Eventually, and ironically, there is one enemy of weight that might come along to help us out at some point: MPG.

 

Fair enough…I can certainly believe that there could be individual examples of an SS Camaro beating a C5 in one or more performance categories.

It could be I just misunderstood the intent of the original comment but I thought the implication was that your average LS1 F-Body (be it an SS Camaro, Z28 etc) would consistently outperform your average C5…that’s the part I don’t accept.

Moving beyond that, the further implication, I thought, was that GM really could build a fifth-generation Camaro with C6 Corvette performance but still at a Camaro price; that’s the implication that is, in my always humble opinion, is really outside normal space/time.

 

Did i say across the model line? no i did not...I said stock SS/WS6 vs. BASE C5. Meaning not Z51, and not a Z06. A real easy example, base C5 A4 with 245s up front vs. M6 fbody 275's on the front, course or strip the C5 is going down.

Do you just not remember anything that happened in the last 10 years? i mean seriously, the F-body taking sales from the Vette(ring any bells) because it was half the price and performed just, ok sorry in more cases than not almost as well and in some cases like mentioned above BETTER! Perhaps thats why GM won't mind so much if the 5th gen is 2-3...ugh 400lbs heavier than the 4th. It won't have anything for the Vette no matter what power it makes stock.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the Corvette, but i'm basing all of this on what i've seen, in person, on tracks...and in my car, and buddy's cars against Vettes and everything else for the last 8-9 years!

I'm not just reading about it in magazines, no false claims here, i don't own a vette cause i can't afford one, i own F-bodes cause i love them, and because the look on a middle aged mans face, and his wifes is priceless when he gets his *** kicked

Thats what owning an F car means to me, having fun, taking it to cars that people think are unbeatable, and doing it with the same parts that you buy for any LS1, but at half the price because the name Corvette isn't attached to it. And my fears and concerns over this weight matter are in my opinion well warranted. I'd like to add a 4th car to the stable, i want to soooo bad, but if i can't have the kinda fun i have with my current cars, well no thanks.

Yes 400lbs is that big of a deal, i don't want to feel like i have 2 dead bodies in the trunk! I've driven a few GTO's, and don't get me wrong here, they are very comfortable, much more so than my Camaros. But where it matters, you know...after you buy the car and you use it the way it was built to be used(anyone....?)unless that car has a good amount of mods its really depressing! Not to mention throwing that nearly 2 ton car around on 245's, what a waste of time! Didn't i read somewhere that wheel clearence will be almost identical to the Goat?

So finally...3800lbs on 245's, 390whp(LS3) you won't get anymore arguments from me about Vette vs. Camaro, because at that point, to take your words they will be worlds apart! I keep seeing 3200lbs, and how its impossible, not one weight **** on here has demanded 3200lbs. But i think 34-3500 is more than a reasonable request!

 

Let’s face it. There are certain folks around here that will not be content until GM offers us a Camaro that is BMW 3-series in size and performance. Unfortunately such a car would come with a 3-series MSRP as well. The 3-series is a great car, but it is not a Camaro by any form or fashion. I am fortunate to own a 4th gen Camaro, a couple 1st gen Camaros and a 2001 M3 at this time. The M3 looks like a freaking Aveo next to my Camaros, that includes my 1st gens, which many of you would have to agree are almost compact in proportions next to a 4th gen.

I’m sorry but I do not hold anyone’s opinion as valid if they fall into the “GM should build a 3-series-like Camaro” Camp. If that is your preference, then buy a BMW and let the rest of us have something more worthy of the Camaro name… even if it does end up weighing in just shy of two tons when all is said and done.

 

Size vs. Weight...i don't want a small car, its not like that.
If 4th gens are so huge, why is my car around my perferred weight? The 5th is 7 inches longer than the 4th, its small enough, no excuse for a major increase in weight and if you want a 4000 pound car, thats your problem

 

LOL. So my opinion is not valid because it doesn't fit your paradigm of what a Camaro should be? That's just an awesome thought, don't you think?

You want a two-ton Camaro? I feel you shall be in luck! And it will have all the neato gadgets you want, and look just like a Transformer, too. Most likely, it will perform quite well for a 4000 lbs car.

Enjoy.
Bob

 

I don’t have numbers in front of me but when I was autocrossing in my ’00 Z28; I always tracked my time against not just those vehicles in my class (Mustangs, other F-bodies, etc) but the C5s…as part of that, I considered comparable weights as well; everything I found in print or online, including GM’s website indicated that an F-body (Z28 or SS) weighed more than a C5. So, even if you believe that the LS1 was allowed to develop the same HP/Tq in each vehicle the ‘Vette still had less weight that had to be thrown around. Since “weight” is the subject of all the hollering going on here, that should catch someone’s attention shouldn’t it?

Moving on, even if you want to believe that an SS F-Body had the same or more HP/Tq than a C5 and the same or less weight than a C5 there is yet another issue to deal with which is that on any given day, a C5 would hand an SS its lunch on an autocross coruse.

After having participated in well over a hundred autocross events in my Z28 (and many more in other cars) and observing thousands of runs with some of the best autocross drivers in the country I can say from my own experience (and I believe published SCCA results will back me up on this) that it was rare when an F-body, even an SS Camaro, was close to the times being posted by the C5s on any given day/any given event (understanding that differences between 1st/2nd/3rd in a given class was usually separated by tenths or hundredths of a second). Even removing the driver from the equation, the difference in SCCA classification alone should be an indicator to the unconvinced since the SCCA certainly considered the vehicles to have different capabilities; the SS Camaro was in a lower class than the C5s; the other LS1 F-bodies lower still.

Same thing with track days that I’ve participated in – the C5s always had an edge over an F-body, SS or otherwise, and would consistently post better lap times.

I can’t comment from experience on Ľ times because I’ve never watched (any and really don’t care) but alleged “kill” stories aside, every published source I’ve ever read has never, as far as I can remember, ever posted SS 0-60 or Ľ mile times that were better than a C5.

So, on the concept that, as a group, SS Camaros consistently outperformed stock C5s I still call bovine scatology.

Maybe the middle-aged guys and their wives you “beat” on the road simply didn’t feel they had anything they had to prove to you.

 

SPECIFICATIONS – CHEVROLET CAMARO CONCEPT*
Wheelbase 110.5"
Length 186.2"
Height 53"
Width 79.6"
Track 63.8 front; 63.3 rear

2002 Camaro B4C**
Wheelbase 101.1"
Length 193.2"
Height 51.3"
Width 74.1"
Track 60.7 front; 60.6 rear
Weight 3462#

 

Yea, those magic beans in the Vettes LS1 made it more powerful....come on man, f cars had a slightly more aggresive cam, in the same exact motors!
My SS put down 320whp bone stock...an A4 C5 through the irs would do 290whp i'll say it just one more time ok? BASE C5 vs. BEST packaged 4th gen.
And if you've been to as many autocrosses as you say you've been, and as much as i've been to, then you know that people can't drive to save their lives and civics routinely best viper times and whatever other insane example you can think of. The only true test, is using the same driver, same course, same day, back to back. Which is what GM did, and there you have your results. As i said, i can base it off my experience as you can yours, mine just happens to match up with what GM said...yours doesnt.

As for not commenting on 1/4 times, you don't care? thats fine, but its a significant part of game, and a lot us do care. Its funny how you just dismiss it, because its not for you. But what do i know, i'm just a liar, hanging out in the kill section making outrageous claims.

I wanna move forward, but when people can't even recall the last 5 years...i just can't let it go.

 

Bologna. The C5 Corvette was marginally quicker - 1/4 mile wise - than any factory F-body. Gearing was the same, power was the same, balance favored the Vette, and weight damn sure favored the Vette.

I have to agree with Mr Nashville on this one.

 

Since we are both old salts (I have a feeling I'm an "older" one that you), I'm glad we can agree on something.

 

and the acid trip continues, i ran 13.1@109 Stock, lots and lots of them busted off 12.9's bone stock. You're saying that C5's were deep in the 12's then huh?

 

Considering the fact that as I’ve already said, I don’t even like Corvette’s that much I can’t believe I’m defending them but here goes…

As far as the “magic beams” go, I have some experience with the “same” engine being used in different vehicles and, through computer management, exhaust, and other items, not being allowed BY THE MANUFACTURER to develop as much HP/Tq in one application as the same engine is in another application; in fact, doing such is pretty much the norm for most manufacturers.

I can’t say what GM did or didn’t do in that regard; maybe the output was exactly equal in the LS1 in all applications but that’s missing the point anyway…as I said, everything I ever saw published indicated the F-Body weighed more than a C5 so even if the HP/Tq were the same, it’s pushing more weight…I guess weight ceases to be an issue when it might make your point harder to prove!


30HP more HP for an SS at the rear wheels with the same engine than a C5? I guess you think the IRS is going to add that much more power-loss to the equation?

Maybe so but if so, it ought to be easy to prove. More to the point, it ought to be easy to prove it it was true as a whole for SS Camaros and base C5s.


I’ve been autocrossing since the mid-70’s so yeah, I’ve been to a few. My region alone runs some 26 events a year and we average 90-100 cars per event/6 runs per…that’s roughly 15,000 runs per year…add in all the regions across the country for all the years when there have been SS Camaros and C5s competing in those events and you’ve got a huge number of examples of competition between C5s and SS Camaros on the same course on the same day. Corvette’s (and I don’t mean Z06s) consistently outpace SS Camaros.

Were the SS that much more capable than a C5 as you allege, the logical expectation would be that the SS would, more often then not, post better times…it doesn’t. Certainly driver’s are a big part of the equation but unless only the good drivers drive C5s and only the bad drivers drive SSs; the SSs should still outperform C5s on a somewhat consistent basis across a large sample of data but they don’t.

If you look at the annual national SCCA Solo2 stats where the drivers in every class are the best in the country which, as much as is possible, eliminates the “driver” from the equation, what you’ll see are lot’s of C5 Corvettes consistently posting better times than SS Camaros.

The SCCA, devotes a lot of time in trying to class vehicles precisely to level the playing field; so that cars of relatively equal capabilities are competing against each other - the SS is in lower class than the C5 that alone should be enough to indicate the capabilities of the SS vs. a C5.


I don’t dismiss it. That said, if the SS consistently puts down better times in a straight line there ought to be lot’s of verifiable 0-60; 0-100 and quarter mile times you could point to that are consistently better than those posted consistently for C5s.

Maybe the C5s were slower than an SS in the quarter and it migh also be that's the only measure of performance you care about...so be it.

However, most of life doesn't happen in the quarter mile and most performance cars can't be maeasured by just one stat.

As I said, an SS may beat a C5 in a performance category here or there and now and then but saying an SS will consistently outperform a C5…I still call that assertion BS.

------------------------
One more thing, please don't mistake my lack of agreement about the SS's performance compared to a C5 as intended to derride the F-body in any way; the SS Camaro/WS6 TransAM are great cars.

 

LOL. If you've been autocrossing since the mid 70's, I suspect you have me by 5-10.

 

...