Dimensional difference between 2016 Camaro & Mustang

[thePill]

51mpg daily polluter

Online mags should have weights on Friday or Saturday do we'll see quickly who's right. Problem is I don't see magazines testing a base 1SS.

No, they will continue to use the manufacturers estimates. Some of the ATS-V's initial test did this as well.

The 1SS as tested is over 3800lbs with only performance options. MRC adds 15lbs but NPP saves 9lbs.


Sorry Dave, you were lied to...

Sponsored

 

[thePill]

I see two things that were originally to be on the ATS V that looks like are not standard according to the site. Looks like the carbon fiber hood is listed as available instead of standard, and the show run flat tires as standard instead of the Pilot S tires.

Nope, you ain't sh!ttin' yourself outta this.

FACT: Caddy lied and withheld the curb weight until initial sales were out. It's f@ckin' sickening to see people on here still being b@ttf___ed.


I think you owe me a HUGE fuckin' apology...

 

[DiMaio90]

I see two things that were originally to be on the ATS V that looks like are not standard according to the site. Looks like the carbon fiber hood is listed as available instead of standard, and the show run flat tires as standard instead of the Pilot S tires.

Changes in standard equipment are only a valid excuse when it's to justify why theAbortion's Camaro weight predictions are wrong. Now F@cking apologize!! But don't expect to get one yourself if we do see a camaro weigh at under theAbortion's speculated 3780-3820 1SS weight.

 

[ZaneWayne]

Nope, you ain't sh!ttin' yourself outta this.

FACT: Caddy lied and withheld the curb weight until initial sales were out. It's f@ckin' sickening to see people on here still being b@ttf___ed.


I think you owe me a HUGE fuckin' apology...

Cadillac never released curb weight. They listed estimates. Was it a dick move? No question.

 

[Chameleon]

OFFICIALLY UPDATED ON CADDYS WEBSITE.

ATS-V COUPE WEIGHS 3803lbs!!!


Sedan weighs 3812lbs!!! :lol:

Well there it is. :lol:

 

[Davy_Baby9]

No, they will continue to use the manufacturers estimates. Some of the ATS-V's initial test did this as well.

The 1SS as tested is over 3800lbs with only performance options. MRC adds 15lbs but NPP saves 9lbs.


Sorry Dave, you were lied to...

I think because the weight change from the 5th gen being such a big deal, some publications WILL weight the cars. I agree some will just copy the manufacturers estimates.

 

[ZaneWayne]

I think because the weight change from the 5th gen being such a big deal, some publications WILL weight the cars. I agree some will just copy the manufacturers estimates.

yeah I really hope they do weigh them, and I think you're right in the sense that most serious reviewers will.

 

[thePill]

Well there it is. :lol:

Yes, the battle was long and vicious but alas, thePill was victorious. I will need to accomplish the same feat in the next few months with the Camaro. Although, many witnessed my struggle first hand and were rewarded with the results. They tried, to some degree, to sweep the whole thing under the rug... but I think not...

Many thought my screams of a 110.5 inch wheelbase Camaro based on the CTS was in somehow a way to justify my higher weight figures. Keep in mind, they are not really thePill's numbers... Some may not remember but, I have contact with people, and apparently some at Motor Trend. The ATS-V sedan they first tested weighed 3820lbs. It was of course a $63,000 bare bones ATS-V with only an Automatic equipped. I was specifically told that Caddy requested that the "3820lbs" figure be left out. So, as many seen, the ATS-V's first test at MT had zero weight info. Withheld from the public to deceive them.

I was told about the axle to dash ratio and the actual wheelbase:track ratio changes... I reported them here months before. Again, many accused thePill of making stuff up to support his higher curb weight claim. In all reality, thePill was the most accurate and honest source for 6th Gen Camaro info... the very earliest in some occasions.

To be honest, the '16 Camaro's footprint is a more serious issue than the extra 100-150lbs. Outside of the "200lbs lighter" clearly being false, the wheelbase:track ratio on the Camaro has got to improve. There are still a couple of tricks left on the table but nothing that is going to get them to Mustang/Corvette level. Plus, you are always stuck with nearly a 111 inch wheelbase.

You would think having information gathered and presented at their feet, some would be grateful... Wrong!!! I typically encourage skepticism, especially about things found on the Internet. The combined contributions from the Camaro community has probably set us back 2 model years. If a lot of this information was just heard, researched and accepted, we would be an all-knowing, all-powerful super intelligence by now. No... thePill needs to spend his time educating people about the wheel or, having someone get personal because I blew his belief system apart.


Where I go from here is the 6th Gen Camaro's curb weight. I am educated somewhat on the process and, it seems thePill has become a force to be reckoned with... This battle won't be so long. All depends on the amount of honesty they decide to use. I'm sure they are aware the ATS-V Coupe weighs 3803lbs. They must realize how silly a larger car looks claiming it weighs 118lbs less. I am affended at the level a blatant disregard for their faithful customers.

It is no worry to me... just as I did with the ATS-V, I will simply apply that to this situation. A mirror issue in my opinion and I think this bullsh!tting people needs to stop... as well as the mounds of disrespect the Camaro community shows thePill. The most accurate and honest source for 5th and 6th Gen Camaro... period...

I could care less about the belly aching. This guy in here isn't even man enough to apologize to me. Not only for being incredibly wrong and trying immensely to mislead people... but for also being an a$$hole the whole time...

He did it again!!!!!!!!

 

[JohnnyUtah]

Yes, the battle was long and vicious but alas, thePill was victorious. I will need to accomplish the same feat in the next few months with the Camaro. Although, many witnessed my struggle first hand and were rewarded with the results. They tried, to some degree, to sweep the whole thing under the rug... but I think not...

Many thought my screams of a 110.5 inch wheelbase Camaro based on the CTS was in somehow a way to justify my higher weight figures. Keep in mind, they are not really thePill's numbers... Some may not remember but, I have contact with people, and apparently some at Motor Trend. The ATS-V sedan they first tested weighed 3820lbs. It was of course a $63,000 bare bones ATS-V with only an Automatic equipped. I was specifically told that Caddy requested that the "3820lbs" figure be left out. So, as many seen, the ATS-V's first test at MT had zero weight info. Withheld from the public to deceive them.

I was told about the axle to dash ratio and the actual wheelbase:track ratio changes... I reported them here months before. Again, many accused thePill of making stuff up to support his higher curb weight claim. In all reality, thePill was the most accurate and honest source for 6th Gen Camaro info... the very earliest in some occasions.

To be honest, the '16 Camaro's footprint is a more serious issue than the extra 100-150lbs. Outside of the "200lbs lighter" clearly being false, the wheelbase:track ratio on the Camaro has got to improve. There are still a couple of tricks left on the table but nothing that is going to get them to Mustang/Corvette level. Plus, you are always stuck with nearly a 111 inch wheelbase.

You would think having information gathered and presented at their feet, some would be grateful... Wrong!!! I typically encourage skepticism, especially about things found on the Internet. The combined contributions from the Camaro community has probably set us back 2 model years. If a lot of this information was just heard, researched and accepted, we would be an all-knowing, all-powerful super intelligence by now. No... thePill needs to spend his time educating people about the wheel or, having someone get personal because I blew his belief system apart.


Where I go from here is the 6th Gen Camaro's curb weight. I am educated somewhat on the process and, it seems thePill has become a force to be reckoned with... This battle won't be so long. All depends on the amount of honesty they decide to use. I'm sure they are aware the ATS-V Coupe weighs 3803lbs. They must realize how silly a larger car looks claiming it weighs 118lbs less. I am affended at the level a blatant disregard for their faithful customers.

It is no worry to me... just as I did with the ATS-V, I will simply apply that to this situation. A mirror issue in my opinion and I think this bullsh!tting people needs to stop... as well as the mounds of disrespect the Camaro community shows thePill. The most accurate and honest source for 5th and 6th Gen Camaro... period...

I could care less about the belly aching. This guy in here isn't even man enough to apologize to me. Not only for being incredibly wrong and trying immensely to mislead people... but for also being an a$$hole the whole time...

Longtime lurker... First time poster.

I find your posts to be interesting and reasonably intelligent for a car forum. Many of them make a lot of sense... some maybe a little on the edge. Arguing chassis superiority based on the golden ratio seems to be pushing it. I know what you're saying but the geometry and physics involved are much more than this. I guess it's one measurement, but really depends on the application.

Just curious... if the 1SS Camaro does happen to be 3700 lbs then what? You seem 100% convinced that you are correct, and very well may be. I think it will be bad for the American car community in general if GM screws this up. On the off chance that the Camaro 1SS hits right around the 3700 pound number, will you be prepared to admit that you're wrong? You certainly like to remind everyone when you're right. Just saying.

Anyway, I appreciate your posts. They are interesting and we'll thought out. I have a Camaro 1LE now and am very interested in a GT350. I have always been more of a M3 person, but am not sold on the new motor. I don't really have a horse in the race. I think the Mustang looks better but doubt that decent deals will be available on the GT350.

 

[w3rkn]

Can't blame thePill for knowing stuff..

 

[thePill]

Longtime lurker... First time poster.

I find your posts to be interesting and reasonably intelligent for a car forum. Many of them make a lot of sense... some maybe a little on the edge. Arguing chassis superiority based on the golden ratio seems to be pushing it. I know what you're saying but the geometry and physics involved are much more than this. I guess it's one measurement, but really depends on the application.

Just curious... if the 1SS Camaro does happen to be 3700 lbs then what? You seem 100% convinced that you are correct, and very well may be. I think it will be bad for the American car community in general if GM screws this up. On the off chance that the Camaro 1SS hits right around the 3700 pound number, will you be prepared to admit that you're wrong? You certainly like to remind everyone when you're right. Just saying.

Anyway, I appreciate your posts. They are interesting and we'll thought out. I have a Camaro 1LE now and am very interested in a GT350. I have always been more of a M3 person, but am not sold on the new motor. I don't really have a horse in the race. I think the Mustang looks better but doubt that decent deals will be available on the GT350.

This is a difficult question because I can't see beyond 3780-3820lbs. There are about 11 reasons why I am stuck in that target area and, as time goes on, those 11 reasons build credit. But, I guess I would just move forward and admit it was incorrect. Ford ran into this issue as well with some of their initial paperwork, most recently the EU GT. Originally, they had the car in the books at 3640lbs... as months went on, it was changed to 3770lbs or something close to that. As I did then, it was wrong and I moved on. I am at the mercy of my eyes and ears and even that is subject to change...

However, this situation has actual weights involved, just as I got with the ATS-V and reported that here... Remember? How crazy it sounded for me to rationalize 3820lbs back then??? It was 120lbs over and I was a fool... until they officially changed it to 3812lbs yesterday... I was given dimensions, weights, impending issues and was taken into the mothership and probed...

...wait...

...that was another night...

Regardless... I guess that is the burning question on every bodies mind... What Will thePill Do??? Who knows... probably keep people guessing...

Look at the Voodoo in general. I denied, fought and ignored any Flat Plane Crank V8 rumors instantly. I was totally wrong... but I refused to believe it... Same with a dedicated platform for the Mustang. I ignored them... I was totally wrong again. If I believed what I heard, I would have never went down the "200lbs less" road as well as the a shared CD4 platform rumor. I spent a lot of time on that and pretty much debunked any Control Blade IRS rumors myself... which left me clueless after that... and I missed the convertible support integration. Basing all of my data in basically a 107 inch wheelbase, 2 door coupe, Fusion BIW (about 670lbs). But the S braces can't be done on a RWD vehicle so, that too discovered by my own research.


The "Golden Ratio", as you said, is just a measurement really. There are many variables that determine what is optimal... Think about this though... It is indeed fact, with the exception of a few, most Sports cars/coupes strive for a ratio between 1.58-1.70. Trust me... Two equal GTPP's, one sporting a 1.63/1.61, the other 1.72/1.68... The first GTPP will have an amazing advantage in handling. Same tires, same everything... However, the 2nd car would have an advantage at the strip and NASCAR like sweepers/highway speeds. The footprint offers less resistance and the ratio supports high speed stability/aerodynamics.

An optimal ratio does exist, the Ferrari 458 is around 1.60/1.58 at 40/60 weight distribution... See where they are going??? That's optimally balanced both geometrically and by weight distribution. It's just expensive and fragile...




As far as the Camaro's weight... Does thePill give you any reason to doubt him? And, as long as you keep reading, the edge is my area of responsibility. That will likely never change, nor will my devotion to this Global Icon...

 

[Davy_Baby9]

MT with the tease, no comparison tests. Lame. I bet that comes out whenever the next magazine drops. GM also gave them a base with no options it seems, not even MRC.

Test weight of 3,672 (54/46) which is lower than GM states.

Yes I know, must be lies! I hope other reviews continue with these numbers.

http://beta.motortrend.com/car-reviews/first-tests/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-first-test-review/

 

[JohnnyUtah]

MT with the tease, no comparison tests. Lame. I bet that comes out whenever the next magazine drops. GM also gave them a base with no options it seems, not even MRC.

Test weight of 3,672 (54/46) which is lower than GM states.

Yes I know, must be lies! I hope other reviews continue with these numbers.

http://beta.motortrend.com/car-reviews/first-tests/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-first-test-review/

Ruh Roh... Paging Mr Pill for an official response to such news.

 

[Cashcow]

Test weight of 3,672 (54/46) which is lower than GM states.

http://beta.motortrend.com/car-reviews/first-tests/2016-chevrolet-camaro-ss-first-test-review/

Not only that but: 3,760 pounds - 2SS, NPP, MRC, Sunroof- Car And Driver

 

[ZaneWayne]

Not only that but: 3,760 pounds - 2SS, NPP, MRC, Sunroof- Car And Driver

Must be a Ringer.

Sponsored