RE: Driven: Camaro 45th Anniversary edition
Discussion
E38Ross said:
300bhp/ton said:
E38Ross said:
hang on....all the American car fans on here had me believing that European cars were all fat and heavy....this weighs over 100kgs more than a "lardy" German sports saloon.
Also....having done it, an E92 M3 will trundle along at 30mph in 6th too. in fact, i've just had a look at the torque curves, assuming both cars 6th gears are geared to 200mph....at 30-40mph neither car will be quicker than the other from those speeds (well, the lower weight of the M3 may help it)
used these graphs
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2007...
http://www.acadiaforum.net/temp/camaro/HP_Curves.g...
Looking at those graphs I see this:Also....having done it, an E92 M3 will trundle along at 30mph in 6th too. in fact, i've just had a look at the torque curves, assuming both cars 6th gears are geared to 200mph....at 30-40mph neither car will be quicker than the other from those speeds (well, the lower weight of the M3 may help it)
used these graphs
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2007...
http://www.acadiaforum.net/temp/camaro/HP_Curves.g...
| 1500rpm | 2000rpm | HP @ 1500rpm | HP @ 2000rpm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMW | 280nm/206ft-lb | 335nm/247ft-lb | 58.8bhp | 94bhp |
| Camaro | 340ft-lb | 350ft-lb | 97bhp | 133bhp |
To me that's quite a difference in performance.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think he means in relation to what people think it should cost.My Mustang costs less in tyres, tax, servicing and insurance than the Focus ST I owned before it and the fuel consumption is very similar maybe 2 mpg day to day and around 5-6 mpg less on the motorway.
swerni said:
God you lot are boring.
I got one because (IMHO) it's an awesome looking car, with a big V8 that makes the right sound ( well it does now).
I really couldn't give a s
t about bhp per tonnne or how many G's it can pull.
I love the comic book styling and It makes me smile just looking at it, let alone driving it.
The fact it cost fk all to run is just a bonus.
Oh come on Steve, surely if it made 3 bhp 750rpm further up, it MUST be better. Can't you see that? Tch!I got one because (IMHO) it's an awesome looking car, with a big V8 that makes the right sound ( well it does now).
I really couldn't give a s
t about bhp per tonnne or how many G's it can pull. I love the comic book styling and It makes me smile just looking at it, let alone driving it.
The fact it cost f
k all to run is just a bonus. Bloody BMW drivers.....
AdeTuono said:
swerni said:
God you lot are boring.
I got one because (IMHO) it's an awesome looking car, with a big V8 that makes the right sound ( well it does now).
I really couldn't give a st about bhp per tonnne or how many G's it can pull.
I love the comic book styling and It makes me smile just looking at it, let alone driving it.
The fact it cost fk all to run is just a bonus.
Oh come on Steve, surely if it made 3 bhp 750rpm further up, it MUST be better. Can't you see that? Tch!I got one because (IMHO) it's an awesome looking car, with a big V8 that makes the right sound ( well it does now).
I really couldn't give a s
t about bhp per tonnne or how many G's it can pull. I love the comic book styling and It makes me smile just looking at it, let alone driving it.
The fact it cost f
k all to run is just a bonus. Bloody BMW drivers.....
E38Ross said:
AdeTuono said:
Oh come on Steve, surely if it made 3 bhp 750rpm further up, it MUST be better. Can't you see that? Tch!
Bloody BMW drivers.....
bloody yank car fans unable to interpret simple informationBloody BMW drivers.....
irocfan said:
bloody BM drivers can't see the attraction of cheap, simple engineering with oudles of low down grunt which translates to a car good on both road and track ;-)
Oh I see the appeal totally. And doesn't appear to have more low down grunt than an M3 if gearing is the same (to max top speed in a given gear) and you're travelling at the same road speed in the same gear. Or have you still not understood my post about percentage of max rpm as opposed to absolute rpm? If you want to talk absolute rpm then you're camaro is no match for a 550d diesel 3.0. At 1500rpm it makes more power than the camaro. But as it doesn't rev as high its not a fair comparison. You should do it assuming each gear goes to the same top speed to be more fair.
Edited by E38Ross on Saturday 3rd November 22:46
E38Ross said:
If you want to talk absolute rpm then you're camaro is no match for a 550d diesel 3.0. At 1500rpm it makes more power than the camaro. But as it doesn't rev as high its not a fair comparison. You should do it assuming each gear goes to the same top speed to be more fair.
Silly boy. Back to school on Monday?BTW; pay a little more attention in Eng. Lang., would you? Mummy will be very disappointed with you're(sic) results at the end of term.
AdeTuono said:
Silly boy. Back to school on Monday?
BTW; pay a little more attention in Eng. Lang., would you? Mummy will be very disappointed with you're(sic) results at the end of term.
Predictive text on a phone doesn't give the best results. Yeah, I'm going to school with my 7 series. Still no decent response to my comments, mind.... BTW; pay a little more attention in Eng. Lang., would you? Mummy will be very disappointed with you're(sic) results at the end of term.
PascalBuyens said:
It hasn't even surfaced officially in the US....
