• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New Camaro SS Nurburgring Time

"An additional feature is a special launch control mode for the manual models. "

...any bet that enabling this DOESN'T void the warranty?
 
The car isn't designed to run with corvette's around a track... it's not a track car at all for that matter and they aren't touting it as such.

What does that Challenger SRT-8 run? Compare it to that I guess.
 
Originally posted by: bananapeel42
The car isn't designed to run with corvette's around a track... it's not a track car at all for that matter and they aren't touting it as such.

What does that Challenger SRT-8 run? Compare it to that I guess.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd agree to a certain level. But I do think it's a big weak spot in GM's new 21st century image. Why even test it on the Nurburgring? The Cobalt SS comes within striking distance, and it's a 4-banger FWD econobox.

In retrospect, it would have been wise for Chevy to have focused on keeping the pork down on this one, it looks to have hurt terribly.

Also : "explained that the Nurburging track sessions helped engineers determine the best tire, steering and suspension settings for the car[/b] ? all of which improve more mundane public road driving as well. The engine was the stock standard 6.2L L99 V8 rated at 422hp (314kW) and 408lb-ft (553Nm) of torque.

All 2010 Camaro models, both V6 and V8, feature the latest StabiliTrak stability control system, while the SS also gets the same computer controlled active handling system as the Corvette. Owners will be able to select a special track mode in the SS, which can fully disable the car?s electronic stability and traction control. An additional feature is a special launch control mode for the manual models. "

^^ Sounds like they did want this thing to perform decently on a circuit.

Dodge are all garbage outside of the Viper, sadly.
 
Yeah but doesn't the Cobalt outperform the Evo X and new STI or come within a smidge of that on the Ring?

Cobalt SS is an outlier for sure.
 
Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah but doesn't the Cobalt outperform the Evo X and new STI or come within a smidge of that on the Ring?

Cobalt SS is an outlier for sure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's fair and 100% true. I just had gathered from GM's new emphasis on fast 'Ring times that they were really going after it at all levels. It says in the article that they used info gathered from tracking the car to improve handling and capability.

My thoughts are that it just seems disappointing to have a 420HP top-shelf Camaro, which will probably cost what, $35k? .. get matched by their econobox. Of course, in a straight line the Camaro *should* have a dominant advantage, but we'll have to wait and see.

I maintain that the new Camaro is heavier than it should have been.
 
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah but doesn't the Cobalt outperform the Evo X and new STI or come within a smidge of that on the Ring?

Cobalt SS is an outlier for sure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's fair and 100% true. I just had gathered from GM's new emphasis on fast 'Ring times that they were really going after it at all levels. It says in the article that they used info gathered from tracking the car to improve handling and capability.

My thoughts are that it just seems disappointing to have a 420HP top-shelf Camaro, which will probably cost what, $35k? .. get matched by their econobox. Of course, in a straight line the Camaro *should* have a dominant advantage, but we'll have to wait and see.

I maintain that the new Camaro is heavier than it should have been.
Click to expand...

In both CnD's test and Motivemags track tests, the cobalt also came within 1-2s of the Lexus ISF. It's nearly twice the price of the camaro and has nearly identical performance...

The problem isn't the camaro's or the ISF's performance, it's that the cobalt is a freak.
 
Originally posted by: mariok2006
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah but doesn't the Cobalt outperform the Evo X and new STI or come within a smidge of that on the Ring?

Cobalt SS is an outlier for sure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's fair and 100% true. I just had gathered from GM's new emphasis on fast 'Ring times that they were really going after it at all levels. It says in the article that they used info gathered from tracking the car to improve handling and capability.

My thoughts are that it just seems disappointing to have a 420HP top-shelf Camaro, which will probably cost what, $35k? .. get matched by their econobox. Of course, in a straight line the Camaro *should* have a dominant advantage, but we'll have to wait and see.

I maintain that the new Camaro is heavier than it should have been.
Click to expand...

In both CnD's test and Motivemags track tests, the cobalt also came within 1-2s of the Lexus ISF. It's nearly twice the price of the camaro and has nearly identical performance...

The problem isn't the camaro's or the ISF's performance, it's that the cobalt is a freak.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I was getting at. I think GM actually surprised themselves on how well that car performs.

But shed 400lbs off that Camaro and then you'd something really special.

In straight line I think the Cobalt pulls low-low 14's or high 13's, the Camaro should pull mid to low 13's.

 
Hrmm, thats really weird. Doesn't the Cadillac CTS-V get a time around 7:59

The Camaro is depressing then. I thought this car was going to pwn. Too heavy I guess.
 
Originally posted by: TehMac
Hrmm, thats really weird. Doesn't the Cadillac CTS-V get a time around 7:59

The Camaro is depressing then. I thought this car was going to pwn. Too heavy I guess.
Click to expand...

The CTS-V also has a lot more go-fast goodies including brakes and 550+HP.
 
Ummm..... the CTS-V is 550 hp supercharged version of what the Camaro has, it better be faster!

Yes, the Cobalt is a superior handling vehicle for the track, straightline performance is solid as well, and by far the best value for the money.

The Camaro will out run it in the 1/4 EASY. The Camaro is a 12 second car for sure in the right hands.
 
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: mariok2006
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: ayabe
Yeah but doesn't the Cobalt outperform the Evo X and new STI or come within a smidge of that on the Ring?

Cobalt SS is an outlier for sure.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's fair and 100% true. I just had gathered from GM's new emphasis on fast 'Ring times that they were really going after it at all levels. It says in the article that they used info gathered from tracking the car to improve handling and capability.

My thoughts are that it just seems disappointing to have a 420HP top-shelf Camaro, which will probably cost what, $35k? .. get matched by their econobox. Of course, in a straight line the Camaro *should* have a dominant advantage, but we'll have to wait and see.

I maintain that the new Camaro is heavier than it should have been.
Click to expand...

In both CnD's test and Motivemags track tests, the cobalt also came within 1-2s of the Lexus ISF. It's nearly twice the price of the camaro and has nearly identical performance...

The problem isn't the camaro's or the ISF's performance, it's that the cobalt is a freak.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I was getting at. I think GM actually surprised themselves on how well that car performs.

But shed 400lbs off that Camaro and then you'd something really special.

In straight line I think the Cobalt pulls low-low 14's or high 13's, the Camaro should pull mid to low 13's.
Click to expand...

That's my feeling as well. The new Camaro won't be an outright disaster, but far from the dynamo it could have been. Imagine if they had kept the weight to ~3400 or so. That would have been epic.

 
Weight is inevitable as you add more safety features, go to a large overall car, etc. It's hard to keep the weight down feasibly, it's just the times we live in now.

Yes, it does suck that a 1998-02 LS1 Fbody will probably run very similiar 1/4 times to the new Camaro, but the new Camaro's suspension ( IRS ) plus other major refinements have been made, so I am going to bet it'll be a great overall platform for the price.

The old Fbody interiors blew nuts.
 
Top Gear is going to be reviewing the Camaro next sunday, tune in for some dry witty English humor and a full report.
 
Originally posted by: bananapeel42
Ummm..... the CTS-V is 550 hp supercharged version of what the Camaro has, it better be faster!

Yes, the Cobalt is a superior handling vehicle for the track, straightline performance is solid as well, and by far the best value for the money.

The Camaro will out run it in the 1/4 EASY. The Camaro is a 12 second car for sure in the right hands.
Click to expand...

Also the CTS-V is a final production and 2nd Gen product.

The Camaro is mostly going to be V6's that are driven by women. So they can't go all out on everything as they would either have to make 2 different parts for the car or go high end on even the base Camaro. Instead they come to a middle ground to keep the price low while not having to many different parts. The base CTS is not a cheap-car so they have options with that line.
 
Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Originally posted by: TehMac
Hrmm, thats really weird. Doesn't the Cadillac CTS-V get a time around 7:59

The Camaro is depressing then. I thought this car was going to pwn. Too heavy I guess.
Click to expand...

The CTS-V also has a lot more go-fast goodies including brakes and 550+HP.
Click to expand...

Well...shouldn't the Camaro have these? Plus, the CTS-V is a frickin saloon car, it should be alot heavier than the Camaro...what the hell were they thinking?


Originally posted by: chorb
Top Gear is going to be reviewing the Camaro next sunday, tune in for some dry witty English humor and a full report.
Click to expand...

You sure that's the Camaro, or the Dodge Challenger?
 
Originally posted by: TehMac
Well...shouldn't the Camaro have these? Plus, the CTS-V is a frickin saloon car, it should be alot heavier than the Camaro...what the hell were they thinking?
Click to expand...

$30k Camaro.
$60k CTS-V
...want the goodies? Go for the ZR1, it has even more 🙂
 
Ok, I see your point, but still, the Caddy is expensive because its a fast, semi-comfortable sports saloon. The Camaro is a frickin Muscle/Pony/Sports Coupe. It's supposed to be light(er) and hence fast(er).
 
The old Camaro was a pony car. The current is a muscle car. It's too big to be considered anything else. Muscle cars aren't designed to turn (not that pony cars are), so the ring time for the Camaro is pretty decent. It's definitely not being marketed as a track vehicle.

Top Gear is reviewing the Challenger SRT8 this week, not the Camaro.

Yes, it does suck that a 1998-02 LS1 Fbody will probably run very similiar 1/4 times to the new Camaro, but the new Camaro's suspension ( IRS ) plus other major refinements have been made, so I am going to bet it'll be a great overall platform for the price.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget, that for the old Fbody, build quality and ride quality were complete garbage. Though I haven't ridden in a new Camaro, if other recent GM releases are any indication it should be light years more comfortable to live with everyday and not have a dozen rattles and things falling off before you even make it out of the new car lot like the Fbodys.

Ok, I see your point, but still, the Caddy is expensive because its a fast, semi-comfortable sports saloon. The Camaro is a frickin Muscle/Pony/Sports Coupe. It's supposed to be light(er) and hence fast(er).
Click to expand...

How about some remotely realistic expectations? There isn't a mass produced production car of any make that has circled the ring faster than the CTS-V that is cheaper. Why should the Camaro, that costs half as much, do so? The Camaro SS at 3850lbs is relatively light by the today's standards. How many sub $40k cars with 400+HP have weighed less in recent years? The GTO is the only one that comes to mind to me. It would take some ridiculous weight reduction to make up the 134HP difference with the CTS-V which is only slightly more than 4000lbs itself.
 
Originally posted by: Pariah

Yes, it does suck that a 1998-02 LS1 Fbody will probably run very similiar 1/4 times to the new Camaro, but the new Camaro's suspension ( IRS ) plus other major refinements have been made, so I am going to bet it'll be a great overall platform for the price.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget, that for the old Fbody, build quality and ride quality were complete garbage. Though I haven't ridden in a new Camaro, if other recent GM releases are any indication it should be light years more comfortable to live with everyday and not have a dozen rattles and things falling off before you even make it out of the new car lot like the Fbodys.
Click to expand...

While the interior might not be anything to write home about, there are a LOT of people that find the cockpit of the 98-02 Camaros quite nice for usability. Most prefer the Trans Am interior for the better seats. As for ride quality, it's really about what I'd expect out of a live axle car. Build quality, sure, panel gaps galore. Pieces of the car falling off? I've never seen that, and I've been pretty deep into the F-body underworld.

The most disappointing thing about the new 5th gen, is what I've posted before. I'm not seeing this car be any quicker than the LS1 (98-02) cars.

 
Originally posted by: Pariah
How about some remotely realistic expectations? There isn't a mass produced production car of any make that has circled the ring faster than the CTS-V that is cheaper. Why should the Camaro, that costs half as much, do so? The Camaro SS at 3850lbs is relatively light by the today's standards. How many sub $40k cars with 400+HP have weighed less in recent years? The GTO is the only one that comes to mind to me. It would take some ridiculous weight reduction to make up the 134HP difference with the CTS-V which is only slightly more than 4000lbs itself.
Click to expand...

The GTO is a well known 'pig' as far as weight goes. However; the number that was circling the GTO forums was the shipping weight of the car in comparison to other cars 'curb weights'.

Comparing curb wieght to curb weight or shipping weight to shipping weight is the only way to compare. A real result though is having the car actually weighed.

Still gearing makes a huge difference and then aerodynamics at speed in the end.

 
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Do you think that anyone who's going to buy this car cares about a time at a track in a foreign country?
Click to expand...

Well, I was considering buying one, but to answer your question, no, but I should expect the people who don't will buy the V6 version anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top