I've been reading your rants about weight for a while now, and I'm sorry, but you really are living in a dream world with these figures. The new Corvette Z06 is a two-seat sports car with a special hydroformed all aluminum chassis and still weighs over 3100 pounds. How on God's green Earth is GM going to produce a 2+2 Camaro that only weighs a couple hundred pounds more, using vastly more inexpensive methods of production to keep the cars affordable like Camaros should be?

I would be very happy with a well-done IRS V8 Camaro tipping the scales at 34xx pounds. That is really all we can ask for. I know this uber-flyweight Camaro is just your opinion, but I can tell you right now, if that is what you're looking for, the next Camaro will not be your car.

 

Agreed.

And even the 34xx weight of the 4th Gen is without a lot of equipment that will have to be on a 5th gen....

 

the original camaro weighed around that... perhaps scales have changed just like the SAE, but I'm putting a bet on Camaro could get lighter... and lets see that old camaro didnt have fiberglass all around it was all metal...

 

Uhhhh...you're joking right? The original Camaro also didn't have air bags...anti-lock brake systems...heck no computer equipment at all...its structure didn't have to conform to any hard-line safety standards, the cars had no modern-day comforts or conveniences that everyone today would demand...should I continue?

So what the new Camaro loses in the use of fiberglass and aluminum engine blocks it puts back on with all these modern car requirements, and then some.

 

Perhaps. Again, I'm only saying what I want. If it truly CAN'T be done, I'll turbo or LS1 a 240SX.

They have a veritable ARMY of HIGHLY capable engineers and designers. If it were made a priority, I have no doubt they could do it. But of course I don't expect that it WILL be made a priority just because that's what one voice in the wilderness wants!

What did I just say?
"I'm only slamming the car IF it winds up north of 3400 lb with IRS..."
I will be VERY surprised if it is. But like I said, I'm TOTALLY OPEN to being surprised!

 

The 99-04 Mustang GT's weighed in only alittle more then a c5 corvette. It could be done, even considering new crash standards that will affect the 5th gen. If alot of this techno crap finds its way onto a new Camaro, which it most likely will, I hope to see an options list removing some of it. I know that the days of things like ps, pw, pl delete are gone, but I hope there are at least a few options to keep some of this weight adding stuff off of the car.

 

"Highly capable", yes. "Miracle workers"? As I said in a previous post, with the ever-toughening crash standards, the creature comforts and features that modern cars must have to sniff success, and the GM parts-bin pieces that will need to be used to keep Camaro the common man's performance car, 3200 pounds is simply out of the question. Not saying I like it either, I'm just being a realist.

I know, to which I replied I'd be very VERY happy with an IRS Camaro weighing just north of 3400 pounds. Where I'm thinking of an affordable, practical Camaro you're thinking of a streamlined purpose built race-car Camaro. Nice vision, ain't happenin.

 

Yup, considering everything involved both the SN95 Mustang and the 4th Gen F-body did a commendable job holding weight down...and they still weighed nearly 3500 pounds!!!! The C5 vert weighed what, 3250 pounds? If 250 pounds is "close"...I don't think you realize what it takes to shave even 50 pounds off the weight of a car....going to an expensive all-aluminum frame on the new Z06 saved just 100 pounds compared to the old one! Now you tell me, how do you propose to drop 300 pounds or more off the next Camaro, keeping the same configuration with no use of exotic materials?

 

so computers gotta weight a lot? i'm sure my computer is much more powerful then anything in any car and it doesnt way 300lbs...

they have computers that weigh single digits... and air bags, i dont forsee those being more then 5 lbs each so maximum of 25lbs if u have some side impact ones or whatever... anti lock brakes, lets just put that with the computer... most new advancements only come through electronics so why should the cars weigh 300 lbs more?

i mean are the seats getting heavier? what about gas is gasoline heavier these days? or maybe its the light bulbs? all the plastic dash board? something has got to be the cause?
most likely its laziness in the engineers or for assembly line efficency...
if they can get the 154" solstice at 2800 lbs... stretch it by about 40 inches and whala we got a camaro that weighs 3450 lbs...
ugg... back to where we started... 194" car is too heavy... ugg...

