To start off,NO, this isn't about some secret specs that were snuck out of GM regarding the next Camaro, and YES this is mostly speculation based on things that have come out and are at the very least "not" denied by others (meaning more than a couple of people).

There is this weird hysteria that a couple of people have refering to the possible size of the 5th gen (NO, I'm not refering to Charlie, but a couple of other people). There is also more indication I'm getting that GM may infact consolidate it's coupe plans for the time being, holding off plans for their big coupes (think Monte Carlo replacement in size).

Because GM has invested quite a bit of money in Impala, and Bob Lutz himself has said that GM's "volume" cars will remain FWD, and he and others emphasize that "Aspirational" cars will be RWD, we can bury any idea that the next Chevrolet Impala will become RWD. Ain't gonna happen. Think a better looking, more solid, and much quicker Ford FiveHundred competitor (meaning AWD).

This can only mean that this Sigma-lite is most likely going to be a "big" car chassis. Big as in Pontiac Bonneville / Dodge Charger "big".

But as "Zeta" is more a manufacturing method than a particular car line, one can easily assume that this chassis will have different lengths, wheelbases, even overhangs, much like Ford's Fox body of the 1980s... only better and more modern.

If the chassis is based on Sigma, and versions of this chassis will take advantage of the move towards AWD, and Buick and/or Pontiac get a version of this car, likely meaning a version of the wide Northstar DOHC engine, this could mean that the chassis is based on the AWD & Northstar capable "big" Sigma (STS-SRX) than the more narrow Sigma (CTS).

We also have plenty of indications that a 5th gen would be of similar size to the 2005 Mustang.

Using these as guidelines, this would give us a Camaro of about 187" long, about 73" wide, and no more than 54" tall. Best guess on weight? same as 4th gen at 3500#

Compare this to:
4th gen Camaro: 194" X 74" X 51" and a loaded coupe weight of 3500#.
2005 Mustang: 188" X 74" X 55" weight.....3500#
Pontiac GTO: 189" X 73" X 55" weight....3725#
2004 Cobra: 183" X 73" X 53" weight.....3665#

As far as the body structure being the cause of vehicle weight, consider this:

The new Corvette Z06's inner structure weighs less than 150 pounds. Yet the Z06 weighs in a 3100 pounds.

The issue isn't chassis, it's all the stuff added to it.

An automatic transmission alone adds over 85# to a manual in the Camaro. You want AC? 52 pounds. Cruise? 4 pounds. Fog lamps? 3 pounds. The driver's power seat is over 8 pounds. Even a rear defogger adds half a pound in wiring! Even choosing leather instead of cloth interior adds weight to a car. We aren't even getting into a 400 horsepower engine, and the added extra weight of having components that can withstand the punishment.

The Pontiac Solstice kept it's weight in check not from it's chassis but because GM cut so much equiptment and options from the car. With V8 and related reinforcements and equiptment, Solstice would weigh as much as a Corvette (which has extensive weight cutting built in at extra costs)

.....and YES.... IRS DOES add over 150 pounds to a car over a live axle...... and [b]MORE[/i] if the chassis is engineered for it.

YES..... I actually looked all of this stuff up.

The debate on vehicle weight should now be ended.

 

 

Sounds good. What about using things like aluminum instead of steel? I know that adds cost but how much can be used before it adds too much cost.

sorry im not an expert.

 

Funny you should bring that up, because I've done my homework since the previous thread.

Primarily, any increased weight would come from an IRS's cradle rather than the suspension itself. You can go without a cradle, but this is not favored due to increased noise and vibration. The design of the actual IRS also matters. The descriptions include double A-arm, 3-link, 4-link, 4.5-link and 5 link. Obviously the more links the more mass associated with the links. The more links however, means more control and better ride. IRS does allow for a more efficient use of the space required to hold the suspension.
In the end you can trade mass in one area for mass in another, more cradle stiffness could mean less rail strength required. There are trade offs for all types of suspensions.
The same goes for the live axle. The axle support could be simple leaf springs
and it could be a multi-armed affair. Just check out all the clap-trap
used in the solid axle NASCAR cars.

In the end, a well designed IRS will add 25-50 pounds.


And this comes from an impeccable source.

 

 

SO?!! I'm not gonna buy one...

If GM makes a 3500 lb. Camaro it will suck and not handle and not be true to the 1967 formula that dictated it be a Trans Am racer which will in turn mean that we are not getting a Camaro, but a straight-line only Mustang clone which will never sell because only Mustangs sell and who wants a copycat Mustang when retro's already been done; nevermind that a Camaro should cost half the price of a Corvette and weigh less and outperform it.

Get real. GM isn't listening to its heart: the enthusiasts.

And the styling sucks; I heard it was retro!

Note: This post was made to eliminate 10 pages of unnecessary "I love the Camaro to death" rhetoric, and does not reflect the views of the poster of said remarks.

 

Aluminum is a soft metal. Yes it saves weight (while adding cost), however in many applications it just isn't practical for daily driven street vehicles. If you want a car that will last more than a handful of years, you want steel.

 

ok thanks. in retrospect aluminum would be a bad idea.

 

Speculative information provided will not deter me from my 2009, Hugger Orange, DOD 5.3, M6, AWD, 3650# Camaro.

 

Is their a possability of a 1le "stripper" model?

 

Depends on what tools you have available.

 

From Camarosource.ca

Chevrolet published curb weights for the 1967 Camaro as 2,910 lbs for the 6-cylinder coupe, 3,070 lbs for the 8-cylinder coupe, 3,165 lbs for the 6-cylinder convertible, and 3,325 lbs for the 8-cylinder convertible. Add 21 lbs for power windows, 20 lbs for the folding rear seat option, 86 lbs for air conditioning, 9 lbs for power brakes, 33 lbs for front disc brakes, 10 lbs for the 250ci 6-cylinder engine, 39 lbs for the 327ci V8 engine, 72 lbs for the 350ci V8 engine, 258 lbs for the 396ci V8 engine, 7 lbs for the four-speed manual transmission, 14 lbs for the Powerglide automatic, 56 lbs for the Turbo Hydra-Matic, 38 lbs for dual exhausts, 29 lbs for power steering, 15 lbs for heavy-duty battery, 8 lbs for an AM radio, 9 lbs for an AM-FM radio, and 17 lbs for the Rally Sport option.

That means a full loaded 1967 RS/SS 396 convertible with power windows, power steering, AC, power disc brakes, dual exhaust, etc. weighed in at over 3900 lbs. A similarly equipped coupe hit the scales at nearly 3700 lbs.

So I guess that means if a modern-day Camaro doesn't weigh in at almost 4000 lbs, it won't be true to the original 1967 formula.

Give me a frickin' break.

 

One thing I dont understand is the fact that yes, Aluminum is expensive, but automotive aluminum has to meet a higher requirement due to its softness.
As for not having the car for a handful of years, there are VERY large LCA's that sit under every Epsilon car, that strech from the cradle to the hub. These look very strong, and will withstand years of pusnishment.
Which brings up another point, if a 22k Malibu can use aluminum in its chassis construction, why cant Camaro?

 

While 3500 isn't bad, IMO. It would be nice if they made a ~3200lb lightweight model/version. Make it a track version. Oh, and give me some big brakes with 4 pistons (or more), and some sticky tires.

 

Hmm, i just thought of something for everyone wanting a lighter Camaro for racing.
We've been told that the Z28 won't return for about 18 months after the Camaro returns.

and

Camaro will get a version of the most powerful engine in GMs production line right now.

ok, pure speculation here...a "Z06" type Camaro (Z28 or something else, the name doesn't really matter) will be available about 18 months after the Camaro returns. Kinda like the time table for the Corvette.

/Speculation