1998/2010

**LimeNine** · 10-01-2009, 07:43 PM

first time I've seen a white one. . . . .The ghetto wheels need to be on a 1995 Cutlass nasty

**c5z28** · 10-01-2009, 07:47 PM

Just saw one the other day with black stripes, did you tell the guy to lose the wheels?

**buswwa** · 10-01-2009, 07:51 PM

do you remember as a kid playing with matchbox cars, and hot wheels and how cars were always way out of scale too each other? This pic reminds me of that. The 2010 looks out of scale to the 98. Just thought I'd point that out.

**Spikito** · 10-01-2009, 08:43 PM

well the 98 is further away...just enough to make them look different.

hes only about 6 feet from the from of the 2010, but the front of the 98 is from 15 feet from the front of the 2010. just a mind trick

but yeah..i knew itd only be a matter of time till someone ghettoed one out

**67CamaroRSSS** · 10-01-2009, 09:53 PM

The 2010 is a V6 car....

**Spikito** · 10-02-2009, 01:37 AM

and?

**ss~zoso~ss** · 10-02-2009, 04:31 AM

has ghey wheels

**AKohler883** · 10-02-2009, 05:02 AM

I have seen pictures side by side, and the 2010 still looks huge compared to the 4th gen.
I think even with the older one in the Foreground, it would still look small.

**tep98ws6** · 10-02-2009, 07:46 AM

i love the white 2010's but they are ridiculously massive. i pulled my TA up next to a white/black stripes 2010 and it totally dwarfed mine. too big, no good.

**KahanaReef** · 10-02-2009, 07:59 AM

They do look big in pictures. But, I was surprised at how much smaller they seem in person. Although, they are quite boxy and that does give an illusion of a larger size.

I was also surprised at how quiet it was while running. And, this was at the track, so, it wasn't a V6. But, the guy said it was stock.

I obviously like my car white. But, I can't say I'm crazy about the 2010 in white. And, those wheels do not help much

**SiggyZ** · 10-02-2009, 10:21 AM

The 5th gen is a good bit larger than the 4th gen. I've had mine right next to my sisters father-in-laws SS and noticed that immediately.

**Zinergy** · 10-02-2009, 10:41 AM

2002 Trans am- length 193.3 inches, width 74.4 inches
2002 camaro- length 193.5 inches, width 74.4 inches
2010 camaro- length 190.4 inches, width 75.5 inches

Looks like you guys are crazy, if you actually look up how long the cars are you will see that the 4th gen is actually longer and only 1 inch of width difference.

**SiggyZ** · 10-02-2009, 10:56 AM

I'm talking about the height and let's not even get into the weight difference.

Originally Posted by Zinergy

2002 Trans am- length 193.3 inches, width 74.4 inches
2002 camaro- length 193.5 inches, width 74.4 inches
2010 camaro- length 190.4 inches, width 75.5 inches

Looks like you guys are crazy, if you actually look up how long the cars are you will see that the 4th gen is actually longer and only 1 inch of width difference.

**Zinergy** · 10-02-2009, 11:18 AM

2010 camaro height 54.5, 2002 camaro height 51.2, so yeah its got a couple inches on the 4th gen but i think its more the way the car is shaped bubbly/plasticky that makes it look soo big. Yes it weighs 250-300lbs more no disputing that.

**SiggyZ** · 10-02-2009, 11:25 AM

More like a 500 lb difference. My car weighs a bit over 3400 lbs while the new SS weighs a bit over 3900 lbs.

Originally Posted by Zinergy

2010 camaro height 54.5, 2002 camaro height 51.2, so yeah its got a couple inches on the 4th gen but i think its more the way the car is shaped bubbly/plasticky that makes it look soo big. Yes it weighs 250-300lbs more no disputing that.

**Zinergy** · 10-02-2009, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by SiggyZ

More like a 500 lb difference. My car weighs a bit over 3400 lbs while the new SS weighs a bit over 3900 lbs.

A full option 4th gen car can easily hit the 3500lbs mark, the 2010 has been marked as 3780-3850lbs.

**SiggyZ** · 10-02-2009, 12:07 PM

Okay, I'll give you the weight on the 2010 2SS, but the weight of the 2000 Camaro Z28 is 3396 for the MT and 3416 for the AT. So that puts the difference at 434 lbs. if factoring in the '00 Z28 with an AT.

Originally Posted by Zinergy

A full option 4th gen car can easily hit the 3500lbs mark, the 2010 has been marked as 3780-3850lbs.

**Zinergy** · 10-02-2009, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by SiggyZ

Okay, I'll give you the weight on the 2010 2SS, but the weight of the 2000 Camaro Z28 is 3396 for the MT and 3416 for the AT. So that puts the difference at 434 lbs. if factoring in the '00 Z28 with an AT.

Ok, you ever been inside a 5th gen, the interior is much more solid and sound proof, it has IRS, it has more options, all these things add weight.

**SiggyZ** · 10-02-2009, 12:32 PM

Yes, I've driven one. My sisters father-in-law has a black 2SS with the RS package and it's a very nice car. And you're right, it does have a better quality interior with plenty of nice new options.

Originally Posted by Zinergy

Ok, you ever been inside a 5th gen, the interior is much more solid and sound proof, it has IRS, it has more options, all these things add weight.

**Zinergy** · 10-02-2009, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by SiggyZ

Yes, I've driven one. My sisters father-in-law has a black 2SS with the RS package and it's a very nice car. And you're right, it does have a better quality interior with plenty of nice new options.

I guess GM figured, 422hp vs 350hp was enough to make up for the weight. F-bodys have never been light, if we were all concerned about power to weight ratio all of us would be driving imports with lsx engines in them lol