View Poll Results: How much would you pay per pound to save weight?
Zero.
17
31.48%
$5 per pound
13
24.07%
$10 per pound
17
31.48%
$15 per pound
7
12.96%
Voters: 54. You may not vote on this poll
How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
01-04-2006 | 10:39 AM
#16
Disciple
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,479
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
I agree that GM needs to sweat the weight while maintaining a competitive price point.
I dunno.
How many 1LE's sold the average year?
IMO the biggest competitor to the enthusiasts dream Z/28 is a used Z06. Once you think track, things like back seats and warranty become immaterial.
Charlie, have you described your "dream" 5th gen and what you're willing to pay for it?
Originally Posted by Z284ever
OTOH, I think enthusiasts would pay more for EXTRA weight savings on a specific model. This is more along the lines of what I was referring to actually. I'd doubt that we would see a Z06 level of effort or cost, but a little something that would be good for weight reduction and bragging rights would be good.
How many 1LE's sold the average year?
IMO the biggest competitor to the enthusiasts dream Z/28 is a used Z06. Once you think track, things like back seats and warranty become immaterial.
Charlie, have you described your "dream" 5th gen and what you're willing to pay for it?
Last edited by poSSum; 01-04-2006 at 10:43 AM.
01-04-2006 | 10:41 AM
#17
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by Z284ever
OTOH, I think enthusiasts would pay more for EXTRA weight savings on a specific model. This is more along the lines of what I was referring to actually. I'd doubt that we would see a Z06 level of effort or cost, but a little something that would be good for weight reduction and bragging rights would be good.
Now I wouldn't want to see the option cost on a mag. engine cradle but just for argument's sake its an entertaining discusison.
Perhaps a lightweight option group? Could combine some various magnesium and aluminum bolt-in structural parts as well as a lightweight set of wheels....but that's all starting to sound like Z06-style Z28 goodies to me
One question though....unique or optional chassis components would require additional crash testing, right? That's expensive........too expensive for Camaro to justify?
01-04-2006 | 10:56 AM
#18
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by poSSum
I agree that GM needs to sweat the weight while maintaining a competitive price point.
I dunno.
How many 1LE's sold the average year?
IMO the biggest competitor to the enthusiasts dream Z/28 is a used Z06. Once you think track, things like back seats and warranty become immaterial.
Charlie, have you described your "dream" 5th gen and what you're willing to pay for it?
I dunno.
How many 1LE's sold the average year?
IMO the biggest competitor to the enthusiasts dream Z/28 is a used Z06. Once you think track, things like back seats and warranty become immaterial.
Charlie, have you described your "dream" 5th gen and what you're willing to pay for it?
You are one thought provoking dude, Art.
Obviously, Z06 is the Chevy pinnacle in this area. But for most people, justifying the 65-70K cost is a tough decision.
What would I be willing to pay for my "dream" Z/28? I don't know yet, but a premium, that's for sure.
But I see it as more about focus and mission that purely cost.
For example, I'd rather have a normally aspirated, all aluminum smallblock, that puts out 430-ish hp (just picking a number)....rather than a cast iron, blown, intercooled motor that puts out 475 hp........because I'd prefer to save the couple of hundred pounds in weight on the NA motor (and cost BTW).
I'd rather have excellent seats with manual adjustments, rather than the 20-40lbs power seats would cost me.
Stuff like that. I'll get back to this later when I have more time....
.
01-04-2006 | 11:20 AM
#19
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,497
From: Okemos, MI
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
At first, I looked at the options and they seemed like a lot of money.
Then I read the #2 post, which put it in perspective. 100 pounds for $1000. I voted $10/pound after reading the second post.
Upon further reflection, I think the price premium can NOT be $1000 or more in order for the car to sell well. It's a bit of a magic number.
Personally, I'd be willing to spend a few thousand on weight loss, but not at the expense of features. I like my power windows, mirrors, seats, etc. But if a bit of extra money gets me a magnesium engine cradle or some other exotic material, then sweet.
If people are willing to pay extra for lightweight components, then maybe that will drive the aftermarket in that direction.
Then I read the #2 post, which put it in perspective. 100 pounds for $1000. I voted $10/pound after reading the second post.
Upon further reflection, I think the price premium can NOT be $1000 or more in order for the car to sell well. It's a bit of a magic number.
Personally, I'd be willing to spend a few thousand on weight loss, but not at the expense of features. I like my power windows, mirrors, seats, etc. But if a bit of extra money gets me a magnesium engine cradle or some other exotic material, then sweet.
If people are willing to pay extra for lightweight components, then maybe that will drive the aftermarket in that direction.
01-04-2006 | 11:37 AM
#20
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
I think the weight issue is more to do with at what performance level do you expect the car to achieve.
IOW, a shifter Kart weighs only a few hundred pounds and only needs 40+ hp to run welll over 100mph and 6"-8" wide tires to pull over 1g......extrapolate that into a 3600#+/- car with 12" wide tires, active handling and over 400hp.
In today's world, we seem to be able to build very high horsepower engines (who'd have thunk that 500hp seems to be mainstream for performance cars sold for under $50k?)....so power ain't a problem, it's how robust does the chassis need to be to still be a good handling car with that much hp? Hell, today's engines are getting 10 year old 4 cylinder mpg ratings!
Oh sure, physics is still relevant, but so is the hp to weight ratio.
I require a car with tons of HP, IRS, big @$$ tires and whatever else needed to make the car handle. Give me a stiff car and I can make it even better....
Just don't give me a pig in both weight and handling....I don't really 'need' to go over 150mph, but I do have to turn corners........
IOW, a shifter Kart weighs only a few hundred pounds and only needs 40+ hp to run welll over 100mph and 6"-8" wide tires to pull over 1g......extrapolate that into a 3600#+/- car with 12" wide tires, active handling and over 400hp.
In today's world, we seem to be able to build very high horsepower engines (who'd have thunk that 500hp seems to be mainstream for performance cars sold for under $50k?)....so power ain't a problem, it's how robust does the chassis need to be to still be a good handling car with that much hp? Hell, today's engines are getting 10 year old 4 cylinder mpg ratings!
Oh sure, physics is still relevant, but so is the hp to weight ratio.
I require a car with tons of HP, IRS, big @$$ tires and whatever else needed to make the car handle. Give me a stiff car and I can make it even better....
Just don't give me a pig in both weight and handling....I don't really 'need' to go over 150mph, but I do have to turn corners........
01-04-2006 | 11:37 AM
#21
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,979
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by Z284ever
random car enthusiast:"Hey, is that a new Z28"?
new Z28 owner: "Mumble... mumble... drool... I liek Hank Williams Jr..."
random car enthusiast: "That's the one with the magnesium engine cradle, right?"
new Z28 owner: "Yar, gist like the siding on my double-wide".
random car enthusiast: "Too bad you didn't have the cash to spring for the SS, mullet-head."
Last edited by PacerX; 01-04-2006 at 11:46 AM.
01-04-2006 | 12:04 PM
#25
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Lighter weight is CHEAPER if it's DESIGNED IN FROM THE START. Consider a 1900 lb. Lotus Elise is ~$20k cheaper than a 2800 lb. Porsche Boxster.
Start with a heavy-**** Cadillac platform, and you could spend $1000s and still only end up with a slightly-less-grossly-overweight F-body.
By the time the car's done, it's too late. You can't really "add on" light weight.
Start with a heavy-**** Cadillac platform, and you could spend $1000s and still only end up with a slightly-less-grossly-overweight F-body.
By the time the car's done, it's too late. You can't really "add on" light weight.
01-04-2006 | 12:08 PM
#27
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 260
From: Nashville, TN
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by Doug Harden
I think the weight issue is more to do with at what performance level do you expect the car to achieve.
IOW, a shifter Kart weighs only a few hundred pounds and only needs 40+ hp to run welll over 100mph and 6"-8" wide tires to pull over 1g......extrapolate that into a 3600#+/- car with 12" wide tires, active handling and over 400hp.
In today's world, we seem to be able to build very high horsepower engines (who'd have thunk that 500hp seems to be mainstream for performance cars sold for under $50k?)....so power ain't a problem, it's how robust does the chassis need to be to still be a good handling car with that much hp? Hell, today's engines are getting 10 year old 4 cylinder mpg ratings!
Oh sure, physics is still relevant, but so is the hp to weight ratio.
I require a car with tons of HP, IRS, big @$$ tires and whatever else needed to make the car handle. Give me a stiff car and I can make it even better....
Just don't give me a pig in both weight and handling....I don't really 'need' to go over 150mph, but I do have to turn corners........
IOW, a shifter Kart weighs only a few hundred pounds and only needs 40+ hp to run welll over 100mph and 6"-8" wide tires to pull over 1g......extrapolate that into a 3600#+/- car with 12" wide tires, active handling and over 400hp.
In today's world, we seem to be able to build very high horsepower engines (who'd have thunk that 500hp seems to be mainstream for performance cars sold for under $50k?)....so power ain't a problem, it's how robust does the chassis need to be to still be a good handling car with that much hp? Hell, today's engines are getting 10 year old 4 cylinder mpg ratings!
Oh sure, physics is still relevant, but so is the hp to weight ratio.
I require a car with tons of HP, IRS, big @$$ tires and whatever else needed to make the car handle. Give me a stiff car and I can make it even better....
Just don't give me a pig in both weight and handling....I don't really 'need' to go over 150mph, but I do have to turn corners........
01-04-2006 | 12:08 PM
#28
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by Dan Baldwin
Lighter weight is CHEAPER if it's DESIGNED IN FROM THE START. Consider a 1900 lb. Lotus Elise is ~$20k cheaper than a 2800 lb. Porsche Boxster.
Start with a heavy-**** Cadillac platform, and you could spend $1000s and still only end up with a slightly-less-grossly-overweight F-body.
By the time the car's done, it's too late. You can't really "add on" light weight.
Start with a heavy-**** Cadillac platform, and you could spend $1000s and still only end up with a slightly-less-grossly-overweight F-body.
By the time the car's done, it's too late. You can't really "add on" light weight.
I think some of you (us?) might be Kappa people when the turbo versions arrive.....
01-04-2006 | 01:38 PM
#30
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Re: How much more per pound would you pay to reduce mass?
Originally Posted by Doug Harden
True dat...but an Elise is a glorified gokart...
I think some of you (us?) might be Kappa people when the turbo versions arrive.....
I think some of you (us?) might be Kappa people when the turbo versions arrive.....
I maintain that if Mazda can build a 2450 lb. 170 Mazda hp (maybe 155 GM hp?) MX-5 roadster, GM *could* (if they chose to) manage a 2450 lb., 177 GMhp Solstice Coupe (drool drool).
Anyway, the larger point was/is, if you design for light weight from the get-go, it doesn't have to cost more and can actually result in CHEAPER cars. If you start with a 3800 lb. sedan, well, you'll end up with a car that will still be tremendously overweight even after you spend $1000s on trying to make it lighter.