May 5, 2015 update to the Chevrolet Camaro SS project car

Chevy Just Sent Us Two Killer Summer Interns

Chevy left one of their new Ultimate Track Camaro SSs in our care for the upcoming race season
Chevy was also kind enough to provide a matching Colorado pickup to tow their beast to and from the track.

Car manufacturers talk a good game when it comes to their “performance divisions,” but few can back it up with the actual hard parts and racing knowledge. Chevy Performance, however, talks the talk and walks the walk: They can actually provide the parts to turn your Camaro into a machine that can attack the track as well as the street.

Hot on the heels of the reintroduction of the Z/28 as a road-course-destroying monster, Chevy Performance has announced that they will happily sell you all the go-fast goodies that make this car a world-class track machine. They even brought a couple of demo cars—Z/28 clones built from Camaro SS models—to show their stuff to journalists on track after the SEMA show in Las Vegas last November.

Chevy has decided their Z/28 imposters were just too good not to share, so they left one in our care for the upcoming race season. We plan to wring it out at the track competing in NASA Time Trials and whatever else we can find.

Want to see exactly what this car consists of? Click here and scroll down to “Stage 3.”

The icing on the cake? Chevy was also kind enough to provide a matching Colorado pickup to tow their beast to and from the track. The bed is big enough to hold all the trophies we’ll be collecting.

Not a subscriber? You’re not reading the full story. Each magazine contains everything you’re missing and more. Subscribe to Grassroots Motorsports now.
Join Free Join our community to easily find more project updates.
Comments
View comments on the GRM forums
Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/5/15 2:50 p.m.

3908 lbs according to Chevy's website for an SS1 package normal base car. It might be heavier than the Colorado. They are damn impressive... like watching a 250lb stripper work the pole but I wish they would cut out about 750lbs before they spend anymore money on power or bigger anything. Bring lots of tires and brakes with you when you go. It's going to gobble them faster than an M5.

JohnyHachi6
JohnyHachi6 Dork
5/5/15 3:05 p.m.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: ...I wish they would cut out about 750lbs...

I wish they would cut 2000 lbs. I really miss light cars.

chiodos
chiodos Reader
5/5/15 3:06 p.m.

How much longer you think it will take for manufacturers to realize a 4000lb car is slower than a 3500lb (or less!) car?

Edit someone else is thinking the same.

I can hear them now "you know what would make our sports car even better? Heated leather 37 way adjustable seats, satnav, back up beepers and even more traction/stability control nannies!"

dean1484
dean1484 MegaDork
5/5/15 3:21 p.m.

You can not have the Camaro whooping it up on the Corvettes and thus it will never be made faster then it. Also I bet that 90 percent of the Camaros that are actually sold are going to be V6 cars with bloated option packages.

That said the first thing that they should work on reducing is the price. I was at a local Chevy dealer and they 15 or so of them on the lot with 4-5 V8 cars. All the V8 cars were listed over $50K and several well over $70k. Chevy needs to figure out how to make performance affordable again. Chevy always was the working mans car that when asked could still lay down the wood. The new Camaro can probably run with some of the best cars on the market but it has got far away from being affordable by the everyday driver.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/5/15 3:22 p.m.

In reply to JohnyHachi6:

Well, me too... but I was trying to be practical. A 3200lb car can have a lovely interior with all the bells/whistles, safety and all that stuff... and go a berkeleyload faster with the same engine. A 1900lb car really needs to be bare bones beyond what most people (except you and I ;)) consider reasonable.

I quite honestly can't figure out where all that weight could be coming from. What luxo crap did they add that a 2005 BMW E46 M3 didn't have? THey must have had to work to make it that heavy.

bearmtnmartin
bearmtnmartin Dork
5/5/15 3:52 p.m.

For perspective, my 1970 ford 4x4 weighs 3950. That's a really porky sports car.

singleslammer
singleslammer UltraDork
5/5/15 3:56 p.m.

My 1966 Galaxie convertible is 3800 lbs! That thing is 18 ft long.

Ian F
Ian F MegaDork
5/5/15 4:03 p.m.
chiodos wrote: I can hear them now "you know what would make our sports car sell even better? Heated leather 37 way adjustable seats, satnav, back up beepers and even more traction/stability control nannies!"

Fixed that for you.

D2W
D2W New Reader
5/5/15 4:05 p.m.

I have a 2011 SS Camaro. For a 3900 lb car it is ridiculously fast and corners on rails. If it only weighed 3000 lbs it would be scary fast. Why does it weigh so much? Frankly its a big car. IF it is sitting next to my 67, which weighs 3100, it is longer, wider and taller. And the inside seems smaller because of all the crap they stuff in there. The next generation is supposed to be built on a smaller platform so lets hope it weighs under 3400.

P.S. It will eat the 400 Hp 67's lunch all day long, and will easily get 24 mpg cruising at 75.

D2W
D2W New Reader
5/5/15 4:08 p.m.
Ian F wrote:
chiodos wrote: I can hear them now "you know what would make our sports car sell even better? Heated leather 37 way adjustable seats, satnav, back up beepers and even more traction/stability control nannies!"

Fixed that for you.

Unfortunately that is the truth

HiTempguy
HiTempguy UberDork
5/5/15 4:21 p.m.

Diesel Colorado??!

SyntheticBlinkerFluid
SyntheticBlinkerFluid UltimaDork
5/5/15 6:04 p.m.
HiTempguy wrote: Diesel Colorado??!

Not Yet

Swank Force One
Swank Force One MegaDork
5/5/15 6:07 p.m.

My personal metric rears its ugly head.

Heavier than my Cherokee? Not a sports car.

irish44j
irish44j PowerDork
5/5/15 6:36 p.m.

Driving to rallycross this weekend I was tailing Nick in his e28 5-series in traffic. For a while he was cruising next to a new Camaro on the highway, and it was amazing to see how the e28 looked like a freaking subcompact next to the Camaro. I knew they were big, but seeing them next to what is considered a good-sized sedan from 25 years ago really drove the point home.

I know they're heavy because they're big. What I don't understand is why they simply can't make the body smaller. It's not like the interior is roomy or big. It's not like you can't fit a V8 into a smaller car (hell, people fit them in Miatas). It almost seems like someone at GM said "hey, we want to make a new Camaro with 20" wheels, so can you guys make the car big enough so they won't look totally silly?"

wbjones
wbjones MegaDork
5/5/15 6:41 p.m.

get aussiesmg started on the interior of those monsters

jimbbski
jimbbski Dork
5/5/15 6:44 p.m.

Talking about how cars are bigger today. It hit me last year at a local cruise night/car show when I saw a early 90's FOX Mustang LX parked next to a late model Mustang GT. The FOX looked small next to the newer car yet I owned 3 of them and never felt like it was to small. Yeah, your not going to put 4 adults in the car and take a long trip but I don't think you would want to do that in the newer model either. And of course there is that weight thing. A V8 FOX weights 3100-3300 while the newer one is about 400-500 lbs heavier which compared to the Camaro doesn't look that bad.

DeadSkunk
DeadSkunk UltraDork
5/5/15 8:06 p.m.

Any new car looks porky when set side by side with it's ancestors. Park a 70s 911 next a current one, or an original Taurus and a current one, pickups,etc.,etc. With crash standards doors are thicker, resulting in a choice between a narrower interior, or a wider car. They're going with wider. GM won't be building a smaller Camaro, although they may try putting it on a diet , like the new F-150 did.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/5/15 8:08 p.m.

I kinda want to stuff the new one's running gear under a 71 RS with a tube chassis. So, you know, normal Chevy customer here

HiTempguy
HiTempguy UberDork
5/5/15 8:41 p.m.
SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote:
HiTempguy wrote: Diesel Colorado??!

Not Yet

Must be an aluminum trailer they are using, the Colorado is only rated to tow something like 6700lbs. Take off 3900lbs for the car, 2k lbs for a 18' steel trailer, and you have 800lbs of capacity. Throw a spare set of rims/tires (200lbs) two people (400lbs) and tools and you are lucky if you aren't over capacity. But I digress :P

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/5/15 8:47 p.m.

In reply to HiTempguy:

Or, put two 'Merica type Camaro owners in the cab and you got nothing left for tools and tires.

scottdownsouth
scottdownsouth Reader
5/5/15 8:54 p.m.

Chevy is still trying to figure out how Buick kicked there beloved corvettes' rear end back in 1987 ! See, we'll just make it heavier and then it'll be just like a GN !

HiTempguy
HiTempguy UberDork
5/5/15 8:56 p.m.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to HiTempguy: Or, put two 'Merica type Camaro owners in the cab and you got nothing left for tools and tires.

Merica type Camaro owners would never own this sissy-mobile, get real man. My stats are accurate, only wierdos from the PNW or from Florida would tow with this thing

T.J.
T.J. PowerDork
5/5/15 8:58 p.m.

Today when I picked up my rental car I had a choice of a Toyota Sienna or a Camaro convertible. I'm driving the Minivan. The current Camaro is way too large for what I think they are supposed to be that I simply have no interest in them no matter how fast they make them go. I have an E-150 if I want o drive a big vehicle. I thnk my WRX is a big car, but it looks small next to a lot of new cars.

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy PowerDork
5/5/15 8:58 p.m.

My mind is stuck on that 250# stripper working the pole......

DrBoost
DrBoost UltimaDork
5/5/15 8:58 p.m.
Swank Force One wrote: My personal metric rears its ugly head. Heavier than my Cherokee? Not a sports car.

Uglier than the new Cherokee? No thanks.
GM just has terrible stylists. GM styling is like typing in all caps, in red! Everything they do screams HEY LOOK AT ME! If they would have turned down the visual volume on the C7, it be a pretty car.

dean1484
dean1484 MegaDork
5/5/15 9:03 p.m.
Datsun310Guy wrote: My mind is stuck on that 250# stripper working the pole......

Envision 6'11" tall at 250# and the picture gets much better.

Type Q
Type Q Dork
5/5/15 10:16 p.m.

I thought the Camaro and the Dodge Challenger are huge because they built on full-size car platforms. GM and Chrysler don't have midsize rear drive platforms you can stuff a V8 into.

yamaha
yamaha MegaDork
5/6/15 1:27 a.m.
dean1484 wrote:
Datsun310Guy wrote: My mind is stuck on that 250# stripper working the pole......

Envision 6'11" tall at 250# and the picture gets much better.

Still, that'd need to be a load bearing I beam.....

Feedyurhed
Feedyurhed SuperDork
5/6/15 5:53 a.m.

What everyone else has already said. Too Porky. The Mustang, Challenger and Camaro are just too, too big for me no matter how fast they are. Also previously mentioned, they need to not just be lighter but far smaller. Like BRZ/FRS size which are 2800 (ish) lbs. Of course I am a MINI, Miata kind of guy so I am at the other end of the spectrum anyway. My first CRX was 1800 lbs. I realize safety items, electronic doo dads and such all add weight.

pushrod36
pushrod36 Reader
5/6/15 8:22 a.m.

Bottom line is that no one ever wants to advertise the "all new for 2016, smaller, less powerful, lower content Chevy Camaro!"

To build the car we are all thinking of they would have to come up with a seperate model and slot it below the Camaro. Fine by me, except that just like the Camaro isn't allowed to be faster than the Corvette, this new sports car would likely not be allowed to be faster than the Camaro.

aussiesmg
aussiesmg MegaDork
5/6/15 10:08 a.m.
wbjones wrote: get aussiesmg started on the interior of those monsters

Berk me, those Camaros are the opposite of a Tardis, damn thing needs a packed lunch to walk around, but has not enough room to carry said lunch inside.

JG Pasterjak
JG Pasterjak Production/Art Director
5/6/15 10:43 a.m.

They've made strides in the interiors. Headroom is still not what it probably should be, but the Z/28 seats and whatever other tweaks they've made give the thing lot more headroom.

Can't argue with the performance, either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdZELOESt3k&feature=youtu.be

wbjones
wbjones MegaDork
5/6/15 10:52 a.m.

Aussie had a convertible that didn't have enough room behind the front seats to store a package of water on the rear floorboards

Joe Gearin
Joe Gearin Associate Publisher
5/6/15 10:59 a.m.
DeadSkunk wrote: Any new car looks porky when set side by side with it's ancestors. Park a 70s 911 next a current one, or an original Taurus and a current one, pickups,etc.,etc. With crash standards doors are thicker, resulting in a choice between a narrower interior, or a wider car. They're going with wider. GM won't be building a smaller Camaro, although they may try putting it on a diet , like the new F-150 did.

You are mostly spot-on. However there are exceptions proving it can be done------ i.e.. BRZ-FRS isn't much larger than an AE86, and although it is heavier, it's still very reasonable for a modern car.

The new MX-5 is also similar in dimensions and weight as the original.

It can be done----it's just that automakers don't do it very often.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/6/15 11:10 a.m.
pushrod36 wrote: Bottom line is that no one ever wants to advertise the "all new for 2016, smaller, less powerful, lower content Chevy Camaro!" To build the car we are all thinking of they would have to come up with a seperate model and slot it below the Camaro. Fine by me, except that just like the Camaro isn't allowed to be faster than the Corvette, this new sports car would likely not be allowed to be faster than the Camaro.

What would be hard to sell about advertising a smaller but roomier, lighter, faster Camaro? Hell, call it the Vega for all I care

chiodos
chiodos Reader
5/6/15 11:27 a.m.

And with the impending "doom" of much higher mpgs to appease epa the only logical solution is drop weight but apparently automakers know not of science and their laws. A 3000lb camaro with a small v8 (dohc maybe turbo?) Would be faster than an ss but get over 30mpg. If a 6speed f body can get real close to 30 at +/-3600lbs why cant they top that? From what I remember the new regulations are astonomically high mpg edit 54.5 by 2025. But at our rate we will have lower mpg. Ever notice how a brand new prius gets worse mpg than a 25 year old honda crx hf?

MCarp22
MCarp22 Dork
5/6/15 12:11 p.m.
pushrod36 wrote: To build the car we are all thinking of they would have to come up with a seperate model and slot it below the Camaro.

Y'all didn't buy them last time around.

bgkast
bgkast UltraDork
5/6/15 12:28 p.m.

In reply to MCarp22:

I would have if they made more than 4 of them.

pushrod36
pushrod36 Reader
5/6/15 12:31 p.m.

In reply to MCarp22:

This captures my point perfectly. Smaller, lighter, different model, and not as fast as the Camaro (out of the box).

MCarp22
MCarp22 HalfDork
5/6/15 1:57 p.m.
bgkast wrote: In reply to MCarp22: I would have if they made more than 4 of them.

They made as many as there were Integra Type Rs, and people seemed to find / purchase those OK. shrugs

Tim Baxter
Tim Baxter PowerDork
5/6/15 2:02 p.m.
Type Q wrote: I thought the Camaro and the Dodge Challenger are huge because they built on full-size car platforms. GM and Chrysler don't have midsize rear drive platforms you can stuff a V8 into.

Seems to me THAT's the real problem. You'd have a better mid-size car, a better cop platform AND a better Camaro.

In a way, it's just like the 60s all over again, only this time there is no Nova or Falcon. So, first we need a Nova or Falcon. Then we get the good pony cars.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker
Giant Purple Snorklewacker MegaDork
5/6/15 2:09 p.m.

In reply to Tim Baxter:

Wasn't the G8 a mid size?

rcutclif
rcutclif HalfDork
5/6/15 3:04 p.m.
irish44j wrote: It almost seems like someone at GM said "hey, we want to make a new Camaro with 20" wheels, so can you guys make the car big enough so they won't look totally silly?"

I bet there's more truth than any of us want to admit.

However, for perspective (from wiki):

1 G Camaro: Wheelbase, 108, length 185, width 72.5

5 G Camaro: Wheelbase, 112, length 190, width 75.5

For fun (my challenge car, 1990 BMW 750iL): Wheelbase 116, length 198, width 72.6

So it IS big, but it always has been. It just LOOKS a lot bigger now.

wbjones
wbjones MegaDork
5/6/15 6:18 p.m.
MCarp22 wrote:
bgkast wrote: In reply to MCarp22: I would have if they made more than 4 of them.

They made as many as there were Integra Type Rs, and people seemed to find / purchase those OK. shrugs

well Gee … I'm guessing you don't see the difference in the 2

svxsti
svxsti New Reader
5/6/15 6:20 p.m.

Very interesting build, hope you guys can fit the FIA GT3 spec tires for maximum g's. DOT equivalents would be the Corsa System 335/30/20x12.5 at all 4s, only $700 a tire and would be my first priority.

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner MegaDork
5/6/15 6:22 p.m.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
pushrod36 wrote: Bottom line is that no one ever wants to advertise the "all new for 2016, smaller, less powerful, lower content Chevy Camaro!" To build the car we are all thinking of they would have to come up with a seperate model and slot it below the Camaro. Fine by me, except that just like the Camaro isn't allowed to be faster than the Corvette, this new sports car would likely not be allowed to be faster than the Camaro.

What would be hard to sell about advertising a smaller but roomier, lighter, faster Camaro? Hell, call it the Vega for all I care

The new Miata is smaller, lighter and less powerful than the car it replaces, and the internet Miata community is going monkeyfeces. Imagine poor Chevy trying to do that with a car for which power is a fundamental part of the identity.

svxsti
svxsti New Reader
5/6/15 6:41 p.m.

Cockpit Windscreen and door windows in Makrolon® Carbon inner door panel Large racing display replacing original display

Body Aluminium/Steel with ABS Body parts, racing front fenders

Suspension REITER Engineering double wishbone front and rear suspension, anti-roll bar, anti-dive and anti squat, racing shocks (Öhlins) and springs, race front and rear uprights based on GT1

ABS Teves Racing ABS System

Power transmission Rear

Brakes Ventilated racing discs, Racing brake system

Steering type Electric-Power-assisted steering, rack and pinion

Rear spoiler High down force racing wing

Front spoiler Front splitter with integral double under floor diffusers, splitter covers complete frontal under floor

Under body Flat under floor with rear diffuser

Cotton
Cotton UltraDork
5/6/15 7:03 p.m.
MCarp22 wrote:
pushrod36 wrote: To build the car we are all thinking of they would have to come up with a seperate model and slot it below the Camaro.
Y'all didn't buy them last time around.

I did. Ours is black.

Cotton
Cotton UltraDork
5/6/15 7:13 p.m.
MCarp22 wrote:
bgkast wrote: In reply to MCarp22: I would have if they made more than 4 of them.

They made as many as there were Integra Type Rs, and people seemed to find / purchase those OK. shrugs

He didn't mean no one bought them period. He meant no one on this site bought them, well except for a couple of us, which is also probably true for the type r. GM had zero problems selling the solstice coupes, all 1152 of them, around half of those being GXPs.

Kreb
Kreb UltraDork
5/6/15 7:56 p.m.

Wow, what a love-fest! If the GM exec whose idea this was is reading this board he's probably going "Hey, did we make that offer in writing?"

As much as I subscribe to the smaller/lighter is better school, I'm sure that a lot of product designers at the car manufacturers also look at it like: "We understand vehicle dynamics so much better than we used to, so that we can make pigs dance rather than waddle. If most of our clientele values the solid thunk of a heavy, well-padded door more than the tinny click of a light one, why should we bother making the minority happy whilst running off the majority?"

That's hard logic to refute (but I'll try). Pleasing the hard-core enthusiast serves a number of functions:

-While the driver of an overstuffed american pseudo-sports car may not want to own its flyweight brother, he/she still wants to be associated with a sporty marque; and if some work isn't put into actual braggable performance accomplishments, sooner or later word will get out that the brand just isn't serious about performance and will lose any cachet it may have with the young and the stylish.

-Engineers that can design a winning bona-fide performance car make pretty good engineers for anything you do - see how Honda used to rotate their engineers through their race program. (Back when Hondas were interesting)

-It's a world market. If your cars are designed only to appeal to middle America, that's putting your eggs in a single basket.

-Gas milleage

wheels777
wheels777 Dork
5/7/15 4:31 a.m.

I am looking forward to what you guys do with the Camaro. I have driven a few and really like them. You can really throw them around.

91RSImpulse
91RSImpulse New Reader
5/12/15 12:08 p.m.

You have to remember the next Camaro is based on the ATS Cadillac platform... which is lighter/smaller and stiffer than the current Camaro platform. The LT4 V8 has already been promised by GM that it is not going away...

randoman5
randoman5 New Reader
6/11/15 12:12 p.m.

There are quite a few reasons this car weighs what it weighs. First of all it's based on a sedan. If it weren't it wouldn't likely exist in the first place. If you don't recall the Camaro died back in 2004 of natural causes. It was a gamble to bring it back and as a result it's not a dedicated platform. Secondly cars (all cars) are much stiffer than they used to be. They make your 90s 4000 pound car look like gumby. This is for safety and for handling. The third is styling. They wanted this car to have the proportions of the first gen and in order to do that on the sedan platform it had to be extra large.

I'm glad these cars exist and they're excellent performers. With the power and grip these cars have they'd eat a lot of the members' dedicated race cars for lunch on a track. I drove one and found it to be too big for my personal tastes, but almost all new cars are heavier than old ones and there are reasons for that that make sense to manufacturers and to most of the people who buy them.

Jeff
Jeff SuperDork
6/11/15 4:49 p.m.

I always chuckle when this group tries to give advice to the automakers on what to make. I've bought exactly 2 new cars in my life. Pretty sure I won't be buying new anytime soon. Why would an automaker listen to me?

Have to admit, I kind of like the big beast. But as GPS pointed out, I don't want to feed it tires and brakes. I'll admire from a distance.

racerfink
racerfink SuperDork
6/11/15 7:33 p.m.

Some of y'all seem to forget what happened to the Miata over the years.

svxsti
svxsti New Reader
6/12/15 7:09 a.m.

To get me to buy a new car from GM it would have to have a NASCAR shape, with the NASCAR 15 inch steel wheels and brakes, and a carbureted V8, in a mass produced chassis...probably a pickup lol.

mistanfo
mistanfo UltraDork
6/12/15 8:38 p.m.

I would have, but my head didn't fit... No Gurney Bump option that I saw :(

Sponsored by

GRM Ad Dept

Our Preferred Partners
pw3ZmrkhNGNYsSMgGLxOx8gbIkxqQKeVlTzq8stGirS1RfCSw0CS9iPapJbTKYW7