News on an '07 Camaro
12-16-2003, 08:38 PM
#61
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Livonia, MI
Posts: 585
Originally posted by Z28Wilson
[B]
There's one big difference. The Ford 9" was paid for eons ago (haven't they basically used that thing since the dawn of time?) That axle has been the industry standard because it has been used in anything and everything and been constantly improved over the years because of it. I don't know the origins of the 4th Gen axle but I doubt it has had that advantage.
Again, "underspecify" would imply massive, widespread breaking under normal driving conditions in stock applications. I personally haven't seen it happen at the track yet on a stock F car.
[B]
There's one big difference. The Ford 9" was paid for eons ago (haven't they basically used that thing since the dawn of time?) That axle has been the industry standard because it has been used in anything and everything and been constantly improved over the years because of it. I don't know the origins of the 4th Gen axle but I doubt it has had that advantage.
Again, "underspecify" would imply massive, widespread breaking under normal driving conditions in stock applications. I personally haven't seen it happen at the track yet on a stock F car.
As for the term "underspecify", it doesn't mean widespread breakage. It strictly refers to more cars having problems than would normally be expected based on how the vehicle was designed and marketed for use. Typically different factors are used to specify different drivetrain components. Vehicle weight and torque would be the two big factors. This would typically be followed by expected usage (i.e. since trucks are frequently used for towing, they normally get sturdier drivetrains, etc.). Cost is also a factor. Since GM's purpose for the Camaro was as an economy performance car, I could easily understand if you argued economy won out so it makes since they used the rear end that was capable under normal driving circumstances, though perhaps not the best choice for the performance aspect of the car. Since I prefer to think of the F-car as a performance car, my opinion is that the 10 bolt was underspecified. It's only my opinion though. You are free to have yours.
On a side note, GM could have at least offered a better rear end as an option. While I would have ordered my LT1 auto car with a standard 10 bolt even if something else was available, I would have gladly paid extra for a factory 12 bolt in my LS1 6 speed car.
Last edited by 94_Z28_ragtop; 12-16-2003 at 08:44 PM.
12-16-2003, 08:52 PM
#62
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 10,287
Originally posted by 94_Z28_ragtop
On a side note, GM could have at least offered a better rear end as an option. While I would have ordered my LT1 auto car with a standard 10 bolt even if something else was available, I would have gladly paid extra for a factory 12 bolt in my LS1 6 speed car.
On a side note, GM could have at least offered a better rear end as an option. While I would have ordered my LT1 auto car with a standard 10 bolt even if something else was available, I would have gladly paid extra for a factory 12 bolt in my LS1 6 speed car.
12-16-2003, 09:25 PM
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
Originally posted by 94_Z28_ragtop
Since GM's purpose for the Camaro was as an economy performance car, I could easily understand if you argued economy won out so it makes since they used the rear end that was capable under normal driving circumstances, though perhaps not the best choice for the performance aspect of the car.
Since GM's purpose for the Camaro was as an economy performance car, I could easily understand if you argued economy won out so it makes since they used the rear end that was capable under normal driving circumstances, though perhaps not the best choice for the performance aspect of the car.
On a side note, GM could have at least offered a better rear end as an option.
12-16-2003, 09:35 PM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 538
IMO I think that the Camaro should come with different options but I can't really imagine a AWD Camaro, to me is like to change the flag or our country, the Camaro newer was AWD.. never lived 35 years because of AWD why change it? sooo now the Camaros come AWD
Can the vette be awd also?
the Camaro need some changes, the ones that many times here we have discused, but not awd, not because that is what is "selling and making $$"
I just hope GM doesn't bring back a car called Camaro that isn't a Maro
better a low production Camaro true to its roots, maybe better dead....
Simple. take a look at the first Camaros the First Gen!
V8
RWD
2doors
maybe smaller like a G35 not too much bigger
and Practical
Can the vette be awd also?
the Camaro need some changes, the ones that many times here we have discused, but not awd, not because that is what is "selling and making $$"
I just hope GM doesn't bring back a car called Camaro that isn't a Maro
better a low production Camaro true to its roots, maybe better dead....
Simple. take a look at the first Camaros the First Gen!
V8
RWD
2doors
maybe smaller like a G35 not too much bigger
and Practical
Last edited by luis nunez; 12-16-2003 at 09:39 PM.
12-16-2003, 10:14 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,736
my stock rear has 140K Miles, is perfectly quiet and I beat on it pretty good, no major mods yet but I drive it like I hate it. I dont expect it to live forever with slicks, a clutch and H/C, but thats fine. No complaints here
I'll take the "maro (or bird) with a lame arsed rear any day VS. No f-body
I'll take the "maro (or bird) with a lame arsed rear any day VS. No f-body
12-16-2003, 10:49 PM
#68
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hoboken, NJ
Posts: 298
Originally posted by Z28x
Was AWD a problem on the Syclone?
Why are so many people against new "options"? If you don't like the option then don't get it. I don't have a Convertable Camaro b/c I don't want it on my Camaro, that doesn't mean Chevy shouldn't offer one for those that do want it.
Was AWD a problem on the Syclone?
Why are so many people against new "options"? If you don't like the option then don't get it. I don't have a Convertable Camaro b/c I don't want it on my Camaro, that doesn't mean Chevy shouldn't offer one for those that do want it.
E.G. my buddy has an awesome '94 trans am... and he is all into drag racing
myself however, when im finally able to purchase my fbod (by the end of summer) plan to gear it more to track racing...
different strokes for different folks. IMO the only thing an AWD option could do is boost sales. esp on the 6 banger models, the bread and butter of the line up. i bet it will attract lots of women, and other people who fear RWD....
12-16-2003, 11:10 PM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: At car shows and cruise nights!
Posts: 3,647
Originally posted by Z284ever
Too bad GM didn't incorporate the "Aussie" Borg Warner 9 bolt on V8 4th gens.
Too bad GM didn't incorporate the "Aussie" Borg Warner 9 bolt on V8 4th gens.
That is a good rear, but it's definetly expensive.
12-16-2003, 11:22 PM
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 2,612
Originally posted by Darth Xed
Hmmm... I've been throwing this (AWD on one of the 2) around for some time here on the board... it will be insteresting to see how that pans out, if at all.
Hmmm... I've been throwing this (AWD on one of the 2) around for some time here on the board... it will be insteresting to see how that pans out, if at all.
Truthfully if the engines were the same I'd take an AWD Camaro over a RWD Camaro, esp. since I already have the later. If its handicapped 50+ hp though...
12-17-2003, 06:47 AM
#71
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 95
Do we have a plant in the US that can build the cars with an AWD drivetrain? Would the plant that is going to be building the next GTO be the one to do it? Or are these AWD cars going to be coming from Australia, and be niche vehicles?
IF the Camaro was to get an AWD option, I think Chevy would be wise to make it an option available for even the base model. The AWD will sell the car to the masses, because people like AWD. From a customer appeal standpoint, I think it's a good idea. As long as it's an option GM isn't going to lose the Camaro fans that exist now. Sure some may be so disgusted by the fact it has an AWD option they'll decide to not buy it, but then as soon as they see a RWD Camaro on the track, they'll be back. The girls, and guys who aren't really into cars will be drawn in by the idea that they can own a Camaro AND use it as an every day car in the snow, and it will actually function better than their FWD cars. Keep it priced in the mid to high 20's with the AWD option, and I think it's a winner.
I know now that GM is coming out with AWD cars with some performance, it's the direction I will most likely be going in. I can't afford to have a track car and a daily driver. I think there's a lot of people like me who would give up a few tenths of a second on the track to have it also function as a reliable daily driver.
IF the Camaro was to get an AWD option, I think Chevy would be wise to make it an option available for even the base model. The AWD will sell the car to the masses, because people like AWD. From a customer appeal standpoint, I think it's a good idea. As long as it's an option GM isn't going to lose the Camaro fans that exist now. Sure some may be so disgusted by the fact it has an AWD option they'll decide to not buy it, but then as soon as they see a RWD Camaro on the track, they'll be back. The girls, and guys who aren't really into cars will be drawn in by the idea that they can own a Camaro AND use it as an every day car in the snow, and it will actually function better than their FWD cars. Keep it priced in the mid to high 20's with the AWD option, and I think it's a winner.
I know now that GM is coming out with AWD cars with some performance, it's the direction I will most likely be going in. I can't afford to have a track car and a daily driver. I think there's a lot of people like me who would give up a few tenths of a second on the track to have it also function as a reliable daily driver.
12-17-2003, 07:24 AM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,504
Originally posted by jg95z28
Did I say it would weigh as much as a Silverado? NO! I said it would have the "same problems" as the Silverado SS. 
Everyone agrees the Silverado SS would be quicker if it were only RWD. Why? Because it would weigh less. The same can be said in comparing a RWD Camaro and an AWD Camaro. All other things being equal... the RWD version would be quicker because it would weigh less.
