A Note to GM: please make an LSD available on all Camaros

[Dan]

Originally Posted by willisit

The GTO (my Monaro) has an LSD. Would make sense for the Camaro to have one.

Yeah it was standard on the GTO but then the GTO didn't come with 6s or 4s either. I would hope it would be standard on the v8s and be available for the others.

[JustinZS]

Originally Posted by Dan

Yeah it was standard on the GTO but then the GTO didn't come with 6s or 4s either. I would hope it would be standard on the v8s and be available for the others.

That would be a good plan. If GM wants to keep the pricing on lower models as low as possible don't make it standard, but at least make it an option on the lower models. Don't just not offer it at all. Please

[Dom]

So here we are and we now know that LSD will not be offered in a V6 auto camaro. I still don't understand the reasoning behind this move. On the 4th gen V6 it was an option regardless of what transmission one had. There better be a really good reason for not allowing LSD in cars they expect people to daily drive in bad conditions. I want a safe year round daily driver. If there is no option for this I can not buy this car and I don't see why anyone that wants to drive in the snow would.

[rayhawk]

I think the stability control system will work for you in slick conditions, that is standard on all camaros. As for the reason, I understand the auto v6 version has a smaller diff unit that does not carry the limited slip option.

[xl1200r]

Stability control will do what you need it to do in the snow. If one wheels starts to spin, it will apply the brakes until the other has less resitance (the one with the traction) and it will turn the other wheel.

It's all good.

[Dom]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

I think the stability control system will work for you in slick conditions, that is standard on all camaros. As for the reason, I understand the auto v6 version has a smaller diff unit that does not carry the limited slip option.

But why even have two versions? V6 manual gets it but not auto. Why did they give it to the manual version? And the thing I don't understand the most is that there isn't even an option for one. It would even streamline their production by having just one differential. Is the housing still the same size?

[xl1200r]

Originally Posted by Dom

But why even have two versions? V6 manual gets it but not auto. Why did they give it to the manual version? And the thing I don't understand the most is that there isn't even an option for one. It would even streamline their production by having just one differential. Is the housing still the same size?

Likely because there are 2 different versions of the stability control for manual and automatic. If you apply the brakes to an automatic car at slow speed, nothing bad happens. If you do it to a manual when the driver isn't expecting it, it can stall the engine, so an LSD helps out for the real slow speed stuff.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by Dom

But why even have two versions? V6 manual gets it but not auto. Why did they give it to the manual version? And the thing I don't understand the most is that there isn't even an option for one. It would even streamline their production by having just one differential. Is the housing still the same size?

I am speculating a bit here, but I believe it is a smaller housing, my guess is they did it for weight/cost savings, figuring the auto car, even when abused will always be much easier on the rear end than the manual car. I do tend to agree with you though, I think it should be standard on the auto v6 version too, I mean the buyer is paying a premium for that transmission, it would be nice to get the better rearend as well-even for a few more bucks.

I can't really remember where I read about the rear-end units, but it is out there somewhere.

[kanys]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

I think it should be standard on the auto v6 version too, I mean the buyer is paying a premium for that transmission

Yeah this is what I am thinking too, I really hope they make it standard, and at the very least an option!

[Jiu Jitsu Jon]

Please folks, LSD and driving don't mix. How bummed will you be when you wrap your new Camaro around a telephone pole because you swerved to miss the big red fire-breathing dragon?

Hallucinations FTL.

[shadowed_Stranger]

Originally Posted by Jiu Jitsu Jon

Please folks, LSD and driving don't mix. How bummed will you be when you wrap your new Camaro around a telephone pole because you swerved to miss the big red fire-breathing dragon?

Hallucinations FTL.

So I read that quote, and then I looked at your avatar to see the man (seemingly) under the influnce of various substances himself. THAT was trippy.

[Speedfreak]

open diff....

[Dom]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

I think the stability control system will work for you in slick conditions, that is standard on all camaros. As for the reason, I understand the auto v6 version has a smaller diff unit that does not carry the limited slip option.

Originally Posted by xl1200r

Stability control will do what you need it to do in the snow. If one wheels starts to spin, it will apply the brakes until the other has less resitance (the one with the traction) and it will turn the other wheel.

It's all good.

I have TCS on my current Z. All it does it lift up on the accelerator when a wheel slips. It does nothing else. LSD/posi will send power away from the wheel with less traction to the wheel with more traction.

With an open diff, same torque is sent to both wheels at all times. I will get stuck really easy if just one wheel encounters a slippery surface or snow. The wheel with traction will get as much power as the wheel in snow or ice can handle which won't be very much. I had the experience of driving my 96 first with an open differential then with a posi once I added it. It didn't have TCS. With snow tires it was a beast in snow and so is my Z.

Originally Posted by rayhawk

I am speculating a bit here, but I believe it is a smaller housing, my guess is they did it for weight/cost savings, figuring the auto car, even when abused will always be much easier on the rear end than the manual car. I do tend to agree with you though, I think it should be standard on the auto v6 version too, I mean the buyer is paying a premium for that transmission, it would be nice to get the better rearend as well-even for a few more bucks.

I can't really remember where I read about the rear-end units, but it is out there somewhere.

If the housing is different one will need to swap out an entire housing. I will probably wait and see how much that will cost and add it to the price of the car. If true GM really dropped the ball on this one. Maybe someone from GM can chime in and explain their position.

They did this in the past. Gave us parts that can barerly hold stock power. Transmissions and rear ends. Nothing wrong with a bigger housing just because it doesn't need it doesn't mean it shouldn't have it. It also limits the aftermarket potential of the car. Can't really add much power to that 6 with a weaker transmission and rear. At least the 4th gens had the same exact trans and rear. That car is pinned as a fleet car. I see it more and more everyday. Very sad to see that.

I am a big camaro guy as you can see from my sig. I hate to see corners being cut on something I really enjoy driving.

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by Dom

I have TCS on my current Z. All it does it lift up on the accelerator when a wheel slips. It does nothing else. LSD/posi will send power away from the wheel with less traction to the wheel with more traction.

With an open diff, same torque is sent to both wheels at all times. I will get stuck really easy if just one wheel encounters a slippery surface or snow. The wheel with traction will get as much power as the wheel in snow or ice can handle which won't be very much. I had the experience of driving my 96 first with an open differential then with a posi once I added it. It didn't have TCS. With snow tires it was a beast in snow and so is my Z.




If the housing is different one will need to swap out an entire housing. I will probably wait and see how much that will cost and add it to the price of the car. If true GM really dropped the ball on this one. Maybe someone from GM can chime in and explain their position.

They did this in the past. Gave us parts that can barerly hold stock power. Transmissions and rear ends. Nothing wrong with a bigger housing just because it doesn't need it doesn't mean it shouldn't have it. It also limits the aftermarket potential of the car. Can't really add much power to that 6 with a weaker transmission and rear. At least the 4th gens had the same exact trans and rear. That car is pinned as a fleet car. I see it more and more everyday. Very sad to see that.

I am a big camaro guy as you can see from my sig. I hate to see corners being cut on something I really enjoy driving.

Again, somebody may have better knowledge than me on this, but this system is more than just traction control in the sense of reducing engine power. This is stability control, which applies braking to one wheel at a time when appropriate, and this is actually how the 2008 Challenger SRT-8's get by without a LSD at all. This system will take inputs from all 4 wheel speeds, then look at steering wheel position (intended direction) vs. actual direction and when it gets out of range, apply braking to the wheel spinning, or the wheel(s) needed to help put the car back on track.

I have to say though, if your concern is control in the snow, I think stability control is much better than a lsd. This system will help you if you are going a bit too fast or begin to slide sideways, a lsd will not do anything for you in these conditions. I don't have first hand experience with modern stability control, so maybe somebody else can give you their take. When you consider the cost of this system (besides the fact it will eventually be required by law) I don't see it as much cheaper than a lsd anyway, so it is hard to say they are cutting corners.

I do still agree with you though, if 3/4 versions of the car have it, why not the auto v6, as nothing replaces a lsd for performance applications. Your concern does not seem to be about performance use though, so I hope this helps you.