Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 141

2002 vs 2010 Camaro

This is a discussion on 2002 vs 2010 Camaro within the Camaro / SS forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; Originally Posted by Firebirdjones You can always count on me... Are you sure Jones ? Seems I remember them using ...

  1. #121
    Member Z ROADSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shreveport,Louisiana .USA
    Posts
    505

    PEWTER
    2002 Z/28 VERT.

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    You can always count on me...
    Are you sure Jones ? Seems I remember them using aftermarket headers & got 400 HP at the crank !

  2. #122
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Crash View Post
    or maybe your just trying to make nothing out of something............




    oh ya

    jones
    Ya I try to use it on my wife too,,,,it never works

  3. #123
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Z ROADSTER View Post
    Are you sure Jones ? Seems I remember them using aftermarket headers & got 400 HP at the crank !
    Ya I've got the article around here somewhere. It's been a couple years,,,,it was either Hot Rod, or Chevy High Performance, or Car Craft, or Muscle Car Review, or Pontiac High Performance or,,,I think I subscribe to too many magazines.

    I do remember them mentioning the strong numbers for reasoning as to why these cars put down 300 + at the wheels regularly.

  4. #124
    KACHME 001CamaroSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glendale AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    180

    Silvaa
    2007 Corvette

    [QUOTE=Firebirdjones;1987864][QUOTE=Zinergy;1987857]
    Quote Originally Posted by LS1Jason View Post
    the op didn't ask about stock to stock. He asked about a full bolt on LS1 against the new camaro being stock


    Okay I give,,,,what the hell is "lift shift"??? Are you talking about torque managment for the automatics or something???

    The one I raced was a 6 speed as well as my wifes car,,,,so we both had lift shift
    He meant No Lift Shift, and he's wrong, the new camaro doesn't have it, the cobalt SS does. Hand down, this drag race is pretty even for an 02 with SLP option rated at 345 hp, but stock for stock '10 camaro takes it in all categories especially comfort and confidence. Although we all know what our cars are capable of, most new people have a lack of confidence in the car, after all they are fairly light and powerful, but I'd say an SS with about 360-385hp would be a real good race against a '10

  5. #125
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    omaha
    Posts
    6

    Disappointed...

    I apologize, because I haven't read the whole post, but I'm thoroughly disappointed in the '10.

    I test drove an automatic last night, with full intent of ordering an M6 (none to be found in the area)....until I actually drove it. I felt it to be VERY heavy and just didn't get the "seat of the pants feel". Today, we found a 6 spd nearby and went ASAP to drive it....and it still didn't do it for me or the wife. It did have 21" wheels and grounf effects, neither of which help the quickness, but I still thought I'd walk away with new keys.

    As a former owner of an '02 M6 WS-6 that I loved and current owner of an '03A4 Vette, I didnt think it would keep up with either. I know all the numbers and technically it should be right there with them, or better, but I was ready to buy and left the dealer feeling let down.

    As a former owner of a '69 Camaro I wanted badly to love it...but felt that it lacked the pure "get up and go" feel and am now thinking of getting an '07 CTS-V (for various and maybe differing reasons than the Camaro).

    Anyone's thoughts? Confirm I'm not being too hard on the '10 or am I justified?
    Last edited by rtomanek; 08-09-2009 at 10:15 AM.

  6. #126
    KACHME 001CamaroSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glendale AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    180

    Silvaa
    2007 Corvette

    I'd say you're being a little hard on it, but I do agree it's a little less of a pure performance car and more about the looks. I'd have like them to lighten it up a little, change the steering wheel and from what I've read there's a bit of a numbness in the steering. If I was buying one though, I'd fix that real quick! Other than that, great engine and brakes, I think weight is it's biggest enemy right now. Why not get a vette if you want all the performance?

  7. #127
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    omaha
    Posts
    6
    We have an automatic vette now, but we were looking to get a manual car, as I drive it much more than my wife thought she would. We also wanted something that we could put the kids in. And, as I mentioned, having had a '69, I really thought it would be the car. I really think we are going to go with a CTS-V now...performance is right there with the others, plus the amenities are a "bit" nicer. I still have a soft spot for a WS-6, though...so I'm torn.

