Jump to content

All-new 2016 Chevy Camaro photos - what do you think?

Gorehamj
 Share

Recommended Posts

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

There will be one in my driveway. 2017 maybe because there will be something they add that might be worth waiting for.

  • Like 2
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

SnakeEyeSS
SnakeEyeSS

Hopefully our future ZL1s are only 5 hp off the vette also!(645)

newdude
newdude

There will be one in my driveway. 2017 maybe because there will be something they add that might be worth waiting for.

SouthernSilveradoGuy85
SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Not bad, still wish it were lighter. I used to have a heavily modified 4th gen that was an autocross/HPDE car. I lightened it by 200# and that made a huge difference.       Actually being just a

Posted Images

KMGZ400 Senior Enthusiast

KMGZ400

Posted
Posted (edited)

Way better then the last one.. The last gem camaro interior was awful and the whole car just looked dated when it came out.. Wish the would make them smaller too

Edited by KMGZ400
  • Like 1
SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

 

It says 200 lbs less then the 5th gen. So roughly 3600-3700 lbs depending on model I believe.

Not bad, still wish it were lighter. I used to have a heavily modified 4th gen that was an autocross/HPDE car. I lightened it by 200# and that made a huge difference.

 

 

 

Actually being just above mid 3,000 lbs is real close to what the 1st gen weighed. That's not bad considering all of the extra stuff that new cars have.

  • Like 2
SnakeEyeSS Senior Enthusiast

SnakeEyeSS

Posted
Posted

Actually being just above mid 3,000 lbs is real close to what the 1st gen weighed. That's not bad considering all of the extra stuff that new cars have.

 

3,500# first gens? Yeah, maybe with a few fat guys in it!

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=OSFaVdX-MsGDNqjrgPAO&url=http://jalopnik.com/5140813/model-bloat-how-the-camaro-gained-827-pounds-over-37-model-years&ved=0CCEQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNF_l7aqkyuokBL266b3O8KGbTeFfw&sig2=BHz6AU2klZx_bjibN9hd1w

  • Like 1
WilliamBos Senior Enthusiast

WilliamBos

Posted
Posted

I agree on the rear blind spot, hope a back up cmaera is an option?

 

What happened to the twin turbocharged 3.6? it was rumoured to compete with the Ecoboost from Ford.

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

 

 

Well from my understanding I thought they were around the 3,400 range. Looks like Gen 2 is when you get around the same as the new gen 6 which is in the same boat because gen 2s were before computers and had steal bodies like the gen 1s. I could be wrong about the computer thing, but I don't think GM started to use computers until the mid 80s.

watergate528 New Member

watergate528

Posted
Posted (edited)

As with all the late model cars & trucks, this camaro is BLOATED!

Need to call in Jenny Craig & Weight watchers for some fat cutting.

 

That being said, 1st gen was the best for body style.


As with all the late model cars & trucks, this camaro is BLOATED!

Need to call in Jenny Craig & Wreight watchers for some fat cutting.

 

That being said, 1st gen was the best for body style.

Edited by watergate528
RyanbabZ71 Senior Enthusiast

RyanbabZ71

Posted
Posted

As with all the late model cars & trucks, this camaro is BLOATED!

Need to call in Jenny Craig & Weight watchers for some fat cutting.

 

That being said, 1st gen was the best for body style.

 

As with all the late model cars & trucks, this camaro is BLOATED!

Need to call in Jenny Craig & Wreight watchers for some fat cutting.

 

That being said, 1st gen was the best for body style.

 

If you call the camaro bloated what do you call the challenger?

  • Like 1
watergate528 New Member

watergate528

Posted
Posted

 

If you call the camaro bloated what do you call the challenger?

I call the Challenger BLOATED also.

Although the Challenger more closely resembles the original car than does the Camaro or the Mustang.

All a matter of personal preference. :thumbs:

RobZ71LM7 Enthusiast

RobZ71LM7

Posted
Posted

I just want it to be able to match real world corner weight scale numbers of the '15 Mustang-not the #'s you read online. It'll be interesting once they get out into the wild.

Formulabruce Enthusiast

Formulabruce

Posted
Posted

Not a bad looking corvette.

Actually its now made back in the US at a "Cadillac" Plant. That will tell you the smaller platform it shares.

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

Actually its now made back in the US at a "Cadillac" Plant. That will tell you the smaller platform it shares.

 

Ya should be the same platform as the Cadi ATS Coupe. Same as the Impala I believe is the same platform as the Cadi CTS and I'm sure the Malibu is the same platform as the Cadi XTS. I could be wrong though.

  • Like 1
Formulabruce Enthusiast

Formulabruce

Posted
Posted

I would like to thank the OP and others posting info/videos. I am a 1st Gen ( 68) lover, and the 5th gen really didnt do it for me, but this looks Hot. Any of you who own a brand new GM truck with a V-6 will know its been ( Ls'ed) and the 4.3 has as much power as a older 5.3 V8 LS engine.. That said; The camaro smaller V6 Im sure has been "Ls'ed" . I bet it flies, and gets 20+ mpg. The 4 cyl Turbo,, Well GM is Finally making use of the Pontiac Solstice GPX engine. Born for RWD use it seems like a natural fit. I am betting on 26 MPG on that ( without turbo running a lot).

BDBiker Enthusiast

BDBiker

Posted
Posted

I bought a '69 when they were new and only sold it after I got married and my new bride begged me to get a car with air conditioning and automatic transmission. I put 120,000 miles on that car and I loved it more than any car I have ever owned.

My current Camaro is a 2013 1LE and it makes me smile like a kid every time I drive it. If you drive the Camaro and the Mustang side by side, which I have done, the handling is far better is the modern Gen5 than the Mustang. Also, the quality of the materials on the interior of my Camaro make the Mustang seem cheap. My son is a dedicated Ford fan and I bought him a Mustang for his first car, so I am not just a Ford hater, I simply like my Camaro & Sierra better than his Mustang and F150.

I like the pics and videos of the Gen6, but I will be in no rush to trade my 1LE with less than 9K miles.

2013-06-23_11-54-34_358_zpsae44f832.jpg

I might change my mind after I see one in person, I know than the interior is an improvement for sure.

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • richard wysong
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • James Beyer
      Trading 7.3 (Godzilla) for G.M.C gas

      By James Beyer · Posted

      Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...