Homepage Garage Wiki Register Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016+ Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum


AWE Tuning


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-18-2015, 12:10 PM   #477
ChefBorOzzy

 
ChefBorOzzy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 F150
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Ok, now for the dinger.

It's 200 pounds lighter because it's a SMALLER car with a smaller fuel tank. And don't claim it's within an inch here and there. Every inch of steel and plastic weighs something.

GM also announced the new 2016 Malibu is BIGGER and weighs 300 pounds less. The current Epsilon platform is porky as well as Zeta.

So does GM get the max grade for the weight loss knowing that?

Just for discussion.
Part of the reason Malibu is listed as so much lighter is because of the new base engine. Sounds like it cut a good chunk of weight as well. Let's wait and see how much they cut from 2.0 to 2.0.

I'm impressed with the weight for the SS.
ChefBorOzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 12:17 PM   #478
whiteboyblues2001

 
whiteboyblues2001's Avatar
 
Drives: 1SS, A8, MRC, NPP, Blade Spoiler
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by obzidian View Post
Sonis the 6.2l hellcat engine and its output is closer to 750hp than 707hp.

Trust me in this.. i sell these cars for a living. They're underrated.
Did you actually say, trust me because I am a car salesman??
whiteboyblues2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 12:31 PM   #479
Posaune
 
Drives: Four wheels and an engine
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Garage
Posts: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001 View Post
Did you actually say, trust me because I am a car salesman??
What's the big deal?
Posaune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 12:38 PM   #480
FenwickHockey65
General Motors Aficionado
 
FenwickHockey65's Avatar
 
Drives: 2023 GMC Canyon, 2020 Colorado
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 37,371
Send a message via AIM to FenwickHockey65
Quote:
Originally Posted by obzidian View Post
Sonis the 6.2l hellcat engine and its output is closer to 750hp than 707hp.

Trust me in this.. i sell these cars for a living. They're underrated.


If I missed more laughing smileys, let me know.
__________________
2023 GMC Canyon Elevation
2020 Chevrolet Colorado W/T Extended Cab (State-issued)
FenwickHockey65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 12:55 PM   #481
joemosfet

 
joemosfet's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro SS
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by 233 View Post
If the 1LE package comes out in 2017, will I be able to upgrade my 2016 SS to 1LE?
You will likely be able to buy the parts from the '17 1LE (should such a thing exist), and put them on your SS. You could even call it a '16 1LE if you wanted to. (Of course those who have a '17 1LE might clown on you for it.)
__________________
SOLD: 2014 Camaro Coupe 2SS/RS M6 Blue Ray Metallic, NPP, Nav
2014 Stingray Premiere Edition Coupe #142/500 Z51 3LT M7 Laguna Blue, Magride, NPP, Exposed Carbon Fiber Roof, Carbon Fiber Dash, Suede Wrapped Interior

Canceled: 2016 Camaro Coupe 1AK37 2SS Coupe, G7E Garnet Red, BRJ Adrenaline Red Trim, F55 Magnetic Ride, NPP Exhaust, CF5 Sunroof, 56R Gray Split spoke w/ machined face, RN2 LPO Illuminated Bowtie, VYW Premium Floor Mats, W2D LPO Cargo Net
joemosfet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 01:41 PM   #482
Bassment
 
Drives: 2016 Red Hot 2SS M6
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemosfet View Post
You will likely be able to buy the parts from the '17 1LE (should such a thing exist), and put them on your SS. You could even call it a '16 1LE if you wanted to. (Of course those who have a '17 1LE might clown on you for it.)
That would be crazy expensive
Bassment is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 03:01 PM   #483
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Ok, now for the dinger.

It's 200 pounds lighter because it's a SMALLER car with a smaller fuel tank. And don't claim it's within an inch here and there. Every inch of steel and plastic weighs something.

GM also announced the new 2016 Malibu is BIGGER and weighs 300 pounds less. The current Epsilon platform is porky as well as Zeta.

So does GM get the max grade for the weight loss knowing that?

Just for discussion.
ABSOLUTELY YES.

On this subject, they get the max grade because they gave us what we asked for. The car is still as large or larger than the most direct competition, with more standard equipment, and more standard performance equipment, and came in weight slightly less....all the while remaining very close to the size of the 5th gen.

Many of us (including myself) asked for a slightly smaller car, and that's what we got.

