2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos
View Poll Results: All things being equal, which would you buy in 2011
4,000 lbs Camaro
108
65.45%
3,500 lbs Mustang
23
13.94%
I'd buy something else.
34
20.61%
Voters: 165. You may not vote on this poll

Here's a weight poll for you guys.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-14-2008 | 05:47 PM
  #16  
TrickStang37's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by jg95z28
Minus 2 doors it will be significantly lighter. (Those rear doors aren't carbon-fiber.)
Aluminum wheels? No more than 5-lbs per wheel.

Your talking about a top dog G8 now? About 100 lbs more. As for the top dog Camaro? It could have a lightweight hood to offset the difference.

The convertible is a different story. A convertible Camaro could very easily reach G8 territory.
Two less doors didnt do anything for the challenger.

Two less doors on the civic was only 50lbs.
Old 03-14-2008 | 05:59 PM
  #17  
jg95z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Originally Posted by Z284ever
How do you figure that? And why does a ZR1 weigh more than a Z06 then?
There's more different between the ZR1 and the Z06 than just the engine and hood.


Originally Posted by TrickStang37
Two less doors on the civic was only 50lbs.
You're comparing the Civic to the G8?
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:08 PM
  #18  
Doug Harden's Avatar
Prominent Member
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Unless the next Mustang will equal a Smart for Two, ther's just no way in hell it'll be 200lbs lighter than today's model.......unless it cost as much as a Corvette, loses two seats and incorporates high priced, exotic materials....that and are four cylinder only.

So to even propose this as a premise is misguided at best....

Targets are as meaningless as pulling a number out of your @$$ without establishing parameters of materials, size, etc....

To me, a car that is 100x more solid, has many more features, gets twice the fuel mileage, last many times as long, doesn't ride like a log wagon or handle like one too, meets all current crash standards....than my 1969, 3,400+ lbs Camaro does, HAS to weigh more and puts this additional weight to good use.

There's no magic pill here people...you want a modern 2+2 car with al the bells and whistles? Then it's gonna weigh more than a 40 year old similar sized car...unless your a magician.....deal with it...or buy something else.

Me, I don't want to drive a Smart car...nor some other p*ss poorly design foriegn POS...

Last edited by Doug Harden; 03-14-2008 at 06:12 PM.
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:11 PM
  #19  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by jg95z28
Minus 2 doors it will be significantly lighter. (Those rear doors aren't carbon-fiber.)
It depends on how much reinforcement needs to be added to offset the larger opening in the body to meet side crash standards. The G37 coupe is heavier than the G35 sedan due to that.

"Minus 2 doors it will be significantly lighter" is more of a hope than a reality. That alone will make little difference.
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:35 PM
  #20  
Pentatonic's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 806
From: MI
Depends on how much power.

You can make anything move with the right amount of torque and horsepower. And, no, I don't care too much about the twisties.
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:50 PM
  #21  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
For the record, the ZR1 has a CF roof, hood, front spoiler, front fenders, side rocker panels and rear spoiler, in addition to all of the Z06's weight saving tricks.
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:54 PM
  #22  
Z28Wilson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Originally Posted by BigDarknFast
3500 lb Mustang? Come ON. Not in its price bracket. Extensive aluminum and CF parts... tiny (TEENY tiny) rear legroom... yet another archaic iron fixed rear axle... and draconian limits on creature comforts... ok maybe then the new Mustang will be 3500
If you feel the new Camaro won't approach G8 weight levels, you're expecting a Camaro in the 3600-3700 pound range. So what's the big leap to 3500 for Mustang? Especially with the wide speculation that the '11 Mustang will be a more compact design (hint: you don't necessarily HAVE to make the interior vastly smaller to cut outer dimensions and heft).
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:56 PM
  #23  
Z28Wilson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Originally Posted by Z284ever
For the record, the ZR1 has a CF roof, hood, front spoiler, front fenders, side rocker panels and rear spoiler, in addition to all of the Z06's weight saving tricks.
Tell me again how brute-forced blown motors and the components to back them up don't add any weight to a car.
Old 03-14-2008 | 06:58 PM
  #24  
jg95z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,710
From: Oakland, California
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
Tell me again how brute-forced blown motors and the components to back them up don't add any weight to a car.
Also bigger brakes, cooling ducts, additional spoilers, etc.
Old 03-14-2008 | 07:22 PM
  #25  
99SilverSS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
I guess pass because I'll probably have a 2010 Camaro.

To me this thread, like the one that spawned it, us just about useless.

We don't know the weight of the 5th Gen Camaro is. And we certainly have no clue about the weight of the next Gen Mustang. Ford can state they want the car to fly too.... Words are just words until the tires hit the pavement.

We can debate the published curb weight when the car arrives. The only thing proven in these weight threads is that everyone has opinions on the curb weigh, no surprise. But no actual info on what it will be other than to say at a certain point it won’t be good. We all knew that before Jan 2006.
Old 03-14-2008 | 07:45 PM
  #26  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by 99SilverSS
.. Words are just words until the tires hit the pavement.

.
Words are the precursors to action.

Should we believe all the rumors and reports on the next gen Mustang? Probably not.

Should we believe Ford when they say they'll drop 200-300 lbs on their future models? Probably yes. That is of course, if they want to sell cars when CAFE kicks in.

In fact, if this CAFE legislation would have passed 30 months ago, I'd bet the Camaro would have been based on something other than Zeta today.
Old 03-14-2008 | 08:38 PM
  #27  
BigDarknFast's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,139
From: Commerce, mi, USA
Originally Posted by Doug Harden
Unless the next Mustang will equal a Smart for Two, ther's just no way in hell it'll be 200lbs lighter than today's model.......unless it cost as much as a Corvette, loses two seats and incorporates high priced, exotic materials....that and are four cylinder only.

So to even propose this as a premise is misguided at best....

Targets are as meaningless as pulling a number out of your @$$ without establishing parameters of materials, size, etc....

To me, a car that is 100x more solid, has many more features, gets twice the fuel mileage, last many times as long, doesn't ride like a log wagon or handle like one too, meets all current crash standards....than my 1969, 3,400+ lbs Camaro does, HAS to weigh more and puts this additional weight to good use.

There's no magic pill here people...you want a modern 2+2 car with al the bells and whistles? Then it's gonna weigh more than a 40 year old similar sized car...unless your a magician.....deal with it...or buy something else.

Me, I don't want to drive a Smart car...nor some other p*ss poorly design foriegn POS...
AMEN.
Old 03-14-2008 | 08:46 PM
  #28  
BigDarknFast's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,139
From: Commerce, mi, USA
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
If you feel the new Camaro won't approach G8 weight levels, you're expecting a Camaro in the 3600-3700 pound range. So what's the big leap to 3500 for Mustang? Especially with the wide speculation that the '11 Mustang will be a more compact design (hint: you don't necessarily HAVE to make the interior vastly smaller to cut outer dimensions and heft).
Just for the record, I'd selected 3650-3699 in the other poll. Not a huge difference, but not what you said of me above either.

It goes back to the point I made above, what a circus this thread is. For example - will the next Mustang have another live axle? What conditions will Ford be operating under in a couple years - will they be able to make a profit on a 2011 Mustang with some exotic materials? And so on. So no, I don't see how they get down to 3500 unless many or all of the conditions I laid out come true for the car - very, VERY unlikely.
Old 03-14-2008 | 08:49 PM
  #29  
TrickStang37's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by jg95z28
There's more different between the ZR1 and the Z06 than just the engine and hood.


You're comparing the Civic to the G8?
no, im comparing the difference two doors does. which is very minimal. you missed the point of the post.
Old 03-14-2008 | 10:00 PM
  #30  
Z284ever's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally Posted by BigDarknFast
3500 lb Mustang? Come ON. Not in its price bracket. Extensive aluminum and CF parts... tiny (TEENY tiny) rear legroom... yet another archaic iron fixed rear axle... and draconian limits on creature comforts... ok maybe then the new Mustang will be 3500
Originally Posted by Doug Harden
Unless the next Mustang will equal a Smart for Two, ther's just no way in hell it'll be 200lbs lighter than today's model.......unless it cost as much as a Corvette, loses two seats and incorporates high priced, exotic materials....that and are four cylinder only.

So to even propose this as a premise is misguided at best....

Targets are as meaningless as pulling a number out of your @$$ without establishing parameters of materials, size, etc....

To me, a car that is 100x more solid, has many more features, gets twice the fuel mileage, last many times as long, doesn't ride like a log wagon or handle like one too, meets all current crash standards....than my 1969, 3,400+ lbs Camaro does, HAS to weigh more and puts this additional weight to good use.

There's no magic pill here people...you want a modern 2+2 car with al the bells and whistles? Then it's gonna weigh more than a 40 year old similar sized car...unless your a magician.....deal with it...or buy something else.

Me, I don't want to drive a Smart car...nor some other p*ss poorly design foriegn POS...
Originally Posted by BigDarknFast
J So no, I don't see how they get down to 3500 unless many or all of the conditions I laid out come true for the car - very, VERY unlikely.
I'm sure that you guys know that the current Mustang is around 3500 lbs.

Last edited by Z284ever; 03-14-2008 at 10:02 PM.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:19 AM.