rlchv70

Noise Vibration and Harshness

ProudPony

Noise, Vibration, and Harshness.

These are quntifyable ride characteristics that depend on suspension, platform, fit/finish, and insulation qualities of the vehicle. They are varied by material selection and placement, suspension tuning, tire selection, chassis stiffness, and about 137 other variables, but the end result is how smooth and quiet the car appears to the driver/occupants.

Pacer makes a living a little closer to the chassis than I so he can probably expound in more detail.

Chris 96 WS6

1. Live axle... Fine with me. YOu don't see the mustang getting raked over the coals for it. They're going to sell 200K cars with an old "outdated" live rear axle and even the new cobra will have it. Its all in how you publicize it. If its "what your customers want" and it is "so well sorted out you won't know the difference" then magazines won't give you grief over it, especially if it increases the bang/buck ratio. Hell, 2 yrs ago people that wanted an IRS 5th gen were in the minority. Now we're all too stuck up and refined to go back to live axle? Give me a break.

Just go back to the 3rd/4th gen rear suspension, same as the new mustang and theoretically the same that Nextel Cup cars use, albiet in a slightly different configuration with regard to the LCAs.

2. I'm more concerned about the FRONT suspension. Strut? That's going backwards in refinement level from the 4th gen. If it must be done it must be done, but can't we just do a carryover double A-arm from the CTS? That at least compensates for the live rear axle IMO.

3. Everything else I'm fine with. Just get SOMETHING to market that will sell and make a good margin per vehicle. GM's got to increase positive cashflow and a new 100K unit per year car wouldn't hurt market share any either.

30 months if they started TODAY. They'd have to do a year worth of navel gazing just to decide, so its a minimum of 42 mos the way I see it. 2009?

Bob Cosby

Just an FYI.....Mexico is as "North America" as Canada - just not as far north in North America. Something called "NAFTA" comes to mind too....for better or for worse.

I believe that most of the buying public wouldn't give a rats *** if the car was built off of a "borrowed" chassis, whether or not it had "quiet steel", and probably live axle or IRS. What they WOULD care about - in spades - is the following:

1) It can't be too expensive - think Mustang prices and NO MORE.
2) It must go fast. Period. (LSx easily takes care of that)
3) It must look like it goes fast. Period.
4) It must have a decent seating position (sorry, but riding on the ground and 'falling in/climbing out' just isn't going to hack it anymore).
5) It has to be well screwed together, but it doesn't have to be CTS-type screwed together, otherwise the price is going to go right through the roof and sales go right next door to the Ford house (again).
5) Above all, it must LOOK HOT. So long as most of the little stuff is taken care of, a hot looking car WILL SELL. Being a fast, V8, RWD coupe just isn't enough buy itself (got GTO?) - it must look the part. Oh, and did I mention it must be affordable?

Granted....many of us pickier folks that are a bit more "in the know", and certainly the critics at C&D and R&D and etc, etc, might frown at some of those things, but we only buy a very small fraction of cars. The new Camaro absolutely MUST sell more to the masses if it is to survive.

That is, of course, all just MHO.

Chris 96 WS6

I agree with everything you said Bob. Key point on looks is it costs just as much to make an ugly car as a good looking car. All other things being equal, pretty sheetmetal and good looking sheetmetal should cost the same to make.

So hopefully bringing us an affordable car doesn't necessarily mean it has to be boring or ugly [crossing fingers!!!]

Oh yeah, I still don't really care anymore

WJH'sFormula

I think Bob just nailed a big point...

I've said before that when our old bow tie pals are conjuring up a new Camaro, they needed to keep KISS in mind...Keep It Simple Stupid...

Good looking, fast, cheap...sounds like my Camaro

IRS vs. solid rear - IRS would be nice, if they can do it at a good price, gimme! If not, oh well, just give me a solid rear that's dishwasher safe on the bottom rack...

Doug Harden

I can't believe how many have focused on the live axle and not the mention of the Macphearson strut front suspension...it's 3rd gen all over again.

I could possibly live with an optional live axle......but NEVER again will I buy a McP strut car! This is 2005 people....

"Make it cheap, forget the frills, make it fast in a straight line, compromises are good, etc....." FOR CRYING OUT LOUD this is EXACTLY the car that DIED 3 years ago! You wanna' see it die all over again?!?!

Do it right or forget it......

Bob Cosby

Once again....personal opinion...I think the vast majority don't care what kind of suspension is has - so long as it performs. Granted, if you can't get good performance out of xyz suspension, then there is an issue. But I think that most of us are far, far more critical of these things than the general buying public is - and while we want as close to perfection as possible (read: each individuals idea of perfection), the car won't be successful if it doesn't sell enough to sustain itself.

For evidence, only only has to look at Mustang.

Good Ph.D

Three years? How about ten. And we still haven't learned anything.

The last thing we need is another benchmarking offer from GM. the G6 is nice, the LaCrosse is nice, but GM needs to do something thats better than nice and at a decent price point. I know they are broke or close to it, but somethings gotta give...

dream '94 Z28

Couple of more thoughts:

- I'd rather have IRS in the back. just my opinion. I don't care about drag racing, I drive to make turns, and on top of everything else, in daily driving I love it when my heart skips a beat everytime the rear end 'hiccups' on certain road irregularities.

- Yes the Mustang is gonna sell close to 200K with an archaic live axle back there...also could be because it owns its own market.

- I know this will be hard to impossible for alot of us to admit or think about here, but you have to face the fact that the V6 cars make the majority of sales for both the Camaro and Mustang. If our car is to continue, the V6 cars have to sell. Therefore NVH is a factor as well as ride quality.

- I've been against struts up front just from a perception stand point, but...I've taken note that MB, Porshe, and BMW all very successfully use struts up front. Maybe GM can too? Save money with front struts to save the IRS rear? (although I'd rather have SLA for nothing more than bench racing purposes...and the envy of my 'Stang driving friend)

- If this is gonna be quick and cheap, forget about rear end options, it'll be on or the other.

Other parts bin areas to save money?:

- GTO seats, but cloth covered std?
- control stalks from a G6 or Malibu (are you really gonna notice?)
- CTS-V steering wheel and shifter?

jpolz

As much as I'd love to have a new Camaro sooner ratehr than later, do we really want to settle for a parts bin car? Something that is slapped together just to get it out the door? Isn't this what got the damned thing sh*t canned in the first place?

If GM wants the camaro to be sucessful, it needs to be cheap, fast, and sexy, but at the same time, it need to be MODERN. Throwing a live axle and Mac front suspension may be enough to satify us enthusiasts, but as history has shown, there aren't enough of us to sustain the market. Normal average Joes are gonna have to love this car too, or it'll die again and probably for good.

dream '94 Z28

I honestly think if you put the right 'wrapper' on it, the vast majority won't care where some parts came from, as long as it all works together.

This strategy would especially help the case for lower buck base models to be successful.

IntimidatorSS

Isn't a sigma refresh supposed to happen before the release of the new CTS?

Well if that would be the case why don't you just give Chevy the old Sigma platform and let the Cadiliacs use the newer one?

jpolz

true, but given GM's approach to platform sharing, I'd be worried that it wouldn't be unique looking enough.

dream '94 Z28

Historically this is true, but some recent example like the Maxx and G6 and Impala and Grand Prix gives my faith they can pull it off right and tight.

One thing that really bothers be about Sigma is the high firewall that is a concession to the design of the SRX.