GM: Camaro SS prototype lapped ?Ring in 8:19
Though we can?t publish our driving impressions of the reborn Chevrolet Camaro SS until Friday at 6 pm Eastern - check back then! - we did learn today from General Motors that what the automaker calls an ?80 percent? prototype of the neo-muscle car lapped Germany?s N?rburgring in a reasonable 8:19.
That figure puts it about three seconds ahead of the Cobalt SS (and, not surprisingly, way behind the Corvette ZR1) though that test is official and was done with a production vehicle. GM figures the production Camaro SS will easily shave a few seconds off of that time.
GM says it sent a prototype Camaro SS around the track last year when the automaker was doing development work on the Pontiac G8 GXP.
The automaker didn?t say who was behind the wheel during the unofficial attempt.
3 seconds faster then the Cobalt SS? Terrible GM, just terrible.
Either the Camaro is really slow, or the Cobalt is really fast...or both.
The Cobalt is a monster of a car and the Camaro sucks balls.
I really don't like it at all anymore.
Give me a 4th gen over the current car, without a doubt. Better yet, give me a GTO.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 16, 2009, 09:25:58 PM
3 seconds faster then the Cobalt SS? Terrible GM, just terrible.
Either the Camaro is really slow, or the Cobalt is really fast...or both.
How is that
Bad? The IS-F does it in 8:18, The 350Z does it in 8:26.
What, do you guys want it to have a super huge margin over a car just because a FWD car did it faster?
This is also a preproduction car.
The Camaro-bashing is really getting old.
Quote from: TBR on March 16, 2009, 09:56:31 PM
This is also a preproduction car.
The Camaro-bashing is really getting old.
Sit in one. Just sit in one.
It make a VW feel like a Maybach by comparison.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:06:41 PM
Sit in one. Just sit in one.
It make a VW feel like a Maybach by comparison.
It's built to a price. I'd rather have a cheap interior than a cheap suspension and transmission.
Perhaps do some research on where 8:20 puts a $30k car...
Plus it was a prototype.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2009, 10:09:12 PM
Perhaps do some research on where 8:20 puts a $30k car...
Plus it was a prototype.
Which one is the $30k car and which is the $40k car? SS or Z28?
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:11:29 PM
Which one is the $30k car and which is the $40k car? SS or Z28?
?
He's probably talking about the car that was tested, the $30,000 SS. Is the Z28 even official at this point?
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:11:29 PM
Which one is the $30k car and which is the $40k car? SS or Z28?
No Z-28 as of yet. And $40k? I'm lost.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/16/2010-chevrolet-camaro-rated-at-29-mpg-highway/
Why is Nurburgring such a big deal? It's comparing apples to oranges anyways when you compare the times by different drivers on different days..
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:06:41 PM
Sit in one. Just sit in one.
It make a VW feel like a Maybach by comparison.
Since when have muscle cars been known for high-quality interiors.
This obsession with interior plastics is getting annoying.
Quote from: NomisR on March 16, 2009, 10:26:18 PM
Why is Nurburgring such a big deal? It's comparing apples to oranges anyways when you compare the times by different drivers on different days..
I guess we should throw out all performance data.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2009, 10:09:12 PM
Perhaps do some research on where 8:20 puts a $30k car...
Plus it was a prototype.
Besides RWD and styling, why would anyone buy a Camaro SS over a Cobalt SS if it's barely faster?
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 16, 2009, 10:49:48 PM
Besides RWD and styling, why would anyone buy a Camaro SS over a Cobalt SS if it's barely faster?
Because the Camaro SS is a quicker/faster car than either the Mustang GT or Challenger R/T (both of which get pwned by a Cobalt SS around the heralded 'Ring), let alone the Cobalt SS.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 16, 2009, 10:49:48 PM
Besides RWD and styling, why would anyone buy a Camaro SS over a Cobalt SS if it's barely faster?
"That figure puts it about three seconds ahead of the Cobalt SS (and, not surprisingly, way behind the Corvette ZR1) though that test is official and was done with a production vehicle. GM figures the production Camaro SS will easily shave a few seconds off of that time."
The fact the two cars are as close as they are is more of a testament of the Cobalt than it is a condemnation of the Camaro. Do you really think the Mustang or Challenger could do better?
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 16, 2009, 10:49:48 PM
Besides RWD and styling, why would anyone buy a Camaro SS over a Cobalt SS if it's barely faster?
Three seconds is more than "Barely Faster". The Nurburgring is a Balance of handling and power. The Cobalt may be easier to drive in the corners (handles better) but the Camaro is faster in the straights.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 16, 2009, 10:48:35 PM
I guess we should throw out all performance data.
In this case, yes.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2009, 10:33:14 PM
Since when have muscle cars been known for high-quality interiors.
This obsession with interior plastics is getting annoying.
It isn't an obsession with high quality interiors. It's a fascination with an interior that might actually be worse than the one in the 1994-2002 F Body. The high sills make it next to impossible to see out of, too.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:56:55 PM
It isn't an obsession with high quality interiors. It's a fascination with an interior that might actually be worse than the one in the 1994-2002 F Body. The high sills make it next to impossible to see out of, too.
You're just short.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:56:55 PM
It isn't an obsession with high quality interiors. It's a fascination with an interior that might actually be worse than the one in the 1994-2002 F Body. The high sills make it next to impossible to see out of, too.
What part of preproduction do you people not understand? Remember the reason the car was delayed was because they had to find a new supplier for the interior.
Quote from: TBR on March 16, 2009, 10:58:27 PM
What part of preproduction do you people not understand? Remember the reason the car was delayed was because they had to find a new supplier for the interior.
It was an open pre-production car. They're not going to change that much.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2009, 10:55:39 PM
Three seconds is more than "Barely Faster". The Nurburgring is a Balance of handling and power. The Cobalt may be easier to drive in the corners (handles better) but the Camaro is faster in the straights.
In this case, yes.
Three seconds on Laguna Seca is not close. Three seconds over a 12 mile course is pretty fucking close.
But it's not an official time, so no real conclusions can be drawn. Except that it's ugly.
And probably won't ever come out.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 11:04:02 PM
It was an open pre-production car. They're not going to change that much.
Considering they didn't have a supplier finalized until last month, it very well could.
Regardless, in a muscle car performance trumps interior build quality.
Quote from: TBR on March 16, 2009, 11:08:19 PM
Considering they didn't have a supplier finalized until last month, it very well could.
Regardless, in a muscle car performance trumps interior build quality.
We'll see, but it's going to have to be one hell of a car to beat the revised 'Stang.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 11:04:02 PM
It was an open pre-production car. They're not going to change that much.
Design and assembly = No. Things like materials, Yes.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=18053.msg1021006#msg1021006 date=1237266347
Three seconds on Laguna Seca is not close. Three seconds over a 12 mile course is pretty fucking close.
But it's not an official time, so no real conclusions can be drawn. Except that it's ugly.
And probably won't ever come out.
Besides, no one is claiming that the Camaro is a handling car. Nor is the Challenger or Mustang.
I bet V6 Camaro is .01 seconds faster than Cobalt SS on 'ring.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2009, 11:11:31 PM
Design and assembly = No. Things like materials, Yes.
Hopefully. It still doesn't help that you feel like you're riding in a bath tub with no "oh shit" handle bars.
It's more to do with the Cobalt SS being F***ing ridiculous as a FWD pocket rocket than the Camaro being slow.
I mean look what the Cobalt beat around VIR in C&D's lightning lap comparisons.
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/download/128503/1741886/version/1/file/LightningLapTimes.xls
Look where it finds itself in the rankings.
Ford Shelby GT500 03:11.0
Audi RS4 03:11.2
BMW Z4 M Coupe 03:11.7
Nissan 350Z Track 03:12.5
Chevrolet Cobalt SS 03:13.0
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR 03:13.3
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR 03:13.5
BMW 135i 03:13.5
Lexus IS-F 03:14.0
Audi S5 03:14.5
Honda S2000 CR 03:15.0
Pontiac Solstice GXP 03:15.7
Mazdaspeed 3 03:16.0
Dodge Challenger SRT8 03:16.3
Lotus Elise SC 03:16.6
Infiniti G37S 03:17.5
Dodge Charger SRT8 03:18.2
Mazda RX-8 03:19.0
Subaru Impreza WRX STI 03:19.0
Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged 03:20.6
Dodge Caliber SRT4 03:20.8
Ford Mustang GT 03:20.9
Volkswagen R32 03:21.8
Mini Cooper S 03:22.9
Honda Civic Si Mugen 03:24.8
Volkswagen GTI 03:25.1
Honda Civic Si 03:26.5
Volvo C30 Version 2.0 03:26.6
Mazda MX-5 03:29.3
I especially like how it's just 2 seconds off the pace of the 500HP GT500, but 7 seconds faster than the Ford Mustang GT. It's also less than 2 seconds off the pace of the RS4, which supposedly does a 7:58 Ring time.
Its unbelievable that the Colbalt is faster then the Solstice with the same engine. GM really worked some magic with that car.
http://www.chevrolet.com/allnewcamaro/
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 10:56:55 PM
It isn't an obsession with high quality interiors. It's a fascination with an interior that might actually be worse than the one in the 1994-2002 F Body. The high sills make it next to impossible to see out of, too.
The interior holds the gauges and the seats and keeps teh weather off of you. In a car that's supposed to be fast for relatively cheap, that's all it needs to do.
And the last sentence is just one of the many really dumb things people say on here. I'm starting to lose track of who's made the dumbest car statments anymore...
Quote from: Raza on March 16, 2009, 11:05:47 PM
Three seconds on Laguna Seca is not close. Three seconds over a 12 mile course is pretty fucking close.
But it's not an official time, so no real conclusions can be drawn. Except that it's ugly.
And probably won't ever come out.
You know that last isn't true as I've already posted a pic of a whole shitload of production Camaros, both V6 and V8, sitting outside the plant ready to be shipped to dealers.
Quote from: ChrisV on March 17, 2009, 07:01:39 AM
And the last sentence is just one of the many really dumb things people say on here. I'm starting to lose track of who's made the dumbest car statments anymore...
Although I agree with you about the interior, I disagree about the belt line. High belt lines aren't a good thing, it makes it hard to see out and makes the car feel bulkier when driving.
Quote from: TBR on March 17, 2009, 07:34:37 AM
Although I agree with you about the interior, I disagree about the belt line. High belt lines aren't a good thing, it makes it hard to see out and makes the car feel bulkier when driving.
