You wouldn't be happy if a hardtop track pack was offered alongside a convertible track pack?

 

How do you make this all out package available on a convertible without watering it down?

 

Argh...

OK, I could probably agree with letting convertibles slide...

... but I really love T-tops.

 

"Convertible" and "Track Pack" are mutually exclusive.

1. 13.99 or quicker with a convertible = roll bar required.
2. Our local road course "parade" laps (parade = no timing ) convertible without roll bar = there are the bleachers, enjoy
3. Suspension tuning: SLP had to revise their Bilstein package to a softer spring, stiffer swaybar to get GM to sign off on it. The SLP Bilstein package is very mild relative to what you would want in a track pack.
4. 1LE: was never available on convertible. Apparently it would have shaken the car apart.
5. 4th Gen SS convertible did NOT get the SS suspension. It was Z28 with SS sway bars.
6. Red Planet has stated emphatically the GM will NEVER factory install a rollbar in their product. (Mind you he also emphatically stated that Holden product would not come to America because of the fuel tank GO BOB!!! )

My preference would be that the hardtop have a roof unique from the T-top car with additional bracing / rollover protection perhaps even in conjunction with the convertible floor pan to optimize peformance and safety.

There are NVH elements that would be tolerable in a "track pack" hardtop that would be unacceptable in a convertible.

This said, it's much more important for Chevy to get the convertible right, because you can't "fix" things like awkward tonneau design after the fact, whereas performance upgrades are possible, aftermarket seats are available, etc.

 

I'd be all for that...but we've got to keep an eye on weight.

We don't want a "Fat Track Pack".

Also, I don't necessarilly believe it needs to jar your tooth fillings loose either. Chevy learned alot from the '84 Z51. When they revised it a year or two later, it rode much better and actually handled better.

The Z06's ride will never be confused with a Buick....but it is more than acceptable to the 25-30% of total C5 buyers who choose it. And there is no denying it's handling capabilities.

 

One more vote for a track biased package avalible for hardtops and t-tops. Convertibles shouldn't get this as an option. Honestly it really defeats the purpose of an all out track car. Besides, looking back at history, the original track carving Camaro-the Z/28- wasn't avalible as a vert.

Now the debate of which gearboxes this package should be optioned with... I'd lean more towards a manual-only myself, but the way the market is now it might make more sense to have a slushbox avalible as well.

 

PLEASE STAND BY:

I'm about to make a concession.

Although there is not a chance in hell that I would consider a "track pack" with anything short of a manual....but, I am willing to accept an available automatic if it makes this package more popular.

I will not budge on a convertible though.

 

If they make a track package they need to call it the z28. Back in part 1 of this discussion i brought up the point of gm putting two different displacement v8's in the camaro. Put the 350ci in the ss, and bring back the 302ci for the z28.

Since we are taliking about a "track package", I believe that it needs to have a 6-speed manual, huge disk brakes (let's say 13 inches), racing seats, no funky computer gizmos in the interior (like gps and dvd crap) its adds weight as well as price. Traction control should be an option. Put a IRS with limited slip as the standard rearend. It should be less than $30k so that i can afford one

Coupe only. Sorry convertible lovers. Can't afford the chassis flex in a track car.

I remember reading in motor trend a year or two ago that gm built a 302ci ls1 so it can be done.

 

I'm not sure what the point of that would be.


Other than that, I agree with you.

 

But a GPS system could not only help get you to the track (and the Chinese buffet restaurant on the way), but it could give you real-time 3-d speeds, lap times, and trap speeds if you programmed it right!

You mean you really don't want those in your track car?

At least the HUD... it could let you concentrate on the upcoming hairpin curve while watching your exact tach readings and fuel levels...

Jackass, I'm totally with you - my sarcasm was meant to uncover realities for some, via humor.

Let me say this before I rant...
I am basing all my following comments on the fact that we ALREADY HAVE A GREAT-SELLING BASE CAMARO, AND A GREAT-SELLING UPSCALE UNIT (like RS or something). Now I'm gonna talk specialty car (again ).

I think something needs to be discussed here and now that has not yet been mentioned. With regards to these "track-pack", Alpha, top-performing, super performing, super-GT, cobra-slaying, option-restricted, non-stripped, CARS...
I base my claims for the top-dawg to be a pure-performer on the fact that I AM NOT going to drive it every day. It would be a "toy" for me, something I would dig out on Saturdays to go get a hot dog and a shake at the drive in, or take to track events/car shows once in a while. I would not rely on this car for everyday transportation, as a work vehicle, or as a grocery getter - therefore I don't care about ride quality, HUD, GPS, leather, or most other luxuries... I just want a fast car ... PERIOD.

