F-Body Road Racing and Autocross Forums

F-Body Road Racing and Autocross Forums > Community > General Discussion

Pages: 1, 2

robz71lm7

Aug 19 2006, 01:10 PM

QUOTE (marka @ Aug 18 2006, 11:07 AM)

Howdy,

Well, it'll be interesting to see what they come up with. It'd definately be nice if they offered a "stripper" model w/only power windows/locks/mirrors, cruise, and A/C (and leaving off side airbags, HUD, big stereo, heavy seats, t-tops, etc.). Also be interesting if they offered standalone options for a lightweight hood, 18x11 wheels, rear seat delete, radio delete, and maybe something else...

Ok, the 2nd part was dreaming. :-)

Mark

I personally don't like a bunch of features. A/C, power windows, locks, cruise, maybe mirrors and that's good enough. I don't need or want power seats, climate control, adjustable pedals, HUD, leather, heated seats, sunroof/t-tops, or onstar. I really don't even want cylinder deactivation, but I know there's no way to avoid that. The one selfish thing I'd really like is the capability to fit big tires like you can on 4th gens. My biggest 4th gen rant is the lack of headroom. It wasn't until I bolted a Kirkey to the floor that I was really ever comfortable driving it.

Crazy Canuck

Aug 23 2006, 01:29 AM

News on the Camaro going to the Oshawa powerplant.
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet...amp;docid=28088

btw, interesting facts:
1st Camaro: 29-Sept-1966
4.8 Million Camaro sold
977 145 Camaros built in Boisbriand, QC plant.

Foxxtron

Aug 27 2006, 10:57 PM

If I may redigress to the "sedan vs. coupe" ordeal.

The coupe and sedan definitions have become somewhat misnomers over the years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan (it may be wikipedia, but this article has much more validity than some others).

I believe that the now defunct Trans-Am series, which was a defining series of the F-body, amongst the other competitors being Ford, Chrysler/Mopar, and the now defunct AMC was originally titled from its inception in 1966 by SCCA:

Trans American Sedan Competition

Also, what about the American Sedan series that is in SCCA as well?

And as usual, us Commonwealthers usually referred to them as saloons.

Okay, now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

rpoz-29

Aug 27 2006, 11:54 PM

QUOTE (pknowles @ Aug 17 2006, 07:14 AM)

I understand that cars are getting heavier, but I think there is a major problem when a 2007 4x4 Land Cruiser is ~4300 lbs and a Camaro is ~3900 lbs. Heck my mom's old 4x4 Bronco II fully loaded was only ~3400 lbs. I think if they hit 3600 lbs for the stripper model, then everything will be fine.

That's weird, because my 1987 4Runner 4 cylinder with no options except air weighed in at 3900 lb.

firehawkclone

Aug 28 2006, 01:19 AM

Well the Challenger is a go, and it will get a Hemi and a 6sp.

Oh the choice's..... the great looks of the Challenger, or an ls2!

Guardsman

Aug 29 2006, 06:06 PM

QUOTE (sgarnett @ Aug 11 2006, 06:11 AM)

QUOTE (Rob Hood @ Aug 11 2006, 12:48 AM)

I'm still not totatly convinced it's the right body style from a retro perspective. It reminds me of a Transformers robot more so than a retro-recreation.

The Challenger is a more faithful reinvention of the original E-body, IMO. Its lines are much smoother and offer easier transitions from one body section to another than the new Camaro.

A lightweight (<3300 lbs) with close to 400HP would be a great vehicle, too. Maybe a "off-road" cam in the trunk for dealer install??

I like the Challenger better too, but don't like it's nose either. All of the modern "muscle cars" look really chunky to me, and remarkably similiar to each other. I suspect that part of the problem is the desire to package a very upright seating position while maintaining a low chopped look for the roof and a short overhang, all while being enslaved to historic "design cues". They all look like they need 6 inches shaved off the bottom of the body.

I have nothing against retro, but it seems to me that they should focus less on retro trademarks and more on retro style. One of my all-time favorite body designs is the XKE roadster, but if you try to grab the trademarks and abandon the style, you end up with, well, a late model Taurus. Ugh.

I think they need to do two very important things: Abandon the trademark mandates, but go more old-school in the design process.

I am absolutely no technophobe (I'm an ASIC engineer), but I think they depend a little too heavily on the cad designers, and not enough on the sculptors.

When you think about the really beautiful cars of the past 100 years, none of them look much alike, and none of them were slaves to what came before.

One sad reality, though, is that the low-slung seating position of the 4th gen and most sports cars doesn't sell to most women, and even the male car buyers have wives.

The key to the Camaro's success has always been great bang-for-the-buck performance. I hope they don't lose sight of that.

I agree with you about the height of the body, it's way too high, and makes the car look weird.

The other thing that I noticed is that the Challenger and the Camaro look almost identical. I saw a picture of a Challenger in Hot Rod, and I thought it was another Camaro in red paint.

The front end are almost indentical in size and shape, the A- and B-pillars and windows are, if not identical, very close, and the overall size and shape of the cars are very close. It's almost like they had the same design team doing both cars.

http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/na...t/photo_02.html

http://www.dodge.com/dodge_life/news/autos...challenger.html

Open up both, and compare the third photo of the Challenger with the Camaro.

Actually, the differences between them are almost like the differences were between the Camaros and Firebirds, just a few body pieces.

John

axoid

Aug 29 2006, 07:42 PM

QUOTE (Guardsman @ Aug 29 2006, 12:06 PM)

The other thing that I noticed is that the Challenger and the Camaro look almost identical. I saw a picture of a Challenger in Hot Rod, and I thought it was another Camaro in red paint.

I disagree. The basic silhouette is similar, but then again it's similar to a BMW 6 series too.

I hate the rear of the Challenger, but I like the nose. And the Camaro has way more character in the creases and edges on side body panels and fender lips than the Challenger does with it's blandly smooth body panels. There is nothing I dislike on the exterior of the Camaro, I can't say that for the Dodge.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.