Camaro Information Page

[Tornado]

Will it be indy suspension, or a solid rear axle? There's the touring vs. redneck battle right there.

I read in Automobile and Motor Trend that the GT500 is supposed to have a live axle rear end due to "cost considerations in relation to performance gains," A.K.A. "so we can reap as much money as possible out of this dated idea" and "because, since our car is an exact ripoff of the car from '68, and retro is in, it isn't required to go left or right."

 

[Omnis]

I read in Automobile and Motor Trend that the GT500 is supposed to have a live axle rear end due to "cost considerations in relation to performance gains," A.K.A. "so we can reap as much money as possible out of this dated idea" and "because, since our car is an exact ripoff of the car from '68, and retro is in, it isn't required to go left or right."

The GT500 is the Camaro? I could care less about a frumpy Ford.

 

[Onikaze]

The GT-500 will in fact have a Live Axle, drag racing is easier with a live axle, Ford noticed how racers would swap the IRS in Cobra's out for a Live Axle anyways, so why not put the Live Axle in, and let them put an IRS in later if they want?

Ideally the IRS would be offered as an option, but at 3800 or so lbs, the GT-500 isn't going to be a track car anyways.

A GT-350, strip out all the crap we don't need, make people pay to get the radio or AC or whatever put back in, give it an IRS, lighten it as much as possible, and slot it in for $5,000 less than the projected $40,000 price for a GT-500.


As for an LS7 Camaro, l don't think it would be close to Vette performance, it's a good deal heavier for sure after all, plus worse C/D, and different gearing/wheelbase all that jazz.

I doubt they would target an SS 6.0 model at the GT-500, unless they keep the weight down under say 3400 lbs, it wouldn't be able to keep up with just 400 Hp.

As for the I-6, I didn't know GM still made a straight six, what cars do they have it in?

 

[niky]

Isn't the Northstar expensive/heavy? Pardon my ignorance...

Yeah, the Camaro would be heavier... but the price point for 500 hp Camaro would be awfully close to that of a 400 hp Corvette.

What about a supercharged V6? A 3.5 with 300hp would actually be able to target both the V6 Mustang and the GT at the same time.

 

[Tornado]

Isn't the Northstar expensive/heavy? Pardon my ignorance...

Yes, and yes. But that never stopped ford from shoving the SOHC 4.6 into the Mustang, which was both expensive/heavy, in addition to being slower than the old modular 5.0 L iron block. Besides, that's why I said option.

Yeah, the Camaro would be heavier... but the price point for 500 hp Camaro would be awfully close to that of a 400 hp Corvette.

That's a non-issue. The Camaro has never hurt Corvette sales before, even when the Camaro was faster than the Corvette, like in '67-'69 with the original Z/28. Only a few Corvettes could touch it, and they all cost about the same.

What about a supercharged V6? A 3.5 with 300hp would actually be able to target both the V6 Mustang and the GT at the same time.

But if GM puts the 5.3 L in the Z/28, it would cannabalize sales of the two unless GM reworked the 5.3 to put out 350-ish BHP. Besides, I'd like to prevent putting crappy, 40 year old Buick engines in a brand new car.

The GT-500 will in fact have a Live Axle, drag racing is easier with a live axle, Ford noticed how racers would swap the IRS in Cobra's out for a Live Axle anyways, so why not put the Live Axle in, and let them put an IRS in later if they want?
Ideally the IRS would be offered as an option, but at 3800 or so lbs, the GT-500 isn't going to be a track car anyways.

The problem is, for $40,000 this will cost, you could buy a few cars that are a hell of a lot faster (I beleive), and the "drag racing" crap is pure PR garbage anyways. It was cost cutting, pure and simple.

As for the I-6, I didn't know GM still made a straight six, what cars do they have it in?

GM Atlas LL8 (A.K.A. Vortec 4200). Used in about 6 cars (but in reality, only one). 291 BHP, 275 lb. ft. torque. Silky smooth. Cheap as hell to build. Needs to be in base GTO (to make the price about $10K less) and should be in next base Camaro. And if they can fit a small block in there, it would fit no problem.
​

 

[YSSMAN]

And how about for the base Camaro the 4.2L I-6 instead of the crappy Buick V6 (though the Caddy 3.6 is a pretty spry engine), and for the Z/28 the Northstar 4.7 as an option?

There are a few problems here:

1) The votec 4200 I6 isnt available with a manual transmission option like the DOHC VVT 3.6L V6 (255HP) out of the Caddy CTS, which has the 6-speed manual transmission. However, the engine is very expensive and is really only in the higher class models like the LaCross, Lucerne, CTS, STS, SRX, etc... There would be a greater chance of the 3.9L V6 from the Pontiac G6 to be adapted to fit an RWD vehicle as it is cheaper, only has ten fewer horsepower (240), and will probably last just a bit longer. But it is a tough call. GM probably would try to use as many adaptable parts as they could, and being that the 3.6L V6 is used in the Aussie Monaros and Commodores, it just may end up showing up.

2) Using the Northstar would never happen. The Northstar engine program was origionally supposed to be exclusive only to Cadillac and Oldsmobile, but when Olds dropped out, the torch was passed to Buick, while Pontiac got ahold of the 4.0L V8 for a short time in the Bonneville GXP. The engines are extremely expensive, heavier, overall larger, and put out less horsepower than the Vortec 5300 and LS2 V8s. The Z/28 was supposed to have a race-preped engine capable of reving up a bit higher than the regular-grade 350, and by placing the 283 crank in the 327 block (with a few other minor differences), you got yourself a 302...Yes, it had less power than the outstanding 327 (the actual displacement of the 5300 V8), but it proved itself on the track over and over again... Chevrolet did produce a modern version of the 302 based heavily on the former LS1 V8, but they only built one, and place it in a Camaro Z/28 showcar. They could do it again, but it may not be powerful enough to compete with the new 300HP 24V 4.6L Ford V8.

The Camaro has never hurt Corvette sales before, even when the Camaro was faster than the Corvette, like in '67-'69 with the original Z/28. Only a few Corvettes could touch it, and they all cost about the same.

Thats a bit untrue. The Z/28 was faster than the 'base" V8 Camaros, but not nearly as fast as it's SS sisters, or it's Corvette sibling. The DZ 302 was underrated at 290HP, and was capable of pulling a 0-60 in 7.4 sec, 1/4 mile in 15.12 sec @ 94.8mph in 1969... Compare that to the 1969 SS 396 with 375bhp, capable of 0-60 in 6.8 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.7 sec @ 98.7mph... The fastest Camaros were of course the infamous COPO 427s, noteably the factory ZL1-powered models (9560) with 430bhp (closer to 500 according to some) with a 0-60 time of 5.3 sec, and 1/4 mile in 13.16 sec @ 110 mph.

...Compare that to the 1969 Corvette ZL1 427 (430HP) which could do 1/4 mile in 12.1 seconds @ 116 mph... Sadly, only two were produced...

But if GM puts the 5.3 L in the Z/28, it would cannabalize sales of the two unless GM reworked the 5.3 to put out 350-ish BHP. Besides, I'd like to prevent putting crappy, 40 year old Buick engines in a brand new car.

Its hard to say it would "cannabalize" the sales of the other models, as the Z/28 was always less-powerful and slightly de-tuned suspension wise as compared to the SS. There are many different versions of the 5300, going from 295HP up to 325HP in the top-line aluminum DOD V8 that will be available in the new GMT900 Tahoe and Yukon. Using what is a modern 327 sourced from trucks would guarantee good ammounts of horsepower, torque, dependability, and the adaption of the truck's 5-speed stick would also cut costs...

Then again (I never really thought about it), GM could use the 4.8L V8 out of the Silverado/Sierra which puts down 285HP and 295ft/lbs of torque. They are available with the 5-speed manual as well, and are actualy quite powerful in the worktrucks... Hell, GM could play with the bore/stroke and make a 302 if they wish, and could push the power output just north of 300.

...This must be the hardest part of designing a new vehicle... Deciding whats going under the hood...

 

[Tornado]

1) The votec 4200 I6 isnt available with a manual transmission option like the DOHC VVT 3.6L V6 (255HP) out of the Caddy CTS, which has the 6-speed manual transmission. However, the engine is very expensive and is really only in the higher class models like the LaCross, Lucerne, CTS, STS, SRX, etc... There would be a greater chance of the 3.9L V6 from the Pontiac G6 to be adapted to fit an RWD vehicle as it is cheaper, only has ten fewer horsepower (240), and will probably last just a bit longer. But it is a tough call. GM probably would try to use as many adaptable parts as they could, and being that the 3.6L V6 is used in the Aussie Monaros and Commodores, it just may end up showing up.

Not knowing how transmissions differ really, what is the difference? Can't they just attach a manual tranny to the 4.2? And I don't think they would put the 3.9L in it. It doesn't seem powerful enough. Maybe if they mess with it, but I think the 4.2 would be ideal if they could get it to work with a stick.

2) Using the Northstar would never happen. The Northstar engine program was origionally supposed to be exclusive only to Cadillac and Oldsmobile, but when Olds dropped out, the torch was passed to Buick, while Pontiac got ahold of the 4.0L V8 for a short time in the Bonneville GXP. The engines are extremely expensive, heavier, overall larger, and put out less horsepower than the Vortec 5300 and LS2 V8s. The Z/28 was supposed to have a race-preped engine capable of reving up a bit higher than the regular-grade 350, and by placing the 283 crank in the 327 block (with a few other minor differences), you got yourself a 302...Yes, it had less power than the outstanding 327 (the actual displacement of the 5300 V8), but it proved itself on the track over and over again... Chevrolet did produce a modern version of the 302 based heavily on the former LS1 V8, but they only built one, and place it in a Camaro Z/28 showcar. They could do it again, but it may not be powerful enough to compete with the new 300HP 24V 4.6L Ford V8.

They could conceivably make another 302, and no doubt it would outrun the new Mustang. If I remember correctly, when Motor Trend got ahold of the new Mustang, they were quite suprised as to how the 300 BHP could be hept pace with by the old 275 BHP LT1 from the early 4th gen Camaro.

Thats a bit untrue. The Z/28 was faster than the 'base" V8 Camaros, but not nearly as fast as it's SS sisters, or it's Corvette sibling. The DZ 302 was underrated at 290HP, and was capable of pulling a 0-60 in 7.4 sec, 1/4 mile in 15.12 sec @ 94.8mph in 1969... Compare that to the 1969 SS 396 with 375bhp, capable of 0-60 in 6.8 sec, 1/4 mile in 14.7 sec @ 98.7mph... The fastest Camaros were of course the infamous COPO 427s, noteably the factory ZL1-powered models (9560) with 430bhp (closer to 500 according to some) with a 0-60 time of 5.3 sec, and 1/4 mile in 13.16 sec @ 110 mph.

Handling man! Handling! Anything with a big block handles like a boat. I know the 396 went faster down the straight, but life doesn't consist of them, does it? The COPO ZL1 Camaro (and really, anything GM made with that motor) was the exception to the rule, but that engine was all aluminum and an arguable extension of the small-block instead of the big block anyways. The 396 would win until turn 1, and then it would be over. And if not, the 302 would catch it at the end of the straightaway (it did have a higher top speed).

Its hard to say it would "cannabalize" the sales of the other models, as the Z/28 was always less-powerful and slightly de-tuned suspension wise as compared to the SS. There are many different versions of the 5300, going from 295HP up to 325HP in the top-line aluminum DOD V8 that will be available in the new GMT900 Tahoe and Yukon. Using what is a modern 327 sourced from trucks would guarantee good ammounts of horsepower, torque, dependability, and the adaption of the truck's 5-speed stick would also cut costs...

I was talking if they made a S'Charged V6 with 300 BHP.

Then again (I never really thought about it), GM could use the 4.8L V8 out of the Silverado/Sierra which puts down 285HP and 295ft/lbs of torque. They are available with the 5-speed manual as well, and are actualy quite powerful in the worktrucks... Hell, GM could play with the bore/stroke and make a 302 if they wish, and could push the power output just north of 300.

