[Drysideshooter]

New member here. I have really enjoyed reading many of the comparison threads.

I recently purchased a 2016 2SS Convertible. I recently sold a Cayman S and did quite a bit of research and looking before settling on the Camaro. I have to say, especially after driving one, it became a very easy, very obvious choice for me. I was pretty convinced going in to it that I would end up with a new Corvette Grandsport convertible. In the end, the Camaro just made too much sense.

As a bit of background, I have owned two Camaro's previously. A 1970 1/2 Z28 and a 1971 SS350. Both owned when I was much younger. Great cars but a world removed from the new cars. I have also owned a C4 ZR1 Corvette, a Jaguar S Type, and a variety of Porsche 911's and the Cayman S. I have a friend with a Ferrari 360 that I've driven several times. I've been fortunate to have owned and experienced quite a few world class automobiles and think I take a hard and honest look at each one.

Porsche was one of the first manufacturers to realize that proper chassis rigidity played a key role in how a car performed, felt and lasted. They rate the rigidity using Hz, and they know at what Hz levels we humans can feel things, and what minimums must be met for a chassis to hold up. It's why when you shut the door on an older Porsche that has never been wrecked, with the window down it still sounds like shutting a vault door. Of all the Porsche's I have owned and driven, the Cayman S was my favorite. I'm not sure any manufacturer will ever top Porsche with regard to the feeling of driving a vehicle that feels as though it was carved from one solid billet. The Cayman handled incredibly. It stayed extremely composed right up to the ragged edge of it's performance envelope and inspired a lot of confidence. It was comfortable and had good visibility. I have driven Boxsters and didn't enjoy the feeling of those nearly as much as the Cayman. For me, it was a case of the coupe and convertible version of basically the same car feeling entirely different.

I owned the Cayman S for three years and thoroughly enjoyed it. It never gave me any problems and I was fortunate from a maintenance standpoint. One of the biggest negatives, in my mind, to many of the European cars is the potential for really high repair costs. Intermediate shaft failures and similar problems with some recent Porsche's can get very costly, very quickly. OEM parts are quality, but expensive. I have friends that have spent thousands on out of warranty, late model BMW's. The Cayman put a smile on my face every time I drove it, and I looked for excuses to drive it. Other than the potential for rather expensive failures that can occur without much warning, it was a pleasure to own.

I have never driven a Porsche that didn't have some appeal to me. They have all been extremely competent, well designed and great performing cars. That being said, having driven some absolutely amazing cars, nothing has brought a smile to my face like my 2016 Camaro. I'm a proud American, and there is certainly that appeal. The best word I can think of to describe the car's appeal would be "visceral". Starting and driving the car feels like it engages every nerve ending in my body to the point of making me borderline giddy. If the sound alone doesn't get someone's heart beating a bit they probably don't have a pulse. The sound and feeling of a decent sized V8 thrumming away isn't something you feel in cars like a Cayman or 911, or a BMW M series automobile. All competent cars, but lacking the soul of the Camaro. The chassis is really tight and the magnetic ride control does an amazing job. They're big doors, and don't feel or sound quite like shutting the door on a Porsche Cabriolet, but it's not that far off, and again, the doors are much larger. The seats are better than any American Car I've ever driven, and I would place them right up there with the best anywhere for a stock car. The bolstering is very adequate. All of the cars controls are very ergonomic and placed where your hands and feet find them quite naturally. In that aspect the car is every bit the equal of the Cayman S. The visibility isn't as good, which seems to be widely acknowledged. But when you admire the car from the outside, that high belt line is part of the aesthetic appeal. It's certainly something you get accustomed to, and the blind zone warning icons in the mirrors do a good job of helping out. Some testers have noted the visibility is better out of the Mustang GT, but to that I say "who cares?". The new Mustang is far from ugly, but I don't personally find it nearly as engaging and attractive as the Camaro.

I think the instrumentation is a best in class. Large tach and speedo, and the HUD isn't a bad addition in the cars that have it. I think having the ring on the central vents control the temp is pretty brilliant. I wish they could have been located up a bit higher, but obviously there were design restraints that prevented that. Given the appearance of the dash and the location of the infotainment screen I can't imagine it wasn't a good trade off.

The fit and finish of the interior is very good. There is less leather and softer materials used than in the Cayman S. The materials used though seem to be of good quality. Some of the gaps are a bit larger than in the Porsche, but nothing that really jumps out at you. The gaps are even and the fit and finish is all very high quality.

I think skid pad numbers can tell part of the story, but not as much as real world driving feel. The Cayman S always felt every bit as planted during extreme cornering maneuvers as a Carrera 4S, I doubt many people short of professional drivers could tell a difference. It was the most impressive handling car I've ever owned or driven. I have to say that so far the Camaro is feeling very close to it's equal in real world driving. Logically I don't think it possibly can. One is a mid engine rear drive car and the other is a rear drive with a good sized V8 out front. Real world feel tells me they are very close, and I could believe that either one is slightly better than the other, and wouldn't want to bet on which one it would be. I don't believe there is much of a gap either way though. Huge Kudo's to Chevrolet for being able to stick to the long time Camaro formula and deliver a car that handles so well. And I am comparing the feel of a convertible to a coupe. To get to the majority of the Cayman's engine you had to have the car on a lift and use a special key. To say access to the Camaro's power plant is much better would be a severe understatement.

The last time a Camaro was COTY was 1982 and I believe the most powerful one available made around 175 horsepower. Fast forward a bit and we have a V-6 available that makes 335 and the wonderful 6.2 churning out 455 with an equal number of pound feet of torque. Wow! Maybe I'm must not sophisticated enough or something, but I don't care how light a car is or how much power a flat 6 or similar powerplant may be making, nothing else is going to provide the harmonic joy of an American V8. For whatever reason, even in cars like a 360 with the motor living right behind your head, you don't get the same sensations. I once drove one of the last Carburetor equipped Lamborghini Countach's and it probably came the closest to providing a similar sensation to a big American V8. You could hear the air being sucked into the carbs and the engine made some beautiful music. We've lost a lot of the intake sounds with modern fuel injected cars, but I have to say the 6.2 has more character than any motor I've experienced in recent times. You forget about the motor in many cars once you're under way. I think the 6.2 is constantly reminding you it's there, but in a very pleasant way that makes me want to giggle like a school girl.

For me, driving the Camaro is all encompassing when I want it to be. Drop the hammer and you're going to get a rush of acceleration that never gets old. It's accompanied by the sound of the motor and exhaust. That is something that is missing in cars like the Cayman S. You get great acceleration, but it all feels much more sedate, maybe like riding a roller coaster where you don't hear the clikity clack of the cart over the track. Maybe the same g's and everything else, but lacking the other all encompassing sensations. Like listening to your favorite guitar riff in mono instead of stereo. The Camaro is much more engaging. It still inspires a lot of confidence. It feels well planted and the brakes are better or equal than in cars costing over twice as much. In the Cayman S there are no unexpected noises, no squeaks or sounds of something not being quite right. There aren't those types of sounds in the Camaro either, but you can hear and feel the engine. For cars that people buy to actually enjoy I think that's huge. I like that for just normal driving the Camaro is perfectly happy to putt along and do commuter duty or whatever you ask of it. It's like Clark Kent though, ready to pop into a phone booth and become something very different when you want it to. For me, it bridges those two sides of it's personality very, very well. It's an easier car to get in and out of than many exotic cars that don't perform much better, or even as well. It has a back seat than can be used if you absolutely have to. It's a nice car to drive at sane levels and doesn't make you pay a price by being uncomfortable or ill suited for such driving. It's a much easier car to get in and out of than a Cayman S. The Cayman is much lower and a bit more of a chore to get in and out of. I think little things like that make a huge difference over time. When you want to kick up your heels and haul butt and enjoy a twisty bit of road it's ready to accommodate you and do it very, very well, at a moments notice.

Without a doubt, it's the most well balanced car I've ever driven, and I have driven some pretty amazing cars. The fact that it's American is the icing on the cake.

[2K16SummitSS]

I can't believe I read the whole thing

All jokes aside, thank you for the informative comparison piece.
Also, that's a fine list of cars you've been through, I can't say I'm not a little jealous.

So far, this is the nicest car I've ever owned....and also the single most expensive item I've ever owned. My wife and I both come from VERY poor families, so this was actually a bigger milestone for us than it would be for many others.

[Casalino]

Makes a lot of sense. You talk a lot about chassis stiffness and rigidity. I wonder why you went with the convertible ss. Since you loose some handling aspects, heavier weight etc...

I haven't got my camaro yet, and can you believe i have never driven one!!! Complete blind order lol. But comparing the 911 4S, i don't think the camaro or most american cars can come close to it, or a porsche in general. I believe this camaro will give you the same if not, more laughs and excitement. I think it will be just as enjoyable if not better on the roads. But be honest, they don't compare. Sure American cars in general have improved by miles! But the quality can't match these other cars. Every time i drive the porsche it makes you feel like this is it...it can't get any better. It can get more flashy and expensive, but not any better

[Subperfect]

Originally Posted by Casalino

I haven't got my camaro yet, and can you believe i have never driven one!!! Complete blind order lol.

Being a guy that likes to know what is happening and or getting myself into..I did exactly this and haven't looked back since. im glad people feel the same way I do about the car.

[MiamiBlueCamaro]

Yes, lots and lots of chassis rigidity.

[Drysideshooter]

Even though it does obviously give up some rigidity, I was really wanting a convertible. I live in the desert in Eastern Washington and this is a great area for a convertible. I think Chevrolet did a great job of not adding too much weight to the convertible, yet stiffened up the structure significantly. It's one of the many things I think they got very right with the new generation. For me it was a worthwhile tradeoff. The convertible isn't my only vehicle and it's mostly going to be a good weather fun car, and quite a few of it's miles will be with the top down. I'm 53 now and don't have the interest in hitting it quite as hard as I used to, and I have a couple bikes that are my preferred outlet for doing serious corner carving, though the Camaro is certainly well suited and a lot of fun too.

Chassis rigidity is really interesting. Years ago I had a chance to talk with a GM engineer that worked on the Oldsmobile Aurora. The Germans had been building to specific chassis rigidity numbers for decades, but the Olds Aurora was the first American car to use a specific rigidity benchmark as part of it's design. From what he explained, there are ranges where a chassis will be rigid and remain rigid, and the vibrations that move throughout the chassis won't be felt by humans. He said things like our organs vibrate/resonate at a particular frequency, and it makes us uncomfortable. It sounded like getting a chassis that felt good to the human occupants and worked well for an automobile involved quite a bit of science and design. He pointed out how some cars like the early IROC Z-28's had very flexible chassis, and how you could stand behind one and see it turn and flex when the motor was revved. He said it was why older versions of so many American cars, even if they hadn't been wrecked and repaired, sounded so tinny when you shut a door, especially with a window rolled down. He said older German cars that hand't been touched sounded so solid because they were designed to a chassis rigidity benchmark. I thought it was pretty fascinating. I am guessing that in the time since the Aurora was released years ago that more and more manufacturers have started making it an important part of new designs.


I am hoping, and fairly confident, that the Camaro will stay tight over time and driving. I've had someone gun it while watching the car from various angles, and even with that V8 generating considerable torque within the mounts there isn't any perceptible twisting of the car like there was with the older versions. I think with the early IROC Z-28's you could practically get a tire to lift off the ground by gunning the motor they twisted so badly.

I think Porsche, BMW, Mercedes and Audi get it pretty much spot on when it comes to chassis rigidity. If Chevrolet even came very close with the Gen 6 I think it's a huge accomplishment. I don't think that Porsche can probably be bested with regard to the chassis when it comes to the Carrera's and Cayman because they are probably as close to perfection as possible. If Chevrolet has indeed delivered a car with a similar chassis, with the kind of power the motors are generating, without the potential disasters that loom for so many of the German cars I think it's big game changer.

And 2k and Miami, those are beautiful cars. I'm partial to the Summit White. My convertible is Summit White with the China White inserts in the interior.

