2016 Camaro SS goes 12.3 look out 5.Slow

[MR.hp]

Well at least that what this report says, car is lighter too.


https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/2016-ch...040103102.html

[Fast One]

Sweet! And the Alpha chassis is also considerably better in the corners than the outgoing platform - thanks to a 28% increase in stiffness combined with the reduced weight. This one will likely put BMW & others on the defense.

The n/a 3.6L V6 version even has an impressive 335 HP & 284 lb-ft. Runs 0-60 in 5.1 sec & does 13.5 in the quarter with the 8-speed auto. Not bad for an n/a 3.6L.

Then there's the 2.0L turbo 4-banger version, with 275 HP & 295 lb-ft. It runs 0-60 in just 5.4 sec & does 14 flat in the quarter. BTW - that's about as quick as a stock 1993-1995 Z28. And that's the slowest version of the car! :D GM says it will get over 30 MPG on the highway.

Joel

[fast toys]

New mustang eco 4 with a tune and down pipe can go mid 12's. Far cry from a 14.0, guess we will see if the new Camaro can do that. 3300 is pretty light though.

[Fast One]

What does the turbo 4 'Stang do, bone-stock?

I expect the GM guys left a fair amount wiggle-room for tuning, as they've done with their past forced-air offerings.

Joel

[MR.hp]

I just wish the car looked a little better.

[HOTCIVIC]

It's about time GM - damn.

This is the weight that the Camaro should have been at when it came back in '09/'10.

And I'm sorry but the Camaro blows the Mustang away in looks. The Mustang doesn't look bad, but compared to the Camaro it looks like a toad with down syndrome. :lol:

[HOTCIVIC]

405 hp / 405 tq stock

https://instagram.com/p/8gQVESJZEB/

[fast toys]

Impressive. I like the yellow car but hate the black wheels.

[MR.hp]

Let's get one to the track and see the real numbers. I think we should let the Z man drive it.