Bing! Give that man a cigar. There have been so many cars given bad reps because people don't know how to take care of a car.

ExGF: I don't know why my paint is dull and nasty, I hate this car!
Me: You've owned it for 4 years, and not once did you wax it or take care of it properly.

 

Regular maintenance is a must....I'm with this guy^^^

A lot of people won't even doing anything to it if their car doesn't tell them to.

 

And the ******* Cobalt SS ran a faster time. So what? I'm pretty sure his "twisties" comment was a piece of dry humor, as have the past 20 or so pages of this retard-fest in this thread.

 

just like someone who hasnt read the entire thread and is YAPPING HIS ******* MOUTH WITH NO GOD DAMN CLUE to what the **** has been going on in this thread. i mentioned handling because people seem to call the 5.0 and the 5th gen trash because they only run low 13's stock. yet its easily forgotten then they both have interiors, brakes and chassis that would make a 4th gen camaro look ancient. ( which is fine seeing that a 4th gen is like 18yrs old). being able to handle isnt a ricer thing. maybe in 1995 performance meant only being able to do one thing well, in 2010 you have to be able to do everything well. no matter how many 4th gens beat either a 5th gen or a 5.0 i doubt their owners would sell their cars for a a 4th gen.

for what its worth my 3850lb 4 door sedan did a 8:19 back in 2003/2004 on the ring. the cobalt ss did 8:22 and thats an econo fwd car. so while a 8:20 is good for a camaro in the grand scheme of life it could have done alot better.



granted what i posted above is going to inflame some people. that wasnt the intent but people who dive into a thread and have no idea whats going on drives me nuts. so sorry to all the 4th gen owners who read that and now have sand in their panties.

 

you should be made a moderator, no an admin for that amazingly intelligent insight!

well you obviously dont know the whole stories. 98-00 got a got a bigger cam than 01-02s, making the power differences in all 4th gens virtually a nothing. an ls6 block with ls6 intake isnt an oddball, theres THOUSANDS of cars just like it.

just to remind you, no one cares about your ls6 block!!!!!

im on 12 pages with 40 per page

 

a man who is well informed.

 

Blah blah blah blah blah... Thats what this thread has turned into... wait thats how it has been since the very first post. Opinions are like ********... everyone has one and some are stinkier than others

 

No it didnt. I ran close, but not faster. It did probably outrun all the mustangs though.

I read the thread and you went for the ricer "the new mustang can out handle the camaro" route. And if not, thats how you came off. You made it sound like the camaro was uncapable of performing other than in the 1/4 mile.

He wasnt informed he was wrong. Its not hard to look **** up on the intertubez. It takes all of 10 seconds.

 

Considering I was off by 2 tenths of a second, that's pretty ******* sad for a car that has almost 200hp more, bigger brakes, and an LS3 with a T-56. 2 tenths on a track that's some 13 miles is pretty disgraceful for a "world beating Camaro with an engine touched by God himself."

 

Actually, the Cobalt is 2.85 seconds slower.
The Camaro's time is respectable considering it wasn't built to be a track car by any means.
The Cobalt was built to be the quickest FWD car, which it was for a little bit.
It's still quicker than a B5 RS4, E46 M3, every EVO, and only 2 seconds slower than a base C5.

It's no track star, but it does alright considering its crappy brakes, massive weight, and soft suspension.

 

Why the hell does everyone always have to argue and bitch in these damn threads???

 

Since when does 8:22 - 8:20 = 2.85 seconds? Unless I'm missing something here.......

 

Your right. LOL. I guess all the cars the cobalt is faster than are sad too. Including pretty much every mustang ever.

You guys find complaints about everything. Are guys truely mad that the new camaro isnt getting waxed by the new mustang? I mean seriously look how bitter this last post is.

 

You just knew this thread was gonna blow up as soon as you saw a couple of days ago.

 

This is why I came to the dark side baby. LS1 ftw. Let the excuses from the ford boys begin!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'm sorry but you are wrong. While you are correct in that 98-00's recieved a slightly larger cam it does not offset the higher HP output in 01-02's. You make it sound like the larger cams in the 98-00's make up for the LS6 intake that the 01-02's got. Dyno after dyno, the 01-02's will put down bigger numbers. They also recieved better heads, (241's).

Also, the larger cam shaft is miniscule. 1998-2000 camshaft profile is 209/198 @ .500. The 2001-2002 camshaft profile is 207/196 @ .500. What you failed to mention is that the 2001-2002 camshafts are on a tighter lobe @ 116 instead of the lazy 98-00 LSA's 119.5.

If you still think "all 4th gen's power difference is virtually a nothing," then I give up.

 

All I hear on svt performance is waaaaahhhhhhh. One guy said that the mustang would rape the SS in every other category. Well the mustang has dam near a full decade of technology on the camaro. Give credit where credit is due. Sure the mustang will be a little faster after the break in period but is it really going to be that dramatic? They said the SS laid down 330rwhp right? What about 412hp and 390rwtq for the stang? Give the camaro props. LS1 FTW!

 

Hoooolllllyyyy **** this thread is long

 

^^^^ Hell yea this **** is long

 

Dunno where you got your #'s but this is from smokemup.com

1998 - 2000 Fbody
202/210 int/exh @ 0.05" duration
0.496" / 0.496" int/exh lift
116 LSA

2001 - 2002 Fbody
197/207 int/exh @ 0.05" duration
0.467" / 0.479" int/exh lift
116 LSA

And as for heads: "The 241's are die casted and the 853's are sand casted" As for performance some people say 241's flow better and are worth 5-10hp. But no one has any proof of any of this if you can find some hard #'s please post them up.