Must be out in the US surely? Seeing a few around in the middle east now, the dealer here has them in but all sold out annoyingly.Certainly on my want want list for next year, just need to save, hard!
If I bought one here would I take it back to the U.K, who knows. The LHD/RHD isnt an issue for me, clearly all the people talking about not being able to see to overtake drive very different to me. Actually cant remember the last time I overtook anything on a single lane road in the U.K! However the fuel price compared to here would be a considerable factor. But it would be nice to have something like that for when went home!
E38Ross said:
irocfan said:
bloody BM drivers can't see the attraction of cheap, simple engineering with oudles of low down grunt which translates to a car good on both road and track ;-)
Oh I see the appeal totally. And doesn't appear to have more low down grunt than an M3 if gearing is the same (to max top speed in a given gear) and you're travelling at the same road speed in the same gear. Or have you still not understood my post about percentage of max rpm as opposed to absolute rpm? If you want to talk absolute rpm then you're camaro is no match for a 550d diesel 3.0. At 1500rpm it makes more power than the camaro. But as it doesn't rev as high its not a fair comparison. You should do it assuming each gear goes to the same top speed to be more fair.
Edited by E38Ross on Saturday 3rd November 22:46
if you want low down torque get a turbo diesel, x40d makes way more torque at 1500rpm so must be better than this and better at doing the lazy grunt thing. doesn't matter it would be 1 or 2 gears lower due to gearing as it doesn't rev as high though 
that's firmly tongue in cheek by the way....but it's kind of what a lot of the "low down torque" fans are saying when comparing a 6500rpm red line engine to an 8400rpm red line engine.
i'm not just saying it for the M3 by the way, things like the RS4, high revving porsche engines etc all go without saying.
why do people compare torque at 1500rpm on one engine and 1500rpm on another engine which revs so much higher? wouldn't it be better to say OK 5th gear goes to 165mph in both cars, lets say floor it from 30mph in 5th gear and see what's what; not from 1500rpm in both, as the higher revver will be another 2 gears up/pulling a "harder" gear.
it's the same with the diesel fans who claim the diesels have more low down grunt.....well sure if you drive around at 1200rpm everywhere without any consideration for what gear you're in. last diesel i drove i thought this pulls really well from low down from 30 at e.g. 1500rpm but then i realised i was in a gear which only goes to 90mph, in something like an RS4 1500rpm at 30mph would be a gear which takes you to over 165mph so hardly a fair comparison!
that's firmly tongue in cheek by the way....but it's kind of what a lot of the "low down torque" fans are saying when comparing a 6500rpm red line engine to an 8400rpm red line engine.
i'm not just saying it for the M3 by the way, things like the RS4, high revving porsche engines etc all go without saying.
why do people compare torque at 1500rpm on one engine and 1500rpm on another engine which revs so much higher? wouldn't it be better to say OK 5th gear goes to 165mph in both cars, lets say floor it from 30mph in 5th gear and see what's what; not from 1500rpm in both, as the higher revver will be another 2 gears up/pulling a "harder" gear.
it's the same with the diesel fans who claim the diesels have more low down grunt.....well sure if you drive around at 1200rpm everywhere without any consideration for what gear you're in. last diesel i drove i thought this pulls really well from low down from 30 at e.g. 1500rpm but then i realised i was in a gear which only goes to 90mph, in something like an RS4 1500rpm at 30mph would be a gear which takes you to over 165mph so hardly a fair comparison!
E38Ross said:
if you want low down torque get a turbo diesel, x40d makes way more torque at 1500rpm so must be better than this and better at doing the lazy grunt thing. doesn't matter it would be 1 or 2 gears lower due to gearing as it doesn't rev as high though
that's firmly tongue in cheek by the way....but it's kind of what a lot of the "low down torque" fans are saying when comparing a 6500rpm red line engine to an 8400rpm red line engine.
i'm not just saying it for the M3 by the way, things like the RS4, high revving porsche engines etc all go without saying.
why do people compare torque at 1500rpm on one engine and 1500rpm on another engine which revs so much higher? wouldn't it be better to say OK 5th gear goes to 165mph in both cars, lets say floor it from 30mph in 5th gear and see what's what; not from 1500rpm in both, as the higher revver will be another 2 gears up/pulling a "harder" gear.
it's the same with the diesel fans who claim the diesels have more low down grunt.....well sure if you drive around at 1200rpm everywhere without any consideration for what gear you're in. last diesel i drove i thought this pulls really well from low down from 30 at e.g. 1500rpm but then i realised i was in a gear which only goes to 90mph, in something like an RS4 1500rpm at 30mph would be a gear which takes you to over 165mph so hardly a fair comparison!
