Handling: 3rd gen vs. 4th gen Options

[Warez]

I’ve seen this question thrown around very often on numerous F car forums with no real consensus reached. So which do you guys think is the better handling platform, the 3rd or 4th gen? Also was the 4th gen front suspension a superior design to the modified McPherson setup used on the 3rd gens? I often hear 3rd gen owners saying the 4th gen setup is inferior.

[prockbp]

third gens are lighter and more narrow than fourth gens..

both cars have front suspensions that WORK..

both cars have limited negative camber unless you modify them..

it is HELLA easier to work on fourth gen brakes!


third gens have proven to be much faster cars in Autocross(weight&width) but there isn't a clear winner in road racing


the real question is: Which car looks cooler? third gens! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Warez]

3rd gen Camaro dimensions:

Wheelbase 101.1

Length (overall) 192.6

Width (overall) 72.4 or 72.8

Track f/r 60.0/60.9

http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/re...rreviewshowall/

http://www.thirdgen.org/newdesign/articles.../shootout.shtml

4th gen Camaro dimensions:

Wheelbase 101.1

Length (overall) 193.5

Width (overall) 74.1

Track f/r 60.7/60.6

http://www.extractando.com/automobiles/Che...vy_Camaro_I.htm



Can ~1 inch in width and track really have any noticible effect in an autocross??

[KeithO]

third gens are lighter and more narrow than fourth gens..

both cars have front suspensions that WORK..

both cars have limited negative camber unless you modify them..

it is HELLA easier to work on fourth gen brakes!


third gens have proven to be much faster cars in Autocross(weight&width) but there isn't a clear winner in road racing


the real question is: Which car looks cooler? third gens! (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

That is my experience as well. (Including which looks cooler).

I have owned/tracked/autocrossed both a stock L98 88 IROC and a stock 98 LS1 Z28 within the last 5 years. In autocross, I was a mid-pack F-Stock driver with the IROC and pretty much won every event after a short learning curve with the LS1. It's hard to say how much my driving improved over the timeframe.

I can say that the 2.77 rear in the IROC versus the 3.42 in the Z28 had some influence.

I have thought about the 3rd versus 4th gen thing many times. If I could trade my 4th gen road race car for a similarly-prepared 3rd gen road race car in comparable condition, I would do it in a heartbeat.

[PF Flyer]

I, too, have open tracked both.

I currently run the 3rd gen because it is easier to work on.

They have their (slightly) different handeling characteristics, as well, but mine has been modified almost from day one with caster/camber plates, bigger springs with adjusters and a lotta suspension components with heim joints.

When I drove my 4th gen, it was basically stock with a brake upgrade and SFC's. I have driven modified 4th gens and their handeling is fantastic. It just depends on what has been done to them, as with any car.

I'm hoping soon to put a number of 4th gen parts in my 3rd gen. LS1, brake and differential upgrade for starters.

[Judd]

This post comes at a good time for me. I've been thinking about picking ua a car for the CMC or AI. It will start off with mostly track days though. If you had your choice, would you do the 3rd Gen or an early 4th Gen {pre-LS1}? I can pick up a 3rd Gen super cheap but I'starting to find a good many 94-97 6 cyl/5 speed cars floating around for cheap.

[KeithO]

Some day I will be running a 3rd gen. The reason that I have a 4th gen is that I got such a good deal on it that I had to buy it.

One vote for 3rd gen, here.

[prockbp]

If you had your choice, would you do the 3rd Gen or an early 4th Gen

it doesn't take very much wrenching to tear down a third gen front end compared to a fourth gen

and third gen engine bays are awesome.. there is a ton of room to work around the motor

[prockbp]

Can ~1 inch in width and track really have any noticible effect in an autocross??

well, by those numbers it looks like the difference is closer to 2 inches, and that can certainly have an effect on autocross times... especially in a slalom

[prockbp]

I often hear 3rd gen owners saying the 4th gen setup is inferior.

what is their argument?

each setup has to be modified/tuned differently, but that doesn't make one better than the other..

any ignorant third gen owning kid will argue that third gens are superior... you really have to learn to recognize BS if you're going to use the forums at thirdgen.org... there is a lot of great information over there, but there is 10 times as much bullshit

[slowTA]

This is a great discussion, here is how I see it.

The guys at thirdgen.org covered brakes easily. I'm going with a 13" C4 set. Just cut some ears off of the spindles, bolt up the adapter, machine the hubs, and you're pretty much done. There are kits for C5, 12" C4, LS1, and I think a Wilwood kit is in the works. These kits are cheaper than Baer's, but so far there is no Porsche kit... maybe 1 day there will be.

I read that a thirdgen will turn in a little better, but I don't remember the reason. I think I read it in a book that covers '82 to '98 f-bodies, that'll give you a rough estimate as to when the book was written.

Fourth gens might have more shock/spring options up front but the rears are the same. It's a million times easier (cheaper) to get big rims to fit a fouth gen. I don't want to use 2" spacers for this.

Like it was said before, half of the engine bay is covered by the dash in a fourth gen. Thrid gens are easier to work on under the hood, but still not as easy as other cars. T5 vs T56... if you have a 9 bolt like me there are no options for a good diff. Let's not forget the power advantage of the LT1 and LS1. I think a thrid gen may be easier to drive since it's easier to see out the windshield, but I've never driven a fourth gen so I can be wrong. Fourth gens are also supposed to have a better ride quality to them.

Also, the whole self destructing bearing hub isn't an issue with third gens!!

I think similar set up cars can run pretty close lap times, assuming the power difference is addressed first.

Keith, even swap your car for mine? (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/drink.gif)

This post has been edited by slowTA: Jul 24 2005, 06:37 PM

[CMC #37]

This is a tough one! I have tracked both, however, my experience in the 4th gen platform is a street car with an RR suspension and fully stock otherwise, including weight (oink!). In the stock form I think the 4th gen is better (less chassis flex), however, prep them both for RR and it is real close. From my limited experience, the third gen seems more tossable, 4th gen better at higher speed. I'll tell ya for sure somewhere down the road in the 2006 racing season when I get some seat time in the '94 Trans-Am!

[CrashTestDummy]

Can ~1 inch in width and track really have any noticible effect in an autocross??

well, by those numbers it looks like the difference is closer to 2 inches, and that can certainly have an effect on autocross times... especially in a slalom

And that's 4" gate-to-gate in a slalom. That would be almost .006 seconds _per_ gate advantage to the 3rd Gen, everything else being equal, in a slalom. Of course, things are definitely not equal, so I think it comes down to what you like, and how far you go in the prep.

[patred]

I've autocrossed a few (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) 3rd and 4th gen F Bodies the past few years. The biggest difference (not to get into an engineering discussion because I usually gloss over all that stuff (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) ) is that a 3rd gen (properly set up of course ... not taking into account some ragged-out '86 TBI car!) seems to be a lot easier to drive. Not saying they're "faster," but the 3rd gens I've driven have for the most part been easier and more comfortable for me to just hop in and drive. The front suspension on the 3rd gen seems to be a bit more, um, settled? and smooth.

Top 3 in no particular order (High Fidelity style) my favorite F bodies I've driven:

Barney (the famous purple ESP '82 ESP Camaro)
Randy Keeton's F Stock '90 1LE
Lonnie's car

Pat

[Warez]

what is their argument?

each setup has to be modified/tuned differently, but that doesn't make one better than the other..

any ignorant third gen owning kid will argue that third gens are superior... you really have to learn to recognize BS if you're going to use the forums at thirdgen.org... there is a lot of great information over there, but there is 10 times as much bullshit

That’s pretty much it, I ask them to elaborate with actual first hand experience and technical info, but no one does.

[Warez]

From my understanding the rear suspension are identical with all parts being interchangeable. However since the rear tracks are slightly different, doesn’t that mean that the 4th gen rear end is slightly wider than the 3rd gens? How exactly is the track measured anyways, is it the distance from one wheel mounting surface to the other?

With regard to the front suspension, the short and long arm (dual A-arm) design on 4th gens have superior camber characteristics by being able to keep the same camber when the suspension is compressed; whereas the McPherson suspension on 3rd gens loses its camber the more you compress the suspension?

Identical to the CTS suspension:

(IMG:http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/PV__005672__.jpg)

http://gm.wieck.com/forms/gm/previewpage?005672

Also from my understanding, cars with McPherson strut suspensions provide optimal handling when the lower control arm is parallel to the road. When you lower these vehicles you move the instant centre below the road line which results in worse handling, such as in Fox body mustangs which actually handle worse when they are lowered unless you install the expensive lowering kits.

So it can’t be as clear cut as that, what else am I missing especially since most of you are tipping the hat to the 3rd gen?

[PF Flyer]

... you can tune a suspension on a 4th gen to run with the vettes, it just depends on the size of your wallet. I know of a guy that re-engineered the entire front suspension on a 3rd gen and achieved those same results. You can't just lower a car and expect it to perform. Once the 'roll center' has been surpassed, the handeling heads for the dumper.

3rd gens are what they are, struts and an external spring. 4th gens are the SLA setup.

I enjoy performance cars of all types. How they drive the corners, how they stop, how they go, it's all fun.

What is the ultimate goal you're trying to achieve?

This post has been edited by PF Flyer: Jul 25 2005, 02:25 AM

[prockbp]

So it can’t be as clear cut as that, what else am I missing especially since most of you are tipping the hat to the 3rd gen?

i don't think anybody is saying that the thirdgen is the best way to go...

you should really tell us your plans if you want good advice...


after adjusting the rear view mirror in my IROC for the 456,731st time, i really miss my old 2000 Z28.... i wouldn't want you to end up that way

This post has been edited by prockbp: Jul 25 2005, 07:10 AM

[robz71lm7]

So how do these cars compare in CMC? CMC would be a good basis since the LT1's are restricted and the rule set limits what you can do to the car.

I think your answer might lie in there.

What's the front roll center height on a 3rd gen at stock height and lowered an inch? That might tell us something.

[trackbird]

after adjusting the rear view mirror in my IROC for the 456,731st time, i really miss my old 2000 Z28.... i wouldn't want you to end up that way

After making the same mirror adjustments in my 2002 Z-28....I find that I miss my 1989 Formula....

Maybe it comes down to which one you owned first. :drive: