[shaffe]

Originally Posted by hotlap

Yep. As a kid, we had Fords and Mercurys in the house

Three factors that swung me to GM
1) My mother remarried and my much older step brother drove a Chevelle SS 396 that he took me places in. I was hooked

2) My best friends, older sister dated a guy with a GTO ram air III

3) Smokey and the Bandit. I loved Trans Ams and became a Pontiac guy, alternating to Camaro when I liked them better (gen3).

haha total opposite for me. Grew up around GM

as far as new cars, Dad had Cadillac's when I was really young. Then switched to Oldsmobile (he was always an olds guy at heart) then had a few chevy trucks(mom had a tahoe, and a suburban). As far as the classic cars my family had when I was growing up all GM. I don't even know if I can remember all of them but the list looks a little something like this

71 El Camino SS
Three different 56 Chevy 210's
Three Different 66 Olds 442's
66 Nova Drag Car
67 Nova SS
66 Olds Model 98

Those are the ones that stand out, there were others sprinkled in at times. Dad never had anything against Ford, just preferred GM. Had a few bad experiences with the chevy trucks and chevy dealer so he switched to Ford and was blown away by how much better the F-350 was then his 3500 Silverado. Got into a great relationship with the local Ford dealer and pretty much ever since then when they needed a new vehicle they looked at ford first.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

This had a lot to do with the issues at the St. Therese Plant in Quebec, Canada. By the time the LS was put in the 4th gen in 1998, GM already knew they were killing the Fbody.

During that time (I was 18 in '98), if you stepped into any GM showroom to look at a Camaro, they were rare to see. Even then, the salespeople would try to sell you a Cavalier or Monte Carlo FWD POS...it was brutal. GM had already completely given up on the Fbody so it was easy for Ford to carry on without much thought and just sell Mustangs like crazy (most were base V6 models).

The plant was closed, crushed, and land sold off. That ended their rights to build F-bodies for GM.

I have a lot of stories from those days after I bought my 1999 SS M6, and meeting tons of modded GTs and Cobras. They were not happy with the results of running my stock 4th gen.

The BIG issue with the F-body and the Camaro dropping from the GM portfolio for several years is that the F-body could not be upgraded to pass upcoming NHTSA crash requirements or fuel economy regulations, so GM had to have another rear drive architecture to build it on. The animosity with the St Therese local union certainly didn’t help much, but the issue was really finding the right RWD architecture. I was in GM Powertrain Portfolio Planning at the time and so very much in the middle of these issues.

GM had two “potential” architectures to consider. One was Sigma, which was at the time Cadillac exclusive (1st Gen CTS, 1st Gen SRX, STS) so that discussion never lasted long the many times it was brought up. The other was Zeta, which was based in Australia (Holdens Omega and Monaro). After a while, GM did import a small number of Holden Monaros, rebadged as Pontiac GTO. Import restrictions capped the number of cars that could be imported from Australia to a number waaay below the volume Camaro would need to be. So Camaro went dark until a decision was made to add a module of Zeta to the Oshawa, Ontario Canada plant.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

The BIG issue with the F-body and the Camaro dropping from the GM portfolio for several years is that the F-body could not be upgraded to pass upcoming NHTSA crash requirements or fuel economy regulations, so GM had to have another rear drive architecture to build it on. The animosity with the St Therese local union certainly didn’t help much, but the issue was really finding the right RWD architecture. I was in GM Powertrain Portfolio Planning at the time and so very much in the middle of these issues.

GM had two “potential” architectures to consider. One was Sigma, which was at the time Cadillac exclusive (1st Gen CTS, 1st Gen SRX, STS) so that discussion never lasted long the many times it was brought up. The other was Zeta, which was based in Australia (Holdens Omega and Monaro). After a while, GM did import a small number of Holden Monaros, rebadged as Pontiac GTO. Import restrictions capped the number of cars that could be imported from Australia to a number waaay below the volume Camaro would need to be. So Camaro went dark until a decision was made to add a module of Zeta to the Oshawa, Ontario Canada plant.

Thanks Jim

I remember the issues with not meeting 2003 safety criteria as well. Of course the union was another straw. Followed the Holden GTOs closely during that time, but they were never released in Canada

Anyway, Camaro is built in a great place now, hope it has a future

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

The BIG issue with the F-body and the Camaro dropping from the GM portfolio for several years is that the F-body could not be upgraded to pass upcoming NHTSA crash requirements or fuel economy regulations, so GM had to have another rear drive architecture to build it on. The animosity with the St Therese local union certainly didn’t help much, but the issue was really finding the right RWD architecture. I was in GM Powertrain Portfolio Planning at the time and so very much in the middle of these issues.

GM had two “potential” architectures to consider. One was Sigma, which was at the time Cadillac exclusive (1st Gen CTS, 1st Gen SRX, STS) so that discussion never lasted long the many times it was brought up. The other was Zeta, which was based in Australia (Holdens Omega and Monaro). After a while, GM did import a small number of Holden Monaros, rebadged as Pontiac GTO. Import restrictions capped the number of cars that could be imported from Australia to a number waaay below the volume Camaro would need to be. So Camaro went dark until a decision was made to add a module of Zeta to the Oshawa, Ontario Canada plant.

I was very sad to get this email this morning.

My 2004 GTO was the best car I’ve ever owned. The materials, build quality and reliability was second to none. 11-1/2 year and 115,000 miles and the only problem was a gas cap recall.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by hotlap

I was very sad to get this email this morning.

My 2004 GTO was the best car I’ve ever owned. The materials, build quality and reliability was second to none. 11-1/2 year and 115,000 miles and the only problem was a gas cap recall.

I was surprised it lasted this long. I remember this from years ago:

https://www.thecarconnection.com/new...ota-may-follow

[oldman]

I have the new Motor Trend Z51 C8 vs base and CF GT350. I'm Joe public and this is what I look at: 0-60 of 2.8, 3.7,3.6
VIR tims: 2.00.96, 1.59.7, 1.56.3
so it does look like the carbon stuff is working. Still the C8 driven by high heeled admin assistants is going to destroy any muscle car that I know of, she may even be sipping a latte.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by hotlap

I was very sad to get this email this morning.

My 2004 GTO was the best car I’ve ever owned. The materials, build quality and reliability was second to none. 11-1/2 year and 115,000 miles and the only problem was a gas cap recall.

Same, my gto had better interior quality and materials than my ss and arguably the c7 as well. The entire dash was a thick soft touch material and I can't remember any hard plastics anywhere noticeable... but that tiny trunk though lol.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Same, my gto had better interior quality and materials than my ss and arguably the c7 as well. The entire dash was a thick soft touch material and I can't remember any hard plastics anywhere noticeable... but that tiny trunk though lol.

Yep. Even the door panels and console were soft touch material. After all those years not a single rattle.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by oldman

I have the new Motor Trend Z51 C8 vs base and CF GT350. I'm Joe public and this is what I look at: 0-60 of 2.8, 3.7,3.6
VIR tims: 2.00.96, 1.59.7, 1.56.3
so it does look like the carbon stuff is working. Still the C8 driven by high heeled admin assistants is going to destroy any muscle car that I know of, she may even be sipping a latte.

The problem is that only one of those cars has performance that is affordable, consistent, reliable, can be had for $65K, and is worth every penny of that price. The other two are inconsistent (for whatever reasons), has been shown to have issues, is very expensive and out of the reach of most buyers, has markups attached, and is proving to not be worth the price it costs. Also one has removable roof and PDR standard while the other two don't even offer those features.

[oldman]

Ford is pay to play, been that way for 50+ years. So the C8 is here and Ford's real flagship the GT is nowhere to be found, I have not a clue how many are made or sold of even if one can be purchased???? The GT500 well really it has some interesting features and what is the limit of front engine rear drive... Supra is approaching 400 HP and BMW is around 500 on the inline 6, Porsche put a real 6 in the Boxster this year too (near 400 HP). The merry go round is getting faster that's for sure.

[bradmo9]

Inconsistent??? Ever car will have a different time depending on weather and track conditions. You just posted how you've run 12.5 to a 11.9 in your ZL1. There's not enough C8's out in the wild to determine really anything right now. Besides that its a hell of value looks , performance and amenities.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

The problem is that only one of those cars has performance that is affordable, consistent, reliable, can be had for $65K, and is worth every penny of that price. The other two are inconsistent (for whatever reasons), has been shown to have issues, is very expensive and out of the reach of most buyers, has markups attached, and is proving to not be worth the price it costs. Also one has removable roof and PDR standard while the other two don't even offer those features.

[oldman]

um I highly doubt that BlaqWhole or anybody else here has the luxury of a closed track and many back to back runs, which only the best run being published. So please.
On the road race, the GT500 is running race alignment on tires know for their limited hero run status. So should these cars be tested with the same more streetable rubber? Dunno. I do find it a little disingenuous to put tires on the car that would be extremely limited in actually usage by Joe Average (yes I know the ZLE is in this area too).

The same complaint has been level at Numbering times, can the tire be purchased by Joe Average at his local discount tire?

GM does this too, their 1le upgrade for SS owners is tested with stock SS tires, same for their DSSV kit!$!@$!@#$. but, their slammer spring kit is tested with 1LE rims and tires... makes no sense. As we know that most guys that would go with 1le suspension upgrades would upgrade to good handling wheels and tires, more so with the DSSV crowd. On the other hand most guys that go for GM performance slammer springs... er probably are running stock SS type or category tire. I think GM was honestly afraid that a DSSV / 1le upgrade on the SS with 1LE rims and tires would perform better than the 1LE itself, so the bulliton went out, NEVER to publish a test of a fully upgraded SS with 1LE rims and tires. Slammer springs well there was no issues that it would under perform vs the 1LE (not by much BTW).

Back to the Mustang, whether it is PP2 or the GT500, are these guys really pretending that these tires would be on for their cars and coffee runs etx. Heck I think my "normal" PS4P can't be driven at all with temp in the 20s or below!!! Could it be that a HUGE bunch of this perforamce would just go away with 220 wear summer tires?

I going to assume far more GT500 are driven by posers vs people that buy a ZLE or Z/28 for that matter.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by oldman

GM does this too, their 1le upgrade for SS owners is tested with stock SS tires, same for their DSSV kit!$!@$!@#$. but, their slammer spring kit is tested with 1LE rims and tires... makes no sense. As we know that most guys that would go with 1le suspension upgrades would upgrade to good handling wheels and tires, more so with the DSSV crowd. On the other hand most guys that go for GM performance slammer springs... er probably are running stock SS type or category tire. I think GM was honestly afraid that a DSSV / 1le upgrade on the SS with 1LE rims and tires would perform better than the 1LE itself, so the bulliton went out, NEVER to publish a test of a fully upgraded SS with 1LE rims and tires. Slammer springs well there was no issues that it would under perform vs the 1LE (not by much BTW).

Are you referring to this test? https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=542333

If so, they never tested the 1LE upgrade kit (for MRC cars only). The Camaro team tested exactly what I asked for in my question to them (for non-MRC suspension). That's the reason they only ran the SS 1LE wheel/tire combo along with the lowering/handling kit - that's the combo I was considering. It's not practical to test and advertise lap times every combination. Also, the DSSV kit was designed for the SuperCar3 R tires anyway and you wouldn't expect to see the benefit of that kit without them.

The "slammer spring kit" was actually their lowering kit (springs, shocks), handling kit (SS 1LE front/rear swaybars and front links). While it's a 20mm drop in ride height compared to a standard SS, compared to an SS 1LE, it's only 11mm lower in front and 5mm lower in the rear. I don't consider that slammed at all!

[oldman]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

Are you referring to this test? https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=542333

If so, they never tested the 1LE upgrade kit (for MRC cars only). The Camaro team tested exactly what I asked for in my question to them (for non-MRC suspension). That's the reason they only ran the SS 1LE wheel/tire combo along with the lowering/handling kit - that's the combo I was considering. It's not practical to test and advertise lap times every combination. Also, the DSSV kit was designed for the SuperCar3 R tires anyway and you wouldn't expect to see the benefit of that kit without them.

The "slammer spring kit" was actually their lowering kit (springs, shocks), handling kit (SS 1LE front/rear swaybars and front links). While it's a 20mm drop in ride height compared to a standard SS, compared to an SS 1LE, it's only 11mm lower in front and 5mm lower in the rear. I don't consider that slammed at all!

the kit is made to lower the ride first and foremost, I like the term slammer, you may want the term "performance"

So the DSSV is made for cup2, so they test them on stock SS tires... all right then. So completely irrelevant test, I think I already alluded to that eh?

GM could have set up on the SS, with off the shelf components a 1le suspension with dampers from their slammer...err.. performance... springs, 1LE wheels. The chose not to, could it be that plain dampers and the plain SS clutch diff would be so close to the 1lE that GM was worried? Don't know.

That "only" 11mm is 110% lower than the 1LE spring on the front, the height that was actually designed for maximum performance. That is one HUGE "only". Was that "only" done for looks or performance? The answer to that question would also answer the ethereal question are these slammer or performance springs.

Your post are always on the up and up. Lets just say that GM released their performance spring and it was only 11mm taller than SS springs. Would you put them on your ride? From memory, the 4th gen 1LE was actually slightly higher 5mm after settling vs the z/28 (the base V8 suspension on the 4th gen). In fact it may have been me that published that when my 3 ton jack would NOT fit under my Z/28 but would under a WS6 / 1le / SS. From memory, we determined that it was not the wheels... heck it was 22+ years ago.