FFS, can't you accept that most people don't choose their cars based on irrelevant torque/rpm equations? And fewer still 'compare' figures when choosing a motor. You plainly don't 'get it'; you carry on driving your sanitized, souless German barge and let others drive what they choose. that's firmly tongue in cheek by the way....but it's kind of what a lot of the "low down torque" fans are saying when comparing a 6500rpm red line engine to an 8400rpm red line engine.
i'm not just saying it for the M3 by the way, things like the RS4, high revving porsche engines etc all go without saying.
why do people compare torque at 1500rpm on one engine and 1500rpm on another engine which revs so much higher? wouldn't it be better to say OK 5th gear goes to 165mph in both cars, lets say floor it from 30mph in 5th gear and see what's what; not from 1500rpm in both, as the higher revver will be another 2 gears up/pulling a "harder" gear.
it's the same with the diesel fans who claim the diesels have more low down grunt.....well sure if you drive around at 1200rpm everywhere without any consideration for what gear you're in. last diesel i drove i thought this pulls really well from low down from 30 at e.g. 1500rpm but then i realised i was in a gear which only goes to 90mph, in something like an RS4 1500rpm at 30mph would be a gear which takes you to over 165mph so hardly a fair comparison!
And FWIW, I've got a BMW as well, and it's the last one of all my cars that I take out day-to-day. While it's perfectly capable, it leaves me feeling cold and uninvolved.
E38Ross said:
If you want to talk absolute rpm then you're camaro is no match for a 550d diesel 3.0. At 1500rpm it makes more power than the camaro. But as it doesn't rev as high its not a fair comparison. You should do it assuming each gear goes to the same top speed to be more fair.
Slap 3 turbos on the LS3 and see what THAT does at the same rpm. Edited by E38Ross on Saturday 3rd November 22:46
Or in other words... utterly pointless comparison between a NA and FI engine.
PascalBuyens said:
E38Ross said:
If you want to talk absolute rpm then you're camaro is no match for a 550d diesel 3.0. At 1500rpm it makes more power than the camaro. But as it doesn't rev as high its not a fair comparison. You should do it assuming each gear goes to the same top speed to be more fair.
Slap 3 turbos on the LS3 and see what THAT does at the same rpm. Edited by E38Ross on Saturday 3rd November 22:46
Or in other words... utterly pointless comparison between a NA and FI engine.
dvs_dave said:
Oh god, your fanboyism is tedious to the extreme.
The zeta platform the car is based on was developed in the early 2000's. The LS series of motors dates back to the late 90's with only relatively minor updates since. Doesn't mean they bad, in fact quite the reverse.
So some pretty significant parts right there that by modern standard are old hat, and don't get me started on what you can't get as optional extras. Understand that what I class as a modern up to date car is something like the latest M5, or even the latest 3 series for example. What is essentially a re-bodied Holden Commodore from the last decade is not the latest and most modern of vehicles. To claim otherwise is simply delusional.
You need to step away from your self appointed role as PH's resident US car expert because very often you don't actually know what you're talking about and just end up looking a bit of a pillock.
chill winston....The zeta platform the car is based on was developed in the early 2000's. The LS series of motors dates back to the late 90's with only relatively minor updates since. Doesn't mean they bad, in fact quite the reverse.
So some pretty significant parts right there that by modern standard are old hat, and don't get me started on what you can't get as optional extras. Understand that what I class as a modern up to date car is something like the latest M5, or even the latest 3 series for example. What is essentially a re-bodied Holden Commodore from the last decade is not the latest and most modern of vehicles. To claim otherwise is simply delusional.
You need to step away from your self appointed role as PH's resident US car expert because very often you don't actually know what you're talking about and just end up looking a bit of a pillock.
So are you saying BMW never base any of their current models on past engineering items and that they are all 100% clean sheet designs..... thought not.
So again, what exactly or if you prefer "specifically" is not modern on the current Camaro?
E38Ross said:
Well done on missing my point completely. Why compare rpm for rpm when one engine revs way higher than the other. Go back again and compare percentage of max rpm and come back. Eg 1500rpm of camaro is over 23% max rpm yet that's like 2k rpm in the M3. M3 makes 94bhp at that and camaro making 97bhp at that so hardly any difference if they're geared to the same max speed.
Are they geared the same??? And tbh apart from you why would anyone care about percentage of rpm used vs HP? 
Not too mention top gear is an 'over drive' ie for cruising and high mpg. If you want to go faster you'd be in a different gear.
Facts are the Camaro makes more torque in lower rpms, more torque means more HP at a given rpm.
300bhp/ton said:
E38Ross said:
Well done on missing my point completely. Why compare rpm for rpm when one engine revs way higher than the other. Go back again and compare percentage of max rpm and come back. Eg 1500rpm of camaro is over 23% max rpm yet that's like 2k rpm in the M3. M3 makes 94bhp at that and camaro making 97bhp at that so hardly any difference if they're geared to the same max speed.
Are they geared the same??? And tbh apart from you why would anyone care about percentage of rpm used vs HP? Not too mention top gear is an 'over drive' ie for cruising and high mpg. If you want to go faster you'd be in a different gear.
Facts are the Camaro makes more torque in lower rpms, more torque means more HP at a given rpm.
k me you're being stupid. If you had an engine which revs to 8k rpm would you drive it at the same rpm as a lower old diesel which goes to 4500rpm or do you drive according to how the engine feels and what gear/road speed you're doing? Assuming they're geared to the same top speed you wouldn't drive in 4th at 30 in 1 car and 6th in another and think "this car seems slower in 6th than the other in 4th" would you? Or maybe you would. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff