I've read where its not as bad with the GT since they use the GT500 LCA's now, but the best cure is bolting in either a new UCA or LCAs. I installed LCA's on my car and low and behold I was actually able to get the thing well into the 12's nanny controlled and granny shifted (once I quit trying to launch the car above 1500-1800 rpm). Almost a 1 second improvement over last fall's trip out to RDI.


The downside is increased NVH. I installed LCA's with urethane at both ends and it tranmits a good amount of noise to the cabin.

 

I just don't want to have to add stuff to a brand new car i'm making payments on to keep it from doing something I don't feel it should be doing from the factory. That's what kills me about the Cobalt, I can't stand the wheel hop. Hopefully they corrected it, I've read some accounts that they say they've fixed most of it but lets see.

 

[QUOTE=bossco;6334507]I've read where its not as bad with the GT since they use the GT500 LCA's now.
QUOTE]
It was the 2010 GT-500 in the Motertrend video that was bouncing like a basketball during a burnout. I was actually feeling sick watching it thinking about what that was doing to the vehicle.

 

The '11 GT has a coupla things going for it compared to the '10 GT500, better F/R weight distribution and not having to manage an extra 120 ft/lbs & 130 hp.


Another reason I added LCA's to my car, I was worried about the axle-hop wrecking the rearend. The GY F1 Supercar tires go to absolute crap under 40 deg F and made wheelspin plus the attendant wheel hop extremely easy on anything but a smooth piece of asphalt.

LMAO, I didn't think I would start modding my car so soon after I bought it, first thing out the gate, I bought a set of SLP Loudmouths so my car sounded like it had 500hp, then I got Ford's CAI so I didn't have to bury the throttle to hear the supercharger, now I'm looking at getting a new tuner to bump the rev limiter and cut off the speed limiter along with a new pulley and tune to eek out a bit more power.

Also want to swap over to FRPP's FR3 suspension, add a bigger heat exchanger and coolant reservior and hopefully by then the '10 GT500 19" wheels will be readily available and priced right - both because I want to try a set of Michelin PS2's and because you dont have alot of choices in tires with the 285/40R18 rears.

After that, I want to swap out the M112 S/C for the TVS and I'll finally have the car I've always wanted.

 

I am one who is not crazy about the size / weight of the Camaro, but let's not get out of hand here.

For one, the Mustang has grown in size and weight in each new generation since the first Fox body cars, just as the Camaro has grown from 3rd to 4th to 5th. Just as the Accord has gone from a compact sedan (about the size of today's Civic) to a large midsize / small fullsize car. And so on and so forth.

Secondly, ignoring the historical trends, just look at the two current cars. The Camaro is 2.3 inches longer, 1.6 inches wider, and 1.4 inches shorter in height than the new Mustang.

I really wish the new Camaro were more like 3500-3600 lbs, but let's not pretend that the Mustang hasn't grown as well, as though it is still a 2900 lb LX notchback.

EDIT: Oh, and while the 5.0L seems to be a pretty sweet new engine, I wouldn't go so far as to call it superior to the LS3. So far the acceleration times and especially trap speeds have been rather comparable, despite the Camaro spotting the Mustang 250 lbs and a big gearing advantage. And that's without even getting into the potential for the engine outside of stock production form...

 

I agree Joe, the Mustang has grown too heavy and bulky. It gets a free pass though, thanks to the Camaro.

 

Almost scary to think what will pass for "lightweight" in the future if this trend continues.

 

Do you think the BMW 1 and 3 series are too heavy and bulky? I've seen the "too heavy" complaint lodged against cars like the 135i too (though not "too bulky").

What about a hatchback like the Mazda 3?

At some point, it seems like it's just grumbling, because nearly everything is too heavy, in spite of all modern cars being designed on a computer.

If we went back to 100-200hp and 15" wheels, like cars from the 80s (my '85 IROC, at 215 was the most powerful Camaro in a decade) had, I have no doubt that cars could get lighter, even with more safety and convenience equipment than they had in 1985.

