06-21-2014, 03:09 AM | #71 |
Account Suspended
Drives: 2011 Camaro VR 2SS/RS & Impala Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Riverside,ca
Posts: 5,342
|
[QUOTE=MikeT;7761918]Hey, I hear ya. As a rule, I'm against these sorts of government mandates too, but I think that few would argue that the current Camaro is the most lookin-over-your-shoulder-friendly car out there. This car has a lot of virtues, but great rear visibility isn't among them. In other words, if there are any cars out there that will become a bit safer due to this mandate, I suspect the Camaro is probably among them.[/QUOT
He said all cars not just Camaros ! We all know the Camaro needs them but not the other cars! Like sedans and etc. So wait! Why do mustang ppl and others talk about the Camaro rear visibility but still all of them have backup camaras! Including the Mustangs! Why if they don't have the Camaro horrible visibility? |
06-21-2014, 10:27 AM | #72 |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,175
|
Back up cameras are simply there to provide visibility of what is right behind your car. You couldn't possibly see a small child sitting behind your car.
Yes, there should be a simple amount of expected responsibility to own and operate a motor vehicle, but sadly too many children have beer backed over by their parents and this response addresses that. Now if you've actually seen the cameras, the wiring to it weighs more. A backup camera is probably adding no more weight to your car than you burrito at lunch. Assuming you have NAV or at least CUE or MyLink. What happens though is the sum of the parts. Add emissions, FE and technology to the total car and it gets tougher and tougher to keep weight down. Simply put, to meet future emissions and FE standards cars must get lighter. Forget the performance crowd. The government has giant leaps in FE required coming up like a freight train. Lighter cars cost more money because they require significant premiums for lighter weight materials. Even high strength steels carry a 10 to 15% penalty. Aluminum carries an even bigger penalty. Carbon Fiber? Even with the recent advances in manufacturing techniques, it remains wildly expensive. Now GM took the C7, added the Aluminum frame and a bunch of CF and for the most part maintained price. This comes from a lot of hard work by a lot of people. And that also isn't free or cheap. It will get tougher and tougher to buy a V8 in a passenger car. But they will all be getting lighter. That has always been the tough battle for automotive engineers. Add mandated content, add technology and maintain cost and mass. Oh and lord help us when the Camaro needs a 150 pound hybrid battery................or worse a 400 pound Volt battery to meet FE standards.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
06-21-2014, 01:05 PM | #73 |
Drives: 2012 Ford Focus Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
The ATS sport with the V6 weighs in at over 3600 lbs. I think once they release the weights for the ATS Couple V6, we'll have a decent ball park of where to expect the 6th gen camaro at.
|
06-21-2014, 02:50 PM | #74 | |
Drives: 2014 2SS/RS Convertible Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lake Orion, MI
Posts: 1,247
|
Quote:
The trend is to keep adding more electronics, nannies, air bags, and every conceivable safety item so people can't hurt themselves no matter how badly they drive or even if they are too lazy to wear a seat belt. But it doesn't matter how much they try to idiot proof these cars because someone will always build a better idiot. |
|
06-21-2014, 06:23 PM | #75 | |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
Quote:
I don't see the Camaro V6 getting magnetic ride...even as an option so IF the 6th gen Camaro was ATS sized, I'd place my bets at it being more around 3,450 - 3,500 instead of 3,600 ish. There is good word that the Camaro is shinking, but how much...who knows. May not shrink quite to ATS size.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
06-21-2014, 07:22 PM | #76 |
Drives: too many Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: oh va pa ma tx
Posts: 3,046
|
why no v6 magnetic ride? the weight vs hp?? I think that would be a big mistake..the majority of camaro sold are v6, so thinking reach to the masses? I think a 1le option as other members mentioned would be great.. I think Chevy needs to target the v6 crowd purely vs sales..
|
06-23-2014, 10:06 PM | #77 |
Drives: Camaros, BMWs, Cummins, Ninja Join Date: May 2012
Location: MA
Posts: 20
|
i think what people are missing here is that this time around (since 2010) GM is playing the game SMART making a car that appeals to both enthusiasts and ordinary people! we have to expect GM to add more luxury features and quality/ comfort in order to keep the car going as well as it has been...BUT we also have to expect more power and less weight and HOPE that its wipes the streets with Mustang BLOOD!!! im really hoping that they make this 6th gen not only look mean but a real contender and take back our title of king! the ZL1 needs to beat the Shelby in every category, the Z28 needs to keep beating (yes i know it already does) the Boss and SS needs to beat the standard 5.0 thats all i ask for with this upcoming generation just MAKE IT HAPPEN!!! so sick of all the mustang guys being on their high horse
|
06-24-2014, 08:42 AM | #78 | |
Drives: 2012 Ford Focus Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
Quote:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2013/...pecifications/ The ATS is a small car, about the size of a Cruze. I'd like to the mustang/camaro get smaller, but I dont see it happening. Not saying its not possible with more exotic materials, but I think we're a couple generations away from that. |
|
06-24-2014, 08:49 AM | #79 | |
Drives: Really Slow Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 56,962
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
06-24-2014, 12:37 PM | #80 | |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
Quote:
http://www.cadillac.com/ats-luxury-s...imensions.html The V6 equipped RWD verson is 3,461 lbs. The AWD version is the one over 3,600 lbs, as I suspected.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
06-24-2014, 01:04 PM | #81 | ||
Account Suspended
Drives: some to distraction Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 627
|
Quote:
Here's a size comparison, in case you haven't seen this before: (and the LT1 is smaller than the 351, pictured!) So how are you going to SHRINK a Stang when the bucket o' oats is that BIG? It was fine in Crown Vics 'n F-series trucks, but... |
||
06-24-2014, 01:48 PM | #82 | |
Drives: 2020 ZL1 1LE Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,337
|
Quote:
__________________
2020 ZL1 1LE [Moroso SC Expansion Tank, otherwise stock]
|
|
06-24-2014, 02:05 PM | #83 | ||
Drives: 2012 45th Anniversary SS Coupe Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 522
|
Quote:
Quote:
Here's what I found: http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/cadi...2015.tab1.html 3411 for the 2.0L (RWD) 3530 for the 3.6L (RWD) Assuming, of course, the 6th gen Camaro keeps the same wheelbase as the ATS, I think it's very possible we could see a manual 1SS that's lighter than the no-frills Mustang GT. |
||
06-24-2014, 02:14 PM | #84 |
Drives: 2010 ZR1 "Satan" Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Norco, CA
Posts: 1,183
|
The ATS is going on a diet.
All GM will say is "Lightest in Class". That's a pretty big claim. The BMW 428i is 3420lb. The ATS will be lighter.
__________________
2002 Z06 "Blue Meanie" 11.36 ET
2003 Z06 in progress 2009 CTS-V "Spooky" 12.36 ET, bone stock at 1600 mi. Rainy day in Sacramento. Sadness. 2010 ZR1 "Satan" no times yet. 2013 Volt SCCA Solo2 #771 HS3. And a bunch of Duramaxes. |
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|