Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dieselstation Car Forums _ Seriously Uncool _ Chevrolet Camaro

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 23 2005, 08:52 PM



















In 2002 the last of a dying breed was rolled off the production lines. An image that had withstood everything from an oil crisis to the 80s was removed, perhaps forever. Many fans of the Mustang liked to say that they won. That the original ponycar smashed the camaro finally but they're wrong. It was a simple marketing descision that ended the life of the Camaro. Production was ceased in order to keep fufilling the demands of Truck purists everywhere.

The car was first birthed in 93 with the hot model being the Z28 with the LT1 small block chevy. With about 275 hp (some believe to be an understatement) it was true to the Camaro's image. For the next few years little changed other than the HP being bumped up slowly and the return of the SS model. The big change came in 1998 with a new facelift (they lost the American Football player look) and most importantly a new engine. The LS1 was the latest and greatest of the Smallblock motors and was all aluminum. The powere hopped up to 320 hp and stayed basically there for the duration of the rest of the car's life.

That being said... is it cool?

Posted by: clarkma5 Sep 23 2005, 08:55 PM

Uncool...there's a lot of retards out there that make me want to say MJU, but there's a sliver of the camaro population that makes me say "man, they can't be that bad."

Posted by: TexanBerettaGT Sep 24 2005, 06:27 AM

I don't think they make a Camaro I wouldn't sell most of my earthly possesions to get.

Very cool car.

Edit: can't type for anything...

Posted by: McKhaos Sep 24 2005, 07:40 AM

Loved the IROC .

Posted by: Black RSX Sep 24 2005, 07:47 AM

UNCOOL!! It looks like a catfish.. drives like one too

Yuck... hate these things... I took one out for a test drive to see what it was all about... the interior is like the worse thing on the planet... numb steering... poor seating position...

Course maybe if I liked mullets... I would like this car.

Posted by: Boxster17 Sep 24 2005, 09:13 AM

I never cared for these ones a whole lot, always prefer the gen before this...

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 24 2005, 10:22 AM

Seems to be splitting the votes rather well...

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 27 2005, 05:10 PM

Ugh someone has to break the 3 way tie on this car.

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 27 2005, 06:33 PM

I had to vote cool just because its the last of a breed. Anyways time for this topic to be shuffled off to MJU.

Posted by: Dweezil Sep 27 2005, 06:39 PM

It's not the last of a breed, see: new Mustang.

Shitty interior, overweight, ugly...

The one thing the Camaro has going for it is that it's easily made super fast, and they can actually be pretty good handlers with some minimal effort.

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 27 2005, 06:42 PM

Well by last of the breed I meant the last GM ponycar wink.gif

Posted by: White RSX Sep 27 2005, 06:57 PM

X.gif

Posted by: Pking688 Sep 27 2005, 07:48 PM

The C-maro lives on and kicks ass. just go to streetfire.net and check out the videos. It's a hell of a muscle car. happy2.gif

Posted by: DZ302 Sep 27 2005, 07:51 PM

the 4th gen is cool, but i prefer the 1st gens. more character and a more interesting interior. 4th gens don't look very good stock, they sit too high and all the wheels they come with save for the ZR1s are fugly. they handle pretty well if you know what you are doing though. most people think they handle like shit because the solid axle scares them in the corners, but you can push it a lot harder than you'd think if you grow some balls.

Posted by: Espen Sep 27 2005, 11:49 PM

Its pretty shocking that GM actually thought they could sell a big, heavy, primitive and at the same time cramped car with an attrocious interior build and live rear axle on the single premise that it had a V8 and made nice sounds.

Posted by: PAULIE_D Sep 27 2005, 11:51 PM

Call me a "gino" but I am still enamoured with the 3rd-gen Camaros (1982 - 1992).

Posted by: DZ302 Sep 28 2005, 01:21 AM

QUOTE(Espen @ Sep 27 2005, 11:49 PM)
Its pretty shocking that GM actually thought they could sell a big, heavy, primitive and at the same time cramped car with an attrocious interior build and live rear axle on the single premise that it had a V8 and made nice sounds.

cramped? what are you, 6'10"? i'm 6 feet tall and 4th gens are plenty spacious enough for me. i don't need a cadillac. and what's so bad about a live axle?

Posted by: DakianDelomast Sep 28 2005, 08:22 AM

QUOTE(Espen @ Sep 28 2005, 02:49 AM)
Its pretty shocking that GM actually thought they could sell a big, heavy, primitive and at the same time cramped car with an attrocious interior build and live rear axle on the single premise that it had a V8 and made nice sounds.

Well there's nothing wrong with the LS series motors and there's even less wrong with live rear axles. The car was for people that wanted lots of just raw power.

Posted by: clarkma5 Sep 28 2005, 11:01 AM

But the Camaro used LT motors, not LS wink.gif

Posted by: DZ302 Sep 28 2005, 11:11 AM

QUOTE(clarkma5 @ Sep 28 2005, 11:01 AM)
But the Camaro used LT motors, not LS wink.gif

what are you talking about? '93-'97 they used LT1s, and then they switched to LS1s and the new body style for '98-'02.

Posted by: clarkma5 Sep 28 2005, 11:13 AM

Well, this thread is about '93-'02 models...so half of them used LT1s. So I'm half right!

Posted by: Halflifehavock13 Sep 28 2005, 11:36 AM

I said cool but as long as it had a v8 in it. Plus, it might not have handled well, but it was purpose built as affordable horsepower.

Posted by: clarkma5 Sep 28 2005, 11:46 AM

QUOTE(Halflifehavock13 @ Sep 28 2005, 12:36 PM)
I said cool but as long as it had a v8 in it. Plus, it might not have handled well, but it was purpose built as affordable horsepower.

You'll notice that this thread only pertains to the V8 '93-'02 models.

Posted by: leif Sep 28 2005, 08:18 PM

only a Hair cut so cool as the mullet could be associated with this car, so cool infact that the term "camaro cut" is interchangable with mullet, thats how you know its wicked cool...wait a minute...what am i saying...mullets are not cool!!!

MJU

Posted by: fiber optic Sep 29 2005, 03:42 AM

Highly modable V8 motor in the front, drive wheels in the back, cool.

Posted by: moethepaki Oct 17 2005, 04:14 AM

There's never been a bad V8 Camaro in history. What should be up here instead is every Mustang ever built, barring the original and the new one.

Posted by: bing5500 Jan 3 2006, 09:21 PM

The cool wall isn't just about specs but also the culture & image of a car so the Camaro just screams "disgustingly uncool". The first thing that pops in my head when someone says "Camaro" is "mullet"...I imagine someone playing Poison or Whitesnake while doing burnouts in the Wal-Mart parking lot. Nothing that comes to mind about the Camaro is fond for me...

BTW, before someone swears that the above is just exaggerated legend, I just have to say that I grew up in the country and I have seen more then my fair share of hicks in Camaros growing up.

Posted by: DZ302 Jan 8 2006, 02:20 PM

QUOTE(bing5500 @ Jan 3 2006, 09:21 PM) *
The cool wall isn't just about specs but also the culture & image of a car so the Camaro just screams "disgustingly uncool". The first thing that pops in my head when someone says "Camaro" is "mullet"...I imagine someone playing Poison or Whitesnake while doing burnouts in the Wal-Mart parking lot. Nothing that comes to mind about the Camaro is fond for me...

BTW, before someone swears that the above is just exaggerated legend, I just have to say that I grew up in the country and I have seen more then my fair share of hicks in Camaros growing up.

I must have forgotten to grow my mullet and shop at Wal Mart huh.gif

Posted by: midnightdorifto Jan 29 2006, 10:16 PM

Camaros are gay.

Posted by: Cyclone Jan 30 2006, 02:45 AM

QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jan 30 2006, 01:16 AM) *
Camaros are gay.


I guess you'd know, huh?

Posted by: midnightdorifto Jan 30 2006, 10:10 PM

QUOTE(Cyclone @ Jan 30 2006, 02:45 AM) *
I guess you'd know, huh?

You bet. They're worthless pieces of domestic trash. They have terrible ergonomics, and they're not made with the finest alacantra and leather. The plastics are terrible. And they have horrible cup holders, they always spill my double grande mocha foam-free latte on my way to the Socialist Club meetings. And mine only gets 28mpg. Hell, they're just pieces of shit.


P.S. Camaro owners prefer Iron Maiden.

Posted by: DakianDelomast Jan 31 2006, 02:42 PM

Don't forget that it still uses lol pushrods lol

Posted by: DZ302 Jan 31 2006, 03:36 PM

yeah, damn they need to get with the times. they should have switched over to overhead cams a long time ago. i mean, ever since nissan invented the ohc engine with the skyline, everybody has seen how ultra high tech and newage it is.

Posted by: PBB Jan 31 2006, 04:33 PM

QUOTE(DakianDelomast @ Jan 31 2006, 05:42 PM) *
Don't forget that it still uses lol pushrods lol

At least it's even got a valvetrain. loser.gif

Posted by: midnightdorifto Jan 31 2006, 05:28 PM

QUOTE(DZ302 @ Jan 31 2006, 03:36 PM) *
yeah, damn they need to get with the times. they should have switched over to overhead cams a long time ago. i mean, ever since nissan invented the ohc engine with the skyline, everybody has seen how ultra high tech and newage it is.

Shoot, with 5.7 liters of displacement, European engineers could make 5x10^9 rwhp. The Japanese could make it hit warp 9, and, under impulse power, create more energy than it uses.

Posted by: DakianDelomast Jan 31 2006, 05:42 PM

QUOTE(PBB @ Jan 31 2006, 07:33 PM) *
At least it's even got a valvetrain. loser.gif


Who needs a valvetrain when you have a fuckin sewing machine under the hood.

Posted by: dukenukem Jan 31 2006, 11:05 PM

QUOTE(DakianDelomast @ Jan 31 2006, 07:42 PM) *
Who needs a valvetrain when you have a fuckin sewing machine under the hood.

If only it had the sheer time-space warping awesomeness of the VTAK !!! You know its a instant chubby inducer right there DS_Naughty2.gif

Posted by: refinehatelovex Feb 2 2006, 02:40 PM

QUOTE(dukenukem @ Feb 1 2006, 02:05 AM) *
VTAK

you're always drunk and/or talking about VTAK. wtf.

Posted by: dukenukem Feb 2 2006, 02:46 PM

QUOTE(refinehatelovex @ Feb 2 2006, 04:40 PM) *
you're always drunk and/or talking about VTAK. wtf.

VTAK > your face.

Posted by: Cyclone Feb 3 2006, 03:53 AM

QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jan 31 2006, 01:10 AM) *
You bet. They're worthless pieces of domestic trash. They have terrible ergonomics, and they're not made with the finest alacantra and leather. The plastics are terrible. And they have horrible cup holders, they always spill my double grande mocha foam-free latte on my way to the Socialist Club meetings. And mine only gets 28mpg. Hell, they're just pieces of shit.
P.S. Camaro owners prefer Iron Maiden.


If I actually liked you, I'd hall of fame this. But your insult to grande mocha foam-free lattes is just way out of line. You asshole ~cries in a corner~ cry.gif cry.gif

Posted by: midnightdorifto Feb 4 2006, 12:59 AM

QUOTE(Cyclone @ Feb 3 2006, 03:53 AM) *
If I actually liked you, I'd hall of fame this. But your insult to grande mocha foam-free lattes is just way out of line. You asshole ~cries in a corner~ cry.gif cry.gif

*emo tear* for not being in the Hall of Fame.

<--apologizes, not a coffee drinker. I seek other means of delivering caffiene.

Posted by: Blue Devil Jan 11 2007, 11:34 AM

QUOTE(bing5500 @ Jan 3 2006, 09:21 PM) *
The cool wall isn't just about specs but also the culture & image of a car so the Camaro just screams "disgustingly uncool". The first thing that pops in my head when someone says "Camaro" is "mullet"...I imagine someone playing Poison or Whitesnake while doing burnouts in the Wal-Mart parking lot. Nothing that comes to mind about the Camaro is fond for me...

BTW, before someone swears that the above is just exaggerated legend, I just have to say that I grew up in the country and I have seen more then my fair share of hicks in Camaros growing up.

Depends on where you live I guess. Camaros around here (miami) are driven by non mullet individuals.. just regular people looking for a FAST as hell car that handles well and can keep up and beat anything in it's category... and then some.

QUOTE(midnightdorifto @ Jan 30 2006, 10:10 PM) *
You bet. They're worthless pieces of domestic trash. They have terrible ergonomics, and they're not made with the finest alacantra and leather. The plastics are terrible. And they have horrible cup holders, they always spill my double grande mocha foam-free latte on my way to the Socialist Club meetings. And mine only gets 28mpg. Hell, they're just pieces of shit.
P.S. Camaro owners prefer Iron Maiden.

No... they are not made with the finest alacantra and leather... because that's NOT what they are for. These cars in their time where the BANG-FOR-THE-BUCK car as performance wise comes. Pulling low 13's in the 1/4 mile stock.. and handled great in the road course.. if you know how to push it. And they spilled all the coffee cause they would PULL so hard!!!

QUOTE(DZ302 @ Jan 31 2006, 03:36 PM) *
yeah, damn they need to get with the times. they should have switched over to overhead cams a long time ago. i mean, ever since nissan invented the ohc engine with the skyline, everybody has seen how ultra high tech and newage it is.


The overhead cams are all nice and fancy... but Chevy and it's dinosaour small block is pulling the best HP numbers and gas mileage. All from the old push-rod... we ARE still using the old push-rod on the new Z06.. the only car on the 500 hp range.. withouth the Gas-Guzzler tax...

Posted by: Halflifehavock13 Jan 11 2007, 12:14 PM

QUOTE(Blue Devil @ Jan 11 2007, 02:34 PM) *
Depends on where you live I guess. Camaros around here (miami) are driven by non mullet individuals.. just regular people looking for a FAST as hell car that handles well and can keep up and beat anything in it's category... and then some.

I agree with the 'bang for the buck' part but they don't handle well. With modifications, you can make them. But stock, no.

Edit: And the z06 gets good mileage not because of the engine, but the extremely long overdrive sixth gear.

Posted by: leif Jan 11 2007, 01:30 PM

^If I remember correctly what PBB told me, I think its skip shift feature also factors into its EPA figures.

Not to say I don't like the Z06...I do.

Posted by: Halflifehavock13 Jan 11 2007, 01:54 PM

QUOTE(leif @ Jan 11 2007, 04:30 PM) *
^If I remember correctly what PBB told me, I think its skip shift feature also factors into its EPA figures.

Not to say I don't like the Z06...I do.

Skip shift? Are you talking about the automatic in the regular C6? Or just the ability to skip gears while using a stick in the z06?

Posted by: DakianDelomast Jan 11 2007, 03:04 PM

QUOTE(Halflifehavock13 @ Jan 11 2007, 04:54 PM) *
Skip shift? Are you talking about the automatic in the regular C6? Or just the ability to skip gears while using a stick in the z06?


Its not an ability, more like an invasive lockout that is disabled by most owners. In a manual GM LS powered vehicle if certain conditions aren't met, the transmission will NOT let you shift into 2nd or 3rd.

Posted by: dukenukem Jan 11 2007, 03:36 PM

QUOTE(Blue Devil @ Jan 11 2007, 01:34 PM) *
No... they are not made with the finest alacantra and leather... because that's NOT what they are for. These cars in their time where the BANG-FOR-THE-BUCK car as performance wise comes. Pulling low 13's in the 1/4 mile stock.. and handled great in the road course.. if you know how to push it. And they spilled all the coffee cause they would PULL so hard!!!

midnight was being sarcastic there .... he drives a camaro mullet edition.

Posted by: Halflifehavock13 Jan 11 2007, 06:14 PM

QUOTE(DakianDelomast @ Jan 11 2007, 06:04 PM) *
Its not an ability, more like an invasive lockout that is disabled by most owners. In a manual GM LS powered vehicle if certain conditions aren't met, the transmission will NOT let you shift into 2nd or 3rd.

Ah. But I don't think that would affect highway mileage that much because you will usually spend most of your time in one gear. Aren't Corvettes exempt from the gas guzzler tax because of their good highway epa mileage? (about 28 for the manual ls2, 27 for the automatic, and 26 for the z06)

Posted by: dukenukem Jan 12 2007, 07:19 AM

QUOTE(Halflifehavock13 @ Jan 11 2007, 08:14 PM) *
Ah. But I don't think that would affect highway mileage that much because you will usually spend most of your time in one gear. Aren't Corvettes exempt from the gas guzzler tax because of their good highway epa mileage? (about 28 for the manual ls2, 27 for the automatic, and 26 for the z06)

Tall gearing and that lockout BS are some of the reasons for such superior gas mileage happy2.gif

Posted by: leif Jan 12 2007, 07:19 AM

I think PBB told me it accounts for about 10%...but I would need to ask him again to be sure.

And I'm fairly sure the EPA figures are derived from a Duty cycle, rather than staying in one gear for a long time. There has been some call for the EPA to update their "duty cycle", if they haven't done so already.

If I'm not mistaken the current duty cycle was designed in the 1970's, and the primary criticism against it is that a commute now has much more start and stop driving conditions than before, making the current test cycle less relevant to the typical consumer.


If the EPA were to update their duty cycle however, I'm sure the figures for most vehicles would be negatively affected.

EDIT: I just found this:

QUOTE
Due to concerns over the accuracy of this method, a new test was proposed and approved in 2006 for use beginning with model year 2008 vehicles[5]. This new test no longer relies on the fixed global correction factors that the old test used; each vehicle is tested through conditions that more accurately model modern driving, and uses vehicle-specific data. The fuel economy ratings for vehicles tested under the new system are expected to drop an average of 12 percent on 'city' mileage, and 8 percent on 'highway' mileage.


The article went on to say that hybrid vehicles will be negatively affected by up to 30% by the new standards...

Posted by: PBB Jan 12 2007, 09:19 AM

GM's skipshift is known officially as "Computer aided gear selection" (CAGS.) It consists of a solenoid on the T-56 transmission that locks out 2nd and 3rd gear under the following conditions:

During the lockout, a dashboard light that says "SKIP SHIFT" is illuminated and you have to shift from 1st directly to 4th. There is no timeout; that is, the lockout continues as long as the above conditions persist.

The entire purpose of skipshift is to avoid the gas guzzler tax, it's just a little trick to bump the fuel economy up above http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml#guzzler Not sure on the exact MPG improvement under testing, but it is fairly signicant.

Of course, skipshift is annoying as fuck all but it's really easy to disable. On OBD-I cars (Prior to 1996), disabably it was as simple as unplugging the wire for the solenoid. On OBD-II cars, just unplugging the solenoid will throw the SES (service engine soon) light for emissions. A 24 ohm resistor spliced into the end of the wire to simulate the electrical load of the solenoid is all that's required. Quite a few companies sell a kit with the resistor that just clips inbetween the solenoid and the harness lead, pictured below.

All in all, skipshift is a just a way for LSx owners to pay $25 to avoid $1000-2000 in bullshit taxes.



QUOTE(leif @ Jan 12 2007, 10:19 AM) *
And I'm fairly sure the EPA figures are derived from a Duty cycle, rather than staying in one gear for a long time. There has been some call for the EPA to update their "duty cycle", if they haven't done so already.

The mileage figure used to compute if a car is eligible for the gas gizzler tax is combined, 55% city, 45% highway. Skipshift works real well under testing to bump the fuel economy in the stop-and-go city portion of the test while the really tall overdrive gearing does wonders on the highway section.

Posted by: DakianDelomast Jan 12 2007, 10:25 AM

But the point is that the pushrod LS engine isn't a magical fairy creation that's capable of pure magic. An engine is an engine is an engine is an engine and large displacement burns more fuel. Its just the gears are used to compensate for that.

Posted by: PBB Jan 12 2007, 11:04 AM

QUOTE(DakianDelomast @ Jan 12 2007, 01:25 PM) *
But the point is that the pushrod LS engine isn't a magical fairy creation that's capable of pure magic.

You're precisely correct. The LSx was made by the hand of God himself. Raspberry.gif

Interesting tidbit about how long the gearing is in the T-56: if there was no wind resistance and the tires could handle the rolling resistance, a bone stock C6 Corvette Z06 would go 284 mph at redline in 6th gear. Sixth gear is strictly an overdrive gear. Fifth gear is good for 228 mph which is why the Corvette, Camaro, Viper and Ford GT and similar big engine, long gearing sports cars do their top speed in 5th.

Posted by: ss670 Jan 13 2007, 10:40 AM

Here's the original page PBB cribbed his !CAGS information from (oops!):

QUOTE
Computer aided gear selection (CAGS) is a hack that was invented to avoid the gas guzzler tax. A solenoid is used to lock out second and third gears when the following conditions are met:
  • Engine coolant is 170 F or higher
  • Speed between 15 and 20 MPH
  • Throttle between 0 and 25%
During the lockout, a dashboard light that says "SKIP SHIFT" is illuminated and you are supposed to shift from 1st directly to 4th. There is apparently no timeout; that is, the lockout continues as long as the above conditions persist.

The good news is that it's easy to defeat CAGS. Prior to 1996 when OBD-II went into effect, one could simply unplug the CAGS solenoid connector. However, OBD-II is required to detect failures that impact emissions, so disconnecting the CAGS solenoid on a 1996 or newer T56 transmission car will cause a service emissions system (SES) warning light. A number of companies (including Chevrolet) sell !CAGS kits. The kit consists of a connector with a 24 ohm resistor potted in it that simulates the electrical load of the solenoid.

I installed a !CAGS rig the day after I picked up SS #670. (This let me have a little taste of how annoying it could be.) I bought it nearly two months before I place my order for the car!

Later I disabled CAGS with http://www.xse.com/leres/ss/efilive.html FlashScan programming tool.

I think CAGS was an elegant solution to the http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml#guzzler. I'd much rather install a $25 part than pay a $2K tax to the IRS.
The original version (with picture) can be found here: http://www.xse.com/leres/ss/cags.html

Posted by: midnightdorifto Jan 14 2007, 04:38 PM

QUOTE(DakianDelomast @ Jan 11 2007, 03:04 PM) *
Its not an ability, more like an invasive lockout that is disabled by most owners. In a manual GM LS powered vehicle if certain conditions aren't met, the transmission will NOT let you shift into 2nd or 3rd.

It is NOT that invasive. You've really got to try to get it to come on in the C6 Z06.

QUOTE(PBB @ Jan 12 2007, 11:04 AM) *
You're precisely correct. The LSx was made by the hand of God himself. Raspberry.gif

Interesting tidbit about how long the gearing is in the T-56: if there was no wind resistance and the tires could handle the rolling resistance, a bone stock C6 Corvette Z06 would go 284 mph at redline in 6th gear. Sixth gear is strictly an overdrive gear. Fifth gear is good for 228 mph which is why the Corvette, Camaro, Viper and Ford GT and similar big engine, long gearing sports cars do their top speed in 5th.

gas_milage++

Posted by: DakianDelomast Jan 15 2007, 10:23 PM

That's the Z06, every F-Body I've ever been in makes me want to stab the car with a blunt object.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)