RE: Driven: Camaro 45th Anniversary edition
Discussion
E38Ross said:
f
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.
Seriously I hove no idea what point you are making....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. If I'm doing 1500rpm in top in any car and wanted to accelerate I'd drop a few cogs. I seriously couldn't give a chuff that a BMW would be running at higher rpms in the same gear for same speed.
Google says an e92 M3 runs a 3.85:1 final drive. The Camaro runs either a 3.45:1 or a 3.91:1 depending on which package you buy.
The only thing I think you might be on about is how much power each vehicle makes at a given speed, rather than dressing it up in some BS about percent of max rpm....
However I really couldn't care less. An M3 still costs nearly double, so I'd bloody hope it's a little bit better in performance terms and then some.
I love these cars, total event.
The power delivery of 'merican V8's has a particular character that's unique to them, combined with the sound track they turn me into an instant child.
Going to be a long time until I can feed such a car again so will have to stay drooling when I see someone else in one.
The power delivery of 'merican V8's has a particular character that's unique to them, combined with the sound track they turn me into an instant child.
Going to be a long time until I can feed such a car again so will have to stay drooling when I see someone else in one.
E38Ross said:
The entire point of the post was to show how other comparisons made are pointless, hence I even said it's not a fair comparison in what you've quoted me!!!
IIRC you stared it by saying X car makes Y hp at Z rpm... while S car makes T hp at U rpm. Still pointless to me, as in the end it all comes down to gearing and effecitve hp/torque at the wheel and how much grip your tyres have before losing it...
I have onwed one to justify my comment.
Some people are a bit slow to cotton on to the fact that the yanks have been building some pretty good cars for a while now. You'd have to be pretty parochial not to have noticed they have been doing it since the 60s.
I'd had a number of MGs for years before buying a new Morgan +4, & racing it in the early 60s. In those days the leading tin top was the Jag Mk2, in 3.4 then 3.8 & finally 4.2L versions. You can imagine all of us laughing our heads off when some clown brought in a yank tank to challenge them. Everyone knew that yank tanks didn't handle.
Pity about that. In just a few months the Mustangs, then the Camaros, followed by our own Holden Monaros, & Falcon GT HOs had consigned the Jags to history. We may have built the Monaros & Falcons here, but their DNA was straight Detroit.
We were pretty disillusioned by this, but it got worse for me. 68 found me driving occasionally for the General in the original Holden Dealers Team, taking second at Bathurst in the first Monaro. I also drove a GT B Ferrari in a 12 hour sports car race, at the Surfers Paradice Raceway. This was a well prepared Ferrari, with 9" wheels racing tyres, & suspension work.
The next day it had been arranged by the team, for the local Holden dealer to bring a demonstrator Monaro to the circuit, for me to test. They were thinking of entering the team in a 6 hour production touring car race there in a few weeks time.
This was the day of my complete disillusionment with UK, & European cars.
That stock standard demonstrator Monaro, on Michelin road tyres on 6" steel wheels, & pump petrol may have been 25 MPH slower down the straight, but it was a full 6 seconds quicker around that circuit. It was quicker, because it handled & stopped better than the up market Italian.
With my values destroyed, what could I do? Yes I have a couple of old Triumphs, but my modern cars are all made of rice today.
Yes I do admire the better yank metal, but they are a bit big for me.
I'd had a number of MGs for years before buying a new Morgan +4, & racing it in the early 60s. In those days the leading tin top was the Jag Mk2, in 3.4 then 3.8 & finally 4.2L versions. You can imagine all of us laughing our heads off when some clown brought in a yank tank to challenge them. Everyone knew that yank tanks didn't handle.
Pity about that. In just a few months the Mustangs, then the Camaros, followed by our own Holden Monaros, & Falcon GT HOs had consigned the Jags to history. We may have built the Monaros & Falcons here, but their DNA was straight Detroit.
We were pretty disillusioned by this, but it got worse for me. 68 found me driving occasionally for the General in the original Holden Dealers Team, taking second at Bathurst in the first Monaro. I also drove a GT B Ferrari in a 12 hour sports car race, at the Surfers Paradice Raceway. This was a well prepared Ferrari, with 9" wheels racing tyres, & suspension work.
The next day it had been arranged by the team, for the local Holden dealer to bring a demonstrator Monaro to the circuit, for me to test. They were thinking of entering the team in a 6 hour production touring car race there in a few weeks time.
This was the day of my complete disillusionment with UK, & European cars.
That stock standard demonstrator Monaro, on Michelin road tyres on 6" steel wheels, & pump petrol may have been 25 MPH slower down the straight, but it was a full 6 seconds quicker around that circuit. It was quicker, because it handled & stopped better than the up market Italian.
With my values destroyed, what could I do? Yes I have a couple of old Triumphs, but my modern cars are all made of rice today.
Yes I do admire the better yank metal, but they are a bit big for me.
Edited by Hasbeen on Wednesday 7th November 13:48
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!
You clearly haven't driven one. The experience is very different, the torque at lower revs makes a lot of difference and the relative to red line comparison is meaningless in the real world. The engine is a masterpiece and is only bettered by the LS7 unit in the Z06 which is a marvel of torque and power, and of course is smaller and lighter than a comparable dohc unit. Look at the bonnet profile of a Z06 with 7 litres versus a DBS or 599, then drive one, play with the gears (remember how to do that?) and you'll get it. 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!
BTW the debate on technology and innovation is mostly myth and marketing, e.g. magneto rheological shock thingies that you find in the latest Ferrari's are sourced from Delphi, as they were invented on those old fashioned GM cars first, HUDs had been on Vettes for a decade before BMW 'invented' them, etc.... the debate goes whichever way you want it to.
Finally LHD is an issue if you find it an issue. It's a personal thing and a bit silly to argue over. I find it fine, and overtaking is safe enough. I also like being on the kerb side on narrower roads as I can better judge the width (which is generous).
Edited by spyker138 on Thursday 29th November 05:36
Im a UK ex-pat, I would never have given these any consideration in the UK, I now love these and have to keep resisting the temptation to buy one, the fuel consumption isn't an issue the issue is I live in AB, Canada and the roads are covered in snow for 5 mnts a year, followed by 4 months of pot holes so i would only use it 1 month a year. Believe me you want an SUV or pickup truck for the winter and the deep potholes that appear as soon as the thaw sets in.
300bhp/ton said:
DRS zone said:
Though inefficient am still a fan, this car has some serious character and not as common as an M3 here in the UK.
How is it inefficient? It makes more power and more torque than a 335i, is slightly heavier yet manages the same mpg and emissions. And for a lower MSRP.ks as we know but there you have itGassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff