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.
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.
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.
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.....
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.
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.
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.
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
Aussie had a convertible that didn't have enough room behind the front seats to store a package of water on the rear floorboards
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.
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
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?
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.
In reply to MCarp22:
I would have if they made more than 4 of them. 
In reply to MCarp22:
This captures my point perfectly. Smaller, lighter, different model, and not as fast as the Camaro (out of the box).
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
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.
In reply to Tim Baxter:
Wasn't the G8 a mid size?
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
You'll need to log in to post.
