Gt 5.0 vs 2017 Camaro 1LE

bluebeastsrt said:

You chevy boys are to hard on the pill. Even a broke clock is right twice a day.

Click to expand...

Now that was funny.

Looks like Ford is doing things right this time. Motortrend caught a possible GT350R mule with a front camouflage being tested against a six gen zl1!

Seceda91 said:

I remember watching the Lighting lap videos and the 2017 Camaro 1LE posting a 3:04 lap time ... people starting dogging how it best the GT with PP in 2015 with a 3:05 lap time ... in the real world, it can't hold a candle to a Mustang GT.

Click to expand...

Seceda91 said:

What da hail happened to my thread!?! Haha

Click to expand...

You done been hijacked! lol

C&D's yearly LL is fun to watch, but there is little doubt 99.9% of Mustang owners will never road race their car (and maybe 2-3% might make a lap or two at the drag strip).

Regarding testing in general, I took issue with TFL over their lap times of a Camaro SS vs a non PP S550 GT, where the skinny tired steed was trounced (SS had Summer tires, GT with A/S). They claimed it was fair because neither car had an optional handling package, but I quickly reminded them Ford offered a stand alone 20" wheel option that came with w/Summer tires.

The take away is:

1) professional testers like the big 3 journals are highly accurate, but often don't reflect actual owner usage
2) private "testers/reviewers" should be taken with a grain, as they're mostly just for entertainment

thePill said:

I wouldn't buy any Camaro EXCEPT this 1LE. It is the only thing that has gone somewhat right since release.

Click to expand...

This just in... I saw thePill driving a new 1LE with a big smile on his face.

...and, many of you forget that even the 2015 SS 1LE was demoted to FS from AS in May 2016's Fastrack.

So... just because Camaro fans think their 1LE deserves to be in Boss 302/GT350 classes, doesn't mean it actually does.

As far as engineering goes? The 5th Gens structure, although heavy, was very, very rigid for what it was. It could handle the z28 and ZL1... this platform? Caddy had to apply reinforcement to the A pillar/B-C Pillar for the ATS-V Coupe, why not Camaro?

bluebeastsrt said:

You chevy boys are to hard on the pill. Even a broke clock is right twice a day.

Click to expand...

Of course I am just making a joke about it. I didn't point out things where the Pill was right. I'm sure he predicted slow sales for the 6th gen and it certainly isn't selling well. He makes a lot of predictions so he is certainly going to be right every once in a while.

It's the enthusiasm/confidence with which he makes his predictions/statements that I find entertaining. It's the main reason I come to this site honestly.

DETLTU said:

Of course I am just making a joke about it. I didn't point out things where the Pill was right. I'm sure he predicted slow sales for the 6th gen and it certainly isn't selling well. He makes a lot of predictions so he is certainly going to be right every once in a while.

It's the enthusiasm/confidence with which he makes his predictions/statements that I find entertaining. It's the main reason I come to this site honestly.

Click to expand...

Whoa now, the sales prediction was the only prediction made. The MSRP details and the initial equipment/weights reported on changed. I reported the change to 110.7 inches while most believed it to be the ATS's short version. I informed everyone about their intent on using 13.79 inch rotors all around and was laughed at... yet they reduced the rotor size even more. Once I knew they reduced the size from 13.79 to now 13.6/13.3, I should have known things had changed. The MSRP target was a window and it ended up right in the middle. The GT's MSRP was reported here (by thePill) and, the intended lightweighting mas moved to the GT350 and S650... the $32,995 MSRP should have told me that.

The Camaro's weight reappeared on the 1LE and, if you look at the Camaro's platform, you can see why. There is a lot missing and that's just to the naked eye. We discussed the fact that the Camaro was still very much a Sedan... you can still see the rear door opening. The 11 sub-frame group system is very, very cheesy...

The A10 running too hot in testing then not showing up on the premier ZL1LE makes you kinda wonder yeah? I don't need them to go public, I already knew not to purchase a 6th Gen. You can see them reducing the bumper to help airflow, hell, the GT4 removes the bumper altogether. A much needed modification on the Camaro...

I reported the ZL1 1LE merger last year and reported the cancellation of the z28. None of that is a prediction, it is simply information that was subject to change BUT, very little did.

We were specific about the Mustang refresh in 2018, about the GT350 and GT500's...


Yeah, in retrospect, thePill has been correct faaaaaaaaaaaar more than he has been wrong. Even the times the information did change (GT and SS curb weights), I can show you where the weight went and why it went there. People click the links because the information provided is usually very, very close to what is going on. All the time on this site and others, I've discovered one thing... people do not understand automobiles and are typically blinded by loyalty. When it was S197 vs. 5th Gen, they were very close but still very unique. This generation belongs to the Mustang and it looks like it will continue to grow into a Sports Car.

There is absolutely nothing Chevy can do about the GT350 except sending a Corvette. The 500 is coming and the ZL1 could actually be mid-level fodder if the KR ends up being what I think it is.

All that aside, like the 2013-2015 1LE, the 2017 1LE is being classed in AS per the request of owners/fans. That is wonderful... but uneventful. With the 2018 coming, FS will be lost.

Sasuketr said:

Looks like Ford is doing things right this time. Motortrend caught a possible GT350R mule with a front camouflage being tested against a six gen zl1!

Click to expand...

What do you mean this time?:frusty:

The mustang killed the camaro in 03.
The mustang was still built when the camaro stopped.
07 GT500 vs what?
People said the 12 zl1 would rein. It was neck and neck 1320 vs the 11 gt500. Then the 13 gt500 destroyed the zl1.
Media and gm said the zl1 could take the 13 on track and showed amateur drivers at ll as evidence.
Yet 3 of 4 magazines tested the 13 gt500 faster than the zl1 on track, including my with Randy driving at LS.
Van then tested the gt500 on homestead with an owner owned zl1. After 2 laps and heatsoak the zl1 was done on track.
Z28 shows up only to offer 20k buck rebate because people did not want it.
GT350/R shows up with amateur and pro drivers alike comparing it to the best(top 5) drivers cars in the world.
GT350 sells for more than z28 started at.
GT350R spellings for double the price.
Porsche factory drivers have GT350R because it's so good!

Sounds to me like Ford has been doing things right for the last 25 years!:cheers::hail:

thePill said:

The A10 running too hot in testing then not showing up on the premier ZL1LE makes you kinda wonder yeah? Nope. Only you seem to keep bringing this point up when it's been pointed out to you at least 5 times that the 1LE package is only manual and always has been. But as I predicted in multiple previous posts, you brought it up again and continue to beat a dead horse.

I reported the ZL1 1LE merger last year and reported the cancellation of the z28. None of that is a prediction, it is simply information that was subject to change BUT, very little did. lol... Subject to change. Nice cop-out for when/if you're wrong again.

There is absolutely nothing Chevy can do about the GT350 except sending a Corvette. The 500 is coming and the ZL1 could actually be mid-level fodder if the KR ends up being what I think it is. Except the ZL1 beats the standard GT350.

Click to expand...

I know I'm talking to a brick wall. But it's still impressive how much theSituation ignores and repeats. :shrug:

thePill said:

In response to this:

Yes Norm, I do... however, NVH and rigidity go hand in hand.

Click to expand...

Sort of. It's not a linear relationship.

thePill said:

So far Norm, manufacturers are still seeing returns over 35,000 on a 98 inch wheelbase.

Click to expand...

I get that it's numerically possible to show improvement. But my question was about the significance of diminishing-returns-level stiffness increases. Not just the theoretical presence of a stiffness improvement where you'd be reaching for upper-branch fruit in order to get it. Remember that this still is for a regular production car primarily intended for street driving with a bit of a nod given to being drivable at and slightly beyond 1g grip.

When vehicles get as long as the Corvette/Mustang (107), they shouldn't be below 30,000 while supporting 400+hp.

Click to expand...

You do realize that wheelbase is irrelevant when the stiffness is expressed in terms of torque divided by rotation . . . all it implies is that the longer the WB the greater the effective torsional R needs to be.

thePill said:

...think of it this way.
In SCCA AS, you put a cage in a car w/ a torsional rigidity of 20,000-25,000 you get a 30,000lbs result.

You put a similar cage in an S550 at 30,000lbs and it just makes them 100lbs heavier.

Some vehicle (S197 and 5th/6th Gens) use a cage to their advantage, to the C7, S550 and 991's, it becomes additional weight gain from a safety feature.

Click to expand...

Any structure added in parallel will increase the total stiffness if you can get it to share in the loading. Of course, adding X amount of stiffness in parallel with a soft stiffness will show greater improvement than the same amount of stiffness added in parallel with a more rigid stiffness. But it won't fail to improve stiffness if it's done up right.

What you're telling me is that those cars you mentioned that have used a cage to some clear stiffness advantage inherently have a 'soft' region that the cage could cover for - and that the cars you're claiming don't gain any stiffness haven't really had their cages optimized (which I find rather difficult to believe). I suppose it's possible that competition cage rules sometimes get in the way of building the most structurally efficient and closest-fitting cage. But all this is way beyond what's required for the original structural design of the platform. Racers have greater freedom here.


Norm

Childs Play said:

I know I'm talking to a brick wall. But it's still impressive how much theSituation ignores and repeats. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Sorry, that just isn't the case here. The A10 and LT4 combo has EXTREME difficulty keeping cool in Camaro configuration. This was talked about in detail here looooong ago. The A10 kept the RPMs in optimal range which caused overheating/heatsoak.

Subject to change yes, but not much has. Listen, I'm not on the board of directors so, yeah, things can and will change. The curb weights changed and that's about it. thePill was THE MOST accurate source for Pony Car info period and a few of you have a hard time with that. Like it or not, pretty much everything on this topic nowadays is what we have discussed previously. I think it is absolutely hilarious what Chevy did to the Camaro's structure to avoid criticism. As thePill stated upon release, they literally neutered the SS and base cars. The structure it ended up with is laughable... even in 2005 I would have question the decision on deleting the inner structure to save weight.

And again, I ask you, why is this car more expensive that the GT? The 2017 1LE should have been $39,995 but boy did they screw the pooch.

It boiled down to this:

Did they want the SS to be 3780-3820lbs and closer to $39,000? Or, save that for the 1LE, increasing the MSRP to $45,000. No telling what structure was added until we see one bare but we can say it was over 85lbs.





Don't be upset, thePill never tries to mislead readers. It is the sole reason he is in high demand. It's true the Camaro was originally a better car, it was true the SCCA placed it in FS after initial testing and it is true that the Camaro has fallen flat in many regards.

Besides, How many people on the internet can give specific details about obscure topics and walk readers into the truth? How many people can say "See you in 30 Days" and the spy photos roll out on week 3? As soon as I have the smoking gun, guess where I'm putting that info?


...and then we likely won't hear from those handful of people anymore. To be honest, the Camaro could be gone in as little as 18 months. They will speak on the topic again in August/September and as of now, it's not looking good.

Norm Peterson said:

Sort of. It's not a linear relationship.




I get that it's numerically possible to show improvement. But my question was about the significance of diminishing-returns-level stiffness increases. Not just the theoretical presence of a stiffness improvement where you'd be reaching for upper-branch fruit in order to get it. Remember that this still is for a regular production car primarily intended for street driving with a bit of a nod given to being drivable at and slightly beyond 1g grip.



You do realize that wheelbase is irrelevant when the stiffness is expressed in terms of torque divided by rotation . . . all it implies is that the longer the WB the greater the effective torsional R needs to be.



Any structure added in parallel will increase the total stiffness if you can get it to share in the loading. Of course, adding X amount of stiffness in parallel with a soft stiffness will show greater improvement than the same amount of stiffness added in parallel with a more rigid stiffness. But it won't fail to improve stiffness if it's done up right.

What you're telling me is that those cars you mentioned that have used a cage to some clear stiffness advantage inherently have a 'soft' region that the cage could cover for - and that the cars you're claiming don't gain any stiffness haven't really had their cages optimized (which I find rather difficult to believe). I suppose it's possible that competition cage rules sometimes get in the way of building the most structurally efficient and closest-fitting cage. But all this is way beyond what's required for the original structural design of the platform. Racers have greater freedom here.


Norm

Click to expand...

Oh trust me, almost every car equipped with a cage see improvement. But, with these new S550's, they get far less Benefit as the S197 did. When they are outfitted with cages, the S197 and S550 can be very close.

As for the diminished returns, you speak of lateral Gs. Well, a trick Chevy used on the SS was to reduce its overall potential to acquire grip, therefore chassis flex would go unnoticed. Once they put tires on it, they had to add in the convertibles sub-frame connections and may have included some inner structure.

To be completely honest Norm, the Camaro's Alpha is a mess. The ATS's platform is great, but the Camaro is essentially the CTS floor with an ATS front section, that's how they got 111 inches. The CTS's IRS links were extended as well, that is terrible.

The 1LE simply became what originally the SS was intended to be. It came down to weight (3780-3820lbs) and MSRP (38,995+) and, after putting proper tire/rotor on a Camaro, they discovered it needed ZL1/Vert type reinforcement.

Long story short, the 6th Gen is only about 70% of what the S550 is while the ATS is nearly 95% around 29,000. In fact, examine the improvements made to the ATS-V and ask yourself:

Are those NVH improvements or for rigidity? The large A-Pillar brace suggest that even the TTV6 was too heavy for the ATS cradle... so why didn't the Camaro get this?

We already know why... and as soon as we can pester GM into coughing up the report, we will plaster it all over the Internet. To be honest, the rear opening on the Camaro where the rear door should be, SHOULD have intrusion beams present.

richtor said:

What do you mean this time?:frusty:

The mustang killed the camaro in 03.
The mustang was still built when the camaro stopped.
07 GT500 vs what?
People said the 12 zl1 would rein. It was neck and neck 1320 vs the 11 gt500. Then the 13 gt500 destroyed the zl1.
Media and gm said the zl1 could take the 13 on track and showed amateur drivers at ll as evidence.
Yet 3 of 4 magazines tested the 13 gt500 faster than the zl1 on track, including my with Randy driving at LS.
Van then tested the gt500 on homestead with an owner owned zl1. After 2 laps and heatsoak the zl1 was done on track.
Z28 shows up only to offer 20k buck rebate because people did not want it.
GT350/R shows up with amateur and pro drivers alike comparing it to the best(top 5) drivers cars in the world.
GT350 sells for more than z28 started at.
GT350R spellings for double the price.
Porsche factory drivers have GT350R because it's so good!

Sounds to me like Ford has been doing things right for the last 25 years!:cheers::hail:

Click to expand...

Ford have failed to test the GTPP against the old gen 1le camaro! Instead they benchmarked it against their own Boss 302 and supposedly Porsches (:frusty Yeah Right!!! They totally ignored the main competition, even though they had the chance. Now seeing how good the six gen camaro is and i m sure they don't want to get humiliated, they are actually on the right track this time! Lessons learned is a really good thing!

Dont get hang up on the z28 vs gt350, Ford is making ton of money with the regular mustang gt's and ecoboosts. Because of those sales they have money to invest on the gt350's and gt500's. Its their foundation. If you have a better foundation, you will have a better structure! Don't forget that.

Sasuketr said:

Ford have failed to test the GTPP against the old gen 1le camaro! Instead they benchmarked it against their own Boss 302 and supposedly Porsches (:frusty Yeah Right!!! They totally ignored the main competition, even though they had the chance. Now seeing how good the six gen camaro is and i m sure they don't want to get humiliated, they are actually on the right track this time! Lessons learned is a really good thing!

Click to expand...

Considering the relative sales, I think Ford kind of knew exactly where to benchmark and where they wanted to land on relative performance/$.

Also, benchmarking DOESN'T mean they'll exceed the benchmark's performance marks, it just means they're looking at it for competition.

Dont get hang up on the z28 vs gt350, Ford is making ton of money with the regular mustang gt's and ecoboosts. Because of those sales they have money to invest on the gt350's and gt500's. Its their foundation. If you have a better foundation, you will have a better structure! Don't forget that.

Click to expand...

The GT350 also seems to be selling about as well as Ford wanted it to.