it's really in the way on a sweeping left turn. The other is that there is a reflection onto the instruments in bright sunlight, making them a little hard to read. Other than those, visibility is great, as it is (surprisingly when I first got it) in my F4 Camaro.

I think the 4.0 I6 turbo from Oz would be fun too.
But S/C V8 or even NA is great also.

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/25/s...d-falcon-gt-h/

I like this one better....and it has 500hp.....

 

I'll take it!

 

I agree, something about it reminds me of the 90s Ford Contour styling, especially around the greenhouse area. That being said these are cool cars and I wish they were available here in the USA, along with the cool Holdens too. Its kind of depressing to think of all the cool cars Oz has gotten over the years that we can't have.

 

Quite honestly, some of those notions of a lighter Camaro is pure fantasy by those who know very little about (or refuse to accept) that what they ask for in a car is exactly what increases weight. I actually have much stronger words for those people, but I'm being very diplomatic today.

Let me point out that the G8 had a shorter hood, smaller wheel, and was only a few inches longer...and weighed more .....the Cadillac CTSv has entirely different proportions and it also weighs more!

The fact of the matter is that if you want independent rear suspension, massive multi-piston brake calipers on massive discs (cast iron, if I need to remind you), a chassis capable of handling 500+ horsepower without folding itself in half, or the ability to run in excess of 160mph without feeling like it's running on a cobblestone street.... let along all the electronic and servo motors on everything from seats to windows, or the extra heavy duty drivetrain components and larger cooling systems...all this is going to add weight.

I've been pointing out to people like that for years that unless you are making a vehicle from pixi dust or that miracle metal, unobtainium, that there simply isn't a way to make a car that has everything these guys want and have the damn thing weigh any less. Ford went with a live axle because IRS would have made the Mustang weigh roughly as much as the Camaro.

I have also pointed out the perfect example of how IRS in fact weighs more than a live axle (the weight difference between the normally aspirated 2000 Ford Mustang Cobra vs the Mustang GT), as well as the long standing, never answered challenger of finding any new, similarly sized, rear drive, independently rear suspended, V8 powered mass produced car on the entire planet earth that weighs much less, let alone coming in at the weight some of these crackpots think the current Camaro should weigh.

No one has ever taken up that challenge and posted anything.

Instead, they come up with cockamamime notions of proportions, wheel sizes, lazy engineers, or a vast General Motors conspiracy to add as much weight to their cars as possible simply for S***s and giggles.

As I always say when this subject comes up, "If you want a lighter Camaro, what are you ready to give up???"

You can easily lose about 80 pounds by going back to the tiny 3rd gen brakes and wheel sizes.

If you want to govern top speed to below 160 mph like the Mustang, you can probably take another 50 to 75 pounds out of the structure and drivetrain.

If you want to go back to a live axle, you could lose another 75 pounds... minimum (more probable, over 100 pounds).

If you want to make the 312 horse V6 the top powerplant, with the above sacrifices, you can almost certainly get the Camaro in around 3500 pounds.

If not, then unless you have been actively working in a lab and just created a new ultralight alloy that's cheaper than steel or aluminum, or have created brand new laws of physics or alternate ralities, in continuing to harp about how Camaro's weight can be lighter means you're just..... how to say this with all due sensitivity and care?..... full of BS.

Yes...BS fits well.

 

I know I'm not the norm and people like me don't put the money in GM's hands but I'll bite. Personally I'd be willing to give up wheel sizes for sure, in fact I'd prefer 17's to be the top size. Of course I wouldn't want 3rd gen brake sizes but with less rotating mass I think a brake that fills the 17in wheel would be fine no?

I don't care about rear leg room or trunk space and I'm perfectly fine with manual seats that go up, down, forward and back, and the backrest tilts all with levers. As for high speed capability, I don't care about noise and I don't want to feel less road. I'd rather have a stiff ride that can feel the road.

A lot of reasons no one makes a lightweight competitor are for safety and I know nobody can get around the regulations but that doesn't mean I want it. That's another thing I'd give up for a lighter car even though it's not something a new car can deliver.

So there's a few things I'd give up and I don't think I'm alone. I know none of those things will ever happen because they all either don't sell cars or they're required to be in place but those are still my reasons. I respect the position of the designers and so i realize I won't get my way, that's why I chose to go with a smaller car with a smaller engine and I'm quite happy with my Mini

 

Don't like the nose. Looks like an Escort.