Did I say it would weigh as much as a Silverado?
NO! I said it would have the "same problems" as the Silverado SS. Everyone agrees the Silverado SS would be quicker if it were only RWD. Why? Because it would weigh less. The same can be said in comparing a RWD Camaro and an AWD Camaro. All other things being equal... the RWD version would be quicker because it would weigh less.
And I really do think an AWD Camaro, whith equal HP could be quicker than a RWD version in 0-60 runs, but most likely not faster on the top end.
The traction advantage is most likely going to "outweigh" (pun intended) the additional weight.... at least in 0-60 runs.
AGain... I am NOT saying this should be standard, across the board stuff... just an option.
12-17-2003, 03:10 PM
#73
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
I've changed my mind about AWD.
I now really want to actually see how many people will actually dish out the substantial extra cash, accept the drop in fuel economy, deal with the extra weight (the RWD GTO w/ Automatic is a gas guzzler and weighs about 3700lbs with IRS), less agile handling, and drop in performance over a RWD version of the same car simply to deal with the 20-30 days out of 365 where there is a blizzard in the northeast bad enough to make AWD an advantage.
I'm also curious to see how many people start acting like the people I see in AWD suv's going to or from Reno on I-80. It always seems to be the AWD vehicles that end up off the road because of that false sense of security.
To finally see how many people will actually put the money where the mouth is, I say "Bring on an AWD Camaro" and let's see you actually buy it over quicker, better handling, and more fuel efficient Camaros.
I now really want to actually see how many people will actually dish out the substantial extra cash, accept the drop in fuel economy, deal with the extra weight (the RWD GTO w/ Automatic is a gas guzzler and weighs about 3700lbs with IRS), less agile handling, and drop in performance over a RWD version of the same car simply to deal with the 20-30 days out of 365 where there is a blizzard in the northeast bad enough to make AWD an advantage.
I'm also curious to see how many people start acting like the people I see in AWD suv's going to or from Reno on I-80. It always seems to be the AWD vehicles that end up off the road because of that false sense of security.
To finally see how many people will actually put the money where the mouth is, I say "Bring on an AWD Camaro" and let's see you actually buy it over quicker, better handling, and more fuel efficient Camaros.
Last edited by guionM; 12-17-2003 at 03:14 PM.
12-17-2003, 03:26 PM
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hou,TX
Posts: 293
Originally posted by guionM
I've changed my mind about AWD.
I now really want to actually see how many people will actually dish out the substantial extra cash, accept the drop in fuel economy, deal with the extra weight (the RWD GTO w/ Automatic is a gas guzzler and weighs about 3700lbs with IRS), less agile handling, and drop in performance over a RWD version of the same car simply to deal with the 20-30 days out of 365 where there is a blizzard in the northeast bad enough to make AWD an advantage.
I'm also curious to see how many people start acting like the people I see in AWD suv's going to or from Reno on I-80. It always seems to be the AWD vehicles that end up off the road because of that false sense of security.
To finally see how many people will actually put the money where the mouth is, I say "Bring on an AWD Camaro" and let's see you actually buy it over quicker, better handling, and more fuel efficient Camaros.
I've changed my mind about AWD.
I now really want to actually see how many people will actually dish out the substantial extra cash, accept the drop in fuel economy, deal with the extra weight (the RWD GTO w/ Automatic is a gas guzzler and weighs about 3700lbs with IRS), less agile handling, and drop in performance over a RWD version of the same car simply to deal with the 20-30 days out of 365 where there is a blizzard in the northeast bad enough to make AWD an advantage.
I'm also curious to see how many people start acting like the people I see in AWD suv's going to or from Reno on I-80. It always seems to be the AWD vehicles that end up off the road because of that false sense of security.
To finally see how many people will actually put the money where the mouth is, I say "Bring on an AWD Camaro" and let's see you actually buy it over quicker, better handling, and more fuel efficient Camaros.
12-17-2003, 03:27 PM
#75
Prominent Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Scott asked this question in Bowling Green....and most of us said no to AWD....JasonE thought it would be a great option, as most of us did, IF it was optional....but most of us didn't want the negatives of AWD.
guoinM makes a great point....sounds good, but who'd pay for it?
Maybe on the Pontiac / Buick models but not the Chevy.
guoinM makes a great point....sounds good, but who'd pay for it?
Maybe on the Pontiac / Buick models but not the Chevy.