It was a laudable goal. A great goal for the engineering team. However, in project development and approval, one has to also be realistic about what can be expected.

If it came out that someone said two years ago, "The Camaro is only worth doing if it can come in a 3550, and at 3850 we'll lose lots of money", then I would include the Camaro team.

But I don't think anyone said that. So I don't include them. I predicted 3800 quite some time ago. I was happy to hear rumors of a goal at 3600. I was not surprised to hear close to 3900.

Unlike you, I don't believe the compromises necessary to hit 3500 would have made it a more successful product. It would have entailed lots of $$ -- perhaps for a different platform -- and tradeoffs at every step, where safety, chassis rigidity, durability, noise, comfort, utility, and/or $$ would have to be sacrificed for weight. The end result could have been 3500 pounds, but at a price, comfort, and utility point that would have left it appealing to fewer people. If low weight is the end-all, just restart the 2001 Cobra production line and put in an LS3. You'd have your IRS, even.

I think that 3860 has blinded you to the positive attributes of the car, and you're getting wrapped around the axle with that number.

Seriously, why not just get a Corvette? You were disdainful of comments about rear seat utility anyway, so apparently two seats is enough? The Corvette has the light weight, you can obviously afford it if you're looking at a nearly new CTS-V. Why not move on?

 

I think I can answer that for Charlie.

The reason is simple.... some of us are just not Corvette guys. Some of us are dyed in the wool Camaro guys. Corvette just isn't us.

Speaking only for myself, I would buy this new Camaro over a Corvette based on exterior styling alone.... if it weren't so heavy... and if the interior wasn't such a train wreck.

Now with all that being said, my wife has been pushing me literally for years to get a Corvette. Looks like she finally has some leverage and that makes me very sad.

 

My 05 GTO handled quite well and had excellent road manners, even though it was heavy. I'm pretty sure the SS Camaro will also handle well and it will be like the GTO, where it will seem like a much lighter car in everyday driving. I think the Camaro team spent a lot of time on ride quality and handling and it will show when you finally get behind the wheel.

 

The GTO is about 200 lbs lighter than the new Camaro SS.

 

Oh? A different platform? One with a future? One that other programs would have shared?

What we have now is, Camaro using a legacy architecture, which sticks it with 200-300 lbs of excess baggage. You know, there's a this thing called CAFE.

As far as the rest, Korry nailed it.

 

Part of the issue may be that there just isn't another platform to share it with, no matter what you do.

The higher CAFE standards are going to kill off RWD platforms like they did before. Fact of the matter is that FWD is inherently lighter than RWD and allows for better packaging and less costly manufacturing coupled with inherently higher fuel economy.

 

I just don't get why it has to weigh 300 pounds more than the mustang. that thing just came out 3 years ago. safety standards havn't changed that much , have they?

 

Oh yeah, I get why they did what they did. Zeta was cheaper than Sigma and more politically expedient than a new smaller RWD architecture. The bonus was that hundreds of thousands of large sedans could share costs and an assembly line with it. Ahhh, a beancounter's wet dream.

But virtually all of those sedans are now dead. I give the lone remaining Caddy Zeta program less than a 50/50 chance of survival. Once that's gone, the Zeta Camaro becomes ONE VERY EXPENSIVE car to produce - don't you think?

At any rate, the death clock is ticking for Zeta. Sigma's safe until 2015. And Caddy really needs a small RWD car if wants to be a serious global player - I'd expect they'd want a Chevy version to help foot the bill.

 

Yeah, all new cars made now must have a built-in bombshelter able to withstand nuclear fallout. Didn't you get the memo?

 

Only if Chevy makes the decision to allow the car to become smaller.

A lot of the porkiness is due, in my opinion, to the sheer size of Zeta - the first Camaro was sprung off a SMALL car platform.

If whatever enters the market as a 3-series fighter by Cadillac is the SIZE of a 3 series, and not a 5 series like a G8/Zeta, you could then reasonably expect a smaller and lighter car.

That being said, a Chevelle-sized Camaro might be a gigantic hit. If so, then don't change a good thing.

Again, the market is going to make the call. The scary thing for everyone involved at GM would have to be that even with all the research and work, deep down in their souls, they can't have 100% confidence in it either...

Not because it's bad or anything, it seems like a great car to me, but because you're always rolling the dice with a new car of ANY type and the market is incredibly fickle.




.

 

You make a good point.

But lemme tell ya, if GM product planners predicted that right smack dab in the middle of $4.50 gas and impending 35 MPG CAFE standards, that a thriving niche exists for two ton coupes, and they're right , then they are freaking geniuses. Somehow, I don't think it'll play out that way.

 

Except there was no other platform to choose. It's too bad that GM took so long to decide to build a Cadillac 1 and/or 3-series competitor. I'll agree with you on that all day long. It's too bad that GM didn't give Holden the $$ to build a Torana. I'll agree with you on that too.

But Camaro alone could not justify the Alpha platform. That's what I meant. Putting the expense of a new platform under Camaro alone would have resulted in a product that was too expensive, which would have hit volume, which would have made it too expensive.

Second, I don't believe that a V8 Alpha, should it ever come to pass, would be 3500 pounds. I just don't see any 4 seat V8s with IRS out there that light. Now maybe that will change, what with CO2 and CAFE religion. But BMW already spent a lot of effort on lightening the M3, and it's closest at about 3600, and the torque peak on that car is under 300 ft lbs.

So then you have to talk about compromises that the general public wouldn't like to make the car lighter. Like the hood flapping in the wind. Like a light radio system. No sound deadening. Low crash test scores. Small wheels and tires. Solid rear axle. Etc.

So I stand by my statement. A 3500 pound Camaro would have been expensive and unappealing.

Btw, it's pretty easy to criticize GM in hindsight for not starting Alpha 5 years ago. But what's the point after a while? We know. They know. Maybe you think you're helping Alpha's case by harping on the Camaro's weight. You might want to check with your sources. If they say "please harp", post it here, and I'll shut up.

 

Current Sigma is just as heavy as Zeta, if not more so. The CTS is smaller than the G8 and slightly heavier. The STS is about the same size as the G8 and heavier still.

The Zeta2 Camaro is lighter than all of them.

 

The difference in weight between a 335i and 535i is something like 150 pounds. That's probably the savings you're looking at with a Camaro on a smaller platform. Any further savings could probably be seen on either platform, whatever size it would be.

 

The difference between a 1.95 ton coupe and a 1.85 ton coupe would be minimal in terms of market acceptance.

Today's market argues for spending money on the Volt.

And if there is a future Camaro, today's market argues for making it a turbo 4 or N/A V6 at the largest.

That's what I don't get. You talk about CAFE and $4.50 gas at one point, and then say that you want a V8 in an Alpha in the next. Or are you arguing for something that isn't in GM's best interests, or ???