Take a look and see what's on the horizon:

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=1

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=2

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=3

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=4

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=5

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plu...idg=1&idi=6

Sweet! Looks alot like my next daily driver. (I don't think I'll order the Zebra paint though....lol)

Nice catch.....hard for me to picture much of what the final product will look like from that tho.....seems a bit tall and too high...but that may just be all the garbage attached to it..........

CROSSINGFINGERSANDTOESNOW!

Indeed Randy! Those must be the Eddie Van Halen versions!

Do you guys really like the new Camaro? Seems too big and heavy to me. I'd rather buy a used GTO for less coin, and let someone else take the big depreciation hit.

I'll like it depending on how it drives. The GTO waddles around like an old lady! Suspension too soft. Good power though, but that alone does not cut the mustard these days!

The A-pillar looks large. Could be a sight impairment. The brakes look unchanged - I was really hoping for something either larger or with 4-6 pistons. It does look a bit jacked up, but then again most stock cars do.

I like the general lines, though.

Doesn't look like something I'll plan to buy. Think I'd rather some used cars than this potentially heavy slug.

I knew we won't be getting the big brakes. We never do.

My guess is those driving pics (high w/ skinny tires) are of the base model V6 version. note the tire/rim size & design on the parked pictures. more along lines of expected Z28 type of styling.

Compared to 4th gen:

shorter overhangs front and rear - good for aero mods and PMI

probably longer wheelbase - good

smaller, lighter windshield - good

smaller, lighter hatch glass, unless the camo is covering an extension to the spoiler - maybe good

very short door window openings - bad for quick exit

roof appears deeper at top of door glass - good for tucking halo up there

Never looked at it that way. Alan, you are the man! Thinking as a true fabricator!

There are only a few cars that jump out and smack me as being the perfect looking car. However there are plenty that I find extremely ugly, and this is NOT one of them.

I'm going to have to wait for a test drive before I make any 'I love/hate it' comments. But based on the last pic next to the mustangs it doesn't look that big. The tires don't look like the performance size on the stupidly large 20"+ rims. Right now it is still in the running as my first new car and so is the G8. For that matter so is the new Malibu. At least I've been able to drive the Malibu!! When the time comes I'll have to see which one weighs the least (Camaro I hope), has the most power, is easier to repair, has cheaper tires, has readily available parts, easier to live with, and is optioned the way I want. It wont be an on the show room floor decision. The manual transmission G8 will probably be available in 2009, about the same as the Camaro.

In pictures 3 and 4 the rear brakes appear to be as large as the fronts - maybe not as much swept area on the rear, but overall diameter looks close.

Picture 6 is great because it show ride height comparison to a Mustang. The Camaro sits much lower, but that appears to be a standard Mustang and may not be the best comparison. At least it helps to compare the size of both cars against each other.

All that said, I think the new Challenger is a much more faithful update of its original body than this attempt at reincarnating a 1969 Camaro. I'm on the fence until they come out with a flush-grille, hidden-headlight RS model. Wonder if they will also use a rear spoiler design similar to the 1991-2 Z28; at least that design would allow some rearward vision compared to an updated 1969 spoiler.

Also the greenhouse proportion to the rest of the body size is off. The "chop-top" doesn't look that good to me. Maybe that's because I see more headroom issues...

Parked next to those newer Mustangs, it "looks" just a bit smaller, at least sits lower. Although who knows how much it will actually weigh.

It looks more like the latest generation of the Javelin. Not that that's a bad thing.

Pat

Yummy! I'm sure as hell gonna get one ... either that or a Z06 'Vette ... lol

Nothing I see has changed my opinion. I'm planning to get one after it's been out for a year or so. I have decided that I don't want to buy the first year of any GM product!

Howdy,

Are there any real details yet as to expected performance?

Spring/wheel rates, weight, weight distribution, gearing, differentials, wheel options, etc. etc. etc. etc.?

The outside of the car looks nice.

Mark

How much weight do you figure could be pulled out of these things (not that it will help the F/Stockers out there any)??

Much less camo in this one ...

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attachment.p...mp;d=1197502270

Hope they paint the mirrors...

How about no camoflague at all....

http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show...52_162_full.jpg

http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show...52_163_full.jpg

http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show...52_164_full.jpg

Someone is gonna burn for this one! Looks nice, though.

My SWAG is the car will be 200-300# heavier than a 4th gen, maybe half of that increase in steel in the chassis for crashworthiness, and the other half in airbags, electronics and creature comforts. Steel stays, geegaws get tossed, race weight ends up 100-150# more than a 4th gen with similar rules. The smaller front/rear glass will mean less weight loss with Lexan. With a 400hp LS3, IRS and enough rubber it should come off the corners well, but give up some in braking and transitions to the lighter cars. Like I said, tho - just my SWAG.

I do expect the stamped steel IRS control arms to spawn a race in the aftermarket to get shiny powder coated tubular arms into the marketplace, but what we really need is a DIY aluminum forge ;-)

FWIW.... and not sure it will come to anything, but:

I was contacted by GM after Solo Nationals with questions about what the car would need to be a competitive autocross car. Apparently the Mustang got their attention.

Hopefully the act on the information.

I've often wondered if auto manufacturers contacted those, such as yourself, on issues like this with upcoming models. This pretty much confirms it...

Jeff

COOL! Thanks for the educated speculation!!

This kind of thing is really hopeful (hope giving?) information!!
Maybe we won't need those D.I.Y. aluminum alloy forges that Alan is talking about afterall??

hope you get involved in the suspension/damping choices

Sounds like GM Performance will be mounting a challenge to F-stock autocross in 2009 or 2010. Hope they don't try to pull the same crap they did with the Z0K GXP solstice in A-stock.

Seriously?!?!?!?!?! After they blew me off for even suggesting they talk to you!!

well... are you sworn to secrecy? hearing you say that makes me think that they are simply looking for a sales pitch, especially this late in development

Late in development? With still over a year until release, it seems like spring/shock/swaybar development (at a minimum) would still be open to change. Especially with the likelihood of multiple packages being available.

Sam, I'm just hoping you mentioned something about race tires being really expensive for 18"+ rims. I can't imagine what a 22" R compound would cost!!

1 year before production begins is late to me. Think about the time it takes to create tooling for something like this. A "Strano Z28" with spring/shock/swaybar is exactly the kind of sales pitch I'm talking about... i don't doubt that Sam could set the car up to be faster, but i'm concered about other things....

that's why i ask if he's sworn to secrecy about what they discussed

Given the supposed 'portliness' of this thing, I hope that a real, FULL delete 1LE is offered on whatever is going to be the 'Z28' type model. Hopefully they will also offer the option of Konis with valving input from Sam (EVEN if they force one to take double adjustables, and only offer it as a 'trunk kit', along with the other suspension stuff).

BTW; are 'trunk kits' F/Stock legal (were they EVER?), or again was that ONLY legal in Showroom Stock???

Trunk kits are not solo legal in stock class and would be a disaster for us if that's the only way this stuff is offerred. I'd rather that the 1LE was not "Full Delete" meaning no A/C and other stuff. Make the suspension a line-item and let us choose the rest ourselves. I need to have a car I can drive every day as well as autocross and mandatory A/C delete makes that impossible.

I was speaking with a GM "deep throat" the other day and the weight numbers sounded much better than we were guessing here for racing apps. That's all I can say for now.

From a production perspective, it's probably more cost-effective for GM to just install upgraded springs/shocks/sway bars rather than remove weight through deleted options. We are a niche in the scheme of things, and niches don't pay the bills, mass-production does. Sad but true. If GM were to offer a low-weight model it would probably come with a higher price tag.

However, it would be nice if the Z28 or SS came with (at least) better shocks and sway bars right off the showroom floor as part of the standard package. I'm not sure how much spring rate GM could get away with and still provide mass- or near mass-production ride quality.

I'm not sure it was an official call, but clearly someone wants to know and the number I called back was @ GM and it's someone working on the car.

I'm not in a position to tell everyone what we discussed. But in basic terms they were curious what I thought it would take to make a competitive car, and if I'd come back and run one if it was (though I'm doubtful they'd give me one).

It was a basic "I'd like to see, this, this, and that". As well as some discussion of why the Mustang is a good autox car, and what the could have done better with the older cars.

very interesting too bad my cousin doesn't work there anymore... he used to work on the development of the C6 and C6-z06 chassis several years back.

Point(s) taken and understood. I was just going by all of the fear and loathing concerning the speculative mass of the 5th gens and thinking that every little bit helps. Hopefully, GM will up the power enough to cover the weight gains, but that will only help us 'left and righters' so much (launching off of apexes). I'm sure we would all rather have less mass, lower in the platform than more power to try and compensate for girth.
Yes, the trunk kits ARE a BAD idea!! Like you said let the good suspension be a separate line item. (EVEN stand alone from any 1LE package!)

Sadly, like Rob H. above has stated, we (especially both Showroom Stock wheel to wheelers, and F/Stock axers who would want a full delete/no options 1LE) are an extremely small niche segment of the total market. So yes, it would probably cost GM less to just bolt in different suspension items rather than to delete standard features for weight savings. They could offer a full delete 'club sport' option for a premium (a la the M3 Club Sports of years/generations past), but I doubt it.
Let's just hope one can still order a 1SC car.

I'm not sure I'd want a 1SC car. Particularly if I planned to daily drive it. Power windows and locks don't weight much over manual units these days. Manual seats are obviously lighter, maybe they could just make those optional. Little things like fog lights and defrosters can't be more than a few pounds. Things like nav systems, heated seats, heated mirrors and more than 2 air bags would be too much for "stripper" model.

Howdy,

Rear seat delete.

Manual sport seats.

Spring/bar/wheel package(s)... Imagine your choice of front spring rates with factory part #'s for springs every 50 in-lbs... :-)

Diff options.

Rear gear options.

Mark

(of course, if they do all that, you'd have most of an ESP car... and the car would be classed in AS. :-)

I second that...I have Not look at newer camaro.Interesting on A lan's comment..

Start saving your pennies for big blingin' 20's:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2009-chevy-...ts/555812/full/

Interior photos can be seen at:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2009-chevy-...y-shots/555822/

as well as the rest at:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2009-chevy-...y-shots/555819/

Don't these spy jockey's know we want them to get UNDER the car?

I like the high tech disguise of duct tape on the wheels.....

Isn't the underneath gonna be a lot like the G8 (but shorter)?

Man, that interior is pretty foul looking. I hope they improve that a bit.

My perceptions:

- Interior is yuck; what's with the steering wheel? It looks like the wheel if offset to the top (top of wheel is farther away from column than the bottom). That'll be funky when doing quick steering inputs.
- The side roof may be nice for a roll cage, but that middle cluster (with the mirror attached) is going to be hell to design around! Either the top windshield bar will be bent, or it's going to impede vision out the windshield. (or, choice C - get rid of the pod or whatever it is)
- Only one of those Camaros has the 20s on it (the bottom one). The top one appears to have 18s or so. And, it looks like 17s would fit (check caliper clearance) if needed.