08-09-2008, 09:28 PM | #351 |
Drives: LS3S/C Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: CALI
Posts: 1,344
|
Govt regulations, No I don't think so,. GM is just running out of money thus can't invest in lightweight materials. but seriously that's a shot in the foot when you consider performance. I may be considering waiting upcoming camaros maybe the Z28 will be at least 3,500 lbs. thus increasing performance with out adding a hole lot of extras to increase HP.
A pure guess |
08-09-2008, 10:14 PM | #352 |
Drives: ‘23 SS1LE Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 290
|
My 2001 Z28 weighs about 3500 pounds. It has plastic fenders, a fiberglass hood, and tiny by modern standard 16" wheels. It also has undersized brakes that warp yearly, a rear end made of glass, the chassis rigidity of a licorice whip, and would not be able to pass modern crash standards.
Car have been getting heavier across the board, this is not a GM-specific problem no matter how many times you say "I don't think so". I spent 5 minutes on Google and found that even a Honda Civic is about 200-300 pounds heavier than it was 8 years ago. That is a gain of approximately 10% which coincidentally is about the same percentage weight gain of the new Camaro over the previous model. When you consider the improvements in structural integrity, power and durability and the fact that this car will cost about the same as an '02 model in inflation-adjusted dollars, it is completely unrealistic to think that there isn't a price to be paid somewhere. you can basically pay for it in dollars, or in pounds. You and I may be gladly willing to pay more for a lighter car but the marketplace as a whole is not. This car can succeed weighing 300 pounds more than a comparable Mustang but if it costs $5000 more it will most certainly not. It has all been discussed as nauseum and nobody is happy about the weight. But it is what it is and it's either time to accept it, or time to move on. Last edited by Craig; 08-09-2008 at 10:33 PM. |
08-10-2008, 12:02 AM | #353 |
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
What the hey... they can have a new advertising campaign where they compare the Mustang and Camaro using weigh scales and promote that the new Camaro is a better value because it costs less per pound than the Mustang!
|
08-10-2008, 11:44 AM | #354 | |
Future Camaro Driver.
Drives: 2009 Escape/2007 Ridgeline Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Northeastern, PA (Poconos)
Posts: 479
|
Quote:
Plus I wouldn't give up the safety features this car offers, if I get into a crash I want to make sure I walk away. That is always more important to me than a slightly faster car. Yea I know, everyone here is the best driver in the world. They never had, and never will be in an accident so they don't need these "Nanny" features. I respect that you want a lighter car, but the vast majority of Camaro buyers want a cheaper, and safer Camaro. Myself included.
__________________
Automatics don't suck. I can flip you off and change gears at the same time.
|
|
08-10-2008, 10:26 PM | #355 | |
Drives: 93 RX-7 and 07 335i Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 4
|
Quote:
Hardly. B-D has nothing to do with whether it looks good or not. I've always been a huge fan of Camaros. 69s (natch) and the 76-78s in particular. I wasn't that suprised that this was coming back and really liked the first pics and specs around it, but like everyone else, it's a massively failed attempt at what's supposed to be a mid-tier sports car. Would I have considered picking up one? Sure, but at a incredulous 3800# for the SS...that's wholely unnecessary. I agree with whoever said they can't wait for the big three to go tits up. It's inevitable at this point. I'll stick with my European and Japanese makes. Bitch all you want, there's a reason they sell. |
|
08-10-2008, 11:09 PM | #356 | |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Quote:
Consider *this* me biting my tongue. |
|
08-10-2008, 11:18 PM | #357 |
Drives: 93 RX-7 and 07 335i Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 4
|
It's not supposed to be a mid-tier sports car? And the spec sheet didn't say it was 3800#?
|
08-10-2008, 11:21 PM | #358 |
Drives: Muscle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,315
|
[QUOTE=railgun;110217]Hardly. B-D has nothing to do with whether it looks good or not.
I've always been a huge fan of Camaros. 69s (natch) and the 76-78s in particular. I wasn't that suprised that this was coming back and really liked the first pics and specs around it, but like everyone else, it's a massively failed attempt at what's supposed to be a mid-tier sports car. Would I have considered picking up one? Sure, but at a incredulous 3800# for the SS...that's wholely unnecessary. I agree with whoever said they can't wait for the big three to go tits up. It's inevitable at this point. I'll stick with my European and Japanese makes. Bitch all you want, there's a reason they sell.[/QUOTE] Ignorance is bliss for some people. |
08-10-2008, 11:23 PM | #359 |
Drives: Muscle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,315
|
|
08-10-2008, 11:23 PM | #360 | |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
Quote:
1: I don't know what you mean by "Mid-tier". But it should (can't say "will" this day in age...) start near 20 grand for the 300hp V6, and start somewhere around 28-29 grand for the 400+ hp V8. So...what tier is that? 2: 3800lbs may look unattracitve on paper, but what you and everyone else who looks at that number and immediately complains don't seem to realize is that raw numbers and real-world driving experiences are NOT linked. This car will feel much lighter than the spec sheet says it is. You can count on it. |
|
08-11-2008, 12:01 AM | #361 | |||
www.Camaro5store.com
|
Quote:
Quote:
In case you haven't noticed, there are reasons why the weight went up. Failed? I don't see how that is even possible seeing as though the Camaro hasn't even hit the market yet. Once the Camaro comes out and it supposedly flops due to weight, then you can say "I told ya so." Until then, the only thing that failed is your expectation of a corvette weight and performance at a Camaro price. Like others have said, sure....it could weight 3,000lbs, but then it'd cost $49,000. Which would put the Camaro (priced lower than the vette for a reason) beyond the average consumer price range which would then force it to............................................ FAIL. Really.... If you are so ticked off about weight that it has turned you off that much, why did you join us on a site that is dedicated to the 5th Gen? Just to complain about the weight? I mean........... Quote:
If that's your take, FINE. Stick with your imports. We don't need to listen to your complaining over here. I'd say to stick around and talk about the good stuff surrounding the Camaro, but apparently that looks like it'll never happen. Stick with your imports and their websites or open your mind to why weight has gone up (try reading the thread) and realize that it's called LIFE. |
|||
08-11-2008, 12:04 AM | #362 | |
Moderator.ca
|
Quote:
Ignoring the actual weight numbers for the Camaro (extremely difficult for some but please bare with me), look at the (lowballed) performance numbers that this horrible, awful, bloated, fat pig of a car is supposed to produce. 0-60 in ~4.7s, 0.9g on the skidpad. Last time I checked, thats pretty good. Could it be better if the weight was less? Yes, but you could use that argument if it weighed 2000 lbs too. Given the fact that the majority of cars have gained 10-15% in weight over the last 15 years or so, the Camaro's weight should not be too surprising to anyone. 1994 Z28 Coupe: 3430 lb +10-15% = 3773-3945, which is what the new SS weighs. Also, 3800 lbs is about what the big block Camaros weighed 'back in the day. The super light 3rd gen Camaros came in at ~3200 lbs. As for how pathetic the new Camaro is, can someone please show me a car from Japan or Europe (or America) on sale over here that that costs 30k or less, seats 4, and has a power to weight ratio better than 9.5lbs/hp? (I omitted skidpad #'s because they are hard to find). The best I can find that meet the other criteria top out at 11 lbs/hp or so, or cost significantly more. And I'm getting too tired to keep searching. But Ford, Dodge, Honda, Toyota, Mazda, Volkswagen, and Mitsubishi don't have anything that I've seen.
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________ Originally Posted by FbodFather My sister's dentist's brother's cousin's housekeeper's dog-breeder's nephew sells coffee filters to the company that provides coffee to General Motors...... ........and HE WOULD KNOW!!!!__________________ Camaro Fest sub-forum |
|
08-11-2008, 01:03 AM | #363 | |
Moderator
|
Quote:
__________________
RDP Motorsport//GEN5DIY//Cultrag Performance//JPSS//Rodgets Chevrolet//
Operation Demon//Buy at Invoice//RACECARWEAR RESPECT ALL CARS. LOVE YOUR OWN. warn 145:159 ban |
|
08-11-2008, 10:55 AM | #364 | |
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
The tables are turning and time will erode the myth. |
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Camaro Product Manager - interview | Moose | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 11 | 04-04-2012 06:10 PM |
GM memo to dealers | Moose | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 41 | 02-04-2010 07:33 PM |
Official Camaro Convertible CONCEPT Press Release | Tran | Camaro Convertible Forum | 12 | 11-18-2009 07:05 PM |
Official 2010 Camaro convertible concept pics!! | Tran | Camaro Photos | Spyshots | Video | Media Gallery | 107 | 07-21-2009 11:12 AM |
Camaro (concept) Press Release!! | Pencil.Fight | 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions | 4 | 07-21-2008 03:33 PM |