VIDEO: CNBC Camaro Video Documentary! (links to full clips)

[K-soldier]

Originally Posted by chevydude26

so its because of australia that the roof is higher than the concept....

and because of Australia that our reverse lights are in such a weird position...

well screw that we should have just kept it here if that was the case...let them build their own version of the camaro...i'm mad now

at least tom tried to beg for the height to be lower

I agree 100% i'm actually mad too. I think I would punch him in the face when he said no you are not going to make it lower because of their non sense regulation. just as the GM engineer in US said I believe a lower roof would give the car much more aggressive look just like the concept and it would give the car a nice wide stand which I love. i mean look at their tail light colors they look like shit. When I saw the concept I loved the low roof I understand they had to make it little higher to be practical but not much

[Info@PeddersUSA.com]

Originally Posted by boxmonkeyracing

you wanna know why? because normal people that they are aiming this car to want a car that can handle but doesn't beat them to a pulp driving around town hitting pot holes.

and that's why I've been wanting them to make the Z with a road race suspension more then a supercharger. but I know that I'm just going to have to go aftermarket with that suspension setup. . .

You do not have to sacrifice drive quality. If you ever get a chance, drive a Pontiac G8 (same suspension as the Camaro) that has a Pedders TrackII system. We have very serious performance with very high comfort quality.

mike
dms

[PA FAST]

Originally Posted by boxmonkeyracing

you wanna know why? because normal people that they are aiming this car to want a car that can handle but doesn't beat them to a pulp driving around town hitting pot holes.

Amen, thats why I would never buy a German car.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by boxmonkeyracing

you wanna know why? because normal people that they are aiming this car to want a car that can handle but doesn't beat them to a pulp driving around town hitting pot holes.

and that's why I've been wanting them to make the Z with a road race suspension more then a supercharger. but I know that I'm just going to have to go aftermarket with that suspension setup. . .

It's one thing having controlled comfortable driving dynamics (BMW, Honda)

It's another to just have a softly tuned suspension (most GM and Toyota vehicles fall into this category).

I am really hoping that, because the Camaro was developed by Holden, and because Jr. told them there's too much unnecessary body roll, that this car is the most buttoned down vehicle ever made by GM - even tighter than most older Corvettes (haven't driven a 2005-up model, but I have driven a few older 'Vettes and was downright dissappointed at how soft the steering and brake feedback was - I was in fact expecting a bone jaring ride and minimal assist with the steering. The Corvette really dissappointed me)

Performance cars are supposed to be tight. When you make a lane change at 70 mph, you shouldn't even have to move the steering wheel but a hair with pinpoint accuracy. You should have strong feedback and easily modulated back pressure in the brake pedal, and instant throttle response. When you go over potholes, they shouldn't be as bone jaring as a Mack truck, but you should still have some well communicated road feel through to the driver.

I don't know, to me, it seems Americans are just too spoiled with old Cadillac Sedan deVilles, Buick LeSabres, and Oldsmobile Delta 88s, and GM just can't move past that point to develop truely sophisticated suspensions that keep the car flat in all but the most extreme manuevers, offer crisp, pinpoint accurate steering with less than 3 turns lock to lock, and provide good road feel and communication to the driver.

That doesn't mean it has to be hard as a rock. But they need to quit making suspensions that are soft as a sofa.

[Info@PeddersUSA.com]

Originally Posted by fastball

It's one thing having controlled comfortable driving dynamics (BMW, Honda)

It's another to just have a softly tuned suspension (most GM and Toyota vehicles fall into this category).

I am really hoping that, because the Camaro was developed by Holden, and because Jr. told them there's too much unnecessary body roll, that this car is the most buttoned down vehicle ever made by GM - even tighter than most older Corvettes (haven't driven a 2005-up model, but I have driven a few older 'Vettes and was downright dissappointed at how soft the steering and brake feedback was - I was in fact expecting a bone jaring ride and minimal assist with the steering. The Corvette really dissappointed me)

Performance cars are supposed to be tight. When you make a lane change at 70 mph, you shouldn't even have to move the steering wheel but a hair with pinpoint accuracy. You should have strong feedback and easily modulated back pressure in the brake pedal, and instant throttle response. When you go over potholes, they shouldn't be as bone jaring as a Mack truck, but you should still have some well communicated road feel through to the driver.

I don't know, to me, it seems Americans are just too spoiled with old Cadillac Sedan deVilles, Buick LeSabres, and Oldsmobile Delta 88s, and GM just can't move past that point to develop truely sophisticated suspensions that keep the car flat in all but the most extreme manuevers, offer crisp, pinpoint accurate steering with less than 3 turns lock to lock, and provide good road feel and communication to the driver.

That doesn't mean it has to be hard as a rock. But they need to quit making suspensions that are soft as a sofa.

I hate to burst your bubble, but legacy rules out. the Camaro will have about the same amount of body role as the G8, possibly just a little bit less. Holden, by design, has made this vehicle with a lot of role. Now with the G8, our Pedders TrackII system eliminates 25% of the role, the Pedders adjustable bars eliminate another 25% of the role, and our Xtreme adjustable struts, another 25%. I can tell you that Pedders has done just about as much R&D on the Zeta platform as GM of USA has done. Keep in mind Pedders is a $125 million a year Austrailian companty with huge R&D. The Zeata platform has been extensively researched and we know what to do.

For example, one of the biggest non compliant set of bushings in the Zeta platform are the rear cradle bushings. The rear end assembly on th Camaro/G8, is rather fantastic. However, the entire suspension system is attached to a rear cradle and the cradle is attached to the body by 4 bushings. These 4 bushings will allow the rear cradle to move quite a bit from the body. We call this "step out" Fortunately, Pedders has developed a very cost effective repair. We do not have to replace the bushings, just add some really strong poly bush inserts into the large voids that are there. It is a easy install, with HUGE improvements.,

The GM front fluid filled radius rod bushings are seriously sloppy. this is designed to hide non compliant other components and tire irregularities. We have this under control. The shocks are under rated, and the spring rates are underrated. We have that under control.

Pedders has been working on this for a very long time. those who want to have a Camaro handle in a off the chart way and still have VERY acceptable comfort levels, Pedders is the way to go.

GM has tested our bushings on the G8 and have been blown away by the abilities and comfort. Now if you install our adjustable coil over,which are designed for the very serious driver, they will be much firmer, with a lot of comfort for the long distance drives.

Any questions?
mike
dms

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by K-soldier

I agree 100% i'm actually mad too. I think I would punch him in the face when he said no you are not going to make it lower because of their non sense regulation. just as the GM engineer in US said I believe a lower roof would give the car much more aggressive look just like the concept and it would give the car a nice wide stand which I love. i mean look at their tail light colors they look like shit. When I saw the concept I loved the low roof I understand they had to make it little higher to be practical but not much

Then engineer should punch you right back then. Heck, I know I would. There are 2 universal laws of engineering:
1st Law -Form follows function.
2nd Law -Anything that can go wrong, eventually will (aka Murphys Law)

The first law makes things extremely difficult for automotive engineers, particularly on cars like the Camaro because there were three overall requirements on the Camaro: make it out perform the competition, make it affordable, make it look like the concept. Considering the fact it will indeed out perform the competition, it will be affordable (told numerous times to look at the mustang for pricing), and that 99% of people would say that the SS looks the same as the concept (general population, not enthusiasts who have scrutinized every detail of the concept and production cars), the engineers have done the best optimization that I can imagine.

To improve in any one area would have a greater negative impact on one of the other areas, generally price. To make it cheaper it wouldn't look as close to the concept. Making it lighter would increase the cost. And certain styling elements would make the car either more expensive or reduce performance (increased drag, for example).

I'm not even going to complete this with the obligatory 'everyone should be thankful for getting what they got'. So far GM is giving us exactly what they promised: A car that is as close to the concept as possible with best in class performance. We will see pricing in a matter of months. But so far they are 2/2

[Convertible Lady]

Thanks !!!!!enjoyed the video, looks like it handles great, things are looking up. :5thgenvert:

[Info@PeddersUSA.com]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Then engineer should punch you right back then. Heck, I know I would. There are 2 universal laws of engineering:
1st Law -Form follows function.
2nd Law -Anything that can go wrong, eventually will (aka Murphys Law)

The first law makes things extremely difficult for automotive engineers, particularly on cars like the Camaro because there were three overall requirements on the Camaro: make it out perform the competition, make it affordable, make it look like the concept. Considering the fact it will indeed out perform the competition, it will be affordable (told numerous times to look at the mustang for pricing), and that 99% of people would say that the SS looks the same as the concept (general population, not enthusiasts who have scrutinized every detail of the concept and production cars), the engineers have done the best optimization that I can imagine.

To improve in any one area would have a greater negative impact on one of the other areas, generally price. To make it cheaper it wouldn't look as close to the concept. Making it lighter would increase the cost. And certain styling elements would make the car either more expensive or reduce performance (increased drag, for example).