 

we are build a car from the ground up we can worry about weight...

its just when its already built its hard to discount it...

weight will also be partial to the price, if the can build it with less steel it will be more profitable, or affordialbe, on a small token, but the c6 is not totally rebuilt from the c5... they share probably the same chasis... or a modified version, but its still the same car in essence

 

First of all, the new Camaro is most certainly not being built new "from the ground up." In fact, the next Camaro we know for certain will be based on some kind of affordable RWD sedan. So right away we aren't talking about nimble little sports car here. In regards to your first post, would you PLEASE stop and think about how much different cars were back then. What are on today's cars you couldn't get back then? How much more steel does a structure need to make it comply with today's crash standards? An air bag only weighs 5 pounds? Umm no. Not only do you have the bag itself, you have the compartment that holds the bag, the components that trigger the inflation in an accident, the sensors in the front end that trigger those components...this is just one part of a vehicle that is mandatory today that no one dreamed of 40 years ago. So please, go back and re-read my post about cutting weight on the C6 Z06. Cutting 300 pounds from a vehicle is more difficult than you can imagine.

 

Umm......are you being serious ? There is no comparison between the materials or equipment used in a 1969 Camaro and the vehicles of today. Here are just a few things to consider:

-How much of a priority were sound deadening materials, carpet thicknesses, etc in '69?
-Yes, I would wager that seats may be heavier today. Afterall, did the '69 use a power seat track, thicker cushioning, have power lumbar adjustments, heated seats, whiplash protection, etc?
-How many modules (aka computers) did the '69 have? In additon to that, how do the wiring harnesses compare?
-As was mentioned, things such as air conditioning, air bags, and fuel injection systems added on pounds.
-How much does a 14" wheel and tire combo weigh compared to today's 17-18" packages?
-Chassis stiffness, side impact protection, plastic quality, large disk brakes, crash requirements, stereo/dvd/Nav systems, all the various electric motors, etc.

These are just a few of the things that have added weight. Alone, they may not seem like much, but they do add up.


-Mike

 

I agree. I don't usually coment on this type of stuff, but there are some truly dense people on here. Sure they "could" make it that light, but it would not be at a reasonable price point. As a sidebar a friend of mine has a 2002 1SC Z28. It was something like 3350 lbs when he bought it. It now about 3100-3170 lbs, and it looks like a theft recovery vehicle. No bumper supports, 1 race seat, no sound deadening, and added a cage. He shaved about 300 lbs (added some back for the cage ~ 200lbs net loss), and it is basically a drag car now and not useful for much else.

 

However back in 1969 there was far less aluminum, plastic, carbon fiber and other materials that are used today to lighten weight. Back then, everything was steel. The entire dash assembly on a 69 Camaro was steel. On a 2002 Camaro it was mostly plastic. Those 14" wheels were steel wheels. On a 2002 Camaro, aluminum wheels. The 69 Camaro engine block was steel. '02 LS1 was aluminum. '69 exhaust manifolds, brake rotors, bumpers, etc???

Sure the 69 Camaros had minimal emissions, no modern electronics and safety measures to speak of. However, today's vehicles use so many lightweight materials and technologies that to suggest one can compare the two by taking the weight of 36 year-old technology Camaro and adding modern safety requirements and electronics into the equation, just flat doesn't make sense.

 

My 14 in steel wheels and 215/70/14 tires on my 1986 Cutlass were not appreciably different than the 17's on my SS. My 1999 exhaust manifolds are not light by any means, the braking assemplies are larger, and the dash assembly is twice the size of a 69 Camaro. Even if it is a third of the weight it is still twice the material. A 69 had slider adjustments for the climate controls. Most cars now have an electronics setup. The electonics crap is just plain heavy. My power drivers seat is twice the weight of the manual passengers seat.