Are Camaros good for anything except drag racing?
04-01-2004, 06:06 PM
#1
Domestic Driving Asshole
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bremerton, WA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are Camaros good for anything except drag racing?
Not from what I've heard.
Or at least that's what was implied.
I've also heard that a crappy little econo-wagon with a little forced induction will 'quite easily eat up' any stock Camaro, WS6, etc. in a road race.
Damn. I wish I would have known that before I bought one. I should have got a 'real sports car' (since the Camaro is in NO WAY a sports car) so I could beat this awesome pr5 I've been hearing so much about.
Yeah, it's sad, but my car can't do anything but go fast in a straight line. Wagons everywhere own me in the curves. And I REALLY have to watch out if I go to a road race and there is a stock s2000! It will beat me around the track by like 30 seconds. Image how much one of those Acura NSX 'supercars' would stomp me. 
A few best lap times from the article are as follows:
Mercedes SLK320 - 2:20.87
Honda S2000 - 2:17.66
Porsche Boxster - 2:17.46
BMW M Roadster - 2:17.28
Chevrolet Camaro SS - 2:16.46
Acura NSX - 2:14.15
Chevrolet Corvette Z06 - 2:08.39
And this was on a fairly balanced track (some long straights, some VERY tight turns, several quick transitions). To eliminate error/inconsistencies from different car magazine drivers, all test times were derived from multiple laps driven in each car by Le Mans winner and record holding IMSA driver Steve Millen. He also had the following to say about the base Camaro SS he drove at the track:
"The Camaro is a very smooth car to drive with nice linear power and a broad powerband. It feels stable and planted through quick corners — even sliding, it still feels very connected, so you're not worried about what it's going to do. Compared with the Corvette, driving the SS is easier physically. This car, you could lap all day."
On a side note, the car tested had the standard SS suspension (skidpad of .86 g's). A lot of them have the optional suspension (including mine) which increases the skidpad to .90 g's, is even more stable in transitions, and lowers the ride height about one inch.
There are a few of you out there that will continue to put words in my mouth and say that I'm closed minded....
These are the same people that say a Camaro/WS6/Mustang was made for drag racing and doesn't handle well. Yep. I'm 'closeminded'. Or maybe I simply understand the fact that NO stock front wheel drive car ever created will stay even close to my car on a real race track. Autocross is not a real race track, BTW.
I don't care if anybody says 'with equal power', etc.
I can add power, too. I can do weight reduction. I can do a LOT of modifications to my car to beat any modification you could dream up. Stock is the ONLY way to compare cars, otherwise somebody will always say 'but what if...'.
Also, for future reference, anyone who would like to have a debate concerning physics, PLEASE don't say this:
It will probably damage your credibility just a little and make others write you off as a complete retard. Instead, say acceleration = force / mass. This will make you appear as though you have a slight clue about the subject at hand (or have at least been through 8th grade) and are not just pulling sh!t out of your ass as usual.
Originally Posted by jaje
camaro was made for dragracing
I've also heard that a crappy little econo-wagon with a little forced induction will 'quite easily eat up' any stock Camaro, WS6, etc. in a road race.
Originally Posted by jaje
kinda funny b/c my pr5 wagon with only 180whp quite easily eats up any stock gt or camaro z28 or ws6 at road events
Originally Posted by jaje
yes a stock s2k, z4, boxster is a faster car than mine b/c they are lightweight nimble real sports cars
Originally Posted by An article you should read.
Out on the open road, the SS proves it's more than just a straight-line performer. Thanks to wider 275/40ZR-17 Goodyear F1 tires, a stiffer shock/spring package and a larger front anti-roll bar than the standard Camaro, the SS handles exceedingly well for a car considered by many as "low-tech." Overall grip and predictability are good, and after getting over the rather high ride height, you can push the car with an increased degree of confidence.
At the racetrack, the SS raised more than a few eyebrows. Everyone expected it to rocket down the straights, but it ended up cornering well too — proof that high tech isn't necessarily the only show in town. While it certainly could work better over bumps and through quick transitions, the SS is generally stable, predictable and as such, surprisingly fast. Grip doesn't measure up to the sticks-like-glue adhesion of the Z06, but with less power, it's not as big an issue.
At the racetrack, the SS raised more than a few eyebrows. Everyone expected it to rocket down the straights, but it ended up cornering well too — proof that high tech isn't necessarily the only show in town. While it certainly could work better over bumps and through quick transitions, the SS is generally stable, predictable and as such, surprisingly fast. Grip doesn't measure up to the sticks-like-glue adhesion of the Z06, but with less power, it's not as big an issue.
Mercedes SLK320 - 2:20.87
Honda S2000 - 2:17.66
Porsche Boxster - 2:17.46
BMW M Roadster - 2:17.28
Chevrolet Camaro SS - 2:16.46
Acura NSX - 2:14.15
Chevrolet Corvette Z06 - 2:08.39
And this was on a fairly balanced track (some long straights, some VERY tight turns, several quick transitions). To eliminate error/inconsistencies from different car magazine drivers, all test times were derived from multiple laps driven in each car by Le Mans winner and record holding IMSA driver Steve Millen. He also had the following to say about the base Camaro SS he drove at the track:
"The Camaro is a very smooth car to drive with nice linear power and a broad powerband. It feels stable and planted through quick corners — even sliding, it still feels very connected, so you're not worried about what it's going to do. Compared with the Corvette, driving the SS is easier physically. This car, you could lap all day."
On a side note, the car tested had the standard SS suspension (skidpad of .86 g's). A lot of them have the optional suspension (including mine) which increases the skidpad to .90 g's, is even more stable in transitions, and lowers the ride height about one inch.
There are a few of you out there that will continue to put words in my mouth and say that I'm closed minded....
Originally Posted by jaje
nate's law: fwd cars have a snowball's chance in hell of winning any race against a rwd car NO MATTER THE WEIGHT OR POWER so i guess its end of story and stop arguing with someone so closeminded
Or maybe I simply understand the fact that NO stock front wheel drive car ever created will stay even close to my car on a real race track. Autocross is not a real race track, BTW. I don't care if anybody says 'with equal power', etc.
I can add power, too. I can do weight reduction. I can do a LOT of modifications to my car to beat any modification you could dream up. Stock is the ONLY way to compare cars, otherwise somebody will always say 'but what if...'.
Also, for future reference, anyone who would like to have a debate concerning physics, PLEASE don't say this:
Originally Posted by jaje
'law of physics: all things being equal a vehicle twice the weight takes 4 times the power to accelerate as the lighter vehicle'
04-01-2004, 07:05 PM
#3
Moderator Alumni
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North America
Posts: 1,128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say that F bodies are actually quite capable on a road course. I've seen some local guys sling their cars around a track/autox course with ease. The cars are relatively stock, just the usual upgrades ... lid, exhaust, some light suspension work, and good tires. IMO anyone that can make a car of that size look agile and nimble deserves some serious props ... I know I could never drive a high HP/RWD car anywhere near that level.
__________________
2005 s2000
2005 s2000
04-02-2004, 05:23 AM
#8
HC Racer H5
Join Date: May 2000
Location: KCK
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will reply to this post in kind as you can't let anything go or agree to disagree. Time is the issue here b/c some of us work for a living and have a family to care for (and do not have the time to badger over why you think your camaro rules any honda vehicle or any other fwd on the market...which is what you are saying).
Also note the post was locked and you violated the TOS (read it) by continuing this worthless argument.
Also note the post was locked and you violated the TOS (read it) by continuing this worthless argument.
04-02-2004, 05:26 AM
#9
HC Racer H5
Join Date: May 2000
Location: KCK
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by senseiturtle
ownerage
04-02-2004, 06:27 AM
#10
Still Plays With Trucks
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that was Nathan's argument. I think he took exception to you claiming your stock wagon would "eat up" (I believe was the phrase) Camaros and Mustangs on a road course. And, in that respect, I have to agree with Nathan's position and his rebuttal.
Man, that Z06 is a bad ass car, huh?
Man, that Z06 is a bad ass car, huh?