The Beltline isn't high. The Greenhouse is just short.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 17, 2009, 07:39:19 AM
The Beltline isn't high. The Greenhouse is just short.
If the greenhouse is short than the belt line has to be high, unless GM wants to sell the car to short people only.
Quote from: ChrisV on March 17, 2009, 07:01:39 AM
You know that last isn't true as I've already posted a pic of a whole shitload of production Camaros, both V6 and V8, sitting outside the plant ready to be shipped to dealers.
.... yet they are not being shipped to dealers despite having orders taken for them how many years ago in some cases?
Quote from: the Teuton on March 16, 2009, 11:09:29 PM
We'll see, but it's going to have to be one hell of a car to beat the revised 'Stang.
You must be talking about the interior! There is no way a 315hp 'Stang will outperform a 422hp SS. Handling might be close (no SS has been tested so I'm giving the 'Stang the benefit of the doubt) but the SS will put up better numbers everywhere else.
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 08:12:49 AM
.... yet they are not being shipped to dealers despite having orders taken for them how many years ago in some cases?
Um, the pic I posted was only from a couple weeks ago. They were probably waiting for proper transportation. Whether they are at the dealers or not is irrelevant to whether the cars were actually manufactured.
HEMI666: Consider this quote from your posting: "...we did learn today from General Motors that what the automaker calls an ?80 percent? prototype of the neo-muscle car lapped Germany?s N?rburgring in a reasonable 8:19."
How many vehicles could easily match--or beat substantially--an 8:19 if you allowed the drivers to change that other twenty percent of their car in whatever details suited them? Changing essentially every fifth part of a car could make a world of difference if done correctly.
The truth won't out until someone buys a production Camaro off a dealership lot, takes it to the 'Ring, and allows a capable driver to have at it. Then, there'll be results from a "100 percent" version of "the neo-muscle car", eh? And that's what Chevy will make available to you through their dealerships, be that better or worse than an 8:19 from an "80 percent" prototype...
Quote from: 565 on March 16, 2009, 11:58:53 PM
It's more to do with the Cobalt SS being F***ing ridiculous as a FWD pocket rocket than the Camaro being slow.
I mean look what the Cobalt beat around VIR in C&D's lightning lap comparisons.
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/download/128503/1741886/version/1/file/LightningLapTimes.xls
Look where it finds itself in the rankings.
Ford Shelby GT500 03:11.0
Audi RS4 03:11.2
BMW Z4 M Coupe 03:11.7
Nissan 350Z Track 03:12.5
Chevrolet Cobalt SS 03:13.0
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR 03:13.3
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR 03:13.5
BMW 135i 03:13.5
Lexus IS-F 03:14.0
Audi S5 03:14.5
Honda S2000 CR 03:15.0
Pontiac Solstice GXP 03:15.7
Mazdaspeed 3 03:16.0
Dodge Challenger SRT8 03:16.3
Lotus Elise SC 03:16.6
Infiniti G37S 03:17.5
Dodge Charger SRT8 03:18.2
Mazda RX-8 03:19.0
Subaru Impreza WRX STI 03:19.0
Chevrolet Cobalt SS Supercharged 03:20.6
Dodge Caliber SRT4 03:20.8
Ford Mustang GT 03:20.9
Volkswagen R32 03:21.8
Mini Cooper S 03:22.9
Honda Civic Si Mugen 03:24.8
Volkswagen GTI 03:25.1
Honda Civic Si 03:26.5
Volvo C30 Version 2.0 03:26.6
Mazda MX-5 03:29.3
I especially like how it's just 2 seconds off the pace of the 500HP GT500, but 7 seconds faster than the Ford Mustang GT. It's also less than 2 seconds off the pace of the RS4, which supposedly does a 7:58 Ring time.
Holy crap. I'm beginning to feel very foolish.
Quote from: ChrisV on March 17, 2009, 07:01:39 AM
You know that last isn't true as I've already posted a pic of a whole shitload of production Camaros, both V6 and V8, sitting outside the plant ready to be shipped to dealers.
Well,
you know. I didn't know.
Apparently, now I do.
Quote from: ChrisV on March 17, 2009, 01:13:42 PM
Um, the pic I posted was only from a couple weeks ago. They were probably waiting for proper transportation. Whether they are at the dealers or not is irrelevant to whether the cars were actually manufactured.
i would think it would be a "good faith effort" to get the cars out asap given they are a year behind already for the people that prepaid for them??
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 04:30:12 PM
i would think it would be a "good faith effort" to get the cars out asap given they are a year behind already for the people that prepaid for them??
If you've prepaid for a car that hadn't had a release date then you're stupid, and the dealer needs to be fined for stealing people's money.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=18053.msg1021393#msg1021393 date=1237326782
Holy crap. I'm beginning to feel very foolish.
Why? Because you bought a Jetta?
I know what my next car will be. Cobalt SS Turbo or a Mustang GT...used of course.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 04:54:38 PM
Why? Because you bought a Jetta?
I know what my next car will be. Cobalt SS Turbo or a Mustang GT...used of course.
I know at the time, I couldn't have afforded one. MSRP is too high, and domestics lease so poorly, it would have been $500 a month.
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 08:12:49 AM
.... yet they are not being shipped to dealers despite having orders taken for them how many years ago in some cases?
