If you moved the engine back any further in an F4 it would be in your lap. The back plugs are already underneath the cowl! It would be better to shave a few inches off in front of the engine.

 

I'm agree with Z28Wilson... Lets see what happens when you either shorten the overhangs, or push the wheels further out to the corners, lengthening the wheelbase..

Shorting the overhangs a bit on both sides, if done right would still keep the dimensions right, and make the car more aggresive and fresh..

Putting in an IRS in the back might allow the rear seats to moved a bit rearward, giving a bit more room back there, and more truck room.. They might be able to sneak a real trunk back there that uses those fancy hinges that don't take up space.. And if they removed the cat hump in the passanger side, that about solves all my major interior space complains for me.... Although maybe you taller drivers would want more headroom.


Then if they pushed the wheels further out, it would yield even more room.. BTW, I'm pretty sure a Cavalier has a longer wheelbase than our Camaro... I believe its 103 inches to 101!


Give us a performance engineered suspension, 3000 lb target weight, and a 400 hp LS6 option.. A slightly better looking and feeling interior.. Keep it low mid 20's to max $30k flat if possible.. a vert version.. a good advertising campaign... how can it not sell?

 

I suppose a few of you would be surprised that the Eclipse has the same wheelbase as the Camaro, and at 4" narrower (I think everyone can see how to cut 2" out of each side) has more front hip room than Camaro (59" vs 57").

Perhaps it should at least be as long as a Cavalier (about 5" longer). But other than that, a car that size with an LS1 & IRS would esily be the fastest, quickest, meanest Camaro that was ever made. It would probally have even better fuel economy too.

It would most certainly make more people think. For the same price for a same size V6 Mitsu or 4 cylinder import, you'd have one mean V8. Seems to be the perfect anti-rice formula to me.

 

While it sounds great, I'd be first in line, we will never see a 3,000 pound Camaro with IRS and a 400 horse LS6 for $30k. I doubt they could even do that for $35k.

 

While it could be a little less "upright" I think Mustang is almost a perfect size.

Camaro's handle great, but driving them around a parking lot makes you feel like you're piloting the Red October.

 

Would you guys buy someting with an LS6, say 430hp, weighs in around 2200lbs for around $40,000 out the door fully loaded?

This would be a mid engine tube chassis car, 2 seater of course.

 

Actually, the lowest I could do that for and still turn a small profit including taxes would be around $51,000 out the door... but damn that baby would haul ***!

 

Do you realize what a 430 hp engine would do with a 2200 pound car, let alone what the size of a 2200 pound car would be like?

You can keep that one, I'll pass.

 

I dunno oh bright one, you obviously have never seen sports car races have you... hell the tube fram riley and scott weighs 1800lbs, and puts out well over 600hp.

What are you talking about man, tell me please, in all your freakin knowledge, what would 430hp to do a 2200lb tube frame car? Whats that... nothing... why is that? Well its called chassis stiffness, you should try reading up about chassis structures, the 450lb frame of the Ultima GTR can handle well over 1000hp, the 300lb F1 monocoque, can handle a 875hp engine attached to it by tiny aluminium allthread and rod couplers.

 

Umm dude those chassis are specially designed to handle that kind of power. R&D alone on something like that would drive the price on any vehicle that benefited from it up.

 

Actually, you should try reading up on torque, because if you are talking about an LSx based Chevy V8, you are probally looking at a minimum of 500 ft/lbs, which is enough to twist your hypothetical sub-Miata sized car in half if you found tires capable of handling that much torque in that weight car without uselessly spinning the tires off the rims. Of course, since you point to a FWD Nissan Altima, you are talking about a high revving 4 cylinder engine on a FWD car. Right?

Now, I suspect (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) that you confused the Altima GTR (which doesn't exist... please post it if it does) with the Nissan Skyline GTR, which weigs in at about 3,400 pounds, not 2200.

As for the McLauren F1's monocoque chassis, there is a reason why that car costs $1,000,000 and not $40,000.

As for Scott-Riley, this car (http://www.mulsannescorner.com/mkiiic.htm) weighs 931kgs, roughly 2,500 pounds. Looking at it (because I know you aren't seriously thinking that car as is is capable of being sold to the public) , I suspect adding a full body, safety equptment (ie: air bags, bumpers, etc...), all convienence items that's expected in today's car, and that would pretty much push this frame's weight to about 2,900 lbs on a car that about 183" long. The steel chassied Corvette Z06 is only 300 pounds heavier, and I'm willing to wager it's probally a bank vault full of money cheaper to produce as well. I didn't even mention that paper thin body (would last 10 minutes in the real world) and it's all alumunum, carbon fiber, and titanium components (all very lightweight and all very expensive).

It also seems that Cadillac Racing evidently wasn't happy with Scott-Riley:
http://www.motorsports-marketing.com...ssages/21.html

Generally speaking, automakers are doing a pretty decent job (especially Corvette) in balencing safety, and construction techniques, with light weight and a price people will actually pay. Afterall, you gotta make money off the thing or you may as well hang up the "Outta Business" sign before you even start.

 

Guion, the Ultima is not a Nissan. It's a specialty type sports car. British, I think...

 

The Ultima GTR is built in the U.K... read the spelling, not how it sounds. Go search for it, tell me if you think its your little Nissan Altima, which is V6 powered by the way.

Stamped steel cars weigh more, learn this, carve into your chest, but get it into your head!!!

The Riley and Scott MKIII, (the older chassis) weighed in at 900kg at scrutineering @ Sears Point last year, I should know, I was there while it was going on along with the Saleen's, C5R's, 550 Maranellos, and Vipers. 931kg is roughly 2052.5lbs, your math is wrong anyhow, and so are your assumptions.

Right... Cadillac contracted an early R&S style chassis, I didn't say the R&S Caddy chassis, I said the MKIII which is a tube frame chassis'd prototype, the engine puts out nearly 560lb. ft. of torque, firstly it doesn't matter about a cars weight, that has nothing to do with its size or strength, let alone torsional rigidity. Read up on chassis engineering, your wasting my time with these comments that have no factual backing.

With your logic, the Saleen S7 should be the size of an Eclipse, but its just as long and wide as the Camaro if not larger.

I really don't give a **** about your assumptions, because like I said, you have no factual backing for your comments, and secondly you have no idea what kind of car I'm talking about.

Take for example... the FFR Cobra's or Coupes, the cars weigh in at around 1900-2200lbs weight with an iron block engine, very thick and very high quality glass fiber body... now add an aluminium block and some carpeting, interior panels, etc. etc. as the A/C and heater are already on those cars, use less steel tubing and more sheer panels of either aluminium or carbon/aramid composite, and use a composite body, and you drop even more weight off that car.

So please, get the facts straight before you post, the least you could do was get the name right of the R&S, hell you even went to Mulsanne's Corner to get the data on the new chassis.

So please, I'll go ahead and build these paper thin cars that will twist themselves to peices because its so lightweight, and that means I can't have a powerful engine, because, well, like you said, a lightweight car thats Miata sized is so not going to handle 500lb. ft. of torque... wooo weight must equal rigidity in your book.

There is a niche market for a mid priced high end performance car, something with the elegance and handling of a Ferrari, raw power of the ZO6 Corvette and pricing of sub $80,000. I have a full build sheet for these vehicles, including sub contracting of all safety components through Delphi Automotive, sub contracting of composites through Advanced Composites, GM Parts, and all labor... with a profit of $30,000 on each car, they can be sold for around $79,000 including government taxes and fees.

 

First of all most of us don't take to personal attacks in this forum. He misunderstood, hey it happens.

I don't think that was his point. Lightweight cars can handle all the power you want to throw at them....with the unfortunate side effect of monsterous production costs. Another point that I would be concerned with is, do you want a fully-prepped race car available to the general public? I'm not sure I want something that light and that powerful in the hands of irresponsible people. Sorry to be the party pooper but IMO a 2000 pound car with a 600 HP engine belongs on a race track.

 

Sorry if I came across that way, and its no big deal really, but he just shuts the idea down because he hears the weight of a car, then he goes to say its going to be some Miata sized car and gives all these bogus facts.

I can understand people not understanding, thats one thing, but going on and on with no factual information etc. etc. about how this and that won't work and how its not possible, after its been done about a million times, I just don't get it.

Live and let live I guess, I wasn't suggesting the General build a tube frame car, I was talking about a small volume company that could offer a high quality product, but Mr. I know all things because of weight, thinks it would dumb idea because, well, if its lightweight, it must be small, if its small, then it must be Miata sized, if its Miata sized it can't handle the torque of an LS1 engine, blah blah blah.