It's time. The official 1LE thread.
08-05-2008 | 09:40 AM
#31
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 954
From: Shelton, WA
Fact - they're both piggy, but the v8 is significantly heavier than the v6. It looks like the v6 would be the best ESP option with its gearing and the availability of the 3.45's from the v8. Road racing you would rather the v8, obviously; but, the weight penalty on an already heavy car is a killer.
What would you want from a 1LE? This is what I think it should be.
1LE Option - available for V6 OR V8
1. Airbag delete - 6 airbags standard? too much weight. Leave 4 out.
2. A/C delete - a/c is a $960 option on the solstice. Do the same on camaro and make it standard on packages
3. Manual everything - door locks, windows, mirrors, seats
4. Radio delete - c6's use standard wiring bundles regardless of options. Leave the wiring open. It saves GM money to put in a plastic plate instead of a radio and speakers
5. Double adj. shocks
6. Massive sways - Big rear for rr. Base can be put on later for autox
7. No fancy electronics - keep lights, gauges, etc. to a minimum
8. Some lightweight body parts - piggy needs to drop as much weight as possible.
9. Lightened wheels - save the bling bling 20's and 21's for people that don't know better.
10. No sound deadening material
11. No rear seats
12. SS brake lines my c6 z51 even came with rubber and a mush pedal. save us the time by putting some good lines on.
13. ps cooler
14. tranny cooler
15. quicker steering ratio
What would you want from a 1LE? This is what I think it should be.
1LE Option - available for V6 OR V8
1. Airbag delete - 6 airbags standard? too much weight. Leave 4 out.
2. A/C delete - a/c is a $960 option on the solstice. Do the same on camaro and make it standard on packages
3. Manual everything - door locks, windows, mirrors, seats
4. Radio delete - c6's use standard wiring bundles regardless of options. Leave the wiring open. It saves GM money to put in a plastic plate instead of a radio and speakers
5. Double adj. shocks
6. Massive sways - Big rear for rr. Base can be put on later for autox
7. No fancy electronics - keep lights, gauges, etc. to a minimum
8. Some lightweight body parts - piggy needs to drop as much weight as possible.
9. Lightened wheels - save the bling bling 20's and 21's for people that don't know better.
10. No sound deadening material
11. No rear seats
12. SS brake lines my c6 z51 even came with rubber and a mush pedal. save us the time by putting some good lines on.
13. ps cooler
14. tranny cooler
15. quicker steering ratio
Also, I'm tired of hearing the "excuse" of deleting options costing more money. Are you serious? The truth is it costs GM money in profit by deleting options. If GM can offer a car with a few option packages, they can do it cheaply and charge more for them, thus making more of a profit. By leaving the options off the car, GM doesn't make the profit off them. Maybe you can call it semantics, but GM will not make a "stripped-down" car because it's profit margin will go down as a result.
So, we, the Camaro enthusiasts, have some choices.
1. Those who love the 5th gen and don't mind their "porkyness" can buy them and enjoy them as is.
2. Those who love the 5th gen, but want it lighter can buy it and do all the weight reduction they want. Surely the aftermarket will accomodate you.
3. Those who love the 5th gen styling but can't stand the weight can vote with their wallets and not buy it.
4. Those who just plain don't like the car obviously aren't going to buy it.
My choice will be #3. It's not just the Camaro, 99% of cars made today are way heavier than their predecessors. For a "regular" A-to-B car, that doesn't bother me so much, but for a "performance" car, weight means something to me. Because the Corvette sets the bar so high, that's the only newer performance car I'd even consider buying right now.
Last edited by onebadponcho; 08-05-2008 at 09:44 AM.
08-05-2008 | 10:43 AM
#32
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,497
From: Okemos, MI
I object to making that decision before you've actually driven the car. If the weight bothers you then, go ahead and pony up for a Corvette if that's what you want. Just please give Camaro a real chance!
08-05-2008 | 12:21 PM
#33
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 5
Non-starter. GM isn't going to delete safety equptment. The first person who becomes a parapalegic or widow would successfuly sue GM for having safety equptment available that would prevent it, but then removed it. This type of suit has been done before successfully, so I'm not making this up.
This goes beyond being a non-starter. Some of the car's engine management is done through the stereo. This isn't just GM, but it's also other car companies. Today's car stereos are wired into the rest of the car's computer network. Lose the stereo in some cars, and the car won't run.
Massive sway bars alone don't cut it. Also, massive sway bars weigh more.
I hear this alot, but when it comes to asking "OK... what body parts can we lose weight out of, how can we take the weight out, and is this going to affect durability", the words tend to drift in the air like stale cigarette smoke or the proposer tends to begin to babble without specifics. Truth is, unless you're ready to see parts break (like your drivetrain, rear suspension components, and differential) or want to see your braking distance increase, you aren't going to lose weight through some miracle "body part" replacements.
Those "Bling blings" as you call it, combines with compatable meats actually do enhance handling. The ZR1 has 20s,and so do alot of other high performance cars that have stellar handling rep. Less sidewall means less sidewall flex. Less sidewall flex means tighter feeling and better feedback.
Doable, but it's going to cost dearly in sales. A lack of any sound deadening material will make the interior sound like being inside a muffled tin can. Despite the talk, there is no one who is going to pay 30 large plus for a car that noisy unless they plan to live on a racetrack.... and even then, they would buy a regular Camaro and simply take the interior out.
Parts like that have to go through GM's validation process. That costs money. Is it worth it to GM to do something like that unless it's going to be used across the board? Does the cost difference between what GM is using and what you propose going to be of noteworthy difference to the Camaro buying public or to the few dozen who are going to void their warranty by turning their Camaro into a pure race car?
This keeps getting brought up over and over again, so I guess I'll do the same:
1. There isn't going to be any substantial weight taken out of the Camaro. You can tweak around the edges, you might manage to get 100 pounds out of it and still have it as a production model. But go higher than that, and you're talking about changes that will send the price up significantly, and/or will have to go through GM's validation process. If it's not as tough as the part it's replacing, it's not going to get made. Period.
1. There isn't going to be any substantial weight taken out of the Camaro. You can tweak around the edges, you might manage to get 100 pounds out of it and still have it as a production model. But go higher than that, and you're talking about changes that will send the price up significantly, and/or will have to go through GM's validation process. If it's not as tough as the part it's replacing, it's not going to get made. Period.
2. Some of you out there may have lots of green sitting in your bank, and think that a BMW M3 is not an expensive car. But, you seem to forget that we aren't talking about a BMW M3. We're talking about a Camaro. When you start pricing Camaros near where a person can get a BMW, guess what? That person is going to sneer at the Camaro, and go get that BMW. In the meantime, you're turning away Camaro's traditional customer base. If you want to ensure not only will this Camaro fail, but also that the next Camaro never sees the light of day, simply add expensive materials and keep saying YOU are willing to pay more for it..... there's probably 10 sales Camaro would lose for each 1 of you.
While it's excellent that is has become domesticated and (finally!) refined to today's car standards, it's thinking like your of what you assume the Camaro customer base has become that lead to the creation of the fwd lineup that put GM where it is. They tried your thinking. There's a reason the fwd Monte Carlo was such a bomb, even with the Earnhardt addition. Because it completely missed the target consumer.
3. Finally, any Z28 package that is outside the one proposed MUST have a better price and be a better value than the one that's currently under the microscope. I am astounded that so many people are actually proposing a car that would be more expensive, more exclusive, yet offer no real advantage to the supercharged version that's proposed, and in more instances than not probably would get you thrown out of a GM office for being ill thought out.
2008 Mustang Shelby GT500 - curb weight 3,920lb
2007 Mustang Shelby GT - curb weight 3508lb. Base Price - $26,875
Yes, the Shelby GT exists. No, it is not supercharged.
08-05-2008 | 02:14 PM
#34
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,497
From: Okemos, MI
You just lost all of your credibility.
Link? Everything I can find indicates that you're about ten grand low. Also, it's now 2008.
Link? Everything I can find indicates that you're about ten grand low. Also, it's now 2008.
08-05-2008 | 03:02 PM
#35
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
Delete 4 of the airbags, not all of them. If people sued over every car that didn't have side and anus airbags, half of Chevy's lineup would be shelved much less all the other cars produced with "only" 2 airbags. If you can make exploding gas tanks a non-issue, then having 2 airbags isn't even on the same level. By your logic, with only 6 airbags people could still sue if injured because there could have been more. Those people wouldn't buy a 1LE in the first place because they wouldn't understand its purpose - a race car that happens to be street legal.
Insurability is absolutely an issue. IOW, what factors do insurance companies look for in determining policy prices on cars and trucks? I can assure you anything that reduces the likelyhood of injury and theft IS what they look toward. Crashworthiness IS something they look for. Cost to repair IS something they look at. Personal injury is the biggest exposure for insurers.
It is strictly anecdotal, but in 2000 when I went from a 1995 Z/28 to a 2000 Corvette FRC my insurance premiums dropped. I'll grant that what other owners of like vehicle do has a big effect on insurance prices. Folks that don't drive their 'vettes recklessly does have an effect as well when the likelihood of loss is considered by the insurers...
Regarding some other suggestions that have been brought up?
AC delete - quickest way to assure horrible sales potential. AC is no longer a luxury item. You might as well paint "Don't buy this, no resale value" on the doors. A dealer would never order one.
Carbon fiber hood and front fenders - Easiest way to get the weight down and get even closer to a 50/50 weight distribution. Educated guess for price?
At the absolute least, $3,500 + to the sticker. Insurance premiums will rise as well. If folks would be willing to pay, it would be offered.
Smaller brakes - The last place a serious racer or driver wants to skimp unless you strictly intend to drag race only. You can have lighter big brakes. Carbon Ceramics are an excellent choice. Huge price increase in rotor cost but it does drop about 20 pounds per wheel. Carbon Ceramics are pretty much a cost prohibited option for most cars. I believe it is a $25k option on Ferrari and they are making a profit but not getting "rich" on them.
You can buy lighter rotors on the aftermarket and go with a more agressive pad to make quite an improvement in performance. Really agrssive pads are something manufacturers shy away from on new cars as they do squeal and devour rotors. < For most customers it a big dissatisfier >.
I'm as big a proponent on light hi-performance as anyone. I also see the value of refinement when it comes to NVH. It comes down to what people will pay for, and in refinement? What they will they forego and what they demand?
You could lose the IRS and the weight associated with it. Drag racing intenders wouldn't mind as sprung weight isn't an issue, nor is adjustible camber. You would also unbalance the weight distribution and alienate consideration from folk who have come to appreciate the benefits of IRS and who also view a live axle as part of what is exceptionally crude about muscle cars in general. It is a bad idea to narrow a market on a vehicle that had a narrow market as part of it's hiatus. Contrary to some opinions, a live rear axle is not the hot ticket in roadracing. They can be made to work but are not they answer in that form of motorsports.
In several racing series it's illegal to modify a car past certain factory options like pulling interior if that wasn't a factory option. If people didn't buy noisy unbearable grassroots cars that serve no practical purpose but to race, why does the Viper still exist? Viper ACR?.
Valid point. What is the price for a Viper ACR? GM could build a ACR style Camaro. The question isn't can you do it... it's can you sell it?
I'm sure there's a good balance of practicality vs. possibility.
People here haven't driven the new Camaro in it's final form, for the most part. The desciples have driven what is very close to a done deal, and none are giving horrible reports of the car being a pig, nor undesirable.
Last edited by 1fastdog; 08-05-2008 at 03:05 PM.
08-05-2008 | 03:59 PM
#36
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Honda makes the Civic DX with NO A/C and NO RADIO, no power doorlocks, no center console armrest, no map lights, only 2 wired speakers and it's manual transmission only. It's not a huge deal for manufacturers to offer a car like this. I don't believe it costs them more, but it does lower the revenue they can make if you would just buy the one that's loaded up.
08-05-2008 | 04:04 PM
#37
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
Honda makes the Civic DX with NO A/C and NO RADIO, no power doorlocks, no center console armrest, no map lights, only 2 wired speakers and it's manual transmission only. It's not a huge deal for manufacturers to offer a car like this. I don't believe it costs them more, but it does lower the revenue they can make if you would just buy the one that's loaded up.
That kind of thing is more a "starting at" point for advertising puposes.
I know a dealer that was stuck with an S-10 4 cyl, stick, no air as the business that ordered it backed out of the deal. For several years they had a birthday party for it...
08-05-2008 | 04:04 PM
#38
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,448
From: Irving, TX
It gains 19 horsepower, better suspension, loses 1 mpg city and 2 highway.
Not a resounding endorsement.
08-05-2008 | 04:07 PM
#39
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
But it is an official Shelby car, which means something to some people. You (and I) may not see the value in that, but going by how many of them I've seen on the streets, more people than you may think do.
08-05-2008 | 04:12 PM
#40
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,448
From: Irving, TX
Honda makes the Civic DX with NO A/C and NO RADIO, no power doorlocks, no center console armrest, no map lights, only 2 wired speakers and it's manual transmission only. It's not a huge deal for manufacturers to offer a car like this. I don't believe it costs them more, but it does lower the revenue they can make if you would just buy the one that's loaded up.
In fact, you might see this with other small cars... at least on websites. How many people would actually pay $25k+ for a car without A/C, Radio etc.
Why do you think the bottom end of the Challenger Race Pack production is 100 cars. They simply don't plan on selling very many of them.
08-05-2008 | 04:19 PM
#41
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,448
From: Irving, TX
I mean, price - cost of parts = 8k stickers.
But you are correct, some people will gladly pay the money to have it say Shelby on it.
08-05-2008 | 04:24 PM
#42
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
Maybe they use this to get a bottom entry price of one. I doubt you will be able to find many of these anywhere.
In fact, you might see this with other small cars... at least on websites. How many people would actually pay $25k+ for a car without A/C, Radio etc.
Why do you think the bottom end of the Challenger Race Pack production is 100 cars. They simply don't plan on selling very many of them.
In fact, you might see this with other small cars... at least on websites. How many people would actually pay $25k+ for a car without A/C, Radio etc.
Why do you think the bottom end of the Challenger Race Pack production is 100 cars. They simply don't plan on selling very many of them.
08-05-2008 | 05:40 PM
#43
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 446
From: Lincoln Park, MI US
The SGT package is about $9500 on top of the GT. Show me a $17,000 Mustang GT and I might just go buy it.
And comparing weight of the SGT and GT500 is moot if you are trying to make a case for weight reduction in the Camaro. The SGT isn't lighter than a standard GT, they don't even switch the hood to a 'glass one, the GT500 is simply much heavier than the GT.
08-05-2008 | 07:16 PM
#44
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,647
From: At car shows and cruise nights!
See Third Gen 1LE's and use the same formula. Mayyyyybe allowing AC and radio to be included if it was really wanted, but I feel that a 5th Gen 1LE would need more lighter weight parts, as many as can be included. None of that air bag and rear seat removal nonsense though. Then there are things like better suspension, steering boxes, etc.
08-05-2008 | 08:55 PM
#45
ALMIGHTY MEMBER
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 2,301
From: Detroit, MI USA
Non-starter. GM isn't going to delete safety equptment. The first person who becomes a parapalegic or widow would successfuly sue GM for having safety equptment available that would prevent it, but then removed it. This type of suit has been done before successfully, so I'm not making this up.
Non-starter. Today it costs more to create a delete package than it does to simply include it on every vehicle. It can be done when you're making 200-300,000 vehicles per year. At 100,000 and less, it's not going to fly.
Forget the dropping power windows. We've had a slugfest with GM over this before. See above. Regarding doorlocks, and mirrors, you're saving probably 8 pounds max. Power seat delete has potential, though.
This goes beyond being a non-starter. Some of the car's engine management is done through the stereo. This isn't just GM, but it's also other car companies. Today's car stereos are wired into the rest of the car's computer network. Lose the stereo in some cars, and the car won't run.
I'd say that's doable.
Massive sway bars alone don't cut it. Also, massive sway bars weigh more.
To what benefit? Again, making something different costs more than making things the same.
I hear this alot, but when it comes to asking "OK... what body parts can we lose weight out of, how can we take the weight out, and is this going to affect durability", the words tend to drift in the air like stale cigarette smoke or the proposer tends to begin to babble without specifics. Truth is, unless you're ready to see parts break (like your drivetrain, rear suspension components, and differential) or want to see your braking distance increase, you aren't going to lose weight through some miracle "body part" replacements.
Those "Bling blings" as you call it, combines with compatable meats actually do enhance handling. The ZR1 has 20s,and so do alot of other high performance cars that have stellar handling rep. Less sidewall means less sidewall flex. Less sidewall flex means tighter feeling and better feedback.
Doable, but it's going to cost dearly in sales. A lack of any sound deadening material will make the interior sound like being inside a muffled tin can. Despite the talk, there is no one who is going to pay 30 large plus for a car that noisy unless they plan to live on a racetrack.... and even then, they would buy a regular Camaro and simply take the interior out.
Doable.
Parts like that have to go through GM's validation process. That costs money. Is it worth it to GM to do something like that unless it's going to be used across the board? Does the cost difference between what GM is using and what you propose going to be of noteworthy difference to the Camaro buying public or to the few dozen who are going to void their warranty by turning their Camaro into a pure race car?
This keeps getting brought up over and over again, so I guess I'll do the same:
1. There isn't going to be any substantial weight taken out of the Camaro. You can tweak around the edges, you might manage to get 100 pounds out of it and still have it as a production model. But go higher than that, and you're talking about changes that will send the price up significantly, and/or will have to go through GM's validation process. If it's not as tough as the part it's replacing, it's not going to get made. Period.
2. Some of you out there may have lots of green sitting in your bank, and think that a BMW M3 is not an expensive car. But, you seem to forget that we aren't talking about a BMW M3. We're talking about a Camaro. When you start pricing Camaros near where a person can get a BMW, guess what? That person is going to sneer at the Camaro, and go get that BMW. In the meantime, you're turning away Camaro's traditional customer base. If you want to ensure not only will this Camaro fail, but also that the next Camaro never sees the light of day, simply add expensive materials and keep saying YOU are willing to pay more for it..... there's probably 10 sales Camaro would lose for each 1 of you.
3. Finally, any Z28 package that is outside the one proposed MUST have a better price and be a better value than the one that's currently under the microscope. I am astounded that so many people are actually proposing a car that would be more expensive, more exclusive, yet offer no real advantage to the supercharged version that's proposed, and in more instances than not probably would get you thrown out of a GM office for being ill thought out.
A better Z28 would need to be lower priced.
A better Z28 would still have to use the Camaro SS as a basis.
A better Z28 would have to sell more than the 5000 that this one is expected to sell.
A better Z28 can't have a $15,000 hand made LS9 designed for a 3100 pound car which won't handle the abuse that it would have if it lived on the Drag Strip hurling a 38-3900 pound car abusively and repeatedly down a track (there's a reason why GM didn't choose the LS9 as the basis for the LSx supercharged engine.... yes, the reason is durability).
We demanded this Camaro we got.
We demanded independent rear suspension & ignored the fact that it's much heavier than a live axle. We demanded 500 plus horsepower ignoring the fact that the body, drivetrain and suspension (especially IRS) designed to handle 500 plus horsepower adds alot of weight. We demanded our Camaro be a certain size, and acted dismissively at the mere thought of a Cobalt sized Camaro. We demanded a big honking V8 at all costs. We demanded world class braking forgetting that large discs and calipers can add up to 10 pounds or more per corner, and a system to back that up is also heavier.
Congratulations.
That's the car we're stuck with.
Meanwhile, the Mustang still has a live axle and even the 500+ horse GT500 Mustangs are governed at a chassis and component saving 155 mph and still weighs about 3500 pounds...... but we'd storm GM if the Camaro was governed and had a live axle, right?
So, back to a Z28.....
.... one that's realistic, one that's better than the one proposed, and one that's actually going to sell.
Non-starter. Today it costs more to create a delete package than it does to simply include it on every vehicle. It can be done when you're making 200-300,000 vehicles per year. At 100,000 and less, it's not going to fly.
Forget the dropping power windows. We've had a slugfest with GM over this before. See above. Regarding doorlocks, and mirrors, you're saving probably 8 pounds max. Power seat delete has potential, though.
This goes beyond being a non-starter. Some of the car's engine management is done through the stereo. This isn't just GM, but it's also other car companies. Today's car stereos are wired into the rest of the car's computer network. Lose the stereo in some cars, and the car won't run.
I'd say that's doable.
Massive sway bars alone don't cut it. Also, massive sway bars weigh more.
To what benefit? Again, making something different costs more than making things the same.
I hear this alot, but when it comes to asking "OK... what body parts can we lose weight out of, how can we take the weight out, and is this going to affect durability", the words tend to drift in the air like stale cigarette smoke or the proposer tends to begin to babble without specifics. Truth is, unless you're ready to see parts break (like your drivetrain, rear suspension components, and differential) or want to see your braking distance increase, you aren't going to lose weight through some miracle "body part" replacements.
Those "Bling blings" as you call it, combines with compatable meats actually do enhance handling. The ZR1 has 20s,and so do alot of other high performance cars that have stellar handling rep. Less sidewall means less sidewall flex. Less sidewall flex means tighter feeling and better feedback.
Doable, but it's going to cost dearly in sales. A lack of any sound deadening material will make the interior sound like being inside a muffled tin can. Despite the talk, there is no one who is going to pay 30 large plus for a car that noisy unless they plan to live on a racetrack.... and even then, they would buy a regular Camaro and simply take the interior out.
Doable.
Parts like that have to go through GM's validation process. That costs money. Is it worth it to GM to do something like that unless it's going to be used across the board? Does the cost difference between what GM is using and what you propose going to be of noteworthy difference to the Camaro buying public or to the few dozen who are going to void their warranty by turning their Camaro into a pure race car?
This keeps getting brought up over and over again, so I guess I'll do the same:
1. There isn't going to be any substantial weight taken out of the Camaro. You can tweak around the edges, you might manage to get 100 pounds out of it and still have it as a production model. But go higher than that, and you're talking about changes that will send the price up significantly, and/or will have to go through GM's validation process. If it's not as tough as the part it's replacing, it's not going to get made. Period.
2. Some of you out there may have lots of green sitting in your bank, and think that a BMW M3 is not an expensive car. But, you seem to forget that we aren't talking about a BMW M3. We're talking about a Camaro. When you start pricing Camaros near where a person can get a BMW, guess what? That person is going to sneer at the Camaro, and go get that BMW. In the meantime, you're turning away Camaro's traditional customer base. If you want to ensure not only will this Camaro fail, but also that the next Camaro never sees the light of day, simply add expensive materials and keep saying YOU are willing to pay more for it..... there's probably 10 sales Camaro would lose for each 1 of you.
3. Finally, any Z28 package that is outside the one proposed MUST have a better price and be a better value than the one that's currently under the microscope. I am astounded that so many people are actually proposing a car that would be more expensive, more exclusive, yet offer no real advantage to the supercharged version that's proposed, and in more instances than not probably would get you thrown out of a GM office for being ill thought out.
A better Z28 would need to be lower priced.
A better Z28 would still have to use the Camaro SS as a basis.
A better Z28 would have to sell more than the 5000 that this one is expected to sell.
A better Z28 can't have a $15,000 hand made LS9 designed for a 3100 pound car which won't handle the abuse that it would have if it lived on the Drag Strip hurling a 38-3900 pound car abusively and repeatedly down a track (there's a reason why GM didn't choose the LS9 as the basis for the LSx supercharged engine.... yes, the reason is durability).
We demanded this Camaro we got.
We demanded independent rear suspension & ignored the fact that it's much heavier than a live axle. We demanded 500 plus horsepower ignoring the fact that the body, drivetrain and suspension (especially IRS) designed to handle 500 plus horsepower adds alot of weight. We demanded our Camaro be a certain size, and acted dismissively at the mere thought of a Cobalt sized Camaro. We demanded a big honking V8 at all costs. We demanded world class braking forgetting that large discs and calipers can add up to 10 pounds or more per corner, and a system to back that up is also heavier.
Congratulations.
That's the car we're stuck with.
Meanwhile, the Mustang still has a live axle and even the 500+ horse GT500 Mustangs are governed at a chassis and component saving 155 mph and still weighs about 3500 pounds...... but we'd storm GM if the Camaro was governed and had a live axle, right?
So, back to a Z28.....
.... one that's realistic, one that's better than the one proposed, and one that's actually going to sell.
as always, some VERY good posts -- you've pretty much nailed it -- other than the ".......that's the car we're stuck with...."
I'm telling you (the group) that you will be pleasantly surprised when you drive this car......
By the way -- to the starter of this post: What you are REALLY describing is a "Body in White" -- not a 1LE.