GM didn't start accepting orders until last October, so 6 mos?
Quote from: Raza on March 17, 2009, 05:01:17 PM
I know at the time, I couldn't have afforded one. MSRP is too high, and domestics lease so poorly, it would have been $500 a month.
Then why do you think you made a foolish decision. You worked within your constraints to get the best (non-Subaru) car you could find.
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 08:12:49 AM
.... yet they are not being shipped to dealers despite having orders taken for them how many years ago in some cases?
I found the REAL answer to my question - those camaros posted in the lot were either not production or not completed...
PRODUCTION ON MONDAY, MARCH 16 - NEWS! Rick Hendrick to drive first one off line.
On Monday morning, March 16, the first regular retail production Camaro will be driven off the line by
Chevrolet dealer and NASCAR team owner Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick purchased this unit through the
recent Barrett-Jackson Auction for $350,000. All proceeds from his purchase went to benefits the
American Heart Association in their fight against heart disease and stroke.
Customers interested in being part of Camaro history have until this Sunday, March 15, 2009, to order a
2010 Camaro under the Early Ordering Activity. Customers who submit their order under this activity
receive a Camaro Welcome Kit, and a special factory processing option code (R6P) that will appear on
their window label and invoice. Sold orders received after this date will be considered part of the
normal ordering process and will not receive the special option code or welcome kit.
I bet the auto show cars came from that lot of cars we saw in the pictures. This leaves me suspect of how much it will differ from the real production models. But then, if Chevy didn't want people to judge the car based on a preproduction model, why did they bring unlocked Camaros to the auto show?
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 05:26:09 PM
Sold orders received after this date will be considered part of the
normal ordering process and will not receive the special option code or welcome kit. [/b]
:wtf:
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 04:54:38 PM
Why? Because you bought a Jetta?
I know what my next car will be. Cobalt SS Turbo or a Mustang GT...used of course.
Even though the Mustang is substantially slower around a track than the Cobalt?
Quote from: r0tor on March 17, 2009, 05:26:09 PM
I found the REAL answer to my question - those camaros posted in the lot were either not production or not completed...
PRODUCTION ON MONDAY, MARCH 16 - NEWS! Rick Hendrick to drive first one off line.
On Monday morning, March 16, the first regular retail production Camaro will be driven off the line by
Chevrolet dealer and NASCAR team owner Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick purchased this unit through the
recent Barrett-Jackson Auction for $350,000. All proceeds from his purchase went to benefits the
American Heart Association in their fight against heart disease and stroke.
Customers interested in being part of Camaro history have until this Sunday, March 15, 2009, to order a
2010 Camaro under the Early Ordering Activity. Customers who submit their order under this activity
receive a Camaro Welcome Kit, and a special factory processing option code (R6P) that will appear on
their window label and invoice. Sold orders received after this date will be considered part of the
normal ordering process and will not receive the special option code or welcome kit.
I think that the proceeds should have gone to support GM. GM is a non-profit organization.
Quote from: the Teuton on March 17, 2009, 05:07:07 PM
Then why do you think you made a foolish decision. You worked within your constraints to get the best (non-Subaru) car you could find.
It's not really a foolish decision (all the Subarus in my price range were utter shit I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies, by the way), but it does make me wish I had more money.
Mind you, I really do love my car, and love driving it, but that kind of power and speed would most certainly be intoxicating.
camaro is a fatty
She's a bit to heavy for me, plus i prefer my 2 doors to be 2 seaters and more focused on performance.
Quote from: TBR on March 17, 2009, 06:11:01 PM
Even though the Mustang is substantially slower around a track than the Cobalt?
:mask:
Yes. The Mustang just has more character, personality, style, and soul. Don't get me wrong, I love the Cobalt SS Supercharged that my parents have, but everything about the Mustang, including the cheap and expansive aftermarket, is just too much to pass up. Unless there's a killer deal on a newer Cobalt SS Turbo. I do want RWD in my next car though. I do miss that.
Forgive me for stating the obvious in a loud and angry voice, but
THE CAMARO IS A FUCKING MUSCLE CAR AND MUSCLE CARS ARE DESIGNED TO BLITZ 1/4 MILES, NOT GO AROUND THE CAROUSEL FASTER THAN AN M3
And given that, 8:19 is goddamned impressive.
Quote from: sandertheshark on March 17, 2009, 07:55:36 PM
Forgive me for stating the obvious in a loud and angry voice, but
THE CAMARO IS A FUCKING MUSCLE CAR AND MUSCLE CARS ARE DESIGNED TO BLITZ 1/4 MILES, NOT GO AROUND THE CAROUSEL FASTER THAN AN M3
And given that, 8:19 is goddamned impressive.
So basically it's like that cheap expired meat i bought at the store. It's meant to be eaten and shit out, the fact that i didn't puke after eating it is impressive.
GM, cheap shitty meat you can keep down! now with 5000 dollars in cash rebates.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 17, 2009, 07:57:17 PM
So basically it's like that cheap expired meat i bought at the store. It's meant to be eaten and shit out, the fact that i didn't puke after eating it is impressive.
GM, cheap shitty meat you can keep down! now with 5000 dollars in cash rebates.
I'm having trouble following your logic.
Excuse the understatement, let me rephrase that.
I'd need
Evel Knievel's rocket bike to follow that leap of logic.
camaro sucks
flat black caddies suck
they do, flat black is overrated and played out.
i've never seen a caddy(production) that i like.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 17, 2009, 08:07:01 PM
they do, flat black is overrated and played out.
i've never seen a caddy(production) that i like.
oh, flat black is cool, and so are caddies. it's just the flat black caddies that suck.
Quote from: NACar on March 17, 2009, 08:13:17 PM
oh, flat black is cool, and so are caddies. it's just the flat black caddies that suck.
does your weiner hurt because i made fun of the fatty camaro
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 17, 2009, 08:14:26 PM
does your weiner hurt because i made fun of the fatty camaro
no, my weiner hurts because your mom forgot to take her teeth out
Quote from: NACar on March 17, 2009, 08:20:37 PM
no, my weiner hurts because your mom forgot to take her teeth out
ahh, that wasn't my mom that was my neighbor who likes to dress up in drag.
I'm sure you will get alot better looking guys when you get a brand spanking new camaro.
Quote from: NACar on March 17, 2009, 08:13:17 PM
oh, flat black is cool, and so are caddies. it's just the flat black caddies that suck.
my next car will be a satin black 2009+ CTS-V. Suck that.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 07:54:43 PM
:mask:
Yes. The Mustang just has more character, personality, style, and soul. Don't get me wrong, I love the Cobalt SS Supercharged that my parents have, but everything about the Mustang, including the cheap and expansive aftermarket, is just too much to pass up. Unless there's a killer deal on a newer Cobalt SS Turbo. I do want RWD in my next car though. I do miss that.
Oh I definitely agree with you. My point was that it is awfully hypocritical to act like its a huge deal that the Camaro SS is only 3 seconds faster around a huge track than the Cobalt when the Mustang is 8 seconds slower around a short track.
Quote from: NACar on March 17, 2009, 08:20:37 PM
no, my weiner hurts because your mom forgot to take her teeth out
LOL!!!
Quote from: Vinsanity on March 17, 2009, 08:44:08 PM
my next car will be a satin black 2009+ CTS-V. Suck that.
satin is cool
Quote from: TBR on March 17, 2009, 08:48:50 PM
Oh I definitely agree with you. My point was that it is awfully hypocritical to act like its a huge deal that the Camaro SS is only 3 seconds faster around a huge track than the Cobalt when the Mustang is 8 seconds slower around a short track.
I'm not being hypocritical. The Mustang isn't built by Chevy. Both the Cobalt SS and the Camaro SS are. The Camaro has 162 more horsepower, 148 lb-ft of additional TQ, is RWD, has a 6 speed manual, IRS, costs over $7000 more, and is supposed to be their performance champ behind the Corvette. If Ford built an SVT Focus that is virtually as fast as the GT500, I would be saying there needs to be a bigger performance gap between the two.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 11:06:53 PM
I'm not being hypocritical. The Mustang isn't built by Chevy. Both the Cobalt SS and the Camaro SS are. The Camaro has 162 more horsepower, 148 lb-ft of additional TQ, is RWD, has a 6 speed manual, IRS, costs over $7000 more, and is supposed to be their performance champ behind the Corvette. If Ford built an SVT Focus that is virtually as fast as the GT500, I would be saying there needs to be a bigger performance gap between the two.
Yes you are. The brand doesn't matter, if a track time is indicative of performance than the Cobalt absolutely destroys the Mustang, despite being down on power and FWD while the Camaro is faster than the Cobalt. Yet somehow it isn't good enough that the Camaro is significantly faster than its competition and is faster than the cars below it in the line-up, it has to be significantly faster than everything.
You're just looking for another excuse to bash what you know is the superior car.
Quote from: Raza on March 17, 2009, 06:37:27 PM
It's not really a foolish decision (all the Subarus in my price range were utter shit I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies, by the way), but it does make me wish I had more money.
Mind you, I really do love my car, and love driving it, but that kind of power and speed would most certainly be intoxicating.
Umm get a programmer and i'm pretty sure your car will run low low 14's or high 13's in the quarter mile for a couple hundred bucks...
Quote from: TBR on March 18, 2009, 06:45:16 AM
Yes you are. The brand doesn't matter, if a track time is indicative of performance than the Cobalt absolutely destroys the Mustang, despite being down on power and FWD while the Camaro is faster than the Cobalt. Yet somehow it isn't good enough that the Camaro is significantly faster than its competition and is faster than the cars below it in the line-up, it has to be significantly faster than everything.
The Mustang has 45 more hp and weighs 600 lbs more then the Cobalt. That's enough for the power to not make much of a difference, and the Cobalt SS (and Camaro SS for that matter) suspension and chassis was setup at the Ring, whereas the Mustang's was not. The 2010 Mustang GT is a whole different story though what with skidpad numbers in the 0.92-0.95 range, it could probably hang with the Cobalt SS on a track now, but it probably still won't beat it considering the power to weight advantage of the Cobalt.
QuoteYou're just looking for another excuse to bash what you know is the superior car.
No, actually nobody knows that yet. The car hasn't been compared to anything yet, so how could I know that?
Now, I have a question for you. Which Mustang should be compared to the Camaro SS?
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 17, 2009, 07:43:44 PM
camaro is a fatty
She's a bit to heavy for me, plus i prefer my 2 doors to be 2 seaters and more focused on performance.
Z51 Vette?
Quote from: TBR on March 18, 2009, 06:45:16 AM
Yes you are. The brand doesn't matter, if a track time is indicative of performance than the Cobalt absolutely destroys the Mustang, despite being down on power and FWD while the Camaro is faster than the Cobalt. Yet somehow it isn't good enough that the Camaro is significantly faster than its competition and is faster than the cars below it in the line-up, it has to be significantly faster than everything.
You're just looking for another excuse to bash what you know is the superior car.
That's what I'm seeing.
No matter what anyone says, 422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT for $31K is a significant feat.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 11:34:12 AM
That's what I'm seeing.
No matter what anyone says, 422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT for $31K is a significant feat.
GoCougs: Share with us which dealership you went to, wrote a check for $31,000, and drove away in a fully-paid-for new Camaro with "422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT"?
Well?
Quote from: Nethead on March 18, 2009, 11:49:27 AM
GoCougs: Share with us which dealership you went to, wrote a check for $31,000, and drove away in a fully-paid-for new Camaro with "422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT"?
Well?
wat - never said anything about having bought one...
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 11:34:12 AM
That's what I'm seeing.
No matter what anyone says, 422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT for $31K is a significant feat.
Is that how much it's going to cost?
Jeeeezus. It makes the Genesis look overpriced.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 11:06:53 PM
I'm not being hypocritical. The Mustang isn't built by Chevy. Both the Cobalt SS and the Camaro SS are. The Camaro has 162 more horsepower, 148 lb-ft of additional TQ, is RWD, has a 6 speed manual, IRS, costs over $7000 more, and is supposed to be their performance champ behind the Corvette. If Ford built an SVT Focus that is virtually as fast as the GT500, I would be saying there needs to be a bigger performance gap between the two.
RWD does little difference. Just because the Cobalt is faster doesn't mean that the Cobalt and Camaro are comparable.
And I seriously doubt that the Mustang GT is able to handle the Cobalt on the track.
Quote from: Raza on March 18, 2009, 12:09:15 PM
Is that how much it's going to cost?
Jeeeezus. It makes the Genesis look overpriced.
GM announcement for 2010 Camaro MSRP: $22,995 for the V6 LS and $30,995 for the V8 SS. (http://www.caranddriver.com/buying_guide/chevrolet/camaro/2010_chevrolet_camaro_coupe/chevrolet_announces_pricing_for_2010_camaro_car_news)
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 12:16:02 PM
GM announcement for 2010 Camaro MSRP: $22,995 for the V6 LS and $30,995 for the V8 SS. (http://www.caranddriver.com/buying_guide/chevrolet/camaro/2010_chevrolet_camaro_coupe/chevrolet_announces_pricing_for_2010_camaro_car_news)
Wow, that is really cheap.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 18, 2009, 12:17:26 PM
Wow, that is really cheap.
People keep knocking it in a vacuum; I fully expect that when tested there'll be some stink about cheapness, lack of refinement and whatnot, but there's simply no arguing with the game-changing value proposition.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 12:29:53 PM
People keep knocking it in a vacuum; I fully expect that when tested there'll be some stink about cheapness, lack of refinement and whatnot, but there's simply no arguing with the game-changing value proposition.
The same crap they bash the Corvette about!
Quote from: Nethead on March 18, 2009, 11:49:27 AM
GoCougs: Share with us which dealership you went to, wrote a check for $31,000, and drove away in a fully-paid-for new Camaro with "422 hp, IRS and 6sp MT"?
Well?
You know damn well what he means! :nutty:
Quote from: gotta-qik-z28 on March 18, 2009, 12:33:01 PM
The same crap they bash the Corvette about!
True, and I have to be honest that I've been one of them (much of it in jest), but the Corvette is a rare bird in that it doesn't have any direct competitors in terms of MSRP, and competitors in terms of performance are much more $$$ (contributing to that kind of criticism).
The Camaro at that MSRP will have two direct competitors in the Mustang and the Challenger, plus a lot of not-exactly-competition from the Accord Coupe V6, to the Genesis Coupe V6 to the G37C - and yet still nothing touches the value proposition. It's quite amazing IMO.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 12:16:02 PM
GM announcement for 2010 Camaro MSRP: $22,995 for the V6 LS and $30,995 for the V8 SS. (http://www.caranddriver.com/buying_guide/chevrolet/camaro/2010_chevrolet_camaro_coupe/chevrolet_announces_pricing_for_2010_camaro_car_news)
That's a hell of a deal. If it didn't look like ass, it's a car I would look at in the future. Well, I'll just have to wait for the Coyote V8 Mustang (might be a while, but I'll wait).
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 09:08:28 AM
Now, I have a question for you. Which Mustang should be compared to the Camaro SS?
The one that is a V8 muscle car and is similarly priced.
I just find it ridiculous that you are willing to condemn the Camaro SS based on a track test of a pre-production version of the car considering how little we know:
1. The weather conditions
2. The driver
3. How hard it was being driven
4. If the suspension settings were finalized
5. If the engine tuning was finalized.
Despite all of these unknowns that could adversely effect the Camaro's performance, it still outperformed the Cobalt, a car which drastically out performed the previous Mustang which was not substantially changed as far as I know (though, the better tires and better tuning could be a big difference).
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 12:55:33 PM
That's a hell of a deal. If it didn't look like ass, it's a car I would look at in the future. Well, I'll just have to wait for the Coyote V8 Mustang (might be a while, but I'll wait).
It doesn't look any worse than a Mustang or a Challenger. Although the interior looks like ass.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 17, 2009, 11:06:53 PM
I'm not being hypocritical. The Mustang isn't built by Chevy. Both the Cobalt SS and the Camaro SS are. The Camaro has 162 more horsepower, 148 lb-ft of additional TQ, is RWD, has a 6 speed manual, IRS, costs over $7000 more, and is supposed to be their performance champ behind the Corvette. If Ford built an SVT Focus that is virtually as fast as the GT500, I would be saying there needs to be a bigger performance gap between the two.
Maybe in a drag race... throw in turns and an automatic C6 drop top would run circles around even the best Camaro ever. That's like saying since the new Accord coupe is about as fast as an S2000 they're too close for comfort....
Quote from: NomisR on March 18, 2009, 01:17:00 PM
It doesn't look any worse than a Mustang or a Challenger. Although the interior looks like ass.
I think it is a distant third to both the mustang and challenger, i don't know if that would qualify it as looking like ass but i certainly understand hemi's opinion.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 03:30:06 PM
I think it is a distant third to both the mustang and challenger, i don't know if that would qualify it as looking like ass but i certainly understand hemi's opinion.
Because it has less of a retro look compared to the other cars? The problem I found with Mustangs and even more so with Challenger is that they look really dated already. And the Challenger looks more retro than the Mustang even though it is newer. I think the Camaro's exterior would stay fresher in comparison.
Quote from: NomisR on March 18, 2009, 03:33:44 PM
Because it has less of a retro look compared to the other cars? The problem I found with Mustangs and even more so with Challenger is that they look really dated already. And the Challenger looks more retro than the Mustang even though it is newer. I think the Camaro's exterior would stay fresher in comparison.
No, because it looks like ass compared to the other cars. The current(pre 2010) mustang looks good from all angles. The design is smooth and cohesive, ditto the challenger. The camaro looks like it had 3 designers and each of them liked a different generation of camaro. Then some bean counter came in and told them to settle their differences they could each design a section of the car implementing styling ques from their favorite camaro generation. The guy who did the front end did a great job, give him a bonus. The other 2 cobbled the side profile together into that rediculous quarter and rear end and threw some retarded fake side fins in for good measure.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 03:37:09 PM
No, because it looks like ass compared to the other cars. The current(pre 2010) mustang looks good from all angles. The design is smooth and cohesive, ditto the challenger. The camaro looks like it had 3 designers and each of them liked a different generation of camaro. Then some bean counter came in and told them to settle their differences they could each design a section of the car implementing styling ques from their favorite camaro generation. The guy who did the front end did a great job, give him a bonus. The other 2 cobbled the side profile together into that rediculous quarter and rear end and threw some retarded fake side fins in for good measure.
I can't argue with that.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 03:37:09 PM
No, because it looks like ass compared to the other cars. The current(pre 2010) mustang looks good from all angles. The design is smooth and cohesive, ditto the challenger. The camaro looks like it had 3 designers and each of them liked a different generation of camaro. Then some bean counter came in and told them to settle their differences they could each design a section of the car implementing styling ques from their favorite camaro generation. The guy who did the front end did a great job, give him a bonus. The other 2 cobbled the side profile together into that rediculous quarter and rear end and threw some retarded fake side fins in for good measure.
I agree with the assessment that the front looks significantly better than the side and the rear. But it's not necessarily ass. I'll have to see that thing in person to judge though.
Quote from: NomisR on March 18, 2009, 03:40:17 PM
I agree with the assessment that the front looks significantly better than the side and the rear. But it's not necessarily ass. I'll have to see that thing in person to judge though.
I have seen it and I still thought it looked like ass.
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/CarShow2007072.jpg)
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/CarShow2007071.jpg)
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/CarShow2007070.jpg)
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/CarShow2007069.jpg)
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 03:37:09 PM
No, because it looks like ass compared to the other cars. The current(pre 2010) mustang looks good from all angles. The design is smooth and cohesive, ditto the challenger. The camaro looks like it had 3 designers and each of them liked a different generation of camaro. Then some bean counter came in and told them to settle their differences they could each design a section of the car implementing styling ques from their favorite camaro generation. The guy who did the front end did a great job, give him a bonus. The other 2 cobbled the side profile together into that rediculous quarter and rear end and threw some retarded fake side fins in for good measure.
I don't think that the 2010 Mustang looks very good. I think it's a rather lazy attempt at a restyle.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 18, 2009, 03:43:02 PM
I don't think that the 2010 Mustang looks very good. I think it's a rather lazy attempt at a restyle.
Well, you're an idiot. :ohyeah:
How is it lazy?
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 03:43:33 PM
Well, you're an idiot. :ohyeah:
How is it lazy?
If it isn't a lazy attempt at a restyle, what is it?
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 03:43:33 PM
Well, you're an idiot. :ohyeah:
How is it lazy?
To the untrained eye, it looks exactly the same as the car it replaced.
When i was talking about the mustang i was talking about the current body style NOT the 2010 restyle.
THIS IS CAMARO THREAD. KEEP YOUR GOD DAMN MUSTANG TROLLING IN THE MUSTANG THREAD. THIS IS CAMARO THREAD.
The Camaro does not have fins. Those are hips.
Let's get back to talking about the fatty.
(http://image.motortrend.com/f/13083713/112_0902_03z+2010_ford_mustang_GT+with_2009_mustang.jpg)
Quote from: NACar on March 18, 2009, 03:46:54 PM
THIS IS CAMARO THREAD. KEEP YOUR GOD DAMN MUSTANG TROLLING IN THE MUSTANG THREAD. THIS IS CAMARO THREAD.
I didn't bring it up.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 18, 2009, 03:48:13 PM
The Camaro does not have fins. Those are hips.
I see fins. What do you call them?
The camaro is back baby, the legacy continues.
I wonder if GM will have a factory delete option for the steering, i won't be needing it. :rockon:
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/449561179_43e8767f7f.jpg?v=0)
(http://www.staffordclassics.com/images/wheelie20camaro69wl2.jpg)
(http://wizbangchassis.homestead.com/bill_s_20wheelie_op_800x590.jpg)
ahh memories, can't wait to have some more. Just ordered a 2ss in black with the fin delete.
(http://www.pelsor.com/mullet/camaro1.jpg)
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 03:54:36 PM
Just ordered a 2ss in black with the fin delete.
Seriously?
I wonder if GM will sell the car with a factory solid rear axle option through COPO.
I think the camaro looks good for a come back, I mean after it's out for a few years it can get a refresh. I mean I guess I'm in the minority that I like all sides except the front.
And it's sad that cars like the Camaro and Mustang just get grouped into drag racing and drag racing only. I mean their roots are more in SCCA and Trans-Am? I rather see the car come back to its roots.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 03:41:06 PM
I have seen it and I still thought it looked like ass.
It doesn't look too bad but some of the details makes it look like a toy and cheap. Maybe it'll look better in black.
I keep sayin' it - I think it looks fantastic - better than the Mustang, and infinitely better than the Challenger.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 18, 2009, 04:35:31 PM
I keep sayin' it - I think it looks fantastic - better than the Mustang, and infinitely better than the Challenger.
I personally think all three look quite good, but I think the Camaro is my favorite. The Challenger is slab-sided and I just can get over the black trim on the Mustang.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 18, 2009, 03:45:19 PM
To the untrained eye, it looks exactly the same as the car it replaced.
True!
Quote from: 2o6 on March 18, 2009, 03:43:02 PM
I don't think that the 2010 Mustang looks very good. I think it's a rather lazy attempt at a restyle.
Yeah, kinda like the Porsche 997.
Quote from: MX793 on March 18, 2009, 05:37:14 PM
Yeah, kinda like the Porsche 997.
Exactly, but even the most adamant Porsche fan wouldn't try to convince you that their styling department isn't lazy when it comes to the 911.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 03:41:06 PM
I have seen it and I still thought it looked like ass.
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/CarShow2007072.jpg)
So does Salma Hayek's ass.
Quote from: MX793 on March 18, 2009, 05:37:14 PM
Yeah, kinda like the Porsche 997.
And every other redesigned Porsche.
Quote from: TBR on March 18, 2009, 05:39:00 PM
Exactly, but even the most adamant Porsche fan wouldn't try to convince you that their styling department isn't lazy when it comes to the 911.
Yes they do.
Quote from: sandertheshark on March 18, 2009, 05:49:14 PM
So does Salma Hayek's ass.
Don't tell me you are comparing the Camaro's ass to Salma Hayek's.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 06:06:20 PM
Don't tell me you are comparing the Camaro's ass to Salma Hayek's.
No, I'm just saying a fine ass still looks like ass.
Quote from: sandertheshark on March 18, 2009, 06:08:56 PM
No, I'm just saying a fine ass still looks like ass.
Well, the Camaro's ass hardly looks good.
the camaro is automotive design perfection.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 06:56:30 PM
the camaro is automotive design perfection.
No, the Honda Civic is closer to perfection then any Camaro in history.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 06:58:38 PM
No, the Honda Civic is closer to perfection then any Camaro in history.
I'm being serious.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 07:00:01 PM
I'm being serious.
You're an asshole and
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 18, 2009, 07:00:55 PM
So am I.
You're a Mustang troll. Why should anyone listen to either one of you? :huh:
Quote from: sandertheshark on March 18, 2009, 07:10:12 PM
You're an asshole andYou're a Mustang troll. Why should anyone listen to either one of you? :huh:
:wub:
Are you hitting on me?
I hope you are because I like it....... :winkguy:
Quote from: sandertheshark on March 18, 2009, 07:10:12 PM
You're an asshole andYou're a Mustang troll. Why should anyone listen to either one of you? :huh:
Well, because I'm right and he's wrong.
Thankfully asshole is lower on the scum-o-meter than mustang troll. :lol:
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on March 18, 2009, 07:31:35 PM
Thankfully asshole is lower on the scum-o-meter than mustang troll. :lol:
You wish. Mustang Troll would be a step up in the world for you. :lol:
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l21/iamrich17/Blacker.jpg)
(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l21/iamrich17/Rumblebee.jpg)
:wub: