[Shotimes] OT New Camaro just slightly retro

[Dave Garber]

Well, keep in mind that a lot of folks aren't interested in doing track work 
with their 30k+ cars. Hell, I have yet to take any car I've ever owned on a 
track (other than 1/4 mile stuff). I could care less how heavy the new 
Challenger is relative to an EVO or STI. Frankly, I don't think a 
Challenger/Mustang customer is also an EVO/STI customer. I have zero 
interest in the STI/EVO, but am VERY interested in the Challenger.

And FWIW, the Charger does very well on the track. Can't remember where I 
read it, but track times were super. Especially when you consider the 'heft' 
of the car.

To each their own. If I were into track work to the point of stripping a Gen 
1 down to the bare bones for fun, I might not be too tempted by anything 
that weighs close to 4000 pounds. But, as a daily driver and a blvd bruiser 
(and occasional 1/4 mile work) the new Challenger looks like a home run to 
me.


Dave Garber
Pittsburgh, PA
99 White, 93k


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Nunnally" <marknunnally@JoiMail.com>
To: "SHOtimes" <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 6:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] OT New Camaro just slightly retro


>> Might want to give the proposed new Camaro a little break.  It is
>> supposed to have IRS, nothing wrong with the Vette engine, lots of
>> torque, power and decent MPG, at a lower price than a 4-cam engine.
>
> I agree, the LS series is a great motor.  It's small, compact, very light
> (lighter than a V6 SHO engine) and a bunch lighter than the past/current 
> OHC
> stuff in the mustang and makes big power.  But that's also sorta the
> point...The LS-1 was basically the same, and around in the last version of
> the Fbody.  The mustang (then) was way way behind the power dept and the
> camaro still sold lousy enough for them to kill it.  I don't think they
> killed it because the quality got bad, but due to slow sales (or maybe
> that's the reason for the slow sales).  I just don't see how "killing it"
> and then bringing it back in just a few short years is going to do much 
> for
> sales, but who knows.
>
>> As for weight.  With all the safety/emissions and other regulations,
>> very little these days of any size is below 3500 pounds.  People scream
>> for stiff bodies, and air bags, and huge stereo systems, along with
>> miles of heavy wire to support all the power stuff.  Very f ew cars can
>> get the weight down other than the oddball exotics that are sold in tiny
>> numbers.
>
> The 03 Cobra had IRS, but @ 3700+ lb it was still a pig in anything other
> than a straight line.  I'm not up on my tech specs on the current dodge
> stuff (IRS or solid rear axle) but I know the charger is 4100+ lb!
>
> EVO, Sti, Z06, and a lot of other "mainstream" non exotic performance cars
> have done really well in the design/engineering in keeping the weight 
> down,
> the C5 Z06 came in at 3115 lb curb weight (remember the previous 3525 lb
> ZR-1 C4?), and the Sti and Evo both were about 3200 lb in original form, 
> and
> if IIRC have stayed in that range.  I've driven a lot of cars, and a lot 
> of
> them at the track, and I'd have to say past 3400-3500 lb the fun factor
> really starts to go away, regardless of the hp.  I will include my 92 SHO 
> in
> that group as well.  At 200 lbs heavier than my 89 (both when stock), the 
> 89
> had a lot more fun factor.
>
>> I always am confused when magazines put down American cars for using the
>> same basic body/design for several different cars.
>
> I'm all for the V8/RWD platform, but unless folks just go crazy for the
> retro styling, I just don't see it selling well.
>
> mark
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes