I've never argued for exotic lightweight materials, read my posts.
Mustang is doing fine. Good car for geriatrics and secretaries. I'm hoping for better out of the Camaro. If it was out NOW, at 3450 lb., and being well marketed, I'm sure it'd be doing OK. But the possibility exists that the market will be VERY different in 2008/2009. And, for the 1,000,000th time, lighter weight is better for those of us interested in TOTAL performance.

aside: How GM managed to not be able to sell LS1 Fbodies vs. the Mustang is beyond me.

"politically correct platform"?! wtf are you talking about?

That is SPECIFICALLY what they should have done (used a lighter-weight platform to base the Z on) IN MY OPINION.

Hey, carmakers work for ME. They don't do what I want? I don't buy their car. If you expect ME to do their structural design and analysis work for them, somebody's gonna have to pay me. I'm willing work for $75/hr (a bargain!), 8hr minimum. You'll have to get me drawings and 3d models too, full access to their testing facilities, etc. etc.

But the point is, if NIssan had simply made WEIGHT a PRIORITY, they would have built the Z on the lighter Silvia platform rather than on the G35 platform. There are 100 reasons why they didn't do that, I'm just saying that if they'd *really* cared to make it reasonably lightweight, they wouldn't have built it on the G35 platform.
If GM makes WEIGHT a PRIORITY, they'll start with a lighter-weight platform than Sigma. They should use the Solstice/Sky platform. IN MY OPINION.

As I've said repeatedly, it is more difficult to get weight out of a heavy platform than it is to start with a lighter weight platform to begin with. Light weight is not something that can be easily "added on" after the fact. Adding 25% power? Generally not a big problem. Subtracting even 5% weight? Exceedingly difficult.

This is my point, that starting out with a luxury sedan platform is BAD for those of us interested in a reasonbly light Camaro in the future.

Beats me, it's not a car I'm interested in in the slightest.

When did I ever call the EXTREMELY capable designers/engineers at GM amateurs? Yes, they've done very well with the C6. Great job. Keeping costs in line, increasing performance, and keeping weight in check. I'm just worried about the PRIORITIES for the new Camaro. If lighter weight isn't a priority and they build on Sigma, we're looking at a 3500-3600 lb. Camaro. Which may be fine with you. OK. But I won't be buying one.

My ultimate interest isn't that the new Camaro is a sales sucess, but rather that it is a car that I WANT.

Yes, I'm a selfish bastard

 

My eyes are on fire, after all that!

 

No specifics there, none in fact anywhere...
If the Camaro comes back and does as well, it will be considered a big success - as the 05 Mustang already is.
Baloney. Very little has changed in the pony performance car market in years, if not decades, and I see no reason why things might change drastically by 2008/9 either. What were you thinking of... maybe that movie, "War of the Worlds"?
Yes, that would be the one all the chatterboxes keep tossing around in discussions on this site. It's been entertaining to watch you jump on the bandwagon too... too bad you apparently can't grasp that stretching ANY platform to give a functional RWD V8 2+2 results in *drum roll please*... about 3450 - 3600 pounds! Yep, every time, imagine that! Oops forgot to build in my transparent aluminum body shell
I can just imagine if your new-car shopping list fell out of your pocket... how it might read:
2005 Mustang GT ....hmm nope. Too heavy, based off a luxo sedan. Wouldnt portray the youthful image driving my 1971 240Z Datsun exudes
2006 Nissan 350Z ....umm no. Too heavy (Gawd what a porker, at 32xx lb!). I shall punish them for not using the platform of my enlightened choice. No sale from me!
2006 Mitsu Eclipse ....what's that? 263 HP? 3.8L? But... a whopping 3540 lb? Darn it! There it is again, even on a FWD!
2006 Charger ... wow the SRT8 has 425 HP. But Eeek! TWO TONS of curb weight! UNacceptable.
2006 Chevy Aveo. Wow! only 2638 lb! I'm in love! (I can always add power later!)

...I see why you're still driving that dear old Datsun

You bumbled and stumbled around and ran right into one of the reasons cars aren't lighter. It costs $$$ to make them so. Those are $$$ that buyers are constantly clamoring for carmakers to do other things with, like put movie screens into the backs of front seat headrests, to make front seat heaters and AC standard eqpt, to provide in-car phones/XM/MP3 jacks... you name it. It's simply not a priority to a lot of folks to have their car be 100 lb lighter instead. The folks who really want a light car get an Aveo.
You never did answer the question, with your aloof deflection. So I'll answer it for you. Ford did it because it WORKS. It's not THAT hard to take out some flanges here, some braces there, shrink a few dimensions and then poof - turn a luxo-sedan floorpan (etal) into that of a sporty 2+2. But that doesn't fit your argument so you've chosen to ignore it. Whatever works for you
Nothing wrong with that... except the car you seek apparently cannot be produced at a reasonable price, by any modern manufacturer (small but important detail). Better get your creeper out and slide under that 240Z to do another quick check for rust...

 

BigDarknSlow,
Before I get into it again, let me just say that my primary points are:
1) lighter weight = WAY better performance at road courses. That's what I'm interested in. I KNOW that's not a big priority for 95% of the Fbody world. I'm just making *my* desires for a new Camaro known.
2) Every vehicle design is a compromise. I don't think weight is the highest priority for most automakers. i.e., I think they COULD make ligher-weight cars, without increasing costs, if they made it a higher priority. How did Toyota make an inexpensive sports car (MR2Spyder) that weighs 2200 lb? They made weight a PRIORITY. How has Mazda kept weight pretty much in check at 2400 lb. with the also-relatively-inexpensive Miata? Weight is a bigger priority for that program. You don't have to go to exotic materials or construction to get weight down. And even if you do, if you're smart enough about it it doesn't have to break the bank. Conisider the Lotus Elise: just under 2000 lb., aluminum construction, at $45,000 for a low-volume baby exotic. That ain't bad, way cheaper than the much higher-volume Boxster.

But of course, the reality is that any new Camaro will be based on an existing platform. Which is fine. *IF* they pick the right platform. My preference is for a smaller lighter platform to be used. It looks like they're going to use a Cadillac. I think that sucks.

SPECIFICALLY, they (Nissan, and now, GM) picked the wrong platform.

My point is, weight is NOT a big priority for them. If it WERE, we'd get better performance. And we MIGHT get a car that would have a PRAYER of keeping up with me at the track. And then I'd buy one

You keep asking for specifics on how I'd reduce weight, I keep telling you I'd have started with a lighter-weight platform. How long are we gonna continue this? Basically, I've been AGREEING with you that it is difficult and costly to reduce weight any meaningful amount on a given vehicle platform. My POINT is that that is why it is CRITICAL to START OUT with a lightweight platform.

So we've finally reached the point in history where nothing will ever change again? No further advancement whatsoever? The oil age will continue with prices relatively unchanged just because that's the way it's always been in your lifetime? Even as demand from China and India is escalating and it is becoming more costly to produce the same amount every year?

I come to this site and throw in my 2cents and I'm jumping on a bandwagon?
Weight has never been a driving priority. I'm saying that for this one I think it should be. Mainly for performance reasons, but also because I *think* it will be necessary to market the car (higher fuel mileage).


Why do keep referring to "transparent" aluminum? Is it supposed to be lighter than the non-see-thru kind? Or are you just trying to make it SEEM as though lighter weight is only attainable thru use of "unobtanium" type materials?

That thing weighs 2638 lb.? I woulda guessed less than 2400. Damn, they can't even build a tiny car that's light! Still, I could take it and put a Cobalt SS engine in the back, hmmm...

If you want to know why I'm still driving that dear old Datsun, bring yourself to the track, and bring WHATEVER car you can muster. ANYTHING. And I will SHOW you
Or you could just have a look at the links I posted a few pages back, and you'll see pretty clearly.
I understand that track performance isn't important to you (at least that's what you *seemed* to be saying). It is to me.

It costs TONS of money to develop cars, period. It does NOT have to cost MORE to make them lightweight. In the SPECIFIC case of the CAMARO, they will base it on an existing platform. IF they base it on a Cadillac, it's going to weigh ~3500-3600 lb. and no amount of money spent is going to change that very much. IF they base it on the smaller and lighter and CHEAPER Solstice/Sky, they could conceivably come in closer to 3200 (maybe LESS!), at REDUCED COST!

True.

Not the folks who really want a light car for PERFORMANCE reasons.
The people who buy Aveos don't do it for light weight anyway. Cost is their number 1 priority. And whaddya know, cheap is lighter weight, no unobtanium materials or exotic construction techniques required!

Choosing the right platform *IS* the answer, not an "aloof deflection".

If your idea of "sporty" means "two doors instead of four".
Myself, If I'm gonna have 4-door luxury sedan weight, I might as well have 4 doors and luxury.

I'm not ignoring anything. If they want to follow the Mustang with the Camaro, it could work as well for GM as it did for Ford (then again it might not in 2009).

But it won't be a car I'm interested in.

You seem to be saying that if it *ISN'T* being built, or *HASN'T* been built, that it *CAN'T* be built. I disagree.

You and your import-phobia

 

i'm going to the store anybody need more popcorn?

 

there goes 20 mons of my life i will never get back

 

I agree about low weight helping. I also agree about it not being top priority for Camaro or for that matter GTO owners. So this is where your logic first begins to break. It's a little like me coming in here and ranting about the next Camaro having a nice shade of purple as one of its colors. "If it can't be had in purple, I simply won't buy one! All muscle cars have come in a shade of purple! Purple is a key characteristic of muscle cars!" (Do I sound like Baghdad Bob yet?)

Much as I like the purple on my 95 Formula, I'm not on a mission to teach everyone else out there how important it is to make it available on an upcoming muscle car.

It's comical, yet 100% predictable, that an import lover would once again run to our hero Toyota
Unfortunately, the MR2 is a poor example. Less headroom, legroom, cargo room, and shoulder room than the Solstice. Less power and torque than the Solstice (but of COURSE!). But not less money... MSRP on the MR2 is $26k, Solstice is $20k. Gee, thanks Toyota! Thanks for making weight a PRIORITY

As for the Lotus "Elitist"... I've got a feeling that even a base C6 could smack it down HARD for the same $$$ out of pocket. Expecially considering the C6 has 7.9 lb/HP while the Elitist has an anemic 10.4. And I like to think of automotive performance in wider terms than just autoX BTW... the strip and the street are also important performance arenas (dunno, maybe that's just me ).

You have no faith in GM then, despite the insincere kiss-up statements you made a while back. If you don't think they can for example, make a sigma-lite into a winning 5gen, it just shows how little you do know about structures. (Where winning = satisfying MANY customers, not beating all comers in autoX).
And I disagree. But that horse is dead now so I will let it be.
Not what I said. My point was, 2008 is right around the corner and the basics of a successful hi-value RWD V8 2+2 were just now re-validated (has that gotten thru to you yet?) in the 05 Stang. It is WISE, good for the customer, and OPTIMUM for Chevy to emulate that in every way possible. Even the idea of leveraging a luxo car if need be!
I am so sick of this chicken-little attitude about oil. Oil is up right now because of one simple thing: the pathologic, psychotic antics of a group of anarchist thug punks in the mideast. EVERYONE ELSE in the world (including the Chinese! Well imagine that!) wants oil to be stable. Once these punks are all KILLED (sadly that is what it will likely require, due to their own sick dogma), oil will resume its steady and boring price march. That price trend is a slow upward one, sure, but one that will take DECADES to climb any big amounts if left to true market forces of supply and demand. There is PLENTY of crude in the world. The mideast is heavily stoked with it. Alaska and Eurasia have it. China's even drilling on their own offshore. Once the punks are done disrupting things, I predict our gas prices will come back down to $2.50 or so and stay that way for years to come.
I had to point out... that statement is loaded with irony
The reference is from a Star Trek movie a few years back. Scottie provides the formula to someone during a time-travel trip, so they can make a big and strong fish tank to save a whale. My point being, if we were actually living in your ultra-modern wonderworld, we could make the entire car's greenhouse out of the stuff and replace heavy brittle glass with strong lightweight aluminum. Alas... we're stuck in the primitive year 2005... so we make do with powerful, sweet-sounding engines like the LS2
There you go again, beating down GM. Why am I not surprised?
Ok... I will bring a Formula One race car Or maybe a kart. Point being, sure you can find "A CAR" that is as fast or faster than the almighty 240Z. But can that car do anything useful outside that one tiny mission? Can the 240Z carry two kids? Protect its owners in an offset frontal crash? Keep occupants cooled and entertained with some good music? No? Then bleah.
And you know this, how? HOW exactly do you know they could enlarge a Solstice structure to become a 2+2, at less cost than by simplifying a sigma? Ford did it, and is now selling all the low-cost Mustangs they can produce, even after ramping up production to meet staggering demand...
In econobox cars, cheap comes from having sparse CONTENT and that happens to include scant interior room. No one should be surprised about the lighter weight.
Keep shining that 240Z then. Buyers have been asking for more and more niceties now for decades, since you hopped off the reality train. It won't be long for example, til AC is standard on every new car.
I'm not afraid of them. However I don't fawn over them like you do

The next GTO and Camaro will be a success not because of shaving some weight, but by meeting the many needs of their TARGET market. And that's not weight-obsessed track racers.

 

BigDarkNFast, your posts are rife with your own assumptions, and there is always at the very least one area of your post that is insulting in nature. I don't know how Dan has restrained himself from firing back as long as he has. I would be really appreciative if you could focus at your own arguement at hand, and actually read what the dude has to write, instead of skimming it really quickly so you can get your two cents in.

Just as an example, you should leave this kind of crap out of your posts

"It's comical, yet 100% predictable, that an import lover would once again run to our hero Toyota "

You have no basis to believe he is an "import lover", despite your gut instinct. Seems to me if he was an import lover, he could give have a crap about the new Camaro at all. Another assumption on your part, with no secure basis in reality.


The only reason I post this at all isl, is because I have read through 16 pages of this thread, and I am picking up a trend here.

 

Can I get a WITNESS!

Thanks, Russ!

Thanks everyone for your nearly infinite patience. I will leave off with the one thing that BigDarknSlow and I share in our otherwise disparate visions for the future Camaro. It should be available in PURPLE, like my '95 (dark purple, and before I bought it I specifically looked only at purple, teal and mystic teal cars). In fact, I thank the car should ONLY be made in purple, no other colors.

If we can't agree on that, I guess all is lost...

 

Man, what a thread.

The "cars are heavier because automakers are lazy" brought this thought to the front...

Cars are heavy (other than obvious safety standards) because of message boards like this full of people who demand a quieter ride. People who are pissed about a rattling hatch and dash are what makes cars heavier. The request for BMWish materials also make a car heavy. Not "the lack of" anything.

 

Then bring the rattles on.

 

Amen!

 

A squeek here, a rattle there and loud Bang over there, all worth it for some true american performance.

When i visit my relatives out in the rural part of michigan, i have to drive down 2 mile long unpaved dirt road, if i go over 5 MPH while hitting 10 year old holes every second the whole dash looks like its gonna smash off (this is in my Z) the pillars shake, and the rear-end is barking stern orders to me in a loud voice, but its all in the name of love.

Because we make up on our 110 mile ride home, that takes me 90 mins to complete.

I love american muscle and all its flaws, because all love is, is an appreciation of ones faults and ones perfections.

and my Z's perfection is the sterdy V-8 heart pumping excitement everytime i turn the key.

 

You can have light weight.
You can have IRS.
You can have a good price.
But you will not get all the above.

You want IRS?
What are you going to sacrifice? It costs more to produce & it's heavier.

You want IRS affordable, that means more steel in place of alumunum.
You want IRS lightweight, that means more expensive alumunum in place of steel


You want light weight?
What are you going to sacrafice to get it?

Are you prepared to sacrafice IRS in favor of a lighter live axle?
Are you prepared to sacrifice price in order to get more alumunum components?

You want it to be reasonable priced.
What are you ready to sacrifice to get it?

This whole thing is getting pretty ridiculous, and downright stupid.

We're condeming a car that no one has seen yet.
We're completely blowing off the words of people involved in actually making the car.
We're making absurd claims that we can get an alumunum IRS vehicle at $20,000 with no sacrafice anywhere.
We came up with a 3600 pound figure from thin air, and are using it as gospel truth.
And finally, very few people are taking a whisker's moment to even think realistically about some of the things they are saying.

Yet, we have so-called "Camaro enthusiasts", and self described "Passionate Camaro" people. I don't see many. All I see is a group of panic mongers, reactionaries, naysayers, and others who seem to want to suspend reality and reason to make an even bigger claim. And some of you actually think GM "has" to come here to hear "real" Camaro enthusiasts?

Give me a break.

You will have a chance to see and hear what's going on soon.

The best advise I can give you (and I think Red's already said this) is to sit down, shut up, and see what comes out.

Red must REALLY hate coming to this place.

 

Thank you!