How big can a 5th gen be?
08-06-2003, 09:29 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 17
removing weight
my .02 cents worth
I think is is very possible to have a 3200 to 3300 hundred lb 5th gen camaro
There are guys in here that regularly take weight off their cars by changing
k-member
shocks and springs
upper and lower control arms front
lightweight brakes
control arms rear
light weight rims
driveshafts
If you add it all up some guys have removed 200 to 225lbs by changing these items.
Yes it costs money but keep in mind that some of the above light weight components are already used on the vette. So it shouldn't affect the price to much if they are engineered into the car to start with. If you add to it the new technology of a hydroformed frame which is supposed to be 10% lighter and 25% stronger I think that a compromise could be reached to keep the weight in the 3200 to 3300 lb range and still be affordable as long as you stay away from the exotic components of the corvette. Also a reduction in body size say between the size of the 1st gen and 2nd gen would help too.
Thanks BUM_Z
I think is is very possible to have a 3200 to 3300 hundred lb 5th gen camaro
There are guys in here that regularly take weight off their cars by changing
k-member
shocks and springs
upper and lower control arms front
lightweight brakes
control arms rear
light weight rims
driveshafts
If you add it all up some guys have removed 200 to 225lbs by changing these items.
Yes it costs money but keep in mind that some of the above light weight components are already used on the vette. So it shouldn't affect the price to much if they are engineered into the car to start with. If you add to it the new technology of a hydroformed frame which is supposed to be 10% lighter and 25% stronger I think that a compromise could be reached to keep the weight in the 3200 to 3300 lb range and still be affordable as long as you stay away from the exotic components of the corvette. Also a reduction in body size say between the size of the 1st gen and 2nd gen would help too.
Thanks BUM_Z
08-06-2003, 10:18 AM
#47
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: South Bend, Indiana
Posts: 2,473
Originally posted by formula79
This goes back to Guion's post about how the Mustang's chassis looks wimpy compared to the F-body.
This goes back to Guion's post about how the Mustang's chassis looks wimpy compared to the F-body.
Thats one of the reasons I fell in love w/ it
08-06-2003, 10:19 AM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19
All this discussion about weight it worthless.
You can't have your cake and eat it too!!!
3000lbs for say a muscle car and keep it price reasonable???? (Starting at $30K) Please
You guys are forgetting about the following:
- Safety equipment... MORE airbags, MORE active systems, etc.. etc.. ALL of which add weight and are mandated by the feds
- Interior Noise levels and harseness - The average buyer wants a Lexus quiet interior and people these days seem to expect that from even $15K cars! MORE WEIGHT in sound deadening materials...
The ONLY way GM will EVER release a 5th GEN is if could make it appeal to the masses! And to appeal to the masses, you can't sacrifice on the things that are hot buzz in the market.... safety, interiors and interior harshness levels.
The 5th gen will com in (if it does ever) most like no less than 3400lbs+.
Heck, I took a poll on the Corvette forum about sacrificing comfort for weight in the next gen Vette, the C6 and it seems that 9 out of 10 would give up weight for the best interior possible!!! CORVETTE GUYS.... THESE GUYS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE PERFORMANCE NUTTS!!!!
I don't even see the next C6 making 3000lbs. I think GM is going to have to bust *** just to keep the weight close to the current C5's!!!
Instead of weight concerns, you guys should be concerned about PRICE because the days of a $20K LS1 Z28 are LONG gone. Expect the F5 to start at $30K easy... (assuming it is made)
You can't have your cake and eat it too!!!
3000lbs for say a muscle car and keep it price reasonable???? (Starting at $30K) Please
You guys are forgetting about the following:
- Safety equipment... MORE airbags, MORE active systems, etc.. etc.. ALL of which add weight and are mandated by the feds
- Interior Noise levels and harseness - The average buyer wants a Lexus quiet interior and people these days seem to expect that from even $15K cars! MORE WEIGHT in sound deadening materials...
The ONLY way GM will EVER release a 5th GEN is if could make it appeal to the masses! And to appeal to the masses, you can't sacrifice on the things that are hot buzz in the market.... safety, interiors and interior harshness levels.
The 5th gen will com in (if it does ever) most like no less than 3400lbs+.
Heck, I took a poll on the Corvette forum about sacrificing comfort for weight in the next gen Vette, the C6 and it seems that 9 out of 10 would give up weight for the best interior possible!!! CORVETTE GUYS.... THESE GUYS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE PERFORMANCE NUTTS!!!!
I don't even see the next C6 making 3000lbs. I think GM is going to have to bust *** just to keep the weight close to the current C5's!!!
Instead of weight concerns, you guys should be concerned about PRICE because the days of a $20K LS1 Z28 are LONG gone. Expect the F5 to start at $30K easy... (assuming it is made)
08-06-2003, 11:49 AM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Originally posted by JAS_LS1
...Instead of weight concerns, you guys should be concerned about PRICE because the days of a $20K LS1 Z28 are LONG gone. Expect the F5 to start at $30K easy... (assuming it is made)
...Instead of weight concerns, you guys should be concerned about PRICE because the days of a $20K LS1 Z28 are LONG gone. Expect the F5 to start at $30K easy... (assuming it is made)
Originally posted by formula79
Onw thing also to note...GM packs alot more structure into its cars than Ford and other makers....This goes back to Guion's post about how the Mustang's chassis looks wimpy compared to the F-body.
Onw thing also to note...GM packs alot more structure into its cars than Ford and other makers....This goes back to Guion's post about how the Mustang's chassis looks wimpy compared to the F-body.
You'll never feel the same riding in a Mustang again.
Last edited by guionM; 08-06-2003 at 11:53 AM.
08-07-2003, 06:52 PM
#50
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: MI
Posts: 806
Originally posted by steves
But most of the arguments i've read on this post are silly, example: the Camaro is supposed to be a "muscle car" and it should be heavy.
But most of the arguments i've read on this post are silly, example: the Camaro is supposed to be a "muscle car" and it should be heavy.
I like the old-style Camaro's! The fourth and the thirdgens! I want those cars to come back!! But they may never come back, which is why my next car will most likely be a Mustang Cobra. GM can kiss my ***.
Last edited by Pentatonic; 08-07-2003 at 06:54 PM.
08-07-2003, 06:56 PM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
Originally posted by guionM
I strongly advise everyone who hasn't done it yet, take a trip to a junkyard, find a Mustang that's been cut up, check out it's construction, then look at a F-body's, especially the floor, door sills, and roof construction.
You'll never feel the same riding in a Mustang again.
I strongly advise everyone who hasn't done it yet, take a trip to a junkyard, find a Mustang that's been cut up, check out it's construction, then look at a F-body's, especially the floor, door sills, and roof construction.
You'll never feel the same riding in a Mustang again.
08-07-2003, 06:57 PM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: MI
Posts: 806
Originally posted by steves
Like I said before fox mustang not toyota celica. If you want a charger, chevelle or road runner I think you should look at a GTO.
Like I said before fox mustang not toyota celica. If you want a charger, chevelle or road runner I think you should look at a GTO.
08-07-2003, 07:53 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: chicagoland area
Posts: 452
Originally posted by Pentatonic
Believe me. If the GTO didn't look like so damn plain, I'd be the first in line.
Believe me. If the GTO didn't look like so damn plain, I'd be the first in line.
08-07-2003, 10:31 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
Originally posted by Pentatonic
Who said heavy? I sure didn't say heavy. Re-read my post and remember that BIG does NOT equal heavy, provided the car is designed correctly.
I like the old-style Camaro's! The fourth and the thirdgens! I want those cars to come back!!
Who said heavy? I sure didn't say heavy. Re-read my post and remember that BIG does NOT equal heavy, provided the car is designed correctly.
I like the old-style Camaro's! The fourth and the thirdgens! I want those cars to come back!!
08-10-2003, 01:26 AM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Chicagoland IL
Posts: 16,179
Originally posted by IZ28
Third Gens.
Third Gens.
Last edited by Z284ever; 08-10-2003 at 01:37 AM.
08-10-2003, 03:39 AM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
Nah, while alot of cars weren't as big anymore by 92, there were still a nice amount and the Camaro has never been tiny. The later cars (91-92) did increase in size though from the cars before, which I didn't like much, by adding more extended GFX. I like that the Camaro has always been bigger than the M*stang. IMO 185" is perfect for a 5th Gen.
Last edited by IZ28; 08-10-2003 at 03:50 AM.
08-10-2003, 08:52 AM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
Originally posted by guionM
[B]The V8s may start around 30K easy, but the V6s I'm guessing will be in the low to mid 20s. In short, the next step up from Solstices.
[B]The V8s may start around 30K easy, but the V6s I'm guessing will be in the low to mid 20s. In short, the next step up from Solstices.
The single best thing about the 4th Gen Camaro was that it was the bang for the buck champ and you could get one for roughly the same price as loaded FWD import sport coupes.
08-10-2003, 12:33 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Originally posted by IZ28
Nah, while alot of cars weren't as big anymore by 92, there were still a nice amount and the Camaro has never been tiny. The later cars (91-92) did increase in size though from the cars before, which I didn't like much, by adding more extended GFX. I like that the Camaro has always been bigger than the M*stang. IMO 185" is perfect for a 5th Gen.
Nah, while alot of cars weren't as big anymore by 92, there were still a nice amount and the Camaro has never been tiny. The later cars (91-92) did increase in size though from the cars before, which I didn't like much, by adding more extended GFX. I like that the Camaro has always been bigger than the M*stang. IMO 185" is perfect for a 5th Gen.
The 1st gen Camaro was less than 1" longer than the Mustang. In '69, the Mustang was less than 1" longer, in 1970 the Camaro was 1/2 inch longer, in 1972 the Mustang was just over an inch longer.
Probally safer to say that Camaro was always the size of Mustangs till Ford down sized them in 1974, while GM stubbornly never did, and it's the Mustang that's still here today.
Last edited by guionM; 08-10-2003 at 12:36 PM.
08-10-2003, 02:45 PM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
While 1st Gens might not have been big by 67 standards, they are not little cars by our standards, that's what I mean.
67: 184.6"
68: 184.7"
69: 186.0"
For comparison early Thirds were 187.8" which was also kinda little in 82, but today not really. It's OK with me though because I don't like driving around in tiny cars and IMO cars need to get a little bigger again. (But NOT 4th Gen big) Mid-size is good, musclecars should be.
67: 184.6"
68: 184.7"
69: 186.0"
For comparison early Thirds were 187.8" which was also kinda little in 82, but today not really. It's OK with me though because I don't like driving around in tiny cars and IMO cars need to get a little bigger again. (But NOT 4th Gen big) Mid-size is good, musclecars should be.
Last edited by IZ28; 08-10-2003 at 02:48 PM.