What If?

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I added a poll. Purely "What-if?" remember that...

If you would buy this car, but you don't believe it should be called Camaro; then the situation I'm trying to create is that there would be no Camaro. This would 'replace' it.

However, keep in mind there is no performance gap between this car and an equivilant 2010. My theoretical Camaro can do everything a 2010 cam.

My first reaction is...No I want my Camaro! But, if I'm in the market for a hotrod I'm sure it would be on my short list. Because it isn't Camaro, they're going to have to sell me on anything I consider a shortcoming that I would forgive if it had the Camaro moniker.

[Camaro68]

If that's all they offered then it would have to be a V6
for me cause this car is a work of art.

[Mr Twisty]

Is this theoretical car the same body just smaller? Or a totally different design?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Let's just say for now that it's exactly like the 2010 car, but a few inches smaller in every dimension.

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Let's just say for now that it's exactly like the 2010 car, but a few inches smaller in every dimension.

You might be onto something there. Lets talk (in theory) about weights, is it a 3000 lb car? Has the turbo 4 and DI6 as options? Manual and auto 6 spd? Performance numbers similar if not better? Sounding more and more interesting.

Also something to consider, does this car compete with the Cobalt or Malibu?
It almost sounds like a Cobalt replacement, but I hear that's quite a nice car now in it's own right.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Like I said earlier, this is RWD, IRS, and loaded with techy-options. So in theoretical base-model form, with a Turbo4, it would be around 3400lbs (not much heavier than a Vette...). If you opt for the theoretical 'SS', and a low-boost, twin-turbo V6: it would rise to nearly 3600lb.

All performance numbers are similar. Handling is better due to it's lighter weight and the V6 engine contributing to better weight balance....

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Like I said earlier, this is RWD, IRS, and loaded with techy-options. So in theoretical base-model form, with a Turbo4, it would be around 3400lbs (not much heavier than a Vette...). If you opt for the theoretical 'SS', and a low-boost, twin-turbo V6: it would rise to nearly 3600lb.

All performance numbers are similar. Handling is better due to it's lighter weight and the V6 engine contributing to better weight balance....

OK, 7/8th scale Camaro styling,
Chevy II rear wheel drive,
base car 4cyl. 200hp, 3300lb,
upgrade turbo4 260hp, 3400 lb,
upgrade DI6 300hp, 3600lb,
Sounds interesting.

[Cubanaso]

No dragon!!!! You had me till you said "another car"....I still want the Camaro, just on a diet. LOL

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Cubanaso

No dragon!!!! You had me till you said "another car"....I still want the Camaro, just on a diet. LOL

It changes the game a little bit when that's brought up, doesn't it?
It's either adapt, or die for any car today...so that's what I want to gauge.

If the Camaro adapts and becomes my theoretical car by losing the V8 while retaining performance; would you buy it? Or would you rather the name die, and buy this car under a different identity?

It seems a no-brainer to me, but I can never tell lately........

[chevydude26]

Originally Posted by boxmonkeyracing

lol please tell me you don't base everything you know about performance of cars on that game. . .


the saying for there's no replacement for displacement is still true even with trubo/supercharging.

i don't know much about performance...i just want american cars to be better and i hated how those games made american cars slow and couldn't handle for crap....yet with like a skyline you put a few things in there and it was the fastest car in the game

[asrapid]

Well it seems there won't be 4cyl with 260 + hp..but there might be one with 216 hp.

GM product chief Bob Lutz revealed the r&d experiment during an interview at this week's London motor show. He first had talked about the possibility of dropping a small turbo engine into the Camaro at the New York auto show last March.

But Lutz also said the 260-hp turbocharged engine gave little benefit compared with the 300-hp 3.6-liter V6 that is the new Camaro's base powerplant.

"The power was similar, the vehicle was the same, so not surprisingly, the fuel economy was also very similar," said Lutz.

A fuel-sipping Camaro is still on GM's wish list, though. Lutz pointed to a new 216-hp, 2.0-liter Ecotec Turbo four-cylinder engine that debuts in the new Vauxhall/Opel Insignia as a possibility for the Camaro.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...0/1023/CARNEWS

[Beelzebubba]

Originally Posted by MisterCamaro69

OK, 7/8th scale Camaro styling,
Chevy II rear wheel drive,
base car 4cyl. 200hp, 3300lb,
upgrade turbo4 260hp, 3400 lb,
upgrade DI6 300hp, 3600lb,
Sounds interesting.

I'm with you...that's very interesting!


but there's just one thing:

Where are we going to get a 200hp N/A 4 cylinder?

Honda's K20A2?

It wouldn't be the first time a Honda motor made it into a GM car. But a Honda J35 V6 in a Saturn Vue is much less heresy than in anything badged "Camaro"

The Vortec 2.9 Makes what....185? (A lot more than Ford's Vulcan V6 and that's all it has to do )
The HO Ecotec 2.4 is like 175.

We're going to need a few more hp.

[Mr Twisty]

Originally Posted by Beelzebubba

I'm with you...that's very interesting!


but there's just one thing:

Where are we going to get a 200hp N/A 4 cylinder?

Honda's K20A2?

It wouldn't be the first time a Honda motor made it into a GM car. But a Honda J35 V6 in a Saturn Vue is much less heresy than in anything badged "Camaro"
.

That's just heresy there! Somebuddy get the rope, they's gonna be a hanging!

[Beelzebubba]

That's exactly what I mean.

You can get away with putting a Honda J35 V6 in a Saturn...after all, it is a Saturn. Nobody with testicles is going to drive it unless they are on the way to the "Pride" Parade anyway.

But in a Camaro? It's heresy.