 

And therein lies the problem. Someone decided a Mustang (and therefore a Camaro) should have 550+ horsepower. That means every chassis from the pedestrian V6 version on up had to be compromised. Well now we gotta stop all that weight, we need bigger brakes. Well now we need to fit those bigger brakes in the wheels and make the styling look better. Well now we need bigger, heavier wheels. Then someone came along and decided that these cars need things like heated & cooled seats and backup cameras.

Kind of easy to see where things start cascading.

It would be interesting to see what a gram strategy would do for future Camaros. It seems that Ford is taking this approach with the next Mustang redesign - every single part is going to be scrutinized for its weight and have a target mass.

 

I think people like the thought of owning a light weight, 3500lb Camaro and the associated performance with it, more than they do actually going out and taking advantage of that 3500lbs. A very small percentage of people would actually go out and buy a Camaro strictly for racing in SCCA, NASA, etc. Otherwise most people will buy it for either their daily driver, or as a fun weekend car. In the latter case, saving a few hundred pounds won't make much difference unless someone needs to perform an emergency stop or evasive manuevour. A simple suspension tuning can over come a lot of that as seen with the new CTS-V.

Most people just want a car that's fun to toss around and I doubt they could tell the difference between a 3800lb car and a 3500lb car, especially considering they probably wouldn't be driving near the limit for a sustained amount of time. They might choose to run the car in auto-x or some type of weekend event, but it would probably just be for fun and not a serious competition. If someone wants to get serious about being competitive, they will dump the money into reducing the weight of the car (as rules allow) or maybe choosing a different car all together to start from.

Going back to my original point, people like the thought of owning a light weight Camaro that keeps everything it has right now, but few would pony up the $$$ for cost assosciatd with actually buying one. Your average consumer won't pay 50-60K for a light weight Camaro.

Those who want a high horse power, big wheels, big brakes, light weight car.....it's called a Corvette Z06.

 

Agree. I said in this forum 5 years ago that I'd rather have a basic ponycar with 250-300hp from the factory than anything with 550hp, 22's, 18" discs, and HUD/NAV/Cams, etc. You realize you help make my case from last month about how overloaded with content and crap these cars are becoming too, right? They are going down a bad road Guy - I'm telling you.

Not only will my stripper econobox be more fun to drive on a country backroad for me, but I can drive it every day, afford the fuel and the taxes and insurance, not be afraid to park it in front of WalMart, and I am also likely to do a few tunes and tweeks on it and hand someone their 550hp @ss on those same backroads too because I can pump the power and handling without adding much weight, but you are stuck with your heated seats, NAV/HUD crap, power motors for everything, 47.6 airbags, 127 lbs of sound deadener, and your microphones and speakers for your OnStar and Sync systems that you can't get rid of - and that crap don't make any car turn better - period.

If there was a new version of a Mustang or Camaro that resembles the old 91-93 Mustang LX - down to the option of "Radio Delete" mind you - I'd be at the bank getting a cashier's check for a purchase this afternoon. All I want is transportation to and from work, with occasional weekends of fun and frolic. I don't need/want all the "crap" in my car. 4 wheels, an engine, brakes, and a windshield, all wrapped in a stylish skin of metal will get me way down the happy-trail fellas. Good lord I'd LOVE to have the opportunity to buy a new LX 5.0 Coupe again today for $9k!

This kinda gets away from the intent of the thread - what a great 4-door family car is avalable in another market - but the weight issue has some merit. Just wanted to reiterate that I am one that will put my money where my mouth is, and I'd jump on a basic stripper car with a good driveline in it instantly, and I don't really want 550hp in it either... 300hp in a good handling and lighter vehicle will amaze you if you know how to drive it.

 

I agree with the last few comments.

The problem I have with the smaller wheel sizes, different proportions, etc., so forth, is that it seems (I have no direct evidence) that they would result in a less appealing car. I'm fine with 16s, but I know I'm in the minority on that. I like a large glass area for good visibility, but there are hardly any cars left like that, so I figure I'm in the minority there too.

So I think the Camaro team did just the right thing, but I'd love to have a retro (guess that's what I'll call 90s styling instead of "dated") four door sedan or even two door coupe like this Falcon. But I wonder how well it would sell in 2011 America.....

 

When I first read this I was a little shocked that they were only pulling 430-440 hp (the 500hp one makes sense) out of a supercharged 5.0. Seems like a lot of complexity and weight to gor that little distance up from 412. Overall cool car.