well. 13.0@111mph not to shabby...
03-25-2009, 05:18 PM
#81
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-25-2009, 05:24 PM
#82
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 1,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think about it this way, we skipped a generation of Fbodies when they went dead. This car is basically closing the gap of 7 years. If it was the 6th gen and the "5th gen" was 250 lbs heavier than the 4th gen we wouldnt be complaining because it would be acceptable.
If the car has as much refinement as people are saying then Ill GLADLY take the 3900lb SS over my 3400lb Formula.
If the car has as much refinement as people are saying then Ill GLADLY take the 3900lb SS over my 3400lb Formula.
03-25-2009, 05:28 PM
#83
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love to see people cry about weight, saying real sports cars shouldn't weigh anything close to this.
What does a GTR weigh?
What does a 599GTB weigh?
What does a lambo lp560 weigh?
Get over it. Cars get heavier, but they also get more power. More power from the factory means more mod potential. I am sure full bot on cars will trap into the 120s in good air without a cam.
What does a GTR weigh?
What does a 599GTB weigh?
What does a lambo lp560 weigh?
Get over it. Cars get heavier, but they also get more power. More power from the factory means more mod potential. I am sure full bot on cars will trap into the 120s in good air without a cam.
03-25-2009, 06:12 PM
#84
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think about it this way, we skipped a generation of Fbodies when they went dead. This car is basically closing the gap of 7 years. If it was the 6th gen and the "5th gen" was 250 lbs heavier than the 4th gen we wouldnt be complaining because it would be acceptable.
If the car has as much refinement as people are saying then Ill GLADLY take the 3900lb SS over my 3400lb Formula.
If the car has as much refinement as people are saying then Ill GLADLY take the 3900lb SS over my 3400lb Formula.
I love to see people cry about weight, saying real sports cars shouldn't weigh anything close to this.
What does a GTR weigh?
What does a 599GTB weigh?
What does a lambo lp560 weigh?
Get over it. Cars get heavier, but they also get more power. More power from the factory means more mod potential. I am sure full bot on cars will trap into the 120s in good air without a cam.
What does a GTR weigh?
What does a 599GTB weigh?
What does a lambo lp560 weigh?
Get over it. Cars get heavier, but they also get more power. More power from the factory means more mod potential. I am sure full bot on cars will trap into the 120s in good air without a cam.
2 of them have AWD and one of them is a luxury grand touring vehicle.
03-25-2009, 06:54 PM
#85
I thought the 6 speed car was 3860? And loaded 4th gens are around 3500?
sounds like a ~400 pound difference give or take.
My car was a stripper with lighter aftermarket exhaust and no spare/jack. It weighed 3297. But the 5th gen doesnt have a stripper option so its not really a fair comparison.
And does anyone know if the 3860 number is 1ss or 2 ss? doesnt the 2 ss have some added weight with heated mirrors and power seats? isnt leather heavier?
A 1 ss 6 speed might be about 3800? If you look at it that way then a loaded 4th gen might only be 300 pound difference from a 1SS. 1 big overweight passenger difference lol
the car is heavy but everyone is rounding up for the 5th gen and rounding down for the 4th gen in my eyes.
sounds like a ~400 pound difference give or take.
My car was a stripper with lighter aftermarket exhaust and no spare/jack. It weighed 3297. But the 5th gen doesnt have a stripper option so its not really a fair comparison.
And does anyone know if the 3860 number is 1ss or 2 ss? doesnt the 2 ss have some added weight with heated mirrors and power seats? isnt leather heavier?
A 1 ss 6 speed might be about 3800? If you look at it that way then a loaded 4th gen might only be 300 pound difference from a 1SS. 1 big overweight passenger difference lol
the car is heavy but everyone is rounding up for the 5th gen and rounding down for the 4th gen in my eyes.
03-25-2009, 07:08 PM
#86
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 1,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its best to kind of forget about the weight until you get to drive one. A specification sheet does nothing until you can actually FEEL what it is specifying.
Here are the weights.
LS auto: 3,769 lb (1,710 kg)
LS man: 3,780 lb (1,710 kg)
LT auto: 3,750 lb (1,700 kg)
LT man: 3,741 lb (1,697 kg)
SS auto: 3,913 lb (1,775 kg)
SS man: 3,860 lb (1,750 kg)
LS man: 3,780 lb (1,710 kg)
LT auto: 3,750 lb (1,700 kg)
LT man: 3,741 lb (1,697 kg)
SS auto: 3,913 lb (1,775 kg)
SS man: 3,860 lb (1,750 kg)
03-25-2009, 07:43 PM
#87
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Califronia
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally love the new camaro and wish I could afford one. 111mph trap speeds! Thats awesome out of an SS, imagine if they come out with the Z/28. This car is easily capable of 12's bone stock and bolt on's low 12's. LS3's are sick as hell to, these cars will be monsters with just a cam. The weight does suck tho, but it's a minor flaw to me.
03-25-2009, 09:32 PM
#88
Wow, guess you didn't bother to actually read what I posted before writing a reply.
I clearly stated that the MPH looked good, but that the ET wasn't impressive. What's wrong with that statement? Are you saying that a 13.0 ET is something to get excited about? If so, you have some low standards for a 111mph trap car that's rated at 426hp.
My point was, I'd really like to see some test runs on an A6 model to take the driver factor out of the equation.
And who said anything about expecting 12.0 @118 for $31K???? Those were your words, not mine. My expectation for the L99/A6 5th gen is 12.50-12.70 @110-ish MPH. This seems totally reasonable, considering the last of the 4th gens with an A4 had little issues hitting low 13s @106ish MPH.
I clearly stated that the MPH looked good, but that the ET wasn't impressive. What's wrong with that statement? Are you saying that a 13.0 ET is something to get excited about? If so, you have some low standards for a 111mph trap car that's rated at 426hp.
My point was, I'd really like to see some test runs on an A6 model to take the driver factor out of the equation.
And who said anything about expecting 12.0 @118 for $31K???? Those were your words, not mine. My expectation for the L99/A6 5th gen is 12.50-12.70 @110-ish MPH. This seems totally reasonable, considering the last of the 4th gens with an A4 had little issues hitting low 13s @106ish MPH.
03-25-2009, 09:50 PM
#89
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 111mph trap speaks to the LS3's power level. But the real question is how much will the Camaro's curb weight affect its ability to turn in a comparably impressive ET? If this were a 4th gen with a 111mph trap, you'd expect low 12's at the minimum.....maybe even high 11's with some good rubber and good driving. But will the 5th gen be able to meet that same standard with an extra 400 lbs of girth? I'm not saying it won't....but I'm getting the impression here that many of you think it will, by simply looking at the trap numbers. Granted, the 5th gen does have a better drivetrain overall to work with than the 4th gens....I'm just wondering if that improvement will counteract the effects of its weight increase.
03-25-2009, 09:57 PM
#90
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London, Ky.
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope they are off like they were in 99 becuase most of the magizines had the camaro's at 13.8 or 13.9 and I ran a 13.09 the day I bought with 150 miles on it. I'll wait till gmhightech gets some passes in it to see what its really going to run.
03-26-2009, 05:43 AM
#91
Weight has nothing to do with being a muscle car, it was a mid-size chassis with a high HP engine. In reality the new SS Camaro in base form is heavier than most of the "muscle cars" back in the day, a SS396 Chevelle in base from was between 3600 and 3700. Most of the Chevelle SS396/SS454, Buick GS455, GTO's, Torino GT's, Plymouth Road Runners and such got heavy because the most people loaded them down with options. The heaviest I have seen an SS454 weigh was just over 4000, that was all the crap, AC PW PS PDB.....et al and remember a 454 in cast iron is a 700 pound engine.
These threads always trip me out...you guys think GM made the body panels out of lead to make it heavier?
There are a lot of factors that go into making a car heavy, and most of them are out of GM's control. You have safety standards, which is why recently all cars are starting to have raised door lines if you haven't noticed...there are emissions standards which require heavy *** equipment, standard features which people will not buy a car without (except a select few enthusiasts that want a stripper model) etc. It is in GM's best interest to make the car as light as possible, because light = better MPG for CAFE and they know that. If they could do it and still bring it in at $34k base MSRP, they would.If you want light, go buy a Z06 vette...but get your wallet out.
03-26-2009, 09:24 AM
#92
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-26-2009, 09:45 AM
#93
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 111mph trap speaks to the LS3's power level. But the real question is how much will the Camaro's curb weight affect its ability to turn in a comparably impressive ET? If this were a 4th gen with a 111mph trap, you'd expect low 12's at the minimum.....maybe even high 11's with some good rubber and good driving. But will the 5th gen be able to meet that same standard with an extra 400 lbs of girth? I'm not saying it won't....but I'm getting the impression here that many of you think it will, by simply looking at the trap numbers. Granted, the 5th gen does have a better drivetrain overall to work with than the 4th gens....I'm just wondering if that improvement will counteract the effects of its weight increase.
The car can Handle better then any 4th Gen can dream of.
03-26-2009, 11:36 AM
#94
The 111mph trap speaks to the LS3's power level. But the real question is how much will the Camaro's curb weight affect its ability to turn in a comparably impressive ET? If this were a 4th gen with a 111mph trap, you'd expect low 12's at the minimum.....maybe even high 11's with some good rubber and good driving. But will the 5th gen be able to meet that same standard with an extra 400 lbs of girth? I'm not saying it won't....but I'm getting the impression here that many of you think it will, by simply looking at the trap numbers. Granted, the 5th gen does have a better drivetrain overall to work with than the 4th gens....I'm just wondering if that improvement will counteract the effects of its weight increase.
About low 12s, i think youre going too far. The LS3 vettes are good to go low 12s maybe, but they trap 116-118!!! Very different!
ET is all about getting the traction and no mags are putting slicks on any test car to see what it can do at the track.
03-26-2009, 04:30 PM
#95
TECH Senior Member
03-26-2009, 05:19 PM
#96
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont understand what information you are looking for, we all know it does a 13.0 @ 111mph. Put better tires and driver in it and im sure it will be in the 12's. Standards change, that why its heavier to begin with, everyone should be impressed by this car.
The car can Handle better then any 4th Gen can dream of.
The car can Handle better then any 4th Gen can dream of.
03-26-2009, 05:37 PM
#97
On The Tree
Join Date: May 2008
Location: McDonough, Ga, U.S.A.
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this may be the worst magazine tester's ever!!!http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4309423.html
03-26-2009, 05:47 PM
#98
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this may be the worst magazine tester's ever!!!http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4309423.html