So yes...they get the grade.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!)
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 03:30 PM   #484
NASTY99Z28

 
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
IIRC didn't the corvette lose weight structurally but gain it back when it put all the new content and safety BS back in?
Yea sir it did. That's why the Malibu,cruze and now camaro losing weight is so crazy.
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
NASTY99Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 05:20 PM   #485
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChefBorOzzy View Post
Part of the reason Malibu is listed as so much lighter is because of the new base engine. Sounds like it cut a good chunk of weight as well. Let's wait and see how much they cut from 2.0 to 2.0.

I'm impressed with the weight for the SS.
The new base engine is a turbo isn't it vs. the 2.5 L NA? I'm not sure there was 300 pounds of weight loss there. A good chunk, I agree, but not remotely close to all 300 pounds. I think the new engine probably only weighs 300 pounds.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
Number 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 07:32 PM   #486
obzidian
 
obzidian's Avatar
 
Drives: 98 camaro turbo
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: miami
Posts: 293
Are you morons serious?

Then explain to everyone in the class how the car consistently dyno's well over 630 to 650 to wheels STOCK and still achieve through a standard tranmission or a "regular" trans with a torque converter?

The only way is if dodge somehow produced a miracle and their drivetrain only eats up 10%.

Sae dont mean a damn thing guy. Nissan with their gtr, ford with the 2013 shelby, bmw with the m4, etc. Etc
Etc... all engines are underrated from factory and yet they all have a sae rating.

I guess they also have magical drivetrains as well.
__________________
.....
obzidian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 07:33 PM   #487
obzidian
 
obzidian's Avatar
 
Drives: 98 camaro turbo
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: miami
Posts: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001 View Post
Did you actually say, trust me because I am a car salesman??
No
__________________
.....
obzidian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 07:57 PM   #488
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by obzidian View Post
Are you morons serious?

Then explain to everyone in the class how the car consistently dyno's well over 630 to 650 to wheels STOCK and still achieve through a standard tranmission or a "regular" trans with a torque converter?

The only way is if dodge somehow produced a miracle and their drivetrain only eats up 10%.

Sae dont mean a damn thing guy. Nissan with their gtr, ford with the 2013 shelby, bmw with the m4, etc. Etc
Etc... all engines are underrated from factory and yet they all have a sae rating.

I guess they also have magical drivetrains as well.
Notice anything in common with each of your examples? All FI. Doesn't that seem like a strange coincidence? Doesn't seem highly likely that chassis dynos do not recreate the same environment used in standalone engine testing? FI is susceptible to atmospheric conditions much more so than an NA motor. Have you ever seen a chassis dyno with a controlled atmosphere, we aren't talking someone's A/C in their shop either. Ever seen quicker ETs by ice packing an intake or intercooler? Don't you think SAE tests under probably less than ideal conditions to simulate the average environment a engine will operate in?

If it is more plausible to you that SAE testing is a joke, and Bubba's dyno/paint shop/bait and tackle is a more true indicator of these car's output...then by all means believe it. Go ahead and believe the moon landings were faked, JFK was shot by a gunman on the grassy knoll, and Diet Coke tastes just like regular Coke. Those ideas certainly appeal to people who don't understand scientific analysis.

BTW, it's 1% of SAE rating in their tests under their specified conditions, not on Bubba's dyno....keep that in mind.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 08:52 PM   #489
obzidian
 
obzidian's Avatar
 
Drives: 98 camaro turbo
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: miami
Posts: 293
Wow... i guess you are.

Nevermind, no point in wasting any time on this but for the record you never answered the question.
__________________
.....

Last edited by obzidian; 09-18-2015 at 09:04 PM.
obzidian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 10:02 PM   #490
newb

 
newb's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LE
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: DMV
Posts: 1,548
Official Performance Specs for 2016 Camaro: SS hits 0-60 in 4.0 sec, 3685 lbs

Quote:
Originally Posted by obzidian View Post
Wow... i guess you are.

Nevermind, no point in wasting any time on this but for the record you never answered the question.

Let's approach your under rated argument from a different perspective.

1. What reason would you have to under rate a 707 (or as some think 750) hp engine?

2. If SAE is BS then why has it become the standard?

Keeping in mind that a 707 hp car is no cheaper for insurance. And SAW ratings are not required and unless they started to recently, BMW doesn't use SAE ratings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
It's a Dingledarm. It's there to dampen side fumbling. If your marzelvanes fumble too much they can cause total protonic reversal. It gets ugly from there. This is really the biggest problem with the new Camaro. That and the tri-pronged blivot.

Delivered 21 Jan 2013

newb is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.