View Poll Results: What type of rear shall we have?
IRS...good for road racing and fine for dragging
172
51.04%
Make mine a solid rear...I like to run around with my shoe laces tied together!!!
165
48.96%
Voters: 337. You may not vote on this poll
Maro...IRS or Solid Rear?
Originally Posted by bad2000z
I don't mind the IRS as long as 1. it does'nt make the car too heavy, 2. add a **** load of $$ to the price of the car, 3. it does'nt blow up every time I pull a 1.50 60". I don't think the IRS is gonna make the car sell any better. Ford sold 150,000 Mudstains last year with a solid rear, why can't we? I'm not even sure why I joined in this discussion, we are getting an IRS! If you don't like it, don't buy it! I'm not crazy about the IRS thing, but my heart still skips a beat every time I see that concept car, how bout you?
Originally Posted by black_knight
Wow, that pretty much sums it up! Well put!
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,798
Likes: 16
From: St.Charles MO
Originally Posted by bww3588
yeah it sums it up. knowing GM, all 3 of thoes things will happen. it will make it heavy, expensive and fragile. just stick with what works, its not a Corvette.
I rather have a weak IRS, than a weak SRA. The Camaro is going to have to compete against more than just the Mustang...
Originally Posted by JD_AMG
10 bolts certainly dont "work"
I rather have a weak IRS, than a weak SRA. The Camaro is going to have to compete against more than just the Mustang...
I rather have a weak IRS, than a weak SRA. The Camaro is going to have to compete against more than just the Mustang...
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,401
Likes: 0
From: MA
Solid rear has one huge advantage over IRS I'm sure...cost savings! IRS is more complicated and therefore costs more to produce. I'm sure a big reason the vette cost so much more than the camaro was the suspension quality.
Originally Posted by Shooter_Jay
Solid rear has one huge advantage over IRS I'm sure...cost savings! IRS is more complicated and therefore costs more to produce. I'm sure a big reason the vette cost so much more than the camaro was the suspension quality.
The Corvette also has a transaxle, aluminum suspension parts, full fiberglass body and a targa top. but im sure that didnt add up to the sum of the car and it was only the Double wishbone suspension.
Originally Posted by Andros
The Corvette also has a transaxle, aluminum suspension parts, full fiberglass body and a targa top. but im sure that didnt add up to the sum of the car and it was only the Double wishbone suspension.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
Originally Posted by bww3588
if my memory serves me correct, in 2002, a base model camaro was around 25k
The price is the real fear right now. "Bogus B.S. it doesn't need" is an accurate description of the IRS. There is a very real possibility that the new Camaro will be waaaay too expensive; GM will count on selling it to boomer douches who have more money and nostalgia than sense. Said douches will appreciate the soft ride of the IRS on their candy asses and won't mind the bloated price tag so long as it looks pretty.
I sure hope that GM pulls a miracle out of their *** and somehow makes an IRS that doesn't add $3-5K to the price tag, will launch without wheelhop, and will stand up to 10 or 11 second quarter mile runs. But even if they do, the fact is that they could have done all of the above better with a solid rear.
Autocross people, don't kid yourselves: GM isn't using the IRS for your benefit. They're doing it for the rich boomer douchebags who must have a soft, cushy ride and who read Motortrend. And Motortrend will make fun of the car if it doesn't have IRS like the european fagmobiles that they worship.
Originally Posted by black_knight
You could order a Z/28 for around $21k in 99-2000. Not sure about the '02's.
The price is the real fear right now. "Bogus B.S. it doesn't need" is an accurate description of the IRS. There is a very real possibility that the new Camaro will be waaaay too expensive; GM will count on selling it to boomer douches who have more money and nostalgia than sense. Said douches will appreciate the soft ride of the IRS on their candy asses and won't mind the bloated price tag so long as it looks pretty.
I sure hope that GM pulls a miracle out of their *** and somehow makes an IRS that doesn't add $3-5K to the price tag, will launch without wheelhop, and will stand up to 10 or 11 second quarter mile runs. But even if they do, the fact is that they could have done all of the above better with a solid rear.
Autocross people, don't kid yourselves: GM isn't using the IRS for your benefit. They're doing it for the rich boomer douchebags who must have a soft, cushy ride and who read Motortrend. And Motortrend will make fun of the car if it doesn't have IRS like the european fagmobiles that they worship.
The price is the real fear right now. "Bogus B.S. it doesn't need" is an accurate description of the IRS. There is a very real possibility that the new Camaro will be waaaay too expensive; GM will count on selling it to boomer douches who have more money and nostalgia than sense. Said douches will appreciate the soft ride of the IRS on their candy asses and won't mind the bloated price tag so long as it looks pretty.
I sure hope that GM pulls a miracle out of their *** and somehow makes an IRS that doesn't add $3-5K to the price tag, will launch without wheelhop, and will stand up to 10 or 11 second quarter mile runs. But even if they do, the fact is that they could have done all of the above better with a solid rear.
Autocross people, don't kid yourselves: GM isn't using the IRS for your benefit. They're doing it for the rich boomer douchebags who must have a soft, cushy ride and who read Motortrend. And Motortrend will make fun of the car if it doesn't have IRS like the european fagmobiles that they worship.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,798
Likes: 16
From: St.Charles MO
Originally Posted by bww3588
whats it going to have to compete againts? the challenger? with SRA? the 10 bolt "works" for the average joe. the average buyer for the car. obviously in the past few years it has been proven that the 10 bolt is inadequate.
TECH Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,798
Likes: 16
From: St.Charles MO
Originally Posted by black_knight
I sure hope that GM pulls a miracle out of their *** and somehow makes an IRS that doesn't add $3-5K to the price tag, will launch without wheelhop, and will stand up to 10 or 11 second quarter mile runs. But even if they do, the fact is that they could have done all of the above better with a solid rear.
Autocross people, don't kid yourselves: GM isn't using the IRS for your benefit. They're doing it for the rich boomer douchebags who must have a soft, cushy ride and who read Motortrend. And Motortrend will make fun of the car if it doesn't have IRS like the european fagmobiles that they worship.
Originally Posted by JD_AMG
If they want a cushy ride, soft springs and shocks will provide that. I want a car that will turn on any kind of road, not just perfectly flat ones.
The person it's being used for is the kind that is
1) A candy *** who can't stand a bumpy ride
2) The kind who blindly accepts the "magazine mantra" of SRA=BAD; IRS=GOOD. Believe me, they aren't the kind who has a good understanding of the tech behind SRA vs IRS and has made an objective evaluation of which is better for his needs. They are the sheep who follow the mainstream magazine/european attitude of dismissing SRA out of hand.
TECH Junkie
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
From: its fucking cold
If you think that adding IRS to a mass produced vehicle will add $3-$5K to the sticker then you are just ******* retarded.
The IRS that the new camaro gets will be better than any solid axle option GM would actually consider using.
The IRS that the new camaro gets will be better than any solid axle option GM would actually consider using.
So true BlueSix.
I also love how everyone whines about an IRS being to weak, as though more than a tiny percentage of people are running around with 500+ hp tearing up drivetrains.
This just in: bolt ons and a cam isn't going to grenade an IRS.
This also in: IRS doesn't mean "soft ride" it means a more controlled ride, the potential for better ride quality is only a positive by product and depends much more on suspension tuning, shock/spring/roll bar packages, etc.
I also love how everyone whines about an IRS being to weak, as though more than a tiny percentage of people are running around with 500+ hp tearing up drivetrains.
This just in: bolt ons and a cam isn't going to grenade an IRS.
This also in: IRS doesn't mean "soft ride" it means a more controlled ride, the potential for better ride quality is only a positive by product and depends much more on suspension tuning, shock/spring/roll bar packages, etc.
Banned
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
People (especially mags and ricers) always claim that IRS is light years better than a solid axle setup in terms of handling, but I honestly can't imagine there is really that vast of a difference.
I mean if you had a 2 next gen Camaros, identical except for one having IRS and one with a solid axle, and you drove them back to back, how different would they really be?? Would the IRS equipped version really handle that much better, or would it just be more predictable around turns and ride nicer?? Is it really worth the tradeoff in straight line performance, weight, and cost to have a slight advantage in handling?? I don't know, I just think the whole IRS advantage is way blown out of proportion.
I mean if you had a 2 next gen Camaros, identical except for one having IRS and one with a solid axle, and you drove them back to back, how different would they really be?? Would the IRS equipped version really handle that much better, or would it just be more predictable around turns and ride nicer?? Is it really worth the tradeoff in straight line performance, weight, and cost to have a slight advantage in handling?? I don't know, I just think the whole IRS advantage is way blown out of proportion.
TECH Junkie
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
From: its fucking cold
No matter what GM were to use for a rear, SRA or IRS, it won't handle 500 hp from the factory. You are going to have to upgrade either way. A 12 bolt/9 inch swap for a 4th gen is still close to $3K using good parts, right? Reality check, if you were to get a solid rear in the 5th gen it'd be the same pos rear they used in the 4th gens, so you're still looking at an easy $3K to get a decent rear in the car. Guess what, you can build an IRS to handle similar levels of power for less. For less than $2500 i can have 3.90 gears, Kaaz LSD, and heavy duty CV shafts for the GTO IRS. It'll still handle all the power and hook up in the straight line and will be better than stock in the turns.
Originally Posted by BlueSix
No matter what GM were to use for a rear, SRA or IRS, it won't handle 500 hp from the factory.
Originally Posted by black_knight
If it's designed from the get-go to accept the LS7, which it is widely rumored to do, then I sure hope it will handle 500hp from the factory...
