RE: New Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 spied
Discussion
300bhp/ton said:
<Some selective quoting>
You've probably got the right quote there; sportscars should be light. I like them around 1350kg, or less if possible. I appreciate the purity of Lotus, and think along the lines of fewer compromises for a dedicated machine.My most recent sports car was a Subaru 22B. 1270kg, and slightly modded for around 360bhp. I also run a modified BMW s1000rr, because I appreciate the light weight, ease of parking, and performance. And I have a Lexus LS for family duties, as it has a lot of airbags, and it generally wins the JD powers quality survey year in year out.
As for my previous cars, yes, I had a predecessor of the vxr8 in Australia. Every second time I drove it, something broke on it. Poor design, even poorer manufacturing, and generally abysmal quality. For your reference, the owners group themselves acknowledge that the first gen 3 engines used almost as much oil as they did petrol, and piston slap was too common.
Your selective quoting to serve your own point has comprehensively failed to quote the many positives I've posted. Look up the many times I've spoken in favour of quality manufacturing. How many times have I referenced the JD Powers quality, reliability, or dependability surveys (as I've referred to it above, yet again)?
These are all positives, but of course you have no interest in an unbiased discussion. You've locked horns with me a few times, and taken exception to people having a different view to yourself.
Just for the avoidance of doubt, I love the BMW, the Lexus, and the Subaru. My view is that they've nailed their design brief. All positive things.
By all means, spin that as a negative if you are that way inclined.
Well, whatever it is, some poor sap just binned it at the 'ring. 
https://youtu.be/etX1UIgrH2s?t=1m35s
https://youtu.be/etX1UIgrH2s?t=1m35s
If you make it over here, you should rent one of these things. Only downside is the s
tty auto-slushbox, mitigated slightly by paddles which take about 1 second for the shift request to be acted upon. Entertaining regardless. Can't beat a good mountain road blat in someone elses V8, especially now the rear suspension tech has left the stone-age live axle back in the past where it belongs.
GM, dump that stty gearbox and this is a decent car. Get it together and use the ZF jobby that BMW use.
tty auto-slushbox, mitigated slightly by paddles which take about 1 second for the shift request to be acted upon. Entertaining regardless. Can't beat a good mountain road blat in someone elses V8, especially now the rear suspension tech has left the stone-age live axle back in the past where it belongs.GM, dump that s
tty gearbox and this is a decent car. Get it together and use the ZF jobby that BMW use.The new Camaro 2016 is based on the award winning ATS platform, and it is so good it can compete with an M4 in real world numbers, such as lap times, 0-100 etc. Motortrend ranked it way above the M4 in their latest test. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D87tO7VUs2I
The new Z28 would probably be a killer.
The new Z28 would probably be a killer.
With regard to the comments on the 2002 Firehawk pic, I'm not overly keen on the front-end appearance.
I personally think the Camaro of that late 4th Generation was much better looking, which is why I bought one.
I drive it regularly on country roads, and get much amusement, and irritation, from all the wimps continually whining about all American cars being too big for this country and "if only they made them RHD".
I have absolutely no problem driving my left-hooker, in fact it adds to the novelty and enjoyment, makes driving it more of an occasion.
An LS V8, for a third of the price of a euro shopping cart, what's not to like?
I personally think the Camaro of that late 4th Generation was much better looking, which is why I bought one.
I drive it regularly on country roads, and get much amusement, and irritation, from all the wimps continually whining about all American cars being too big for this country and "if only they made them RHD".
I have absolutely no problem driving my left-hooker, in fact it adds to the novelty and enjoyment, makes driving it more of an occasion.
An LS V8, for a third of the price of a euro shopping cart, what's not to like?
GranCab said:
300bhp/ton said:
I guess I'm in a minority here. But I don't really like how these new age muscle and pony cars look. The Challenger and Charger look good. But not keen on the new Mustang or the 5th Gen and newer Camaro's. Not even really taken with the C7 Vette.
Visually I much prefer this:
That is truly revolting ... it looks like a body-kitted Ford Probe Visually I much prefer this:
They are basically GM's version of a Mustang II.
shakotan said:
The 4th-gen Firebird and Camaro were just horrible. A real low point in the GM 'muscle car' era.
They are basically GM's version of a Mustang II.
Really? Are you able to justify that or add any rational or common sense?They are basically GM's version of a Mustang II.
The Mustang II was a back to basics economy car, the original concept of the Mustang. With an aim at being smaller, more fuel friendly and arguably more about style than performance.
The 4th Gen Fbody's were from the go class leading in terms of power and performance and had no intentions of being a compact economy style car.
300bhp/ton said:
shakotan said:
The 4th-gen Firebird and Camaro were just horrible. A real low point in the GM 'muscle car' era.
They are basically GM's version of a Mustang II.
Really? Are you able to justify that or add any rational or common sense?They are basically GM's version of a Mustang II.
The Mustang II was a back to basics economy car, the original concept of the Mustang. With an aim at being smaller, more fuel friendly and arguably more about style than performance.
The 4th Gen Fbody's were from the go class leading in terms of power and performance and had no intentions of being a compact economy style car.
I'm not talking about the market they were aiming for, or their performance. The discussion was about the visual aspect.
4th gen cars are horrible, visually, they have no redeeming features at all.
I'm sure they have their fans, seems you're inlcuded in that group, but to me they're welcome to them!
shakotan said:
Erm, pretty sure you don't have to justify an opinion.
So basically this boils down to "you don't like the look of the Mustang II, I also don't like the look of the 4th Gen Fbody. So for no other reason you'll hate both and call them the same thing".Riiight
shakotan said:
4th gen cars are horrible, visually, they have no redeeming features at all.
No redeming features at all? Is that maybe a little harsh, to somewhat absurd thinking considering the performance and bang for buck they offer. Not just when new, but now too?You don't have to like them. But when a car costing less than half that of a Corvette offers the same power and performance, surely that's a good thing?
Someone posted this vid yesterday in another thread, I'd not seen it before. If you like the sound of V8 engines, turn your speakers up!
https://youtu.be/DTCzZoVIUBw?list=FL5qbYwTGMWUTTEP...
Jesus Christ, I don't give two hoots how quick they are or value for money.
To me they're fking ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.
The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
To me they're f
king ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
5ohmustang said:
shakotan said:
Jesus Christ, I don't give two hoots how quick they are or value for money.
To me they're fking ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.
The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
Theres quite a few million 4th gen owners that think otherwise.To me they're f
king ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
'A few BILLION' people believe in religion, doesn't mean I can't find the idea retarded.
5ohmustang said:
shakotan said:
Jesus Christ, I don't give two hoots how quick they are or value for money.
To me they're fking ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.
The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
Theres quite a few million 4th gen owners that think otherwise.To me they're f
king ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
lostkiwi said:
5ohmustang said:
shakotan said:
Jesus Christ, I don't give two hoots how quick they are or value for money.
To me they're fking ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.
The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
Theres quite a few million 4th gen owners that think otherwise.To me they're f
king ugly, and it appears I'm not the only one who thinks so.The comparison between the Mustang II is that in both lineage, the Mustang II and 4th Gen Trans-Maro are both the ugliest of their respective families.
Anyone is entitled to think a 4th gen is a delightful looking machine.
My point is that I'M being told I'm wrong when I say they look ugly.
I really don't understand what's so difficult for some people to grasp. They way people are resting it like I called their mother a
.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff