V6 vs V8, and the 50/50 weight balance

[Gatecrasher]

I decided to engage some of my impressive Google-fu, and see if I could shed a little light on the expected mass for the Camaro.

As quoted by Maximum Bob...

Lutz said that with the V6, the Camaro achieves a nearly perfect 50-50 weight distribution: “With the V6, it is not a heavy car. The Camaro will be a very lively and engaging car,” he said.

We've all been concerned about the mass of this car. Well, most of us anyway. Lower mass equals better fuel economy and more effective application of available power. Some folks were concerned that the V8 will mean the car is a lot heavier or will spoil this "nearly perfect 50-50 weight distribution"

Not so. Assuming we get an LS3 or similar engine, it's not much heavier than the confirmed DOHC LLT V6. Here's some numbers for comparison.

LLT V6 - 380 lbs
LS3 V8 - 415 lbs
LS4 V8 - 419 lbs
LS7 V8 - 454 lbs (not sure why this is 40 lbs heavier than the LS3...)
LSA V8 - 467 lbs (marine variant. Only one I could get a number for, car engine is likely to be a bit heavier)

So in short, we're only looking at ~35-40 lbs weight difference based on the engines alone. The weight will be shifted forward in the chassis due to the length difference between the V6 and V8, but as a bonus, it'll be lower down in the chassis due to not being an OHC motor like the LLT.

I think we'll be just fine

[TheMadHatter99]

On a similar subject, anyone else seriously intrigued w/ the 50/50 weight distribution idea? I high-performing V6, with nearly perfect distribution (and thus amazing handling), with pretty good gas mileage?

Is that sounding fairly good to anyone else?

[radz28]

Well, I think weight can be offset to the rear with heavier-duty suspension and drivetrain components (i.e. differential, half shafts, suspension craddle, etc.) I'm very curious as to the weight, because as most of us understand, it's all about the power-to-weight-ratio. I can be happy with 450 S/Cd' horses if the car weighs 3500 lbs., but I don't think this car is going to get that low. I understand it was supposed to go to Jenny Craig or Atkins but to go from around the G8's weight to 3500 doesn't seem to realistic. I'd rather give up a hundred-or-so pounds in favor of metal panels, unlike the plastic ones on the 4th. Gens. It just seems cheap to me, even though the dent-resistance is nice to have.

[DGthe3]

The G8 GT has 50-50 with driver and passenger.

As for the overall weight, I'll highball things and say the engine alone will weight 50 lbs more. There will be some comfort features added, along with probably some upgraded suspension parts, and other items that at 5 lbs here, 20 lbs there, and so on. I think that other stuff may add an extra 100 lbs. Most of it will be pretty evenly distributed in the car. So we are looking at an extra 100 lbs on the front and 50 on the rear. For guestimation purposes, lets say the V6 Camaro comes in at 3500 lbs. The V8 would then have 50.7/49.3 weight distribution. Thats still pretty damm good. Also, who decided that 50:50 was the perfect distribution? I imagine that a car with more nose weight would be better at braking while having a heavy rear would be good for acceleration and make for a car that is quite twitchy, which would make for having good handling potential if it could be controled.

Regardless, ~50:50 is pretty good.

[Grape Ape]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

The G8 GT has 50-50 with driver and passenger.

As for the overall weight, I'll highball things and say the engine alone will weight 50 lbs more. There will be some comfort features added, along with probably some upgraded suspension parts, and other items that at 5 lbs here, 20 lbs there, and so on. I think that other stuff may add an extra 100 lbs. Most of it will be pretty evenly distributed in the car. So we are looking at an extra 100 lbs on the front and 50 on the rear. For guestimation purposes, lets say the V6 Camaro comes in at 3500 lbs. The V8 would then have 50.7/49.3 weight distribution. Thats still pretty damm good. Also, who decided that 50:50 was the perfect distribution? I imagine that a car with more nose weight would be better at braking while having a heavy rear would be good for acceleration and make for a car that is quite twitchy, which would make for having good handling potential if it could be controled.

Regardless, ~50:50 is pretty good.

A slightly tail heavy car actually has an advantage in braking because the weight shifts forward evening the weight distribution out. This is one more reason why FWD sucks.

The more weight you can keep over the rear tires, the more they can contribute to stopping the car. It’s same thing you are doing when you put wider tires on the rear, spreading the load over a wider contract patch.

[JustinZS]

just curious, how the weight distribution on previous gen camaros??

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Grape Ape

A slightly tail heavy car actually has an advantage in braking because the weight shifts forward evening the weight distribution out. This is one more reason why FWD sucks.

The more weight you can keep over the rear tires, the more they can contribute to stopping the car. It’s same thing you are doing when you put wider tires on the rear, spreading the load over a wider contract patch.

Thank you, that makes at least as much sense as what I was thinking. But this then goes back to why 50/50 is considered so great when it appears that cars would perform better with more weight at the rear.

[WillInThe04Ranger]

I think the new camaro engines and with the 6 being the way it will, the 6 will be a monster :P

[Grape Ape]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Thank you, that makes at least as much sense as what I was thinking. But this then goes back to why 50/50 is considered so great when it appears that cars would perform better with more weight at the rear.

With a front engine, 50:50 is hard enough to achieve without adding unnecessary weight to the back bumper and nobody outside the luxo-barge segment likes a fat car. The people who really want 50:50 are generally the ones (like me and most car magazine writers) who really like corners, because that is where even weight distribution really shines.

If you are still having trouble wrapping your head around the braking, imagine that you are designing an AWD dragster. You have to use the same tires on all four corners but you can distribute the weight however you like. Hard braking is a lot like a drag race with AWD and almost infinite torque.

[jhitson]

I have a '88 with a 2.8 v6 (not running, go figure). A friend of mine had a '89 with the 5.0l v8. Both cars had the same wheels, tires, shocks, and both were automatics. The v6 held much better in the curves. The V8 suffered from a bit of under-steer. The only difference that could account for this is Overall wieght, wieght distribution, or suspension differences from '88-'89.

[Dark Eric]

Originally Posted by Gatecrasher

I decided to engage some of my impressive Google-fu, and see if I could shed a little light on the expected mass for the Camaro.

As quoted by Maximum Bob...



We've all been concerned about the mass of this car. Well, most of us anyway. Lower mass equals better fuel economy and more effective application of available power. Some folks were concerned that the V8 will mean the car is a lot heavier or will spoil this "nearly perfect 50-50 weight distribution"

Not so. Assuming we get an LS3 or similar engine, it's not much heavier than the confirmed DOHC LLT V6. Here's some numbers for comparison.

LLT V6 - 380 lbs
LS3 V8 - 415 lbs
LS4 V8 - 419 lbs
LS7 V8 - 454 lbs (not sure why this is 40 lbs heavier than the LS3...)
LSA V8 - 467 lbs (marine variant. Only one I could get a number for, car engine is likely to be a bit heavier)

So in short, we're only looking at ~35-40 lbs weight difference based on the engines alone. The weight will be shifted forward in the chassis due to the length difference between the V6 and V8, but as a bonus, it'll be lower down in the chassis due to not being an OHC motor like the LLT.

I think we'll be just fine

Not that much of a deal after you've added large subs and a powerlift jack to the trunk of the car.

[Good53X]

50/50 weight distribution should (technically) remove understeer/oversteer.

Understeer is caused by the front end tracking wide, causing the car to turn wide of the projected path.

Oversteer is caused by the rear end tracking wide, causing the car to turn inside of the projected path.

Understeer is generally corrected by letting up on the throttle or 'powering over" and steering against the direction the vehicle is travelling, which is hard on CVs (in FWD). In RWD understeer is less common but more devastating because you have no control over the direction your car takes - braking is the only option. This is one reason why RWD vehicles are so difficult to control in snow.

Oversteer is generally corrected by countersteering, and this is used in drifting to the great pleasure of many. However in race terms it's ineffective use of momentum and causes a loss of overall velocity - you're better off entering the turn at a lower speed and powering through it, exiting at a higher speed unless the corner is outrageously sharp. In FWD oversteer is doubly rare because you don't have power to the rear and thus seldom maintain loss of traction at the rear wheels for long.

With 50/50 the front and rear of the vehicle will share equal inertia going into a turn causing the vehicle to (actually) drift sideways evenly tangent to the projected path, maintaining direction, velocity and control over the vehicle.

[Mindz]

Originally Posted by Good53X

50/50 weight distribution should (technically) remove understeer/oversteer.

Understeer is caused by the front end tracking wide, causing the car to turn wide of the projected path.

Oversteer is caused by the rear end tracking wide, causing the car to turn inside of the projected path.

Understeer is generally corrected by letting up on the throttle or 'powering over" and steering against the direction the vehicle is travelling, which is hard on CVs (in FWD). In RWD understeer is less common but more devastating because you have no control over the direction your car takes - braking is the only option. This is one reason why RWD vehicles are so difficult to control in snow.

Oversteer is generally corrected by countersteering, and this is used in drifting to the great pleasure of many. However in race terms it's ineffective use of momentum and causes a loss of overall velocity - you're better off entering the turn at a lower speed and powering through it, exiting at a higher speed unless the corner is outrageously sharp. In FWD oversteer is doubly rare because you don't have power to the rear and thus seldom maintain loss of traction at the rear wheels for long.

With 50/50 the front and rear of the vehicle will share equal inertia going into a turn causing the vehicle to (actually) drift sideways evenly tangent to the projected path, maintaining direction, velocity and control over the vehicle.

Which is why the Silvia/240sx is one of the most common cars used in drifting events. It's either 49/51 or 50/50 balanced.

[LS9CamaroSS]

I don't care!!! i want that V6!!! it is an amazing looking engine, but it won't be much better than the V8 on gas... at least the CTS compared to the G8 GT (i looked at both of them on the lot today...) is 1mpg on the high way and 2mpg in the city... so... idk anymore...maybe the V8 will be mine...