Who else is gonna miss the F-body?

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: thebestMAX
For those of you who dont know, GM will soon be importing the Monaro from down under and rebadging it as a GTO.

Coupe with 6M, LS1 engine and rear wheel drive. True comfort for 4 people AND PERFORMANCE TO BOOT wit good economy. Still probably not as wild as the fbody but better than nothing.

Was just about to say the same thing.
Also pontiac might have that 2 seater that lutz was showing at the car shows.

And the Camaro WILL be back. Probable be a 2 seater with V-8 and just a little bigger than a Z3 or miatia(sp)

And the Mustang is also about to change(die). They were going to make it FWD but had a lot of groups cry foul, so now it looks like the mustang will share a platform with a Lincoln, so it will probable be bigger(more back seat space) and heavier(slower)

GM still has a lot of cards up its and Lutz's sleaves. And with the coming in with such high realibility the last several years, The general is alive and kicking, watch out.

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: thebestMAX

And the Camaro WILL be back. Probable be a 2 seater with V-8 and just a little bigger than a Z3 or miatia(sp)

That would be just wrong. Don't get me wrong I'd love to see a GM two seater with a V8, but a Camaro is all about shoehorning 3 or 4 of your friends in and having some fun.

 

[chevelle396]

I for one, will definitely miss it.

I used to drive a red 95 firebird and now drive a pewter 02. I didn't get the ls1 in the 02, and I really regret it, but I couldn't swing it financially. Personally I don't think there's anything on the road in that price range that looks as good as the firebird.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: LAUST
You started off comparing the 3.5L Nissan vs the LS1... that was you're move. The "Nissan has 290HP out of a tiny 3.5 vs GM's 320 out of 5.7". The LS1 is great for the F-body it feeds it perfect. The Torque in that 3.5 and in your little rocket are not near enough to power a Z28 for what the car is AIMED at... Do you get that part now?? It sure doesn't seem like you are even in the vacinity. The Z28 is a OUT OF THE BOX Drag Racers car, and it can hit many open road coarses too, If you think tight turns make the race a challenge then again, you are a weak driver. You slap that "Efficiant" Nissan motor into a F-body and it will be a DOG. Get it?

There is only one real way to get the HP of a vehicle. You run it's MPH and E.T in a calculator, screw Dyno's for HP, they are meaningless. Put that Nissan motor in an Altima and then in some car thats 1000lbs more heavy. The end result won't be the same now will it? But then again I just like real world numbers, I don't settle for white papers like you do. I'd be very interested to see you're 3.0 slapped in a Camaro to see if it got better E.T.'s

Also I never got into any high compression motors that require 116 octaine, you are just using that as an out.

AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

Great f-in logic... If you were to use Nissan's 3.5L V6 in a "Camaro", you could shorten it by 3 feet, shorten the turning radius by 5 feet and make the car lighter by a few hundred pounds. 274lb-ft and 290hp would be enough. Why not just throw in an engine from the Civic? Conversely, why not throw in the LS1 in the 350Z? Heck, you might as well throw in a Bentley 6.7L V8 in the F-body if you want. They make 650lb-ft @ 2200rpm and 420hp @ 4000rpm. That beast would give that old dinosaur yet another lease on life.

I just hope that when the LS1/LS6 comes back in the next Camaro, they use a newer platform, and make it a little lighter and smaller.

What kind of stupid suggestion is that? Slap in my 3.0L V6 in the Mustang and see how it does? You *DO* know that the V6 Mustang weighs less than my Eclipse right? And it's still slower. And a foot longer. So I think that my engine would be BETTER than it's current 3.8L V6. AND it has a lower compression. AND more hp @ 5500rpm.

What was your point again?

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

Now this is even more funny to me.

Great f-in logic... If you were to use Nissan's 3.5L V6 in a "Camaro", you could shorten it by 3 feet, shorten the turning radius by 5 feet and make the car lighter by a few hundred pounds. 274lb-ft and 290hp would be enough. Why not just throw in an engine from the Civic? Conversely, why not throw in the LS1 in the 350Z? Heck, you might as well throw in a Bentley 6.7L V8 in the F-body if you want. They make 650lb-ft @ 2200rpm and 420hp @ 4000rpm. That beast would give that old dinosaur yet another lease on life.

It wasn't about throwing around engines thats just you going Bi-Polar, you just can't understand correct displacement for type of application. Some people want a full body sports car (Pony), you just don't get it

What kind of stupid suggestion is that? Slap in my 3.0L V6 in the Mustang and see how it does? You *DO* know that the V6 Mustang weighs less than my Eclipse right? And it's still slower. And a foot longer. So I think that my engine would be BETTER than it's current 3.8L V6. AND it has a lower compression. AND more hp @ 5500rpm.

It wasn't a question, and I'm talking full application, you buy the Pony you get the V8 if you are going for function, stop the V6 talk.

What was your point again?

My point was to make a point that you're "3.5 290HP vs 5.7 320HP" statement is just a stupid statement. This magizene HP/Liter quote crap people try to spread around is lame. GM can make a small displacement motor make power, high compression is not a new technology you uhh whatever you are like to talk about. They don't for a reason, and they laugh at you on their way to the bank. You just can't grasp the reason, so it's pointless to even point it out.

 

[thomsbrain]

Any car that weighs as much as mother's Volvo station wagon is not a sports car. If you're going to drive a tub of lard, you might as well do like Clint Eastwood, and swap that V8 into a Volvo and get that power with some build quailty and refinement.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: LAUST
It wasn't about throwing around engines thats just you going Bi-Polar, you just can't understand correct displacement for type of application. Some people want a full body sports car (Pony), you just don't get it

It wasn't a question, and I'm talking full application, you buy the Pony you get the V8 if you are going for function, stop the V6 talk.

My point was to make a point that you're "3.5 290HP vs 5.7 320HP" statement is just a stupid statement. This magizene HP/Liter quote crap people try to spread around is lame. GM can make a small displacement motor make power, high compression is not a new technology you uhh whatever you are like to talk about. They don't for a reason, and they laugh at you on their way to the bank. You just can't grasp the reason, so it's pointless to even point it out.

That's not me being bi-polar, that's you telling me that if you stuck the Nissan 3.5L in a Camaro it wouldn't have enough TORQUE to move the beast. What kind of statement is that? This whole thread is about what, a 2 decade(i think) old platform being put out to pasture to make way for a new one? Other manufacturers change/improve their platforms every how many years? It's NOT the death of the LS1. It's the death of the F-body.

As for the LS1 and the "I don't care about the whole hp/L thing" don't you think that it a 5.7L V8 would benefit more airflow and FOUR valves per cylinder? Sh!t, if you're that bent about torque buy a diesel engine. You don't think there's any room for improvement in the LS1? Do you think that the engine is perfect and performs as well as it could? Don't you WANT more? If a 3.5L V6 can put out 290hp and 270lb-ft, don't you want a 5.7L V8 that can put out 500hp and 400+lb-ft?

GM and Ford are the only ones that can get away with using old technology to make outdated (yet cheap and productive) engines and not have people bitch. And on top of that, the fit & finish is pretty bad too. Where the heck would we be if TVs, VCRs, computers were still being built with 10 year old technology? And they laugh at YOU on their way to the bank for buying their outdated technology while they make a big ole phatty profit.

I respond to your 3.8L V6 comment, and you change your tune. The FACT is that the newer 3.0L V6 in my Eclipse is better than the 3.8L V6 in the Mustang and the Camaro. As is the 2.8L VR6 that VW makes. And before you bust out the "well it's not the V8," MOST PEOPLE DON'T BUY THE V8. THEY BUY THE 3.8L V6. Which is slower than sh!t.

Out of the ~70,000 Camaro sales, which engine do most people opt for? Because I see mostly men driving V6s and when they try to race me they think they'll win because they drive a "Camaro." My AUTOMATIC is quicker than those cars are in STICK. It's sad. Especially the V6 automatic "Camaros". It's a disgrace to the name "CAMARO." :disgust:

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

As for the LS1 and the "I don't care about the whole hp/L thing" don't you think that it a 5.7L V8 would benefit more airflow and FOUR valves per cylinder? Sh!t, if you're that bent about torque buy a diesel engine. You don't think there's any room for improvement in the LS1? Do you think that the engine is perfect and performs as well as it could? Don't you WANT more? If a 3.5L V6 can put out 290hp and 270lb-ft, don't you want a 5.7L V8 that can put out 500hp and 400+lb-ft?

My LS1 does 560lbs of Torque with a single BOLT ON, why make it so expensive out of the factory.. Also there is this thing called Emissions and this depeartment called D.O.T. They would not allow GM to sell as many V8's as they do with that much power, it consumes a lot of fuel the more power you have. More valves does not allow it to be more efficiant, it allows more air and fuel in. GM already get reemed for the Suburban's sales. This is not you're own little world, the Nissan 3.5 290HP motor will be on par if HARDLY better then the LS1 in milage, look at the milage the Vette gets, heck I get 19mpg from mine with a blower and 4.10 gears. How much does that Nissan Cup Noodles get? "Do I want more" Hell I'm waiting for you to show up with SOMETHING. Get off your dreamscape. My LS1 can swat you're little rice mobile just fine and for well under the cost of yours and it's not desighned to race even!.

GM and Ford are the only ones that can get away with using old technology to make outdated (yet cheap and productive) engines and not have people bitch. And on top of that, the fit & finish is pretty bad too. Where the heck would we be if TVs, VCRs, computers were still being built with 10 year old technology? And they laugh at YOU on their way to the bank for buying their outdated technology while they make a big ole phatty profit.

You have no clue what vehicle technology is, you are prolly one of those kids who things OHC motors are new. Why fix whats not broken? There is nothing wrong with my LM7, I have a coil per cyl distributerless ignition, how is that weak machine you have.

BTW how much did you pay for you're POS Crapsler product? I paid $28,000 WITH Taxes brand new and I can do 10 fold what you're little can can ever do... I'm laughing at YOU

I respond to your 3.8L V6 comment, and you change your tune. The FACT is that the newer 3.0L V6 in my Eclipse is better than the 3.8L V6 in the Mustang and the Camaro. As is the 2.8L VR6 that VW makes. And before you bust out the "well it's not the V8," MOST PEOPLE DON'T BUY THE V8. THEY BUY THE 3.8L V6. Which is slower than sh!t.

Out of the ~70,000 Camaro sales, which engine do most people opt for? Because I see mostly men driving V6s and when they try to race me they think they'll win because they drive a "Camaro." My AUTOMATIC is quicker than those cars are in STICK. It's sad. Especially the V6 automatic "Camaros". It's a disgrace to the name "CAMARO." :disgust:

If you don't understand what the sales of a V6 Maro/Stang is then you don't understand marketing at all. I thought you were smarter then that Tuffkid.

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
Any car that weighs as much as mother's Volvo station wagon is not a sports car. If you're going to drive a tub of lard, you might as well do like Clint Eastwood, and swap that V8 into a Volvo and get that power with some build quailty and refinement.

it's 3500lbs

 

[FenrisUlf]

I was surprised to hear that the F body was being discontinued. I'm going to miss the IDEA behind the Camaro and Firebird more than the actual F-bodies themselves. The Camaro/Firebird was the entry level sports car and now they have nothing filling that gap. The Corvette is a 2 seater and doesn't compete in the same realm as the 2+2. Maybe they were put off by flagging sales or compitition, but I will miss the idea. Before anyone flames me, I have driven every generation of Camaro and I think they became more refined but less sporty as time went by. My first car was a 1967 Camaro that I rebuilt myself in high school. It was 3000 lbs curb weight (lightest stock Camaro ever built yet still built better than most newer cars) and 330+ horsepower. Even going to 8" tires and 2.73 rear end (4.11 stock - stupid acceleration), I couldn't use more than 1" of throttle without lighting up the tires. That car could take on just about any stock car (under $50K, lets be reasonable here, it only cost $2300 in 1967) built in the last 30 years. Plus, it could turn really well. The 1967 Camaro was designed to beat the Ford Mustang (which it did handily) in the GT races and the first three years it was basically a street legal rally car. In high school I had a friend with a stock 1967 Mustang - it was much nicer with creature comforts but just couldn't compete performance wise. My 67 also blew away my best friend's 1990 IROC in college. It was pure visceral car with none of the niceities to weigh it down. This is the spirit that I will miss.

For those arguing torque vs. horsepower - what really matters is power to weight and driving skill to get the most out of your vehicle's strengths. I own a Harley Sportster (my current automotive thrill ride) with about 75 horsepower and can easily hold my own on the twisties with the punks on 120+ hp rice rockets. Yes, I have less power, less cornering clearance and more weight. What I do have is a flat torque band, which is useful because I don't have to constantly shift gears and an intimate knowlede of the limits of my bike. I know just how hard I can push it and myself. Experience counts alot in going fast and surviving to tell about it.

 

[StageLeft]

Don't give a dying rat's ass.

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: FenrisUlf

For those arguing torque vs. horsepower - what really matters is power to weight and driving skill to get the most out of your vehicle's strengths. I own a Harley Sportster (my current automotive thrill ride) with about 75 horsepower and can easily hold my own on the twisties with the punks on 120+ hp rice rockets. Yes, I have less power, less cornering clearance and more weight. What I do have is a flat torque band, which is useful because I don't have to constantly shift gears and an intimate knowlede of the limits of my bike. I know just how hard I can push it and myself. Experience counts alot in going fast and surviving to tell about it.

Exactly, you only need a 4 banger, the Z28 needs a 8 cyl, the new Z will do great with a 6 as it's done in the past.

 

[nemo160]

i'm inclined to think that the fbody isn't so much dying as taking a nap..it'll be back in a few years, especially if the economy improves
i'd like to see a return of more stripped down models, like the classic muscle car era
i would prefer to have a radio, bu tother than that to hell with ac and other such unnessecary additions
camaro will be back and stronger, its just a matter of when
and as for mods..i don't think any other engine hads the range of aftermarket parts made for it that the smallblock chevy does
mods are like overclocking, some will, some won't
maybe the new camaro will be offered with a version of the 496 truck motor
too bad they won't cause that would push it past the corvette...still fun to think of, the return of the big block camaro

 

[brtspears2]

I never heard so much Nissan talk until I visited here.

Classic debate is usually Mustang vs Camero. Kids, fixing their cars in their driveway, making a mess, knowing they did a good job when they leave their marks on the road...memories.

I'd buy a f-body over a 350Z just because I like f-bodies better. People buy cars because they, no surprise, like it. Just something about having a V8 under the hood. I dont know what it is.

I just see so much more fun out of a V8 for some reason. I like deep, natural roars over high reving whines.

Sad to see it go, but really, how long do you think GM can go without a sports car for the masses? That leaves them with something like a GTP as one of their faster cars they produce...

 

[Fulcrum]

Torque is the thing that causes my nuts to draw up when I hit the gas and is directly connected to the smile on my face.

I don't want more torque than him or him or her or them. I want torque.

I couldn't have said it better.

Hmmm weight somehow comes to mind, don't ask me why, might just be thinking is all

Nah! You must be thinking too hard. Weight couldn't have any bearing when comparing the performance of cars to that of bikes! It must be that torque is bad. Yea, that must be it...


As for the way most of you talk about how X car beats Y car around the track in various styles of racing, you'd think the quality of the driver had nothing to do with it. This tells me most of you don't race, you just talk like you do. Go to the track with your "chosen car" that you think should beat all those other cars. See what happens when you get beat by an experienced driver in one of those cars that you say is way inferior to yours. Guess what, play racers? The most important factor in determining who beats who in racing (relatively equal class, of course) is the driver! Not the car! That's right! Go to track and see for yourself. Live it, learn it, and love it! Racing lessons and the teachings of a good driver will do more for you on the track than buying an expensive performance car! That's why the F-body can hold its own even though it's heavier and bigger than most of the other cars people race. You just have to learn how to drive them. Seriously, go learn from a pro. Racing is fun! It can be expensive, but fun.

 

[CraigRT]

I don't care THAT much but I have always liked the Camaro SS.

the firebird is just disgusting looking, but the SS Camaro I think will be missed.. from me even a little bit. lots of power, and fairly affordable too. now who's competing with the Rust i mean Mustang? kinda sucks.

 

[Howard]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I understand the physics of the situation. But, an engine that provides a lot of torque comes out of the hole with such ferousity [sic] that that its [sic] bound to put a smile on your face.

It's not torque that does that, it's acceleration.

Take, for example, Caterpillar's crazy C-16 engine with !!!2050!!! lb-ft of torque! But you don't see that thing moving trucks real fast...

 

[danchler]

All this talk of great drivers and sports cars makes me wonder. Why are the overwhelming majority of Mustangs and Camaros sold with a 4-speed (really a 3-speed w/ overdrive) automatic transmission?

 

[Siddhartha]

I will not miss it. I really do not care for how the last two genterations have looked. I wonder if GM will bring it back as a front wheel driver.

 

[Howard]

All this talk of great drivers and sports cars makes me wonder. Why are the overwhelming majority of Mustangs and Camaros sold with a 4-speed (really a 3-speed w/ overdrive) automatic transmission?

Well because the target demographic is not real drivers.

 

[LiLRiceBoi]

U.G.L.Y.

 

[Jmmsbnd007]

What's an Fbody? /me is a car n00b

 

[absolutiza]

not me..