    A few minor things that we could've overlooked if we had loved it otherwise:

    When the steering well is at an optimum driving position (elbows bent, somewhat close to the body, etc.), the speedo and tach were partially blocked by the top rim.
    My wife is 5'6", not short, but felt like she needed a booster seat to see over the dash, due to the passenger seat not having upwards adjustable power.
    Blind spots suck- the low-pro windshield and windows look great, but the A and C pillars are huge on the interior.

    All these things just added up for us- to each their own, of course.
    Last edited by rtomanek; 08-09-2009 at 10:14 AM.

  8. #128
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    [QUOTE=001CamaroSS;2017835][QUOTE=Firebirdjones;1987864]
    Quote Originally Posted by Zinergy View Post

    but I'd say an SS with about 360-385hp would be a real good race against a '10
    That's in the realm of what my wifes SS makes and it was more than enough,,,,I was pulling away from a new camaro.

  9. #129
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by rtomanek View Post
    We have an automatic vette now, but we were looking to get a manual car, as I drive it much more than my wife thought she would. We also wanted something that we could put the kids in. And, as I mentioned, having had a '69, I really thought it would be the car. I really think we are going to go with a CTS-V now...performance is right there with the others, plus the amenities are a "bit" nicer. I still have a soft spot for a WS-6, though...so I'm torn.

    A few minor things that we could've overlooked if we had loved it otherwise:

    When the steering well is at an optimum driving position (elbows bent, somewhat close to the body, etc.), the speedo and tach were partially blocked by the top rim.
    My wife is 5'6", not short, but felt like she needed a booster seat to see over the dash, due to the passenger seat not having upwards adjustable power.
    Blind spots suck- the low-pro windshield and windows look great, but the A and C pillars are huge on the interior.

    All these things just added up for us- to each their own, of course.
    I was thinking the same thing about the blind spots. After seeing a few and sitting in one at the dealer,,,,I had a hard time seeing around the car. The roof line is just too short and would have been horrible to drive and switch lanes in. I agree, I would take a CTS-V over a camaro, and actually like the looks of the Challengers over any of the new cars now. But I'm not going to spend the kind of coin it takes to own any of them. Good luck with the caddy though, they are nice cars.

  10. #130
    Member Z ROADSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shreveport,Louisiana .USA
    Posts
    505

    PEWTER
    2002 Z/28 VERT.

    +4
    For all the girth/size of the HUGE 2010 Maro its awfully cramped inside,even claustrophobic . Too many things with the wrong ergonomics . Its as if a committee of twelve designed the interior without knowing or having any input one from another. The interior definitely wasn't designed for comfort or safety. I think the same idiot who put that damn hump in the floor of the passenger side of our F-bodies designed the interior .
    For my money I'd take a black Challenger with chrome wheels-6-speed manual-SRT/8 Hemi-dark tinted windows-full length headers-Flowmaster 40 Series mufflers-cold air box with a tune -moon roof-navigation. Now THAT'S a man's car . Not a secretary's pony car or a bloated cartoon shamaro.
    Sorry , just my 2cents .

  11. #131
    I don't sell out! blackSS01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,558

    Black
    2001 Camaro SS M6

    [QUOTE=Zinergy;1987857][QUOTE=LS1Jason;1987856]the op didn't ask about stock to stock. He asked about a full bolt on LS1 against the new camaro being stock

    Ic that now, well the new camaro can trap 110-111mph, which is right about where most bolt on m6 cars are at. It would be close imo on street rubber, but the new camaro has no lift shifts so it would be interesting to see how that helps.
    Full bolt on, I trapped 114mph
    ┌∩┐(◕_◕)┌∩┐

    Man: The Mods you are fighting,
    they are the biggest Men I have ever seen. I
    wouldn't want to fight them!

    Me: That is why no one will remember your name!

  12. #132
    MOTOR CITY MARO' SSTODD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    LIVONIA,MICHIGAN
    Age
    51
    Posts
    786

    PEWTER
    2000 CAMARO SS #3821

    Hey Jones, you are a racer and techy at heart, what is the effect on the gear ratios when our 4th gens. have 25.7" tire height and the 10's have almost 29" with the same axle ratios. That has to kill the new car manual or auto out of the hole. Do you know how much each inch taller takes from the ratio?
    Last edited by SSTODD; 08-10-2009 at 07:50 AM.

  13. #133
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by Z ROADSTER View Post
    +4
    For all the girth/size of the HUGE 2010 Maro its awfully cramped inside,even claustrophobic . Too many things with the wrong ergonomics . Its as if a committee of twelve designed the interior without knowing or having any input one from another. The interior definitely wasn't designed for comfort or safety. I think the same idiot who put that damn hump in the floor of the passenger side of our F-bodies designed the interior .
    For my money I'd take a black Challenger with chrome wheels-6-speed manual-SRT/8 Hemi-dark tinted windows-full length headers-Flowmaster 40 Series mufflers-cold air box with a tune -moon roof-navigation. Now THAT'S a man's car . Not a secretary's pony car or a bloated cartoon shamaro.
    Sorry , just my 2cents .

    2010 camaro

    Wheel base 112.3
    Length 190.4
    Width 75.5
    Height 54.2
    Headroom f 37.4 r 35.3
    Legroom f42.4 r29.9
    Shoulderroom f 56.9 r42.5

    Cargo capacity cu ft 11.3

    2002
    Wheelbase 101.1
    Length 193.5
    Width 74.1
    Height 51.2
    Headroom f 37 r 35
    Legroom f43 r26
    Shoulderroom f 57 r56

    Cargo capacity 12.9


    as you can see our f-bodys are close to as small as the new ones..but i think what really helps our cars are all the window space..and the fact of how our hatch is designed..makes it appear alot more roomy..compared to the new maro..where the windows are long horizontally and short vertically...give you a cockpit kind of feel.

    @ "I'd take a black Challenger with chrome wheels-6-speed manual-SRT/8 Hemi-dark tinted windows-full length headers-Flowmaster 40 Series mufflers-cold air box with a tune -moon roof-navigation. Now THAT'S a man's car . Not a secretary's pony car or a bloated cartoon shamaro."

    the challenger is more bloated then the maro..and you pop those same mods with the camaro ..and the srt/8 is even more out of the class of the maro ....but that is my opinion

  14. #134
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by SSTODD View Post
    Hey Jones, you are a racer and techy at heart, what is the effect on the gear ratios when our 4th gens. have 25.7" tire height and the 10's have almost 29" with the same axle ratios. That has to kill the new car manual or auto out of the hole. Do you know how much each inch taller takes from the ratio?
    Ever inch of tire you add to the rear you loose about 200 rpm or about 2 mph roughly.

    That is equivilant to taking about .1 to .15 out of the rear gear ratio. You can do some math for exact numbers but this gives an idea.

    Whats interesting is that the new 6 speed gear ratio's are much steeper than the 4th gen 6 speeds. So even though the taller tires on the new camaro kill some of the rear gear,,,they are making up for it in the transmission.

  15. #135
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Here is something for conversation sake....

    The new 2010 camaro has a 3.01 first gear in the new 6 speed.

    Our 4th gens have a 2.66 first gear in the 6 speeds.

    If you multiply that by your effective gear ratio of 3.42 (stock)

    You get an overall effective ratio for the 4th gens of 9.09

    Thats not exactly stellar,,,and quite frankly sucks for optimum acceleration.

    If the new camaro with the 6 speed has 3.42 rear gears (which I think is close) It gets an overall effective ratio of 10.29,,,,much better to get out of the hole with.

    This doesn't take into account the tire diameters,,,I don't know the dimensions of the new camaro tires as to aspect ratio, width, and rim diameter so I can't figure that for you...

    Just for the record our camaro tires are.....

    245-50/16's are exactly 25.645669 inches tall
    275-40/17's are exactly 25.661417 inches tall

  16. #136
    Member kevnstac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Woodstock
    Age
    57
    Posts
    211

    Black
    1999 WS6

    I think the 2010 Camaro would be a close race. They claim 13.0 flat 1/4 mile. It would be a drivers race IMO. It certainly wouldn't be a blow out by any means. Just my opinion though.

  17. #137
    MOTOR CITY MARO' SSTODD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    LIVONIA,MICHIGAN
    Age
    51
    Posts
    786

    PEWTER
    2000 CAMARO SS #3821

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Here is something for conversation sake....

    The new 2010 camaro has a 3.01 first gear in the new 6 speed.

    Our 4th gens have a 2.66 first gear in the 6 speeds.

    If you multiply that by your effective gear ratio of 3.42 (stock)

    You get an overall effective ratio for the 4th gens of 9.09

    Thats not exactly stellar,,,and quite frankly sucks for optimum acceleration.

    If the new camaro with the 6 speed has 3.42 rear gears (which I think is close) It gets an overall effective ratio of 10.29,,,,much better to get out of the hole with.

    This doesn't take into account the tire diameters,,,I don't know the dimensions of the new camaro tires as to aspect ratio, width, and rim diameter so I can't figure that for you...

    Just for the record our camaro tires are.....

    245-50/16's are exactly 25.645669 inches tall
    275-40/17's are exactly 25.661417 inches tall
    I believe they are = 275-40/20's rears for over 28.5"
    245-45/20's front for over 28.5"
    for +3" over a 4th gen.

  18. #138
    King 0f n00bz shady milkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Shepherd, Michigan
    Age
    29
    Posts
    11,775

    blacker than wesleysnipes
    98' trans am

    Quote Originally Posted by SSTODD View Post
    I believe they are = 275-40/20's rears for over 28.5"
    245-45/20's front for over 28.5"
    for +3" over a 4th gen.
    if i bought a new marro..the FIRST thing i would do is buy some vete z06 wheels...at least those are 18x8.5 up front and 19x12(cant remember the width) out back...

  19. #139
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by SSTODD View Post
    I believe they are = 275-40/20's rears for over 28.5"
    245-45/20's front for over 28.5"
    for +3" over a 4th gen.
    In that case you are correct.

    The 275-40/20's are exactly 28.661417 inches tall
    The 245-45/20's are exactly 28.681102 inches tall

    Honestly that is more my taste,,I prefer a 28 inch tall tire on most everything to fill up the wheel well. Unfortunately it's accompanied with a 20 inch wheel,,,,ICK!!
    I actually ran 29.5 inch tall drag radials on the back of my chevelle for a while. The slight drop it provided in gear ratio didn't slow my car down a bit, but every car reacts different.

    In the case of the 4th gen short tires and these 28.6 inchers on the new camaro??? Not really going to affect the gear ratio much considering the trans has a 3.01 first gear. It's going to get up and go pretty well.
    Getting even more technical,,,a taller tire also provides more contact patch on the ground providing better traction. The biggest drawback to the larger wheel and tire combo here though is recipricating weight as well as unprung weight. It takes more HP to turn them.

  20. #140
    MOTOR CITY MARO' SSTODD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    LIVONIA,MICHIGAN
    Age
    51
    Posts
    786

    PEWTER
    2000 CAMARO SS #3821

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    In that case you are correct.

    The 275-40/20's are exactly 28.661417 inches tall
    The 245-45/20's are exactly 28.681102 inches tall

    Honestly that is more my taste,,I prefer a 28 inch tall tire on most everything to fill up the wheel well. Unfortunately it's accompanied with a 20 inch wheel,,,,ICK!!
    I actually ran 29.5 inch tall drag radials on the back of my chevelle for a while. The slight drop it provided in gear ratio didn't slow my car down a bit, but every car reacts different.

    In the case of the 4th gen short tires and these 28.6 inchers on the new camaro??? Not really going to affect the gear ratio much considering the trans has a 3.01 first gear. It's going to get up and go pretty well.
    Getting even more technical,,,a taller tire also provides more contact patch on the ground providing better traction. The biggest drawback to the larger wheel and tire combo here though is recipricating weight as well as unprung weight. It takes more HP to turn them.
    Yes, the wheel/tire weight must suck too. The challenger gets 3.91's with
    20's, the mustang 3.73's and the camaro has to get by with 3.45's and beats them with the best motor. GMHTP said in their drag test that the short/stiff sidewall on these 20's makes for a difficult launch.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2010 camaro ss or 2002 camaro z28
    By pgviper in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-13-2011, 07:13 PM
  2. 2010 Chevrolet Camaro vs. 2010 Ford Saleen Mustang - Ponycar
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Almost Anything Goes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 04:30 PM
  3. 2010 Chevy Camaro V6 LT vs 2010 Hyundai Genesis Co
    By trev0006 in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 02:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •