I too wish there would be a 1LE or at least a option to delete power windows and locks.Not that I am trying to save weight its just that I have zero faith in power windows.My Y2K Z28 doesn't have them and I can only hope that my 2010 doesn't although I know that won't happen.

BTW I started a thread a few months ago about the hopeful possibility of a stripper car but I can understand from GMs point that me being in the less than 1% group it wouldn't be profitable to engineer such a car and complicate the assembly process

 

Except for street tire class (which run 140 wear tires), show me ANY series that races on a grooved low profile radial. You think stiff sidewall is the earmark of a great tire? Ask C6 owners how much they love runflats. Take a comparable Hoosier A6/R6 and, according to your logic, those tires are worse for racing than a runflat simply because of sidewall stiffness. There are more components to a tire's performance than the sidewall.


My mistake. I got confused with the base GT. Sorry. But, I've never payed MSRP for a car, ever. Most recent purchases:

2007 C6 Z51 - MSRP $52k, purchased $46k new
2007 Cobalt - MSRP $13.8k, purchased $9.5k new

2008 markets are even weaker. <$35k for a race version of the Camaro vs. $98,810 for a Viper ACR ( http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=124547 ) is worth building to promote the racing heritage of the Camaro.

It's interesting how many people get angry at having more choices.

 

For those of us not intimately familiar with the third gen 1LE package, please describe it for the purposes of this discussion.

Oh, so now we're talking about autocross? When did that happen?

You said, "Sidewall strength of a radial is a non-issue." If you feel that's the case, go drive a car with a 60- or 70-series tire (Hoosier or not), and enjoy all of the sidewall flex, since apparently it doesn't matter to you.

Sidewall stiffness is important. Too much is bad, and too little is bad. This applies whether you're on the street or running in an autocross, although the ideal ranges are different depending on what you're doing.

This conversation isn't about a Camaro equipped with race tires. Don't blur the lines.

 

Your complete lack of familiarity with and understanding as to the purpose of the 1LE package is exactly why you shouldn't be discussing its merits (or tire selection) as you have absolutely no idea why it even exists.

Read and understand first. Then comment.

 

Hmmm.....did it have something to do with building a Camaro to compete in the SCCA "Showroom Stock" racing series?

http://ve3eie.ncf.ca/1le_history.html

 

I've been wondering, what does it take to get a "Body in White"???

 

I was asking for you to write something for me (and others in the same boat, which is the majority of the people reading this) to read.

So, I've now done some research on my own (since you apparently can't be bothered to share what you know, just to bitch about it). Here's what I know:

1. The 1LE package began life as a brake upgrade. Larger rotors (from the Caprice, IIRC) and Corvette calipers.
2. 1LE development led to some changes to the fuel tank (to avoid starvation), but AFAIK the redesigned tank was integrated into all Camaros and was never 1LE-only.
3. Later on, manual transmission 1LE cars got a better ratio in 5th and an aluminum driveshaft.
4. Finally, air conditioning and power accessories were removed for all 1LE cars.
5. For the 4th gens, GM added Koni shocks to the 1LE package, along with stiffer suspension bushings and tranny mount, thicker sways, and stiffer springs.
6. As of 1996, air conditioning was included on 1LE cars (it became standard equipment for all Camaros that year).
7. 1LE was discontinued for 1999.

My source: http://ve3eie.ncf.ca/1le_history.html

So, when you said there needs to be a 1LE option like there was on the 3rd gens, you're saying you should be able to get a 5th gen with no air conditioning and manual everthing?

The rest of the 1LE stuff is possible (big brakes, racier suspension, better gearing), but you are NEVER going to see a factory 5th gen without air conditioning or power windows. It's simply not going to happen.

One thing to note: A modern power window motor is not significantly heavier than a typical manual window crank. That certainly wasn't the case in the late 80's, but things have changed.

 

I don't disagree with the list portion of the post so I've left it off. As for the rest...
The car magazines demanded IRS, there were many here vocal about not being overly excited by the prospects of IRS. A live axle could have been developed for Z/28. A live axle could have been an option. Like T-tops, people who wanted them would have paid for them.

If the heavy weight is due the the demands of 500hp, then where is my 500hp car? With Zeta Hi-po dead, all we're getting is a 400hp car. Not every component on the SS is sized for 500 hp and that is a fact, so why is it a pig? Why can Ford build build a 400hp car at 3500lbs?


It wouldn't, it would have the engine already bought and paid for by the CTS-V.



BTW, does anyone else find it disturbing that Caddy will have a better performace car in the CTS-V than anyting you will be able to buy in a Camaro?

 

What car is that?

Assuming you're referring to the upcoming Mustang... keep in mind that those are just numbers floating around on the internet. Neither the car nor the 400hp engine have entered the realm of the real world, so throwing those numbers out in a "why can't GM do it too" sort of way is unfair at best.

 

I don't think that has been determined with any certainty.

 

After having read this entire thread, I guess I'm getting old at the ripe old age of 25, because I just don't understand the desire for a stripper car. After having had a 4th gen, I want one with more substance and more creature comforts, one thats a little more "grown up" if I can use that extremely bad term. One me and the wife can hop in and drive around for 2, 3, 4 or more hours be comfortable enough to want more. Hell, I want one I can feel comfortable strapping nova jr. in the back seat when I cross that brige. Yet again, I guess I'm just getting old ahead of my time though.