2010 camaro

[Jerboa113]

well, not to be stereotypical, but the majority of camaro owners in the past are more concerned about linear acceleration times than handling.

[ShrinerMonkey]

Exactly. Corners have never been muscle car's strong points.

[Mblock66]

YEah but this one will hold .90g's with an IRS. It is going to handle very well and go fast.

 

The time at the ring was a joke. They have said in other write ups they didn't push the car and it wasn't even tuned. It will probably run like 7:45-7:55 is my guess.

 

The new Cobalt SS is a beast though. They are running 13.2's in the 1/4 mile with just a tune. Go over to the Cobalt forum, that car can MOVE.

[Jerboa113]

no thanks. if I wanted a 4cyl FWD I have lots and lots and LOTS of choices. Even if it is a super-compact, the cobalt could turn feces into diamonds and it wouldn't interest me.

 

I thought they canned the cobalt SS tho like a year or 2 ago due to low sales?

 

I agree with you, the numbers for a well tuned IRS RWD performance car like that should be better than captain understeer of the good ship FWD.

[NY2005GT]

Cobalt was on a Hiatus to re-tool to make it turbo instead of Supercharged It's back now. It has the Solstice GXP/Sky redline engine now. I am sure once the full production camaro goes to the ring it will set a much better time, probably within 5-7 seconds of the Z06.

 

Edit: off topic you can see the Cobalt SS here http://www.chevrolet.com/cobalt/

[chenc544]

I thought they canned the cobalt SS tho like a year or 2 ago due to low sales?

 

You are probably thinking of the old super charged version. The new SS has the Ecotech turbo-4 making 260 hp.

[chenc544]

well, not to be stereotypical, but the majority of camaro owners in the past are more concerned about linear acceleration times than handling.

 

Exactly. Corners have never been muscle car's strong points.

 

Then why bother do any testing at the Ring?

[NY2005GT]

The ring can help iron out chassis tuning for the street. My guess is it was either a pre-production car, which I heard the one they took there originally was a suspension test mule and didn't even have a fully tuned engine, or they were dry running one of the first production cars and didn't want to chance a crash. What was the date on the run?

[NY2005GT]

well, not to be stereotypical, but the majority of camaro owners in the past are more concerned about linear acceleration times than handling.

 

Lol, turns mess up our mullets. I think it's funny how you all think because of the live rear axle on the old cars that they don't handle well. WS6 did .88G's and 67 through the slalom and the Firehawk with the bilstein suspension did .91 and 68 (stats from motortrend). Man that is pretty piss poor handling. What was the LGT again? .79 and 64? With IRS and AWD? How did that happen?

[camber]

To get it back on topic...

The all new Chevrolet Camaro SS laps the Ring in... Wait for it... Wait for it...

8:20... Just for comparison, Chevy's own Cobal SS did it in 8:22.

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/22/chevrolet-camaro-ss-laps-the-ring-in-8-20/

 

 

Isn't that 30s off the CTS-V 'ring time?

 

FWIW, there's a video floating around where Dale Ehardt(sp?) Jr. is lapping the new Camaro SS in Austrailia. He complained that there was way too much body roll.

[Mblock66]

I had a 1997 Z28 with the stock suspension and it handled way better then my legacy does with tein H techs and front and rear adj sways.

 

With very minor tweaking of the old F bodies those cars drove circles around everything. From the factory they could be a little loose though. The new one should be fantastic. With good rubber and sways that thing might hold close to a G

[NY2005GT]

Actually the best handling of the bunch was probably the wimpy third gen's with the front springs seperate from the struts. Good way to get killed changing them (ever see a coil spring go flying?) but the cars handled great, just short about 200HP...well except the 89TTA

[Mblock66]

Isn't that 30s off the CTS-V 'ring time?

 

FWIW, there's a video floating around where Dale Ehardt(sp?) Jr. is lapping the new Camaro SS in Austrailia. He complained that there was way too much body roll.

 

 

Yeah that is exactly why they had him in it. They asked him to test the car and drive the piss out of it in Austrailia for real world feedback so they can tweak and design the car.

[camber]

Yeah that is exactly why they had him in it. They asked him to test the car and drive the piss out of it in Austrailia for real world feedback so they can tweak and design the car.

 

 

Ummm... I sure hope they have that figured out by now. That video was part of introduction launch...

 

The car is supposed to be on sale in the first quarter of 2009. Production is going to start in a few months in Oshawa.

[Jerboa113]

Lol, turns mess up our mullets. I think it's funny how you all think because of the live rear axle on the old cars that they don't handle well. WS6 did .88G's and 67 through the slalom and the Firehawk with the bilstein suspension did .91 and 68 (stats from motortrend). Man that is pretty piss poor handling. What was the LGT again? .79 and 64? With IRS and AWD? How did that happen?

 

you're the one pulling stereotypes here, not me. Whats the largest sport among classic and vintage autos? Drag Racing.

 

I'm not saying that its stupid or that its wrong. I'm a huge fan of drag racing, I'm just making a point that by in large the American musclecar movement has been more about linear acceleration than about handling.

 

I have driven quite a few vintage vehicles and they all handle rather poorly. Thats not to say ALL solid rear axle vehicles handle poorly. Anything with enough money can be made to do just about anything you want.

[SubLo]

The CTS-V is Supercharged while the Camaro SS is not. Big power difference there.

[camber]

The CTS-V is Supercharged while the Camaro SS is not. Big power difference there.

 

 

About 130 hp difference but the Camaro SS is 200 lbs lighter. Still,doesn't explain 30s difference, even if the Camaro driver wasn't driving 10/10ths.

[chenc544]

It would be interesting to see what the '04-'07 CTS-V ran the Ring at. That one has a 400 hp 6.0L LS2 which is much closer to the LS3 in the SS.

[NY2005GT]

 

I have driven quite a few vintage vehicles and they all handle rather poorly. Thats not to say ALL solid rear axle vehicles handle poorly. Anything with enough money can be made to do just about anything you want.

 

I guess that would make sense in a vintage car, those Model t's had alot of body roll . Good thing there were no improvements on solid axle cars in the last 50 years or ignorant statements like that would be void......anyway moving on.

 

I was beating around on GM insider and there is anote up there from Lutz the car should be back at the ring in March in full production trim for another run. I agree even spotting the CTS that much more power it shouldn't be more then 10 seconds behind it at most, probably even closer then that.

[Jerboa113]

someones got their asshole hat on.

 

wtf is the purpose of this hatred? ignorant comments? i'm sorry I havent driven every car ever made.. I never said they haven't made improvements on anything. In fact if you look at my statement I made it very clear that this was NOT a sweeping generalization direct at all solid axle vehicles. My LGT is the first vehicle I have owned that is NOT a solid rear axle vehicle.

[IwannaSportSedan]

Car companies will make whatever car is profitable.

 

Mass produced, low cost(ie. little or no profit), high performance cars, in a slow economy with high gas prices aren't the best for business.

 

No, but they also lose enthusiast customers if they don't cash-flow some resources from high profit vehicles to cover low profit vehicles.

 

Car companies don't just make one model for that very reason. Otherwise Corvette, GT-R, and lots of performance cars would never get off the drawing board, and everyone would try to sell carbon copy camrys, since they seem to sell the best.

 

And it is also a function of profitability to meet government regulations, rather than responding to customer demands, which is not government's function in a free market economy.

 

Gas prices are more quickly cyclical than car design. It is foolishness to let a quickly changing situation completely determine the whole product line.

 

It was the opposite with SUVs. Affordable, or even cheap gas in the 90s gave rise to a singular focus on SUVs, and government regulatory oversight on them was less than cars, which re-inforced that singular focus.

 

Now all of the sudden, they find themselves completely unprepared for quick market changes. IF they were somehow to convert completely to economy cars, then the market changes again, and this record price oil bubble were to burst, and bring the crude price back down to ~60$, just above the current *real cost* of production of a barrel of crude, then all of the sudden people want nicer, more comfortable cars than econoboxes, then the auto makers are left behind the 8 ball again.

 

A balanced, quality, reasonable, diversified lineup is the way to weather market changes. You would diversify your investments to protect your fiscal position, why should a car company not diversify to protect their commercial position?

[05GT Guru]

someones got their asshole hat on.

 

wtf is the purpose of this hatred? ignorant comments? i'm sorry I havent driven every car ever made.. I never said they haven't made improvements on anything. In fact if you look at my statement I made it very clear that this was NOT a sweeping generalization direct at all solid axle vehicles. My LGT is the first vehicle I have owned that is NOT a solid rear axle vehicle.

 

Its fine that you havent driven every car ever. But everyone on this forum always says live axle cars handle like shit. But when you actually look at the test results the 98-02 ls1 cars had better handling even with live axle and RWD. They car them straight line race cars, what kidna car does that make the legacy if it can take it on twisties and straights?

[Jerboa113]

you know what.. screw the both of you.. I never said live axle cars handle like shit, I never said the LGT had perfect handling or was the best damn car in the world.. you're putting damn words in my f*cking mouth and I'm DONE with it..

 

*un f*cking subscribe*

[IwannaSportSedan]

Its fine that you havent driven every car ever. But everyone on this forum always says live axle cars handle like shit. But when you actually look at the test results the 98-02 ls1 cars had better handling even with live axle and RWD. They car them straight line race cars, what kidna car does that make the legacy if it can take it on twisties and straights?

 

What the hell does breakneck speed and outright horsepower have to do with handling?

 

I am one who doesn't appreciate a live axle in a performance car, but I NEVER have said they handle like "shit".

 

I have said that IRS handles better, ESPECIALLY in the real world, than a live axle can, and it is because of physics.

 

So now all of the sudden, Legacy is crap because someone in an F-body with a death wish can go faster with at least 30% more power?

 

I suppose my Miata is crap too, because it just isn't very fast at all. Only ~140hp... I am sure a clapped out F-body with bad shocks, but with twice the power is probably outright faster in almost any situation, including "twisties."

 

Faster does not equal better, it is just faster, even if it is barely under control, and much more susceptible to loss of traction and control.

 

Some people may not be fans of live axle suspensions. Like Me. I've had live-axle cars and a truck, and a FWD car, and now independent suspension AWD and RWD cars. I know how they work, first hand, it isn't just conjecture.

 

REGARDLESS of power, independent suspensions handle better, more consistently, and with much higher tolerance of road imperfections.

 

Some other people seem to think that live axles are wonderful, and just as good, without factoring OUT other considerations, like engine power, which has nothing to do with critical analysis of suspension mechanics.

 

Funny, but there is only one RWD/AWD car with a live axle left. Mustang, and it was admittedly done (admitted by Ford engineers on the Mustang design team) to appease drag racers, and save money. Neither one of those considerations are street handling.

 

And I don't see any of the other IRS equipped cars being converted over to IRS, besides the Mustang Cobra, specifically FOR drag racing. On a smooth, straight track.

 

A live axle can be made to be acceptable, and decent. engine power can overshadow the suspension advantage that IRS cars have. That doesn't make live axle better.

 

It will be interesting to see people start comparing Challenger and Camaro to Mustang, where the playing field of weight, and engine power becomes a lot flatter, and then we'll see how the live axle compares to GM and Chrysler's IRS cars on REAL streets.

 

Considering that I don't want a muscle car, that is about the ONLY thing I am looking forward to hearing about considering those three cars. I'd rather own a number of used Porsches, an MR2 SW20, or an FD RX7, than those three hulks. I'd rather drive something more than 15 years old and properly sporty, than something new that weighs two tons.

[05GT Guru]

you know what.. screw the both of you.. I never said live axle cars handle like shit, I never said the LGT had perfect handling or was the best damn car in the world.. you're putting damn words in my f*cking mouth and I'm DONE with it..

 

*un f*cking subscribe*

 

Woah woah, clam down, i never said darkfox has told me the f-body handles like crap, did I? All i said is I have spoken about the F-body on this website often and almost everytime i do someone says they handle like crap and the legacy would run circles around them. Never said it was you. I never said the legacy was crap it does some things well, but now after owning one for a while im thinking its time to move on.