Look, if anyone has any sort of contact with the bean counters or someone higher, tell them that most people will not noticed the 1k added extra cost of the Zeta cars.

I want to know a few things.
- What exactly do we know from Zeta? I mean, if we are gunna have the GTO's rear set up, and not the CTS's more modern set up, then Ill go live axle.
- Do Zeta's used SLA front suspension? Or Strut?

I dont think we know enough out Zeta.

 

...

 

I’ve written this post like 5 times but I keep deleting it all and starting over…

I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t know what to think anymore.

I guess I’m just ganna sit back and wait. Not bitch and worry about every rumor that comes in here.

GM…if your listening….past the basics of what a Camaro is just make sure people 6’6” can fit in the 5th gen comfortably and paint at least one for me in SOM.


This is the positive post that I agree with.

 

BTW do we know how strong Colorado rear-ends are? Can they take the beating from an M6 bolted up to a 400hp LS2?

I dont need another glass rear end like the 4th gens

 

Z284EVER....thanks for the info. Personally, I see it as mostly good news.

I have ~7000 miles on my IRS 04 Cobra and ~7000 miles on my live axle 04 Cobra (and haven't been to the track once with it). My butt-o-meter knows virtually no difference. Perhaps I'm not typical, but perhaps you are not either.

 

Charlie if your info is correct, and I have no reason to think its not, then I amend what I said in Guy's Future F-body lessons thread about the IRS. Still agree with his overall point in that thread but specifically if the IRS is near-zero cost then it should be a non issue.

However, live axle would not dissuade me from considering the Camaro if it were priced right, looked the part and otherwise was well sorted out.

 

I think you have changed more than the Camaro has. It does sound like your tastes - along with that of others on this boeard - have changed since the last time you bought a Camaro. Its the same as with my dad. He had three or four f-bodies, but it got to the point where those seats hurt his back, and where he wanted a bit more luxurious a vehicle to take co-workers in. Like you, he now has a GTO. The GTO is a much more expensive vehicle, and it shows.

The Camaro is a different kind of car. The Camaro has never offered class leading refinement. It has never been the most sophisticated setup. The Camaro is a car that should offer the style and performance of expensive cars for an affordable price. Sure the Cobalt has heated seats, but the Camaro has a V8 from the Corvette.

Along these lines, I think GM needs to make sure that this new car appeals to and is affordable enough for young people. In my old high school lot, at least a quarter of all the cars were 4th gen F-bodies. Ford got this right - they gave the Mustang a cool look and befitted it with a slick looking interior. They also made sure it starts under $20,000 and under $24,000 for the GT. Ask some of the young, mostly female new Mustang drivers what type of rear suspension their car has, and they'll have no clue. Meanwhile, Ford is laughing all the way to the bank.

BTW, If any GM people are reading this, I'll take my Z/28 in black. Give it to me with that truck live rear axle, an LS2 V8, cloth seats, and manual windows and locks. I'll check my local dealer around 2007 or 2008. Thanks again .

 

Looking on the bright side, I wonder if this means the Colorado might actually get an LS2 SS version.

Look. the bottom line is I want a Camaro. As long as it looks, drives, handles and performs like a Camaro, then I'll be happy. (Ok it also has to out perform Ford and Chrysler's ponycars. )

And I'm sorry, but I just put a brand new "buggy" rear suspension in my 1st-gen Camaro and that thing handles 10x better than a "truck" and I'll bet will out perform 90% of the new cars on the road.

Just because something is "old" technology doesn't mean it can't be made to work in modern times. For cripe's sake you guys are starting to sound like a bunch of ricers. "There's no way that ancient pushrod American V8 technology is better than my modern state of the art engineered 4 cylinder... blah, blah, blah...." Have any of you actually stopped and listened to yourselves? Fine I'll buy the fact that you're speaking your mind and IRS is what you really want. But then you had better stop bitching about FWD 4-cylinder performance sports compacts, otherwise you're nothing but a bunch of damn hypocrites!

 

Pretty soon GM will be pulling the old second gen tooling out a warehouse somewhere to build the 5th gen off of an save money.

GM wants a slice of the Mustang's pie. The problem is, rather than build a car that blows the Mustang out the water and is a tremendous value, we may have to settle for the usual "two years late, and almost as good as the competition" approach.

I personally have no isse with the IRS, however it concerns me that GM started with Sigma, but dumped it because it cost's too much...then went to Zeta....and dumped it because it costs so much. Now we have Zeta-Lite, and it seems like they are trying to squeeze every penney they can there. What is next? Dip into the Daewoo parts bin?


Yet they can design a whole new chassis for Solstice, and bring it to market under $20K? IRS, great interior, and all?

 

I'd say the difference is that a Corvette was designed with an IRS and the Cobra's are afterthoughts....hell, they even bolt to the live axle mounting points.

I can't believe people will accept a live axle and the admission of building cars just good enough for the $200.00 difference.

But again, ther should be NO reason that the IRS couldn't be an option for the Z/28 hipo models....I ain''t buyin' a V6 base model anyway.

 

If its anything near the size of teh 14 bolt monster under the 360's, it looks stout.

I might be one of those people who move on to bigger and better cars. CTS, CTC, or GTO. If there is a Pontiac sedan, I might do that as well, all depending on what its packing.

GM is doing exactly what its been doing for the past 5 years, benchmarking PRESENT cars for FUTURE vehicles.


As for the Cobra's rear, you are judging a IRS that was made for the car, Corvette, and IRS that was thrown in there on a 25 year old chassis.
Little bit of difference.

 

 

Certainly was (an afterthought) and certainly does....makes the swap quite easy. I've done two now - my 99 Cobra and now my 04 Cobra.

That said, it was still a fully-functioning IRS, and for "normal" driving, I simply don't notice much of a difference. I guess my butt-o-meter isn't very sensitive to such things.

 

the problem with using solstice as an example is that it isnt a profitable car. But I will say i dont know if its because they are not going to sell enough cars to cover R&D costs or whether it cost like 21k worth of the materials and they are selling it at a loss. (although thats something i would rather doubt.)

 

Struts.

At any rate, front struts were nearly a forgone conclusion on this "new" platform...for you guessed it....reduced cost. But if they go with a live axle, what we're basically going to have is 1982 3rd gen set up.

Maybe that's what Bob Lutz was referring to with that nostaglia baked in comment.