What's the bigger sin: the Stang log rear axle, or the Maro porkiness?

[JusticePete]

Originally Posted by Jarhead

One has to ask a few questions here.
Did the same driver make all the runs???
Were they done on the dame day/temp/etc????
How many miles on the vehicle/tires??/

If a driver wanted to make one car look better they only needed to exaggerate their steering inputs slightly to reduce the times, as well as push another car harder/tighter to make a better time. that is why I feel that these tests are just that a test, and are subjective to those that complete the tests.

I won't say when or where, but I can tell you we put a magazine writer in the Camaro with one of my professional drivers on a road course. My drivers run hard -- real hard. The writer or should I say writers were overwhelmed. One may have needed a change of clothing. They said they were experienced... These are people that are supposed to be good drivers that test cars and write about them. Some people would say I am a good driver. I know better. I have been in the car with GREAT drivers going back to people like David Hobbs. Very few people are really gifted behind the wheel. These are the people that can take a car to the level it was designed to operate. The rest of us just watch them and think about what it would be like to be that good.

You are spot on to question results done in different weather conditions by different drivers. The numbers are good for bench race chatter.

[hair10]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

personally, i think the weight is a bigger issue than the solid axle since it effects handling, braking and acceleration. the camaro was just put on a platform that it probably shouldn't have been.

If I were racing, I'd be agreeing with you. Since my Camaro is my 'fun' daily driver (when the weather's nice anyway) I'll take the ride of the IRS.

It just depends on what you want out of the car.

Originally Posted by SleepWarz

Blame the safety features.

I do.

If that's really the case, I'll take the extra weight and the safety that comes with it!

Originally Posted by detroitboy

But for guys used to Camaros its really gonna feel porky I'm sure.

This is my 5th Camaro and I'd hardly call it "porky". Bigger, yes but not porky.

[Speagle]

Originally Posted by sen10l

As a person with an engineering educational background, I appreciate good technology, so I don't appreciate the log rear axle of the Mustang despite the propaganda spouted (read: excuses) for it. I can't in good conscience drive a car that has a "feature" that no other sports car has.

On the other hand, the Camaro is a porky car. Every picture I see of the 3 main muscle cars shows the Camaro as the widest of the three. This thing is massive! And the weight of course is no better. In fact, I think the Mustang size and weight is "perfect".

The perfect car will be a Camaro with trimmed down dimensions to be around the same size as the Mustang, slightly higher roof and slightly lower body height to improve visibility (which I don't think will reduce its good looks), and improved handling. Ideally the Camaro will weigh no more than the Mustang. That is the absolutely perfect car. I will be completely and 100% satisfied in every regard.

Okay, so given that at the very least, I will not see this perfection until 2014 when the Camaro will apparently move to the Alpha platform, what is your opinion on the two sins described above? We have to compromise, and therefore choose what we can live with.

Obviously you prefer the Camaro porkiness given you own or aspire to own a Camaro, but if we were to discuss these two negatives independently, what is your opinion?

A distant alternative to the Camaro for me would be the 2011 Shelby GT500. However, the log rear axle is a big deterrent for me as well as the fact that Mustangs are as common as jeans. Maybe a discussion into the two sins will persuade me for the log axle, or for the porkiness.

I wouldn't be too concerned about the camaro's weight as it outperforms its competition. Also keep in mind that the camaro is a safer car than its competion. Besides the camaro was designed to just be a cool ass ride that's tons of fun to drive. If you want max performance look at vettes

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Find a single car on the road with the Camaro's specs and lighter weight. There isn't one. Even the 'almighty' germans don't deliver.

Enough with the weight comments, as far as I'm concerned...because they're baseless when put in context. Would you like them to revert back to Live axle to save some pounds?




EDIT: Oh, and newsflash...we're talking about an inch or so in every direction to "match" the Mustang in dimensions.

EDIT2: The CTS-V May drove weighs 4300lbs.......

I think you forgot about the corvette.

[sen10l]

Originally Posted by MIKnam67

With your engineering background how do you feel about the ZR1 Corvette? Is it porky to you?

THe Camaro is 75.5" wide.
The 2010 ZR1 Corvette is 75.9" wide without mirrors. Porkiness?????????

the "engineering" reference is a euphemism for "my geeky side doesn't like unsophisticated features", like the log rear axle. It actually has no relevance whatsoever to car engineering, of which I have no knowledge.

As for "porkiness", the Corvette doesn't look porky because the side of the car doesn't look like the side of a barn. The Camaro is pretty "tall" in the body. I think it could be a little less fat in that area. As for my comment about the width, it's probably an illusion due to the design of the Camaro so the Camaro looks like a very wide car. I don't necessarily think the width makes it look porky though - mainly the body height.