I also have a distinct line drawn between a fast car (like the Z06 or Cobra) and a fast car like a Mach 1, GT, SS, or WS6. To me, they differ in price, seating capacity, design intent, and basic presence. By presence, I mean where you can go in the car and what you can do... for example, I wouldn't think twice about driving a WS6 or GT to a funeral, but would wifey and I show up at a friend's funeral in a RED Z06? Not likely, a funeral should bring out respect and humility - not testosterone and attention-magnets. Certain cars only fit in certain places and situations, ya know? The "track-pack" car should likewise have a dedicated purpose - track work. It should be built for big boys wanting big toys - it should not be the car of choice for a 16 y/o to grow up and go to college in or to raise toddlers in IMO. Those of you picturing a track car that you can also drive around every day and "live" in are not sharing the same vision for this car as I.

Now having said that, who cares about the production levels and associated costs? I have yet to hear anyone say that they would not pay extra for this "specialty" car. Nor does it have to justify itself by being insanely profitable - that's a lame and stupid rule made up on the fly by folks not wanting to do it. The huge sales of base cars should justify the costs and existence of the top-level cars - we've all said that before, so why this sudden rule of "self-justification"?!?! Who says? Think about it for a second... "We can make $15,000 a peice on 1,000,000 SUVs and $7,000 on each of 500,000 cars, and we can offer $5000 incentives to buy our stuff... but we are not going to accept a break-even price on 3000 special units that would excite our most loyal supporters, and could produce $miilion$ in free advertising due to rag covers, articles, comparo-tests, track meets, TV coverage on car shows like MotorWeek, dealer spots, and the like. Nope, sorry, can't do it 'cause we won't make any money on those units." Baloney! . You show me no love, I show you no love. Look across the street guys... the neighbor is doing it... successfully too I might add.

And let's be honest, we talk alot about different engines, different displacements, and so on to get different HP ratings to differentiate the models. "It will cost too much for a specialized powertrain... it will cost to much to do crash testing on a new engine... it will cost to much to tool the line for special engine/tranny packages..." HORSEPUCKEY!!! A simple cam change and chip flash can turn an amateur boxer into a lethal street fighter - I know, I've done it. So it will take $27-gazillion for GM to put a Vette-spec cam in the LS1, and then de-tune the beast via computer a bit? Pah-leeze.

You know what this all boils down to? Having a "CAN-DO" attitude. If GM and certain individuals inside wanted to show the purists some gratitude for their loyalty and support, I don't think anything short of a nuclear holocaust could prevent such a small project from happening successfully.

Like many others, I'm getting kind of tired of this whole rhetorical thing. I grew up in an old-style home with old style values, and I see some good lessons in this situation that my old values apply to very well...
1) You reap what you sew. Sew nothing, reap nothing.
2) Treat others as you want them to treat you. (i.e. loyally)
3) The customer is ALWAYS right, especially the customer with cash in hand.
and probably the best one...
4) You gotta give a little to get a little.

So with that, for a while I'm checking out of this furious debacle that has grown from some good ideas being tossed about. Looks like we got some time to let things sink in anyways... 2006, 2007 maybe?

 

You guys make it sound so complicated..

"all that has to happen"

GM picks a Series and Class to compete the next gen f-bod in. Something that isn't too pricey or exotic, and too insane on parts.. like SCCA T2, the current LS1 Camaro's do pretty well today in that.. or maybe NASA AI.. or perhaps Motorola Cup, stock class...

GM funds a racing team, with an outside shop, capable of manufacturing parts in a relatively small #'s, and throw them a few GM engineers.

This team, GM engineers, and shop work together in fabricating and selecting parts to make this car into a pure roadracer, according to the class rules.

GM funds this team to go out and win races

After a good season or two, they take what they've built and used, rollcage, seats, harness, coolers, custom brackets, ducts, cams, springs, etc and make them available thru GMPP.. GMPP handles all the orders while the team, shop, engineers actually make/order and QA the parts.



Local club racer, orders these parts, like a rollcage, seats, harness, and fire supression, coolers, brackets follows the guidelines and installs it himself/local shop.. assured that his setup is has been well engineered and tested on the track, everything is going to fit together retlatively well, so the driver can concentrate on racing on the track, instead of the car's core setup.. (overheating, oil starvation, safety, etc)


Profits for the parts should go to GMPP marketing (as in processign the orders, and getting everyhing setup) and fudnign the shop and the team for making and QAing everything.


Sponsering the actual team and engineers for racing, can be seperate.. It would help to also make a deal to have this racing series have good coverage, like on the network channels.. A few Camaro ads in between, and a Camaro taking the checkered flag with media coverage on the race would be grab attention..

Oh, and in a faster class, do the same with the Corvette..

and keep LeMans Vette too..

In fact, do that for all GM vehicles, including trucks.... that can be your unified advertising campaign for cars and trucks.

 

ProudPony.....you are awesome, man!

I agreed with every syllable.

 

and they can race it in the ALMS gt class.