I dunno...the whole badge thing has everyone over at GMI in a 10 page rant. I dunno if they could take live axle Camaro.

Question for Charlie. Ok, so Zeta+355= Zeta-lite. Now, isnt Zeta dead in GM NA? Where are we gunna get Zeta from? Or basicly we have Zeta-lite built here, and Zeta cars are built in Oz.

Struts up front, live axle multi link in the back....
I have one of thoes already.

 

thats sickening, it really is. even if it was a savings of 300 dollars DO IT seriously it isnt that hard to understand that a much better ride is worth more than 300 bucks.

 

I was wondering, what if this is just some disinformation from GM, why are they being so open with this info all of a sudden. For years they said nothing. If GM came out and said Hey its going to have SLA and IRS the blue oval boys would counter by releasing IRS first and beating GM to the punch, but by releasing some misinformation they would be caught of guard. Just a thought.

 

Leaf springs??? Wow, state of art stuff. My 67 GTO would have a more sophisticated setup with it's 4 link suspension. That would be ridiculous.

 

so with an after market kit i can now light my camaro? dang, thats way easier than custom work.

seriously
i would like to know exactly what you heard. it would be ashame if you got the entire internet riotinig when GM was actually contemplating giving the camaro the vettes transverse leaf springs.

 

Well, now that Evok's "proposal" seems to be exposed and in print, and everyone seems to be going into vaporlock over the thing, I'll take up the other side's possible view over it, though I personally don't care one way or the other as long as it's a good car.

1. GM needs to make profit.....FIRST AND FOREMOST!!!!!

GM is loosing money, and doesn't do charity work. They need to find a way to make significant money on their cars and trucks. Trucks & SUVs are selling in large volume. Cars make up less than half of the new car market, and also make up far less profit per vehicle than trucks & SUVs because it takes alot more to develop and make cars.


2. IRS isn't a requirement to sell a vehicle.

The Navigator and Explorer have IRS. Yet the live axle Escalade, Tahoe, and GMC lines of SUV are the ones selling like crazy (until all big SUVs started crashing some months ago). The Mustang is simply burying every other coupe in the US in sales. No matter how hot under the collar you get over the prospect of a live axle, from a sales standpoint, you don't have anything in your favor whane making a sales case.


3. $300 is a trunkful of money.

GM may save only $300 per vehicle by using a live axle than IRS (though I suspect it's more), but that's still a massive amount of money. How?
Say the next F-body sells 100,000 per year. That's THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS TOTAL!! Throw in a series of sedans totalling out around 300,000 per year, that's another 90,000,000. GM stands to save over 100 million+ just on that alone.


4. GM needs to get these cars out in a hurry.

GM-NA decided not to go with Zeta but as hinted in another thread, that doesn't mean that there will be no Zeta parts used. There is a massive inventory of GM parts available for use that don't need to be certified or tested since they already have been.


It's pretty telling here that so much venom spite & whining has been spilt on various threads regarding IRS, but where is the same effort from everyone over having seats that are comfortable? Or an interior that is well assembled? Or a clutch that's going to last more than 50,000 miles? Or a structure that's solid? I haven't seen a thread demanding T-tops, or one for top drawer stopping ability.

There is probally 1001 other things I'll notice and feel sitting in & driving a 5th gen Camaro before I'll feel or even notice the difference between IRS and a well done live axle. The same live axle ALL of us are driving already.

 

Solid Axle? I might believe that. Leaf springs? No way. Let's just say I'll believe it when I see it. The only even remote precedent for such nonsense is the Bel Air concept car of a few years ago. That was a body on frame car that sat right on top of a GMT355 chassis. It was used as a showcase for a potential 300+ hp turbo line 5, AND as a study for the idea of bringing back body on frame in certain market segments.

When Trailblazers and Suburbans are body on frame with 5 link, coil spring solid rears, I REALLY have a hard time imagining a solid axle with leaf springs on a unibody sports coupe for the 21st century. Even bean counters aren't that dumb. The car would be crucified in the press (regardless of how well it was made to handle).

Some of you people, with your replies of "I'm never buying GM again" or "I'm buying a Ford" or "GM is in the toilet" or whatever need to remember this is merely a rumor, almost guaranteed to be a false one, and you should not make decisions on such a lame rumor about a car that isn't even fully planned out yet. GEEZ.

Again, a solid axle I might see. Ford got away with it, in fact has been praised by Mustang fans for it, and the normally rabid import-loving media has at least been gentle/open minded about it (since it wasn't made by GM, they can do that). But I HIGHLY doubt the leaf sprung entire rear suspension from the Colorado will come back on a Camaro. I've been wrong before, but...

 

True, but another benefit no one seems to mention of IRS is the increased interior room.

The fact that there doesn't have to be accomadations in the underbody for the axle to move up and down must have some bearing on the back seat room.

Remember that new mustang that you were wondering how anyone was going to fit in the back of? Camaro will likely have the same configuration with a solid axle, and I think that there is alot to be said for more interior space when it comes time to compare the cars.

 

I sincerely hope GM steps up to IRS on this--"good enough" doesn't cut in in the market today.

They need to scare the crap out of people with cars that everyone's willing to GET IN LINE for, not SETTLE for.

 

#2 Those are truck based SUV's with the live axle. NOT performance cars that people demand in a performance coupe. Why is the mustang selling so much? NO competition.

#3 then bump the price up 300 bucks per car. then no profit is lost and everyone goes home happier with a nicer ride

#4 then why spend time and money (which they cant afford to waste) dumbing down an already capable and desired chassis?

 

Not ALL of us.....I just spent 1,650 miles straight behind the wheel of a 5 year old C5 (mine of course ) and I'll tell you that there is a ton of difference between a buggy axle and an IRS.

GM needs to lead at something and stop building "just good enough" cars....let's face it, when and if this frankenstein hits the ground, it'll be benchmarked against a 3-5 year old Mustang.....

 

Maybe there will be a crank lever sticking out of the grill as well...

 

i was think more of a 4bbl holley.

 

I think live axle is fine for the six cylinder model, the people who buy those don’t know or care what suspension is back there, as long as the ride is not harsh. I could see live axle with IRS as an option if there were a RS, and IRS standard on the Z28. The bulk of sales are 6 cylinder any way, with 8 cylinders as a smaller percentage, that way they could save all the IRS money that all those 6 cylinders and base RS cars wouldn’t need.

 

I'm starting to get the feeling that maybe Camaro is no longer the car for me...

I want a modern suspension with a great powertrain, and a great interior with available options (guess what... stuff like heated seats aren't "fluff" anymore... you can get them on Cobalt for crying out loud!), all in a 4-place, 2-door sports car.

I guess I have that in my GTO, though I perfered the low-stance of my 4th Gen Z28 to the more upright GTO as far as driving position...

Shrug... maybe I should be more worried about the next GTO, or a potential Cadillac CTC Coupe than a new Camaro.

Maybe Camaro is supposed to be just bargain bin stuff, just-enough-to-get-by... I dunno anymore.