|
To give a good idea of what the weight penalty is for the Cadillac ATS (I find this to be pertinent as they will both be on the alpha platform) for AWD.
The ATS with the 3.6L engine has a base weight with no options of 3,461 pounds. When you add AWD to this vehicle the base weight is listed as 3,629, this is a difference of over 100 pounds. To be exact it is a difference of 168 pounds of weight, you can look at other vehicles which are offered in both RWD trim and in AWD trim to see their weight gain.
If you are looking at vehicles like the Porsche 918 or the Mclaren P1 (don't know why you would) then you have to take into account that those are not typical AWD vehicles. If you look at even a Porsche 911 turbo for example there is a driver shaft feeding to the front of the car to a differential sending power via half shafts to each front wheel (the rear engine layout makes the 911 platform uniquely perfect for AWD). The Mclaren P1 only sends power from its engine to the rear wheels, it sends power to the front wheels via batteries, some cords, and electric motors. In other words with a setup like that it doesn't have as big of a weight penalty from the drivetrain itself (though adds weight from the electric motor/s and batteries). Honda has gone this route for its NSX and you can find pictures of the drive train naked for a good example.
Also based on the laws of physics if you have more mass to move (in this case spin) it is going to take more power to spin it. This is why AWD vehicles are not only heavier then their RWD counterparts they also have lower fuel economy ratings (BMW 328i is rated 23/35 328i X drive is 22/33).
Where AWD would pertain to the Camaro is with the all important marketing 0-60 times, stop light to stop light, and 1/4 mile drag racing. The reality is all things being equal while these setups perform well there would actually do poorly from a roll race due to traction limits being reduced. AWD also doesn't improve handling characteristics of a car (don't care what anyone says more mass and greater losses doesn't improve handling). Firstly the best handling cars in the world are RWD and not AWD, as fast as cars like the Mclaren P1, Porsche 918, and Ferrari LaFerrari are they are beaten on tracks by track special (which are street legal in some countries) that have a fraction of the power and an even smaller fraction of the cost. That doesn't mean that you can not make an AWD track car and be successful with it, in a perfect worlds with all things being equal you couldn't however all things are never equal. Also considering that those hyper cars have a combined (engine and electric) horsepower of around 900BHP. Take a C7 Z06 and push its engine to 900BHP and watch how fast of a lap time it puts down.
It is true that it has become increasingly popular of a trend to offer AWD for performance cars. Should the Camaro join the ranks on this one? honestly there is no real reason for them to do so. 450BHP today isn't so much power with modern tire technology that it can't possibly put the power to the ground. Truth is no one has compared a stock 545BHP R35 GTR to one of the GTRs altered to be RWD and only have that mod done to see how the whole picture would look like. In otherwords there isn't really a scientific way for us to compare how the GTR will perform without its AWD system. Yes it isn't going to have that 2.9 seconds from 0-60 time, however with less mass, and lower losses it should be able to get around corners faster.
|