I'm not even going to complete this with the obligatory 'everyone should be thankful for getting what they got'. So far GM is giving us exactly what they promised: A car that is as close to the concept as possible with best in class performance. We will see pricing in a matter of months. But so far they are 2/2

You pointed out some very good points. But the 3 domestics are still living with legacy engineering and concepts. That means leaving the suspension soft and gooey. this type of suspension is made on purpose from GM. they make it to attract the largest clientel, However,BMW and Mercedes E class suspension systems are not like the domestics for a reasonl

With proper engineering, systems can be installed to keep a great ride, and at the same time, radically improve the handling. Pedders has this system currently for the Camaro.

mike
dms

[boxmonkeyracing]

Originally Posted by fastball

It's one thing having controlled comfortable driving dynamics (BMW, Honda)

It's another to just have a softly tuned suspension (most GM and Toyota vehicles fall into this category).

I am really hoping that, because the Camaro was developed by Holden, and because Jr. told them there's too much unnecessary body roll, that this car is the most buttoned down vehicle ever made by GM - even tighter than most older Corvettes (haven't driven a 2005-up model, but I have driven a few older 'Vettes and was downright dissappointed at how soft the steering and brake feedback was - I was in fact expecting a bone jaring ride and minimal assist with the steering. The Corvette really dissappointed me)

Performance cars are supposed to be tight. When you make a lane change at 70 mph, you shouldn't even have to move the steering wheel but a hair with pinpoint accuracy. You should have strong feedback and easily modulated back pressure in the brake pedal, and instant throttle response. When you go over potholes, they shouldn't be as bone jaring as a Mack truck, but you should still have some well communicated road feel through to the driver.

I don't know, to me, it seems Americans are just too spoiled with old Cadillac Sedan deVilles, Buick LeSabres, and Oldsmobile Delta 88s, and GM just can't move past that point to develop truely sophisticated suspensions that keep the car flat in all but the most extreme manuevers, offer crisp, pinpoint accurate steering with less than 3 turns lock to lock, and provide good road feel and communication to the driver.

That doesn't mean it has to be hard as a rock. But they need to quit making suspensions that are soft as a sofa.

what you described about lane changes and such I did in my 98 Z. I loved how that car drives. just wish it hugged the corners better. but I'm willing to sacrifice comfort for a better handling car. just most people in the US aren't and that's who GM is selling this car 2

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Then engineer should punch you right back then. Heck, I know I would. There are 2 universal laws of engineering:
1st Law -Form follows function.
2nd Law -Anything that can go wrong, eventually will (aka Murphys Law)

The first law makes things extremely difficult for automotive engineers, particularly on cars like the Camaro because there were three overall requirements on the Camaro: make it out perform the competition, make it affordable, make it look like the concept. Considering the fact it will indeed out perform the competition, it will be affordable (told numerous times to look at the mustang for pricing), and that 99% of people would say that the SS looks the same as the concept (general population, not enthusiasts who have scrutinized every detail of the concept and production cars), the engineers have done the best optimization that I can imagine.

Actually you left one off...
AND meet all mandated government safety regulations. which includes roof height and strength for rollover protectecion. Headlight, tailight, side marker light and turn signal size and placements along with light output. and many others that we as consumers don't really understand and always seem to question Why they did something the way they did.

[Angrybird 12]

Many things can be changed to increase handling and ride comfort . With properly tuned springs, shocks, links and swaybars you can have a great ride along with great handling. The new Corvette standard suspension is a good compromise.
The standard Camaro suspension will be tuned more to a smoother ride with good handling. the SS suspension will be a tighter controlled and better handling suspension.
Remember Jr test drove these prototypes fairly early in the development. and as when the reporter asked about the turn signal, "is that the turn signal?" the engineer said, "yes but it won't be tomorrow"
Don't base your opinions on the Camaro's suspension by what Jr said.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Actually you left one off...
AND meet all mandated government safety regulations. which includes roof height and strength for rollover protectecion. Headlight, tailight, side marker light and turn signal size and placements along with light output. and many others that we as consumers don't really understand and always seem to question Why they did something the way they did.

Included in rule #1: function

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Included in rule #1: function

Sorry I was looking at it as part of your 3 requirements for the Camaro...and some of the major complaint areas on here

[Shifty 6]

Man I had people over at the house and I forgot to record it. Does anybody have the whole thing? How long is it?