2016 Camaro

[TTC6]

No information, only speculation(aka hopes and dreams).

Alpha chassis
LT1
7spd stick

Sponsored

 

[Todd15Fastback]

Keep denying reality, pal. The information is already available.

Please do share.

 

[Mustangchief]

I have never once said the Mustang sucks. All what I said is not to blindly trash the camaro before it has even been announced. This forum is full of sour Mustang owners, that can't hear anything other than the mustang is an oh Jesus car.

I have to say you haven't read many threads. This site is full of happy 2015 Mustang OWNERS, where are the sour ones? Yes, this is a MUSTANG site, not Motor Trend or any other "All Vehicle site" Yes, we debate the competition, even throw out friendly trash talk, but remember this is Mustang6G, not Camaro, Porsche, Corvette, BMW 6G. It seams unreasonable in my basic logic to fail to understand why you want Mustang enthusiasts to even consider other vehicles. If you want to proselyte readers to another car, prepare for harsh criticism.

 

[1320']

Keep denying reality, pal. The information is already available.

Not for the Camaro it isn't. Saying the Camaro "it's going to weigh more" doesn't mean much when the car already is 3900lbs, heck the Challenger R/T is 4,082lbs curb weight, or just under 4,000 with a 1/4 tank and no spare in the trunk (aka race weight) and that's a "fat pig". You could shave 100lbs off of it and it'd be "less" than the current car and still be at 3800lbs, aka 100 lbs more than the Mustang.

Camaro fans are all in a twitter at the idea of some featherweight Camaro, Mustangers were in the same boat too when people speculated on a 3,500lb GT...then the Mustang gained weight in the end.

 

[thePill]

...and to piggy back off of 1320, when your a fat guy, you have the potential to say "I lost weight".

The Mustangs platform is missing quite a lot of metal the S197 had. We discussed this to death on the Chassis thread. There were people here posting a 200-300lbs gain overall. I could tell them from pictures alone that the S550 had a smaller, lighter shell. Even still, with bigger everything, standard everything and IRS, it was a great effort. The most accurate depiction of how much was gained in the V6's... 26lbs was gained I believe... With what was included and added, that's not too bad for a coupe today.

Now, the little Alpha needs to support a convertible and a FI variant down the road. I'm not even sure if a V8 can fit into the ATS without major changes so,... we might get a CTS/ATS platform. That could explain the pinched butt cheeks the Camo'd 6th Gen had. It was beyond Coke bottle.

I'm still not sure the 6th Gen will use a 109.3 inch WB and may be closer to the 5th Gens 112.3. Regardless, my figures are solely based on a 109 inch WB. I am having a difficult time getting a V8 Camaro under 3900lbs. I still need ATS Coupe weights but, I'm figuring 3700lbs on the dot for the ATSV, when in fact it may be closer to 3750lbs. The CTS platform is just far too heavy to use but, it is an example of what the Alpha goes through when it becomes larger and is able to accept bigger, more powerful drivetrains. For a 114 inch WB, it's pretty light, right now, until it offers a coupe and wagon.

At first glance, the Alpha is just a regular platform. At second glance, it appears to be just that. Nothing really special or beyond what anyone else is doing. Even if I use a a far reaching engine weight of the LF3 of 500lbs, a LT1 Camaro is still projected to be heavier than a Mustang.

Here is a serious question, how do they fit a V8 into the Alpha's structure while keeping the engine behind the front axle? It cannot be accomplished in its current ATS configuration. I have no idea how much weight will be gained here, I assume the front of the Camaro Alpha will need to be a CTS Alpha. Right now, the Alpha ATS can't make a V8 fit, it's the main reason the Alpha is weight competitive. Most other body styles are excluded as well, another weight gain most vehicles go through. The Camaro is the by product of a CTS and ATS and none of those two platforms offer what a Camaro needs to be as is. The CTS is too large and the ATS can't handle a V8. My intuition tells me a CTS/ATS hybrid is required to support a Camaro. That is another big weight gain if it happens over the ATSV too. Also keep in mind, these ATSV weights we are hoping for are based on a V product. This is an expensive base we are hoping Chevy builds. If the Alpha ATS-V was actually lightweight, I would say there is a good chance of a 3800lbs SS. It is not a 3500-3600lbs coupe like promised. The 2 door got heavier... I imagine the 6th Gen SS will experience gain being the by product.

 

[thePill]

Not showing up in Detroit will be a bad sign, it may push an unveiling to late 2015/early 2016. Sales of the 5th Gen cannot sustain this pace. It's damaging to their reputation to offer a fire sale on limited special edition cars. The Camaro has depreciated overall in one fell swoop.

As soon as we have word on the official ATS-V, we can start getting a better picture of the weight. I highly doubt the SS will go as far as the ATS-V on weight loss in order to keep the MSRP down. If the ATS-V is in the 3700-3800lbs weight range already, it doesn't look good for a Camaro. Weight needs added for the Vert and ZL1 type models. A big issue is the length of the LT1 vs. the LF3. There may need to be an increase in WB in order to fit a V8.

Compare the V6 ATS Coupe to the Mustang V6, the ATS is over 3600lbs as it sits. The V6 Mustang starts at 3526lbs. Even then, there is 75lbs between the two at a minimum (some say the ATS Coupe weighed 3650lbs). The Mustang is GT350 and Convertible ready and, will not need to support any other body styles. There could very well be over 120lbs between a Mustang V6 and an ATS V6 Coupe...

When a Camaro takes on V8 weight, there is no way they are able to keep the gain low.

Is any of this getting through to you guys? A V6 ATS Coupe is nearly the same exact weight as a Mustang GT PP. Hope all you want, reality seldom sustains real hope.

The only remedy I can think of was to design the ATS around an Inline 6. This would leave plenty of depth for a V8 like BMW and most others that use a Global Platform.

 

[thaext]

Not showing up in Detroit will be a bad sign, it may push an unveiling to late 2015/early 2016. Sales of the 5th Gen cannot sustain this pace. It's damaging to their reputation to offer a fire sale on limited special edition cars. The Camaro has depreciated overall in one fell swoop.

As soon as we have word on the official ATS-V, we can start getting a better picture of the weight. I highly doubt the SS will go as far as the ATS-V on weight loss in order to keep the MSRP down. If the ATS-V is in the 3700-3800lbs weight range already, it doesn't look good for a Camaro. Weight needs added for the Vert and ZL1 type models. A big issue is the length of the LT1 vs. the LF3. There may need to be an increase in WB in order to fit a V8.

Compare the V6 ATS Coupe to the Mustang V6, the ATS is over 3600lbs as it sits. The V6 Mustang starts at 3526lbs. Even then, there is 75lbs between the two at a minimum (some say the ATS Coupe weighed 3650lbs). The Mustang is GT350 and Convertible ready and, will not need to support any other body styles. There could very well be over 120lbs between a Mustang V6 and an ATS V6 Coupe...

When a Camaro takes on V8 weight, there is no way they are able to keep the gain low.

Is any of this getting through to you guys? A V6 ATS Coupe is nearly the same exact weight as a Mustang GT PP. Hope all you want, reality seldom sustains real hope.

The only remedy I can think of was to design the ATS around an Inline 6. This would leave plenty of depth for a V8 like BMW and most others that use a Global Platform.

Nobody is going to listen nor take you serious when you have proclaimed that you are in a one man war against Chevy, Camaro and GM. Did Chevy kill your family, to have such a vitriolic hate against them?

 

[thePill]

Nobody is going to listen nor take you serious when you have proclaimed that you are in a one man war against Chevy, Camaro and GM. Did Chevy kill your family, to have such a vitriolic hate against them?

Anyone that has ever clicked on my thread has determined that already. Did Chevy kill my family? No, but they have killed others very recently. I am a very small, private investor, my endless references to the GM investor site should have tipped that off.

It's aweful when a product kills someone... This is one of those times Chevy (nor GM) didn't care... initially.

In my opinion, the whole company and everyone involved should be punished.

My hatered stems from the past business plan GM used prior to bailout. I was under the impression changes were made. It's my money and, I invested in rebuilding as much I could. I have made my money back for certain... From what I have seen this year, they don't deserve the customers trust. That's pretty much the same message I have been conveying. Now, I wish that this way forward would continue this year as well, investors getting paid...

The poor decision to pluck the Camaro from production in 2002 kinda screwed a lot of people. None of that really matters though, people typically care about what I am saying just based on views and comments alone and not why I am saying it. Hundreds of thousands of people want to read my thread... About 5 times more that people that viewed the z28's Ring run. Why should it annoy you so much? Because people keep reading? Doesn't that get under your skin that any person with an Internet connection can put a product on the spot? Just some random guy... reporting his best version of the truth.

In the near future, the Camaro will be taken down a similar path the other cars have. It's the dreaded "stay faithful" BS they start preaching over on C5. I have looked at their proposed weight loss... Where are they getting this weight from?

While we are on the subject, I'd like to call out a few faithful. One being Fenwick and his assumption that the 5th Gen would sell strong and NEVER dip as low as the Chally and NEVER need a refresh. Uh huh... Not only has that happened (right where I said it would, 4th MY). Now it's 20% off on a refreshed and completely new, high performance model... that they claimed were all sold in the first place. Don't talk sales Fenwick, especially Pony Car sales. Stil the Camaro is half a million sales behind the S197... Aww....

The whole 1LE gang... The 1LE did horribly in 2013-2014 season until Todd bailed on the Camaro and returned to the Corvette for Chevy. Did you hear what I said??? He bailed on his manufactures ride to race another (better) platform. The 5.0 GT's devowered the 1LE... There was no contest other than the one in their minds.

The poor, poor ZL1 people... 11's all day, simulated comparisons and all the "greatest handling Camaro of all time". I'd leave the GT500 out of this, it delivered a killing blow that November, with a 6-6-2. Years later, Ford releases a video supporting my claims at Nurburgring... No one believed that I would personally attend the event. 2 and a 1/2 years later... It ran a 7:39, 2 seconds faster than a ZL1... Damn... Another of my silent victories here was my reported ZL1 weight 3-4 months before it pop up. Blammo!!! They were hoping for a 3950lbs... WTF??? For the numbers I gave, I was banned because people were reading an about to discover that it was pretty accurate. They laughed at a 600+ HP GT500 didn't they? I haven't heard a chuckle since.

The z28 people... This was worse than the ZL1. Was it heavy? Nah, not really, really heavy but unusable for track or racing. If there was any weight left on it to come off, it would fair better. Secondly, the price... Now we see z28's for $24,000 off sticker... Most of the 2014 z28 owners were robbed. Forget that you can't race it and the equipment on it makes it difficult to down grade too... Let's just look at the MSRP, on 2014 z28's they said were sold... Roger???

If Chevy doesn't want bad media, don't lie, cheat and steal... I didn't have much to help but I did it anyway. I would have given Dodge/Chrysler a look too if I had the cash. I'm glad I didn't since they sold the company anyway. I didn't give my measley share to watch a company cut corners, cheat at every corner or deceive customers... not at all.

Innovation doesn't exist at Chevy anymore and it is spreading to other GM brands. This huge lawsuit will get right into the budget of every car/truck developed. You will begin to see cut backs in Customer Service, Advertisment and eventually performance vehicles... to recoup the cost of this never ending payout for Ignition Switches.

Anyway...

The Mustang gained 175lbs from V6 to 5.0 this year, about 120lbs last year. A similar strategy may work from the V6 ATS Coupe... There is a big weight difference between LS3 and LT1 drivetrains. The previous Camaro gained how much from V6 to LS3? Wasn't it close to 200lbs last Gen? Gonna be hard to beat that difference with an LT1 now. Your looking at 3800lbs working from a straight 3600 for a V6 ATS Coupe. I need some guidance here because my numbers show gains in every component... There are some losses in the CTS-V's drive train, but expensive ones in the LT4's transmission (20lbs).

I also cannot predict a wheelbase increase over the ATS although it seems like the only option to house a V8. It is an issue that was just brought up a week or so ago by someone more important than me.

Technically, this 3800lbs car would be an LT1 equipped ATS Coupe if it were possible. Just adding in the 80lbs between the LF3 and LT1. That is just engine alone... I can accumulate a lot of weight on the ATS V6 to compensate weight of the brakes, suspension, drive train, drive axle, transmission and front suspension... It's all heavier than the LS3 equipped 2015 Camaro... and that is working from 3600lbs on the dot. Not a pound over...

233lbs separated the V6 and SS, this is weight from the component differences only. As of right now, an LT1 equipped 5th Gen would gain weight in every area. This 233lbs also doesn't include new mandatory crap. Can we assume a V8 ATS Coupe would weigh 3833lbs. That is kinda set in stone. I imagine the base V6 would have more standard features inside but, that is interior and other options. I can get 200lbs in equipment weight easy. This is based on a 3600lbs ATS Coupe. A platform that supports a Vert, Coupe, V8 and FI V8 will start slightly heavier. A V6 Camaro should actually encroach the Mustangs 3705lbs just based on a 3600lbs Coupe. I'm sorry, I just can't get the numbers to work for an honest sub 3800lbs 6th Gen. If I start figuring in structural reinforcement needed, I can't get the weight below 3900lbs.

If Caddy comes out and says "the ATS Coupe V6 is officially 3650+ lbs" like I am hearing then, a sub 3900lbs car becomes nearly impossible just based on LS3 drive train weight gains over the LF3. We start pushing 4000lbs with an LT1.

Someone please help me here. I can't say anything will be lost in the structure. The previous V6 S197 was 100lbs lighter than this so call lightweight sedan/coupe. To me, it isn't really light at all. Sure it's larger but, it's still not lightweight.

If I equip a V6 with all the SS equipment like brakes, wheels and everything else, I can lose 50lbs. That is still almost 200lbs added onto the ATS Coupe for an LS3 (180lbs). Not including any structural support weight into component weight. I have no idea what that will be. It was over 100lbs previously but, I feel most of that is engineered into the base cars... I am hoping so. The Mustang is ready for all the above but the ATS is not... Maybe the equipment weight increases in the V6 drastically, like it gets all the SS stuff standard. Maybe the next SS doesn't use brakes and wheels the same size as the 2015. If they can bring that 233lbs down to 150lbs and the ATS starts at 3600 even, it's still poise to be heavier in the utmost best case scenario. Reality is, the interior garb is bring weight up considerably. The C7 gained 199lbs when equally equipped with a C6. It will be a difficult road ahead just given what we know about the ATS Coupe. This is a $38-54,000 price point. The Camaro is in the $28-38,000 level. You won't see any weight savings the Caddy hasn't got.

 

[thePill]

No??? No one wants to talk about weight anymore? Makes a sub-3800lbs 6th Gen seem like a very, very difficult task... Even in multiple best case scenarios...

A little birdie told me the ATS-V has a little less than 50lbs of additional structure reinforcement over the ATS Coupe to accommodate the extra engine weight. That is pretty good news in my opinion.

Another 50lbs (or so they said) was taken on in performance equipment. The interior packed on "22.5lbs"... So "they" say... 130lbs over the 3600lbs they say the ATS Coupe weighs puts the ATS-V at 3730lbs. Or, the ATS-V weighs 3700lbs and the ATS Coupe is 3550... Since the M4 is 3550, I'm thinking the ATS Coupe will be closer to 3650lbs. (Edit: the 50 or so pounds between the Coupe and Sedan would not be included in the ATS-V weight difference.) The 130lbs included a 60lbs increase for the Twin Turbo LF3. I used only 60lbs because the heaviest I have heard an LF3 weighed was 405lbs and the lightest TT weight I heard was 465lbs. It keeps my math lower.

Ya' never know though, maybe they pulled it off. With the amount of CF in the M4, it will be difficult to beat that. Although, the M4's real curb was closer to 3300lbs, 3550 is the US Curb Weight. It's also very possible there are pluses and minuses on the answers I was given. I was told they had 4 ATS coupes and not a single one of them were under 3700lbs. One was 3900lbs and over $50,000 they said...

Here is something else my GM birdie talked about... When the LT1 6th Gen comes out, it will have a Z51 Package. I thought that would be pretty competitive... After he discussed MRC weight gain, he jumped right into the Camaro's next GT PP equivalent. The Camaro Z51 will gain similar weight the Corvette did once optioned. That's 150lbs folks... The C7 was 3298lbs base and is 3450lbs in Z51 form.

What are we potentially dealing with here Camaro fans? A Recaro'd GT PP was weighed on here at 3722lbs. That's as good as we are gonna get (other than losing 50-70lbs the Performance Pack adds, EU says 3640-3660lbs)... I don't think the Premium was optioned and I'm pretty sure it had no options. We are talking about a very heavy Camaro Z51 man... There is NO WAY the Camaro can stay weight competitive pack per pack, model for model.

...and here is another kick in the ass...

Currently, the GT PP has been trailing the mighty z28 in many, many comparisons. In fact, the GT PP is very, very competitive with the C7 so far in the few tracks they were run at. Accurate? Never, most likely different drivers, days, weather... but... the pictures getting clear. It's funny how they believe the new Mustang isn't faster than the S197. That was in an actual statement from GM... I can't wait to see how the "not gonna be heavier" statement plays out.

There is a battle on many fronts here, one-lap wonder lap times only appease a handful. There is an MSRP battle that the 6th Gen Camaro has already lost. A base 6th Gen LT1 looks to start at $39k if it came out today, who knows 20 months from now. The output battle has been a win usually, mostly because weight was an issue and more wasn't needed. Torque will always be 20 or so lower on the peak, DI should benefit a DOHC more, that gap may close come next Gen Coyote, just as HP has now exceeded the LS series output.

I got a run down of how the Alpha scales. Apparently, pretty much everything in the structure can be changed... as in, scaled up or down, they just need a point (or model) to scale to and wha-la!, it can be swapped out. It's suppose to be a seriously flexible platform. This could be a way they can minimize the weight gain when sharing a Convertible, Sedan, Coupe, FI cars, Long Wheelbase, Short Wheelbase and, even potentially a Wagon in the CTS's case.

However, while that may sound great, there are some drawbacks. First off, Cost... Not just in production but in R&D. The 5th Gen Camaro got caught in a similar cycle of a constant state of R&D. For whatever reason, the initial structure couldn't support Convertible models or Hi-Output HALO cars. Cost and weight increased over the next 5 years, now to the point of pushing $40,000 and 4000lbs.

Another issue with Platform Flexibility is Chassis Stability. Not just in the terms of structure strength but right down to the research and developement. You see, the Mustang uses a dedicate platform and is an engine, transmission and IRS parent. The 6th Gen is using a barrowed platform with a barrowed engine, transmission, IFS/IRS and some interior components. The Alpha started life as an ATS and grew into a CTS a year or so afterwards. Now we see the 2 Door Coupe and Camaro... gaining a little bit of pork along the way. It's not as bad as the Zeta/Sigma but, it's not a weight gain immune approach to platform design either.

So, praises be hailed to its flexibility. While it attempts to reduced material and production cost long term, it will wreak havoc on a car (or cars) in a performance competitive field with multiple body styles. This would only be short term though, the first 3-4 years maybe similar to the 5th Gens lifespan. However, I feel with each new variation, the platform gets spread too thin.

 

[newmoon]

Without a doubt Chevy has had a very bad year. With Z/28s collecting dust on dealer lots, the long awaited Z06 introduction being completely overshadowed by the Hellcat, Z06 issues with overheating after a single lap, and now Chevy screwing all the prior owners with 20% incentives to bail out their dust collecting inventory. Add to this numerous vehicle recalls and you get the picture.

Ford hasn’t done very well either with the luke warm reception to the revised mustang, and again the Hellcat stealing the thunder of the new GT350. If there was a winner this past year it is Dodge in a big way with the ScatPacks and Hellcats.

I do however still hold out hope in regards to the 6th gen, but that is a wait and see.

 

[thePill]

As of now, the ATS-V Coupe is sitting on a sub-optimal wheelbase:track. Currently, the 109.3 WB uses a laughable 60.5/61.4 track FR/RR (60.3/61.7 standard coupe). There is an issue right off bat, it is far too skinny at a 1.80/1.78:1 FR/RR ratio... That isn't great at all really... The other issue is the LT1. It will need over 62 inches of track to fit an LT1. The CTS-V uses a 62.1 FR track so, 62 is all you really need. That's 2 inches wider than the ATS-V Alpha.

The 5th Gen had a better footprint to be honest. I wouldn't recommend Chevy going any skinnier than 62" in the front.

In order to compete with the Mustang's superior footprint, it would need to return to the 5th Gens 63.7 track. Or, like so many other GM Performance cars, use a wider front track vs. a rear. This allows you to do more with less tire in the front. We can sort of confirm that with the initial spy pics from a birds eye view. Maybe a 63.7 in the front and a 63/62.x in the rear.

In other words, the ATS Alpha will need to increase the platform width by 2-4 inches. 2-4 inches is a big deal, that's wider than a CTS-V by far. Both Caddy's use a non-performance oriented WB/T ratio... The Camaro will not follow suit and should strive for a 1.65:1 to 1.72:1

The Corvette sits on a 1.69 and 1.73:1, pretty close to the Mustang's 1.72/1.65:1. The 5th Gen uses a sub-optimal 112.3x63.7 FR and RR or a 1.76:1. It is rather large and, as you can see, not a very good footprint.


I expect the 6th Gen's track to increase to 63.7 or 64.x in front (4 inches wider than the ATS-V). I would also expect the rear to increase using the popular small rear Chevy uses. So, maybe a 63 inch rear track. That would give the Camaro a 1.71:1 in the front and a 1.73:1 in the rear. Much better than a 5th Gen, still very much sub-optimal but, not as good as the Mustang and Corvette.

Increasing the width and track of a vehicle usually has a weight penalty nearly 3 times that of WB and overall length.

 

[MrPoopALot]

Are you saying that the Mustang GT PP will outperform an ATS-V on a track since they weigh about the same and have about the same power? Additionally, you're saying the ratio is much better on the Mustang so looks like you're thinking I'll be a better handling car as well.

ATS-V will beat the GT around the track with less tire, but you won't care since they are in different price ranges.

Have you thought about educating GM on doing better with the platforms since you are much more educated on the subject than they are?

For your information, there is no reason to place "but" before a comma.

 

[thePill]

Are you saying that the Mustang GT PP will outperform an ATS-V on a track since they weigh about the same and have about the same power? Additionally, you're saying the ratio is much better on the Mustang so looks like you're thinking I'll be a better handling car as well.

ATS-V will beat the GT around the track with less tire, but you won't care since they are in different price ranges.

Have you thought about educating GM on doing better with the platforms since you are much more educated on the subject than they are?

For your information, there is no reason to place "but" before a comma.

Oh yes, an ATS-V will most likely handle a GT... but it ends there... The GT is not the Mustang maximum potential.... The ATS-V is...
The GT is a volume car, no need comparing it to an almost one off model. What if the GTTP is close though? With less tire, maybe more weight (might not be true)? If the GTTP just whooped a Boss 302, this GTTP may be faster than the GM paid Motor Trend would have you believe. Especially if others are finding that Motor Trend is full of sh!t.

It isn't just GM doing this stupidity and claiming it is a "Performance" vehicle. Look at the M4...

Right now, the Mustang and Corvette are the only one using an attractive foot print. That is just plain Geometry and Physics.

...and I put my "but" where ever I want.

Geometry is geometry, the Camaro is already at a disadvantage if using a 109x64/63. The Alpha will not require as much tire as the 5th Gen, just as long as some other spec's don't get out of hand.

Edit: Gm is more concerned about style (failing though) and less about pure performance oriented vehicles as time goes on. Sorry, a basic foot print is the first thing you learn in Chassis Geo. GM only cares in Corvette applications. It is the only true race bred car they build ya' know... and it's a good one.

I know you don't know Chassis, most people don't. This optimal set up is clearly evident in the Mustang and Corvette. It is true the Mustang has a slightly better footprint than the Corvette, on paper. However, the Mustang needs to contend with issues the Corvette does not, speaking weight, tire and roll center to name a few.

Before you start crying, try to understand what is being discussed instead of trying to sell Camaro's and Caddy's here. The ATS was built with a luxury WB to accommodate a mid-sized sedan/coupe. 109 is close to the M4's 110 and is exactly where it needed to be. It's maximum potential is great compared to the 3/4 series and the M's. the Camaro gets a hand me down platform that was not initially equipped to handle a sports car/coupe WB/T set up. Any vehicle using an optimal foot print vs. (what the Camaro is using) will see an advantage at every turn.

The Camaro will need more tire, even at equal weight and roll center, to perform as the Mustang does. So far, everything the ATS and CTS is built for is more stability at high speeds and, more streamline aero (stability and MPG). It isn't a bad thing, it just isn't intially designed for performance, FACT. There certainly isn't anything wrong with it, it is just at a disadvantage when the Mustang is around... and I highly doubt we have seen the S550's full potential in performance OR, weight reduction as of yet. Even still, IF the Camaro's track can increase to accommodate something more optimal, they WILL need to go that way... and put on massive weight. Even still, at 64/63, the 109 WB will still be sub-optimal. It would need major weight reduction and tire to compensate on the Mustang's stage.. and yes, it is the Mustang's stage. It would need a 65/65 66/63 to actually be optimal vs. the Mustang and Corvette. However, that will see a Camaro shoot above 4000lbs and would require a 77/78 inch wide vehicle overall... Nearly 5 inches thicker than the ATS.

The ATS is only lightweight because it sits on a ***goty 61/60 inch track over a 109 inch wheelbase. The Camaro won't be caught dead there.

Anyone in Motorsport will tell you a footprint is the most important aspect building a car. Chevy just chose NOT to go that way and I refuse to accept it as "great or competitive". I didn't build the car, GM did, I'm not going to alter the laws of physics and dismiss geometry to save your feelings. Man up...

Anyway, prove me wrong. I want to hear how a sub-optimal foot print has more potential than an optimal one. I want to see my education in this area challenged and won.

Hopefully it isn't as dumb as the Co-efficient of Friction argument because that was the dumbest thing I've heard another human say.


Edit: Looks like Camaro5 has pissed Chaz off so we might not get any more awesome renders. I was hoping he would continue so we could see some tweeking and maybe where the car was headed.

I can tell you right now, the cooling on this thing will be awful, the 2014 was awful... this looks just as bad or worse. Lots of air for the AC condenser, meaning any FI cars will demand an AC delete forever and ever and ever and ever...

I never understood this concept Chevy prefers to hinder the Camaro with. The ATS has a great cooling design, this crap??? Is crap... The Wedge design has got to go, the 6th Gen Camaro is a slab-sided monster... with barn doors for entry and exit.

See what the Mustang is doing here? It's cooling the engine... The Corvette is having issue with cooling and its no wonder they are going mid engine. The Camaro needs a 70 inspired front fascia bad...

Look... soooo nice...

Look at that roof!!!

...Now look at this one :(

I would rather roll over in a Camaro that is for sure...

Wait... The ATS is only engineered to hold an 18" wheel. The Camaro is going up to 20's again no doubt.

A 19/20 is likely too... That is big weight, big standard brakes compared to the ATS. More drivetrain weight from the flywheel back.

The 6th Gen Camaro has a Musclecar presence, it is not going the way the Mustang did.'

It's like comparing a Sports Coupe to a Sedan-Based Musclecar.... Oh wait!!!

We are comparing a Sports Coupe to a Sedan-Based Musclecar....

 

[dragonacc]

Man, I hope the new Camaro looks better without all the camo... It looks like a brick with wheels.

 

[1320']

The Camaro faithful are being kept above water by people saying that isn't the actual car shape..how there could easily be carbon fiber panels concealing the real shape..

yea...okay boys.

Sponsored