[Casalino]

Originally Posted by Subperfect

Being a guy that likes to know what is happening and or getting myself into..I did exactly this and haven't looked back since. im glad people feel the same way I do about the car.

Yea! the dealer obviously had no 1le's available to test drive. I figured it is a whole different animal compared to the ss besides sharing the same engine. I knew id be happy with the power. So i didn't bother. And it gives me the opportunity to receive the car, hop in and drive it and experience everything for the first time.

[ron scubadiver]

Nice write up. The Cayman has fallen victim to fuel efficiency rules and has lost its high revving NA 6 for a turbocharged 4. My 2SS feels really solid with no creaks when going over the awful roads in my area. I used to have a C4. That car is a great example of a lack of chassis rigidity.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Chassis rigidity is much easier to achieve in a shorter wheelbase like the 911 than a coupe/sedan with a longer wheelbase. This is one of the reasons tiny short wheelbase cars feel so spirited. Take the Miata for example. If you watch that car go around a track, it has a ton of body motion in the turns. But it feels really fun and engaging. Why? Because the short wheelbase makes for a rigid chassis and immediate turn-in, even though the Miata is not built like a 911 or Camaro in terms of chassis and suspension development. Want to take it further? Drive a go-cart. Talk about imediate turn-in!

The downside to a short wheelbase is ride comfort. Why do you think they called the Ford Bronco the Bronco? Because when you take that thing off-road, it bucks like a bronco due to the short wheelbase. Now think of a long wheelbase vehicle like a full size extended cab pickup. Much more comfortable off-road, but turn-in is non-existent. And the chassis will flex like a wet noodle.

I am highly impressed with how stiff the chassis of the Camaro is given it's longer wheelbase relative to a true dedicated sports car, like a 911 or 370Z. It makes for a great foundation for a car that can handle well, but it won't beat you up like a bucking bronco. That's why I love it so much. It's comfortable enough for a daily driver, but can hit the road course like a beast!

[Drysideshooter]

While it's harder to achieve the same benchmark rigidity with a longer wheelbase, Mercedes does it throughout the S class line. A friend of mine's wife was involved in a head on collision with a full size Buick that crossed the center line several years ago. She was in a S class sedan. The force was enough that the whites of her eyes were almost completely black because the force of the impact ruptured most of the blood vessels in her eyes. Air bags deployed in both cars. She was able to open the door and exit the S class and had no injuries other than a cracked rib. They had to use the jaws of life to extricate the dead driver out of the Buick. The benefits of a properly rigid chassis, designed to behave in a controlled manner in the event of a collision.

It used to be true that it took a longer wheelbase to ride well, and it's certainly easier to achieve. With modern suspension and design technology I don't think it's quite as true any more. The Olds engineer explained to me that it's a specific Hz number that must be achieved, and they need to do whatever needs to be done to achieve it if it's the benchmark. Probably a lot harder to do with larger and more doors and a longer wheelbase, but Mercedes has been doing it for years.

I'm not sure how much real attention the US makers are paying to the chassis of sport utilities. I think most German manufacturers tend to pay quite a bit of attention to it with all vehicles. My wife has a Mercedes GL450 and has had Suburban's and Tahoe's. World of difference in the feel of those vehicles, and in how the doors sound when shut.

The 2016 Camaro bested a 2015 BMW M4 in a Motor Trend head to head. There is a great YouTube video of some of it. The folks at Chevrolet should be toasting themselves pretty heartily over that. They beat what is considered by many to be a benchmark automobile that costs considerably more. They have really accomplished something and I hope it's something that continues, and we see repeated throughout the entire line.

The C4 didn't have the chassis of the C7, but I believe it was the first car to ever exceed 1g on the Motor Trend skidpad.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Mercedes also puts a ton of development into safety, and it is probably quite a bit heavier than the Buick as Mercedes tend to be heavier than most if not all similar sized cars.

Yes, the Camaro chassis engineers can definitely pat themselves on the back. I was skeptical at all the hype regarding the chassis, and whether I would be able to tell the difference and really attribute it to the chassis. When you are driving a car, it can be difficult to determine what attributes are related to the chassis flex vs. the suspension flex vs. damping vs. sway bars vs. alignment etc... There are a ton of things that go into handling and driver feel and feedback. But, the first time I drove the Gen6, I could definitely tell the difference in the chassis from my Gen5. It was night and day to me. I'm super impressed, and it's not hype. This chassis is top notch!!

[Drysideshooter]

I think they did a brilliant job of pulling some tricks, like the forced shifts to 4th in the manuals, and the cylinder deactivation to avoid a gas guzzler tax too. I think the European manufacturers are going to have get creative to keep their cars from further losing what they once were. I don't think just adding a turbo 4 into cars like the Cayman is going to cut it long term. In that test between the Camaro and M4 the testers said the M4 had lost quite a bit over the previous M3. Chevrolet obviously had some similar restrictions and regulations to worry about but seemed to have gone about dealing with it much, much better.

US manufacturers have the darn CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) to deal with, and I think it's all vehicles up to about 8,800 GVWR that are affected. Having things like the turbo 4 Camaro's and V-6's available, that many people will buy, sure helps them keep their corporate average up.

I have never been as impressed by a car as I have been the Gen 6. I didn't really have any budget constraints when I was shopping for a new fun car and it quickly became the obvious choice. After first driving one I asked myself if I was so impressed because I wasn't expecting too much? After a lot of thought I realized that wasn't the case at all. I wasn't expecting it to be nearly as great as it was, but it's an impressive car no matter what I chose to compare it to, including cars costing considerably more. I also have a lot of faith that the 6.2 is a well sorted motor and there probably aren't any potentially costly surprises lurking. Lord knows GM has been building pretty stellar pushrod V8's for quite some time. I think they dropped the ball a bit with cooling on the Z06, and that was addressed in the new ZL1, but I don't think there are any such issues with the SS.

Not to be political, but I was thrilled with how the presidential election turned out. I truly believe we are going to turn the page and achieve new levels of greatness as a nation. With Chevrolet producing a car like the Gen 6 that is no longer just being compared to the Mustang, but the worlds best cars, I'm especially proud to be an American and to own a Gen 6.

[whiteboyblues2001]

For car companies (since they are so global) it isn't CAFE that is much of an issue, it is the regulations in Europe where there is an annual tax on displacement. That is why so many manufacturers are going to smaller turbos that have displacements ending in .0 or .5 (like a 2.0 turbo, or 3.5L, etc.), because if you go to a 3.1 liter, you end up in a higher tax bracket than the 3.0, and you are in the same tax bracket as a 3.5L. And remember, this is a tax the owner pays annually.

The CAFE standards are an average fuel efficiency standard. Nothing states that they have to use lower displacement and turbos (but the European standards implicitly dictate such). The CAFE doesn't care what technology you use, or how many liters of displacement. They just require a certain level of fuel efficiency across many vehicles sold. So, we can still have large displacement V8's as long as they are decently efficient, and they sell enough of the lesser models with even better efficiency. That way everyone can have what they want (we get big v8's others get smaller more efficient engines with good power, and the government gets less fuel consumption overall).

The European model is the one I have issue with. It kind of dictates specific technologies rather than dictating a desired outcome (like less fuel consumption). And as we can see, some of the smaller displacement turbos don't get better fuel efficiency of their normally aspirated counterparts. For example, the ATS-V has a twin turbo 3.6L in and Alpha based car that gets worse gas mileage than the Camaro with a 6.2L V8. Or look at the M4, it is lighter and has less power than the Camaro, but the Camaro gets better mileage.

And that is on the EPA testing equipment. In real life, the turbo engines have a bigger gap between EPA tested results and actual results.

I just read an article that stated that many of the car companies are telling the European policy makers this very thing, and want to go back to more normally aspirated engines. So, hopefully it will change.

[Fraxum]

OP, Nice review. I appreciate the good writing. You spend some time on your posts. I came out of a N54 335i Sport and feel the new Camaros are a more fun driver.

Have you spent time in the hard top and the convertible? Chassis rigiidity sealed the deal for me on the 5th gens and the 6th gen is even better with less weight. But I read the CA6 vert makes a pretty big sacrifice in this area. Not true?