Has there been any chevy (NOT other divisions of GM) car with that same factory hp as a vette during the same model year in the last 20 years? 30 years?

 

1991 Camaro

 

I know the L98 in the fbody was rated at 245 but I'm pretty sure the corvette's hp rating was raised to 250 in 1990. But I'll concede.

 

I suppose the question at hand is, should there be a direct Camaro competitor to the GT500.

Personally, I'd have no interest in a 3,800 lbs, live axle, $40,000 Camaro...regardless of how much power it has. That's just me though.

Do I believe that a future Z/28 could have total performance parity with a GT500 at less cost? Yes, I think so.

If Mustang doesn't get it's promised suspension upgrades during it's mid-cycle enhancement....I can imagine a 5th gen Z/28 completely b!tch slapping GT500 around a road course. And I wouldn't be surprised to see a substantially lighter (than 3800lbs), Z/28 staying just about even with a stock GT500 in a straight line either.

But perhaps the one to watch might be the Challenger SRT. We already know that it's chassis will be composed of top shelf stuff, but tuned for a smaller coupe, rather than the requirements of a large 5 passenger sedan.

Imagine the performance of a Charger SRT-8....but with maybe a quarter ton less weight, maybe a foot shorter, with a six speed manual and probably more power.

Also, here's just an unsubstantiated rumor...but it's too juicy not spread around. Rumors of a Challenger SRT-10.

 

First off, I want to apologize for my off-topic post. The reasoning behind it were a great number of posts that proceeded it............... that had morphed into what Camaro should be. Thus, I was just stating my opinion on that subject.

Next, my post was not about comparing Camaro against Mustang........... or copying Mustangs forumla. It was about Camaro, and Camaro only.............. based on its most successful version.

Now, on weight. Vehicles are getting heavier, and will continue to do so. This is caused by the extra equipment and space that buyers want, but also on the continued addition of more and more safety equipment mandated by the government. I am sure that the GT500's weight already takes into account the next round of government mandated safety. Some may bring the Z06 into this discussion based on its light weight. However, I don't think anyone here is fooling themselves into believing that the Camaro/Mustang, or any pony/muscle car has the ability to absorb the price of carbon fiber, or even an extensive use of aluminum. Also, as vehicles get more powerful, their supporting hardware has to be heavier to survive the stress that this power comes with.

Everybody likes to complain about the weight of the GT500, yet I don't see too much complaining about the 300C or Hemi Chargers 4050-4100lbs............. or the SRT-8's 4200lbs.

Thus, I certainly do not anticipate any new Camaro being any............. or much lighter than its equivelant Mustang. Just as I anticipate the GMT900 trucks being much heavier than the GMT800's

Anyway, it would be cool to see the 3 cars listed actually competing against each other. The funny thing is that we have about 3 years to continue to debate all of these subjects............. and I'm sure we will.

 

One of the biggest success points of the Cobras (03/04 & upcoming GT500) was that it easy to get more power from, since it already came from the factory with a blower and fully forged block. F-body people want the same thing. If GM can keep it best bang for your buck, I can see a blown LS2 Camaro selling quite well at around ~39K..

IMO, There is no excuse for a 5th gen weighing in near 3800. There is no heavy *** iron block (Mod motor), and hopefully no IRS.

That's the biggest problem I have with the Charger, it's excessive weight. A 4100lbs is just too much when it comes to performance. Whether it's an RT or SRT Challenger, if they can keep the weight down to around ~3500lbs, It will be on my shopping list.

As for the SRT10 Challanger, I don't see how that would work without the Charger getting the V10.

 

I definitely don't share that sentiment.

Also, I thought I remembered reading last winted in MM&FF that the IRS setup on the stang would weigh in the same, or lighter than the live axle setup, due to the car being originally developed for IRS in mind. I wish I could find the article, but I don't usually hold on to old magazines.

Either way, a new Camaro needs and IRS, because if the Mustang doesn't bring an updated supsension to the party a few years from now, the Challenger definelty will.

 

And while we're at it, why don't we add blackjack and hookers? You know what, forget the Camaro. And forget the blackjack.

 

I think this is very unfortunate. With recent development in and movement to plastics, I would expect at the very least the weight to stay the same. Just think of how many things this weight is affecting, ranging from fuel consumption, to breaking distance, to destructive force upon impact. I guess it is not a big deal if a 4200 lbs vehicle hits another 4200 lbs vehicle, but there are other things it can hit, including hydro poles that stand on the way between the flying missile and the pedestrians on the sidewalk.

I think we call them teenagers

Seriously, even Ferrari and Lamborghini are quote the pigs (weight-wise), weighing in anywhere from 3800 to 4200 lbs. I am very surprised, but at least there is one explanation behind their single digit fuel economy.

You are right. I think it is simply hard to accept the fact that vehicles that used to be heavy a decade ago and weighed 3400 lbs are now considered medium to light-weights. The GTO is porky, so is the Cobra. But compared to Chrysler's LX platfrom?

I really hope that 4000 lbs will not become the norm for most domestic (american, that is) performance coupes.

At best, in my opinion, we will see a sub 3500 lbs V6 base model Camaro. The V8 I expect to be in the upper 3500s (optimistically looking), or even 3600s. It's not what I hope for, and it's not what I want, but that will be the reality. Perhaps a stripped down performance version will weigh less (assuming such will be provided).

And I expect quite a few deaths to occur in some of the most heated debates and fights on this board.

 

I'm all for a smaller lighter camaro. I thought the 4th gens were on the long side, and the weight was one thing it gave up to the smaller sn95 mustangs (GT's weighed less than v6 camaro). So it would be nice and interesting to see the roles reversed.

The biggest advantage a z28 will have will be the fact that it won't have a heavy *** blown iron-blocked Dohc motor under the hood. That's the thing killing the GT500 in terms of weight right now. But if the motor is as (or more) durable and potent than the S/c'd 4.6L Dohc, it's a sacrifice most are willing to make. It's a pig of a motor, but it's my kind of pig.

I like the sound of that.

I'd normally say that's crazy talk, but i've learned not to doubt the boys over at SRT. They're pulling out all the stops and doing some pretty amazing/crazy things.

 

perhaps the SS version should accually include an increase of power on the vehicle... or the GT500's competition ought to be the vette...

 

Well, that's what I'm saying. GT500's iron block, blower, IC, plumbing, etc., carries an automatic couple of hundred pound penalty over an LSx equipped Camaro. And it all sits over the front wheels. Can you say dumptruck? As far as "hopefully no IRS"....sorry, you'll be disappointed. The good guys at engineering killed off the bean counters live axle plan....dead.



Like I said, just an unsubstantiated, wild rumor. But nevertheless, I don't understand your reasoning. Why does the Charger have to get the next gen Hemi V10 for it to work on Challenger?

 

 

You lost me...
"Those elements had absolutely nothing to do with performance (or for the majority of the populace - good looks). They added NOT ONE IOTA OF PERFORMANCE.....in fact probably reduced it." -----> please elaborate for me.

 

I was commenting on this post, Proud:


I was referring to these elements that you mentioned. I think that we can be in 100% agreement that they sacrificed good driver position/visibility/drivability, etc. These sacrifices gave you NO payback. They added nothing to performance, and for the overwhelming majority of the car buying population - yes, even most car enthusiasts - were cosmetically unacceptable. IOW, you had to give up/accept/sacrifice lots for that "cruise missle" look.....and in the end the actual execution of the look, is what people found silly looking.

A lose/lose/lose situation.