It seems like it's easier to take out bulk than weight....

 

I think we all understand what enthusiasts desire and would like to have. All I'm stating is what GM actually had available to work with, keeping in harmony with reality (available in chassis and available funds). Being a realist it's not too hard to look back and see how Camaro came to be in it's current form.

Going back to the original point of your statement that GM should have used a smaller RWD platform. There simply wasn't one. Kappa was vaguely an option, though likely very likely under sized, and with doubt it could support high HP V8 options.

So when it comes down to the tough, real decisions, not all is ever perfect. It was Camaro on Zeta, or maybe no Camaro at all. Would today's Camaro consumer be better served with no Camaro cause the only other option would be slightly hefty?

Camaro weighing more than Malibu and Camry is not unexpected for many high HP RWD reasons. The chassis for a high HP RWD vehicle is going to have more supporting structure. The requirements for overall strength and rigidity are going to be more for high HP RWD vehicle (subframes, axles, transmissions, drivetrain links, etc). Unless expensive materials and tooling are introduced (aluminum, carbon fiber, composites, fiberglass, etc) it simply wasn't a reality in for the current car with Zeta being the only viable chassis option.

Developing small RWD chassis for Camaro alone simply isn't a realistic reality. The platform needs to be the source for multiple product variants, that's the reality of today's manufacturing. Alpha might likely turn out to be the ticket, just not on the time table some enthusiasts want. If Mustang fits the bill, why not buy a Mustang? We've owned three of them, and three Camaro's. Mustang is a great car. If weight is at the top of your priority list, get the Mustang.

Now from the Camaro side of the house, we could all sit here and beat up on the best selling pony car Mustang for being woefully underpowered for over a decade. We could all second guess and the decisions not to have offered a 400HP Mustang GT years ago, but it is what it is.

If there are things about the Mustang you like, buy one. It seems as it's worked for me in the past.

 

oh you mean like the 6.2 Boss engine that can be punched out to 7.5Liters?! Its crazy that roush already has one stroked to 7.0 that is making 800hp n/a!

 

BINGO!

That's what really disappoints me with the so called GM car enthusiasts. They would rather have no Camaro at all than to have a 5G in its current format, if their attitudes are any guide.

I noticed a similar reception for the Pontiac GTO. People were up in arms that GM should call it the GTO, which re-introduced RWD, V8 performance to GM's Pontiac brand, than to accept the car for its many virtues. The car was canned, not because of its weight, but for its bland looks.

In comparison, the Camaro has the looks, but it has more weight... Some people are just too self-righteous for their own good.



The 1-series cars are around 3300 lbs... and as far as I know, the package hasn't been design protected for a [BMW] V8... even though 40% of its components are shared with the 3-series platform.

So, as far as weight and size is concerned, how low can you go? Notwithstanding the fact that a 1-series sized platform is just too small to base a Camaro off [of], IMHO.

 

That engine is sweet, to bad its AL/CI construction - the 2v heads on the Boss flow as well as the 4v heads on the Coyote.

IMO, it would make for a killer S-197 Mach provided they could implement an aluminum block to save some weight. Dimensions aside, the Boss can easily go toe to toe with the LSx.

 

I didn't know that. wow

 

What does that have to do with what I said?

 

Answer and you'll find out.

Well okay.

There are lots of complaints about weight, but everything is heavy these days. Everything has gained weight. The Mustang is up about 15% over where it was 20 years ago. So is the Camaro. The 3 series and most FWD hatches have gained more than 20%. To a large extent, complaining about added weight, when it's all market and regulation driven is like complaining about "kids these days" or "that modern music". You're complaining that the Mustang has been given a free pass. Well, if the Mustang has, so have 98% of the cars out there.

For the most part, the only way cars get lighter is by losing HP, such that power to weight drops, or by using exotic materials. There are a few exceptions. The GM Epsilon II is so heavy that I think they could drop some pounds just by trying harder.