I'll bet they could get far more than that. The old 302 didn't have any fancy aluminum wizardry and that was sometimes reported as having just north of 370 BHP. Not to mention the 305 from the Gen III Camaro was capable of pushing 300 with a few mild adjustments.

 

[YSSMAN]

Transmission limitations are GM's biggest problem at the moment. Although they do have 6-speed manuals available in the Pontiac G6 GTP, GTO, Cadillac CTS, Chevrolet SSR, and Corvette... The trucks continue to go on with 5-speed manauals on the 4.3L V6 and 4.8L V8, otherwise you are stuck with the 4L60E automatic... The 4200 can only be sold with a 4L60E variant, and I have no idea how or where GM would come up with a 5 or 6 speed manual to match it with...

Having 291HP and 277 ft-lbs of torque puts it right in V8 range in terms of power, and I'm not sure if the fuel savings would be all that much between the 4200, 4800, and 5300...

 

[DeRFmAN]

yeah that thing is friggin sweet. But I think they should bump up the time table for an 07 model then it would be perfect timing to make it an anny edition.

 

[niky]

It's the Camaro's anniversary? Holy Cow... they really should step it up, then.

Handling is the reason I pushed the SC V6 for the lower end models... and there are enough power freaks anyway to ensure the sales of any LS powered models above them.

As for the IRS vs. live-axle thing... I just fished up a recent copy of EVO wherein they pick their Car of the Year for 2005. Interesting what they said in comparing the live-axle of the Mustang to the transverse composite leaf of the base Corvette... where they actually preferred the handling of the live-axle over the Vette's suspension, which some compared to a live-axle in its reactions to off-cambers and bumps.

Of course, testing being done in Scotland, and British roads being notoriously bumpy, this is understandable, and the Corvette has been pretty good in testing elsewhere, but given that an IRS Camaro would definitely be better than a live-axle Mustang, what's to prevent magazines from making comparisons between the Camaro and the Corvette when the Camaro comes out?

One other thing GM has to learn from Ford. Embrace the damn aftermarket. Vette tuners were complaining that GM was being stingy right before the launch of the C6, and they're making it harder to work with what's there. Rumor has it that this has something to do with GM's relationship with EMI, and its straightlaced view of intellectual property rights.

Ford, on the other hand, has a massive presence at car shows and drift/track events thanks to tuners who have wholeheartedly embraced the new Mustang. Never mind that tuned GTs compete with Ford's own GT500... giving customers such free rein in modification just keeps them coming in.

That's the way GM should go with the Camaro... keep it cheap, and make it damn easy to upgrade, whether by factory kit, or by aftermarket.

 

[Onikaze]

Thats the idea.

Put engines that we can afford and make hot ourselves.

The 4.8 would make a 5.0 with ease,

Crap, would it be impossible to stick the 5.3 crank into a 4.8 block?

As for the base engine, I'd love to see an I-6, but I don't see it as very likely.

The Vortec I-5 would be interesting too.

I'd bet on a V-6 though, they tend to be more compact, and you could get more of the engine behind the front axle than you could an Inline engine.

 

[YSSMAN]

The biggest reason why they made the Camaro IRS was because they gave up with the live-axle design at the end of the F-Body run in 2002... Being that the car is probably based on the new Zeta platform, or maybe the current GTO/Monaro platform, its probably why we have IRS... I wouldnt complain... When you can get handeling that can match a BMW 3-series coupe for $27K, its a good deal in my book...

Crap, would it be impossible to stick the 5.3 crank into a 4.8 block?

I think it has to be the opposite way around to make the 302... Its the 283 crank in a 327, so theoretically you would have to put the 4800 crank in the 5300...

Considering how vast GM's V6 lineup spans, they have a pretty wide variety of engines to choose from... The biggest challenge is going to be to design a 5 or 6 speed manaul to match up with the usual suspects like the 3500, 3800/3900, and 4200 for use in the Camaro... But then again, GM still has the RWD Silverado V6 that runs with the old-school 4300 V6 paired up with the 5-speed manual...

 

[Onikaze]

Oops, thats right, lysdexic moment there.

Either way, couldn't you make a true Z28 type hybrid from a 4.8 and 5.3?

 

[YSSMAN]

...It would make sense, almost too much for GM, to make a true 302ci V8 for the Z/28... Call me crazy, but I think going completely old-school in look and mechanics would sell cars, fast... Plus, a high-reving V8 would keep the Camaro on the heels of the Mustang and possibly keep it gunning for the 330ci and G35 Sport Coupe...

 

[Onikaze]

I'd dig it, for sure.

Like you said though, it would make too much sense, so we have to see how eager they are to get out of the trouble they're in.

 

[Slicks]

This weeks' PSC Weekly competition features the Camaro concept, so feel free to visit the PSC Weekly 127.

[/blatantadvertising]

 

[OmicroN]

Chunky, Solid looking, Retro, with modern touches.

Best Camaro I've seen since a '69...

Now, someone photoshop a magazine cover shot of a Mustang GT-500, Challenger, and Camaro!

Funny you should say that, I was just at the Detroit Auto Show, I took some pictures, and...

 

[VIPFREAK]

I can deal with the front of the Camaro but the rear sucks ass and looks like a Vette (like people have said).

GM is finally making decent concepts, this should be a must build for them.

I think it really evokes memories of the legendary Camaros gone by, and that is exactly what should be done. Pontiac GTO looks nothing like the GTOs of old and nor does the Charger or Challenger.

I'll say it once and I'll say it again... Well, yeah since that traitor Lutz is there.

After looking at this new Camaro and new CHallenger I would easily pick the new Challenger. I thought after a while the look of the Camaro would grow on my, but it doesnt. I just dont like it.
Dodge did a great job capturing the retro feel with the new Challenger.

Yep, agreed. 👍

 

[YSSMAN]

... The Camaro has some design influence from the Corvette because it can... The Camaro always got hand-me-downs from it's older sibling, usually in the form of suspension bits and pieces, breaks, engines, transmissions, axles, etc... So what if the tail lights are a bit like the Corvettes? Technically they are exactly like the old Camaro's, just they arent surrounded by the black plastic like they are supposed to be...

Camaro vs Challenger? Its likely to be another repeat of history... The Camaro will come out on top, without a question. Less weight, lower price, more compotent suspension, and generally a more sporting attitude... Sure, the Challenger is going to be a great car, there isnt any doubt about that... But only in top-dog form with the 6.1L HEMI will it be a good fight with the Camaro...

If we were to compare bread-and-butter models of the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang, it would be close, but the Challenger doesnt have the right combination of engine and weight to have it compete with lower level models.

1) Challenger 5.7 HEMI: 340HP, 0-60 somewhere near 5.5 seconds (based on Charger R/T times with 350HP R/T package)

2) Chevrolet Camaro with 325HP 5300 V8, 0-60 near 5.0-5.3 seconds (based on Pontiac GTO with 350HP LS1, taking weight loss into account)

3) Mustang GT: 0-60 in 5.2 (Car and Driver with 2005 GT)

Weight is the enemy, and Ford has the advantage there. With the Challenger being based on the LX platform, it does not lend the idea that it is going to be the all-out performer unless equipped with the best that the SRT crew has to offer... But why would it? Wouldnt they need a Challenger SRT-8? The Chevy would land smack dab in the middle of all of the mess... Although it is only speculation as to it having the 5300, the wildcard will be the "base" V8 model or Z/28 packages... Weight is a problem the GTO had to overcome, but with the 400HP LS2 it became a monster....

 

[YSSMAN]

Just to prove that German automakers aren't the only ones who plan products based on what their rivals have done, GM comes out with the Camaro--a retro-styled, two-door coupe with a honking big V-8 that harks back to the glory days of Motown. If that sounds familiar, that's exactly what Ford did with the Mustang. Hot on the heels of the Pony car's success, DaimlerChrysler has dusted off the Challenger and Chevy has produced a new Camaro, a nameplate that was more recently interred. The muscular Camaro concept is pure '69 updated, with the kind of subtle detailing that makes it look up-to-the-minute. The interior is very glitzy, and pays homage to the original, even down to the GM seat belt insignia and the twin instrument pods.

The car is 186.2 inches long and rides on a 110.5-inch wheelbase. The wheels are 21s at the front and 22s at the rear, shod with monster 275/30 front and 305/30 rear tires, which should be able to corral the 400 horses from the LS2 6.0-liter V-8 engine powering through a six-speed manual transmission. The show car has a cobbled together chassis with an all-independent suspension, but if it makes it into production, it will use the so-called Zeta Lite architecture that will be shared with Holden in Australia. The good news for GM is that the architecture--while hardly cutting edge--is far more sophisticated than the live-axle Mustang. Insiders say that a $20,000 base model production car could use an inexpensive V-8 (the LS2 would come in a costlier model), so a V-6 version would be offered only to make the car easier to insure. The real car would have smaller wheels, but the overall diameter of the tires wouldn't be much changed. GM vice-chairman and product czar Bob Lutz apparently loves it and joked on the show stand "all I have to do is persuade this man"--referring to GM CEO Rick Wagoner--"to pay for it."

Interesting... So the Zeta lives! And it kinda confirms our arguements about the engines and well... SWEET!

 

[JohnBM01]

In terms of old-school styling, how does this design compare to the Dodge Challenger concept and the latest Ford Mustang?

 

[niky]

Just like performance, maybe... somewhere in the middle... with the Ford carrying the more forward-looking design, and the Challenger bringing up the retro.

Although the difference in modernity between Mustang and Camaro is more relative... the Challenger definitely makes no concessions to being a modern car, which is fine for the showroom floor, but it remains to be seen whether they spruce it up for production. I think they must.

 

[YSSMAN]

The Camaro looks pretty similar to the origional '67-'69 models, but does add some modern touches to make it look like a more modern version of a familar model.

The Challenger on the other hand takes 99.9% of it's design cues from the '70 and '71 Challenger and makes no excuses for it. Although the interior is very modernistic, the exterior looks more retro than the Camaro (overall).

The Mustang set the standard, and remains to be the standard "retro-futuristic" design available today. Combining the best from the '64-'69 Mustang GT fastbacks, the car looks like the origional much more than the Camaro and Challenger concepts.

 

[Blackbird.]

I like the Challenger because it looks more what it would look like in production (if it does). The Camaro concept is far too radical and i'm sure will under go rather drastic changes if it goes into production. Just my two cents.

 

[YSSMAN]

Chevrolet is good at turning their concepts into reality, so I wouldnt expect the Camaro to be turned down too much other than the wheels shrinking to a more realistic 16" standard on the V6, 17" standard on the Z/28, and 18" standard on the SS...

Stylistically speaking, the mirrors would be changed. They look too expensive, and it would be more likely for Chevy to pull off Corvette Mirrors than build brand new ones. Also, I wouldnt be surprised if the tail lights change just a bit... Maybe the inclusion of the black backing would be in order?

 

[Blackbird.]

Just it looks far too radical and ahead of itself compared to what's on the road right now.

 

[VIPFREAK]

Chevrolet is good at turning their concepts into reality, so I wouldnt expect the Camaro to be turned down too much other than the wheels shrinking to a more realistic 16" standard on the V6, 17" standard on the Z/28, and 18" standard on the SS...

Huh? no, you mean now right? because Lutz in there? I don't see why the Camaro wouldn't be built anyway, because they are expected to bring it back and it's not like that can't be built either.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, take a look at the current Mustang versus the GT Concept that preceeded it. The more radical lines changed just a bit, and they wisely went to a 2+2 setup than just a straight coupe.

...I just want to know what ever happened to last years Mustang GTR?

 

[Joey D]

Confirmed

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=108825

 

[VIPFREAK]

Well, take a look at the current Mustang versus the GT Concept that preceeded it. The more radical lines changed just a bit, and they wisely went to a 2+2 setup than just a straight coupe.

...I just want to know what ever happened to last years Mustang GTR?

They just totally dropped the ball on it...