2ss l99 vehicle weighed. - LS1TECH

Log In 


Gen 5 Racing Tech Heads, cam, valvetrain, short block discussion
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

2ss l99 vehicle weighed.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-22-2009, 08:01 AM   #1
12 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (15)
 
ss1129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: hannibal, MO
Posts: 1,463
Default 2ss l99 vehicle weighed.

I weighed my car on a certified CAT scale. Nobody in the car, 1/2 tank of gas exactly, as the car comes from the factory. No ground effects, standard 20" wheels, no rs package (not that it matters).

Front axle weight was 2020 lbs
rear axle was 1840 lbs

for the combined weight of 3860 lbs.

So with my Brock Lesnarish towering 5'7 and Yokozunish weight of 170 my cars weight adds up to 4030 lbs.
ss1129 is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 08:44 AM   #2
12 Second Club
iTrader: (9)
 
fly pantera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SanMarcos,TX
Posts: 554
Default

wow.its ashame gm didnt make these 300 lbs lighter
fly pantera is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 09:28 PM   #3
TECH Apprentice
 
SS02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 397
Default

^^^ Still running High 12s
SS02 is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 09:35 PM   #4
TECH Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Dallas
Posts: 642
Default

My stick car weighs 3985 with me.
OrangeChevyII is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:38 PM   #5
TECH Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Default

Thanks for posting your weight.


The Camaro is a pig because GM built it on the G8 sedan chassis (Zeta). I don't know why anyone would buy a "sport coupe" that weighs close to 4,000 instead of a true sedan (G8).
But, the Camaro does look good.
427C5 is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 10:42 PM   #6
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
Dark SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 427C5 View Post
Thanks for posting your weight.


The Camaro is a pig because GM built it on the G8 sedan chassis (Zeta). I don't know why anyone would buy a "sport coupe" that weighs close to 4,000 instead of a true sedan (G8).
But, the Camaro does look good.
Because the true sedan weighs over 4000# and sedans are for parents.
Dark SS is offline  
Old 07-22-2009, 11:13 PM   #7
11 Second Club
iTrader: (23)
 
98LS1Formula's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 295
Default

NY state lists my 2SS L99 at 3853 on the title
98LS1Formula is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:32 AM   #8
TECH Resident
 
Johny GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 844
Default

They should have hacked a section out of this chassis to shrink it and cut weight, and made the camaro out of that. How hard is it to cut a section out, or just shrink the size of the chassis? You aren re-tooling, redesigning a new chassis, etc. It shouldnt cost GM anything to do this, so why not?
Johny GTO is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 10:54 AM   #9
TECH Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark SS View Post
Because the true sedan weighs over 4000# and sedans are for parents.


I hate to break it to you brother, you ARE driving a sedan.
The new Camaro has all of the negatives of the G8 (weight) with none of the G8's positives (utility).

There is NO DOUBT that the Camaro is a great looking car and much better looking than the G8. But, if I wanted a great looking coupe, I'd buy a TRUE coupe that is light and built on a true coupe platform. That's why I bought a C6 and not a Camaro.
427C5 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 11:45 AM   #10
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
Dark SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,099
Default

I hate to break it to you but the C6 is not a true coupe. It's a sportscar. There is no backseat and is much more compact and constrained. It's not in any coupe class. In todays market you can't find a coupe that weighs much less than the Camaro and through most of history coupe's and sedan's have been built on the same frame. Again the Camaro is 200# lighter than the sedan and has a cheaper price tag, I'm not seeing the disadvantage.
Dark SS is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 11:56 AM   #11
TECH Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark SS View Post
the Camaro is 200# lighter than the sedan and has a cheaper price tag, I'm not seeing the disadvantage.
Where are you getting your numbers from ??????
I believe the weight difference is negligible.


As far as price, I'm seeing new G8 GT's selling for around $25k and making LS3 type power with a tune.
427C5 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 12:16 PM   #12
TECH Resident
 
Johny GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 427C5 View Post
Where are you getting your numbers from ??????
I believe the weight difference is negligible.


As far as price, I'm seeing new G8 GT's selling for around $25k and making LS3 type power with a tune.
I agree with your power remark. The G8 GT is just a detuned LS3.
Johny GTO is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 12:44 PM   #13
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johny GTO View Post
They should have hacked a section out of this chassis to shrink it and cut weight, and made the camaro out of that. How hard is it to cut a section out, or just shrink the size of the chassis? You aren re-tooling, redesigning a new chassis, etc. It shouldnt cost GM anything to do this, so why not?
i get it you are joking...
liqidvenom is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:07 PM   #14
TECH Resident
 
Johny GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by liqidvenom View Post
i get it you are joking...
lol. yes.

Still, with this style camaro coming in so heavy, i almost wish they would do something like this. Friggin chop out the whole back seat area, and weld the front and back together again. Shorten the car by about 2 feet.
that should knock of a couple hundred pounds.
Johny GTO is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:13 PM   #15
TECH Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johny GTO View Post
lol. yes.

Still, with this style camaro coming in so heavy, i almost wish they would do something like this. Friggin chop out the whole back seat area, and weld the front and back together again. Shorten the car by about 2 feet.
that should knock of a couple hundred pounds.
They already did this.
It's called a Corvette.

Frankly, I can't understand why anyone would buy a new Camaro over a C6, G8, or a C5.
427C5 is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:13 PM   #16
Staging Lane
 
Rubrignitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, Tejas
Posts: 51
Default

Every automobile manufactured these days is going to weigh more due to safety ratings. The S197 has 5-star front and rear and I assume the new Camaro does as well. How much does the IRS weigh? Yank that puppy out.
Rubrignitz is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:26 PM   #17
TECH Resident
 
Johny GTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 427C5 View Post
They already did this.
It's called a Corvette.

Frankly, I can't understand why anyone would buy a new Camaro over a C6, G8, or a C5.
LOL. "BAMM!! Take that, Johny!!" hehe. Argg, you got me. Good point, i wasnt thinking.


I have a question to ask, perhaps someone can help me here. PEople site "safety standards and equipment" as the reason why our modern day muscle cars weigh so much more then the 60's and 70's muscle cars.
Muscle cars then weighed around 3300lbs or so, correct? Now the norm seems to be da,mn near 4000lbs. Safety equipment?? What do they make air bags and seat belts out of, lead?? The cars back then were made of solid steel. If you had a 69 camaro run head first into a 2010 camaro, i would put money on the '69 ripping the new camaro in half.

what exactly have they added to jump the weight up by 700-1000lbs???
Johny GTO is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:32 PM   #18
Staging Lane
 
Rubrignitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, Tejas
Posts: 51
Default

That's an easy one.. POWER EVERYTHING. Take away the power steering, power windows, door locks, radio, amplifiers, speakers, bells, whistles, et etc etc etc.

The classics (well, now I'd have to classify them antiques) were just seats, body and drivetrain.

Along with that, more bracing materials are now used to keep everything from rattling, creaking, flexing in a unibody.
Rubrignitz is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 01:57 PM   #19
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (19)
 
2002_Z28_Six_Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Wash, DC
Posts: 4,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johny GTO View Post
LOL. "BAMM!! Take that, Johny!!" hehe. Argg, you got me. Good point, i wasnt thinking.


I have a question to ask, perhaps someone can help me here. PEople site "safety standards and equipment" as the reason why our modern day muscle cars weigh so much more then the 60's and 70's muscle cars.
Muscle cars then weighed around 3300lbs or so, correct? Now the norm seems to be da,mn near 4000lbs. Safety equipment?? What do they make air bags and seat belts out of, lead?? The cars back then were made of solid steel. If you had a 69 camaro run head first into a 2010 camaro, i would put money on the '69 ripping the new camaro in half.

what exactly have they added to jump the weight up by 700-1000lbs???
I find that to be a misconception.

Many of the cars people hot rodded or pimped in the 60's and 70's weighted about the same as today with only some of the car weighting in 2800 to 3300 lbs. Those cars that weighted in less were stripped or had simple suspensions with minimal features. Unibody and not chassis....

1967 Chevelle was about 3800 lbs.
Chevelle wagon (quite popular actually for family use) cleared 4200....4400
Biscayne could weight in the 3800....this car was a cheap full siz and could be ordered with a big engine


74 Monte Carlo was 4000 lbs, awesome car that can fit a freaking jet engine in there
70 Carlo was still 3800 ish.

I mean yea the Camaro and Nova had less weight but still. Those cars had crappy suspension and were cheap. A stripped Nova has a weight that would make you smile but have fun putting the big block in there. It does fit but its not fun.... for me anways.

So they weren't magic numbers that a racer would droll over like say 2400 lbs or something. But yes the crappier cars had weights that drag racers rave over now.
2002_Z28_Six_Speed is offline  
Old 07-23-2009, 02:44 PM   #20
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (4)
 
Dark SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 427C5 View Post
Where are you getting your numbers from ??????
I believe the weight difference is negligible.


As far as price, I'm seeing new G8 GT's selling for around $25k and making LS3 type power with a tune.
Here's the weight of the G8
http://www.leftlanenews.com/pontiac-g8-gxp.html
The OP said his Camaro weighed 3860 so simple math
4050-3860=190lbs.

Now please show me where a G8 GT is making 364rwhp with a tune because that's what my car put down stock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johny GTO View Post
I agree with your power remark. The G8 GT is just a detuned LS3.
No it's not, it's an LS2 with AFM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 427C5 View Post
Frankly, I can't understand why anyone would buy a new Camaro over a C6, G8, or a C5.
Well that's simple the C6 is 50K, the G8 is a family car and costs more for the same power train and the C5 is old technology. Not to mention not everyone wants a vette, can you even wrap your head around that?

Last edited by Dark SS; 07-23-2009 at 02:49 PM.
Dark SS is offline  
Closed Thread


Tags
2010, 2020, 2ss, 4th, camaro, cheapest, fort, gen, l99, no, pimped, rs, slow, vehicle, weighing, worth

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:50 AM.