[2010SLVRBULIT]

Originally Posted by MIKnam67

You should stick to engineering

[Revo1]

Porky? Last I checked, a wide stance is a positive attribute for a muscelcar to possess.

As for the fastback, forget it. The "porky" hips on the Camaro are IMO one of the best, most defining features of the car.







Oh and say "porky" like 5 more times. I'm gettin into it.

[Revo1]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

it's funny how so many owners want that "sophistication" that the IRS brings, but then when it comes to something like the rough idle from the pushrod engine, they just brush it off as nothing.

just an observation, i don't want to turn this into Mustang vs camaro, so i'll just leave that.


personally, i think the weight is a bigger issue than the solid axle since it effects handling, braking and acceleration. the camaro was just put on a platform that it probably shouldn't have been.

btw, a properly designed IRS should not weigh much more, if anything, than a solid axle. the cobras (such as mine) lose about 120 lbs. from the switch over because the subframe that had to be designed afterwards in order for it to work properly.

Tread carefully

[sen10l]

Originally Posted by Revo1

Porky? Last I checked, a wide stance is a positive attribute for a muscelcar to possess.

As for the fastback, forget it. The "porky" hips on the Camaro are IMO one of the best, most defining features of the car.

I am in no way referring to the hips, which I actually like (and my fastback sketch also has the hips - corvettes and porsches have fastbacks AND hips). The comment about width was just an off-handed remark that the car looks big (probably an illusion). When I say "porky", I'm actually referring to the height of the body.

[Revo1]

Originally Posted by sen10l

I am in no way referring to the hips, which I actually like (and my fastback sketch also has the hips - corvettes and porsches have fastbacks AND hips). The comment about width was just an off-handed remark that the car looks big (probably an illusion). When I say "porky", I'm actually referring to the height of the body.

Hmmmm. Height = pork. And ignore the width comments. Got it.

[derklug]

Ok, my 2 cents worth. My friends Challenger is the most comfortable of the 3, the Camaro I had for a weekend handled the best of the 3, my Mustang is what I like. When it all comes down to it, what you like is what you are going to be happy with. Would I like to have 800hp, that handled like a Lotus and rode like a Caddie? Well, duh. But it ain't gonna happen, so I drive what I like, and learn to live with the warts.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by HIGHOCTANE

Have you driven a 2010 Camaro? My 2SS handles and brakes WAY better than the Terminators. 100 mph in the 2010 Camaro feels about like 60 mph in a Terminator. And the brake...again the better on the Camaro...... the Terminator and the 2010 Camaro weigh about the same..
I love the Terminator..but a spade is a spade...I do miss the low end TQ..but that is really all I miss..
JMO..

oh im sure it does. the Terminator's are built on an ancient platform that must be modified in order to keep up with progress, i agree with you completely.

My arguement is more along the lines: if i had a camaro and someone told me "do you want it with or with out IRS? just to let you know, the IRS is going to weigh down the car about 250 lbs. more." If that were the choice, I would go with a well built/engineered solid axle that handles better, would give the added benefit of better acceleration, puts the power to the ground more efficiently, can generally handle more abuse, and better braking. the only area it may suffer from is if you are really pushing the car in an unknown area and hit some rough roads on a big bend. I think, in this scenario, the benefits FAR outweigh the negatives.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by HIGHOCTANE

Have you driven a 2010 Camaro? My 2SS handles and brakes WAY better than the Terminators. 100 mph in the 2010 Camaro feels about like 60 mph in a Terminator. And the brake...again the better on the Camaro...... the Terminator and the 2010 Camaro weigh about the same..
I love the Terminator..but a spade is a spade...I do miss the low end TQ..but that is really all I miss..
JMO..

and, btw, the terminator mustangs don't weigh anywhere near the same as the camaro's. the terminator mustangs came in at an obese 3660 lbs., or about 200 lbs less than the morbidly obese camaro. even the convertible terminators weigh a decent deal less than the camaro's.

[Mr CLuTcH]

On the other hand, the Camaro is a porky car. Every picture I see of the 3 main muscle cars shows the Camaro as the widest of the three. This thing is massive! And the weight of course is no better. In fact, I think the Mustang size and weight is "perfect".

The Camaro a "porky" car?lol! That's ridiculous,....you want porky look no further than Dodge. Check out the Charger and the Challenger and the Camaro will appear like a middle-weight boxer. Plus, it weighs less than both. The Mustang being the lightest of the group, fine, but we all know who has the best physical appearance...

And actually to me, the Camaro SS seems to be a wide yet slender and sleek fellow. I mean look at it. When I look at that car,....my car, I don't see pork, I see SEXY. The ladies all seem to think so. You want pork,....try a 4-door musclecar.