Jump to content
Create New...

Camaro Nurburgring time


Recommended Posts

This was about 10 sec slower than I expected.

It really is not a bad time because the times the Cobalt and CTS are really very very good time and hard to compare.

The Camaro as it is is still better then the Caymon S and BMW M3. But about 4 seconds of the M5. Still a good time for they type of car and price it will cost.

Besides the Camaro is a flying brick the aero cd numbers are in the mid 30's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a good time, for it to be 10 seconds quicker it would have to be as fast as a BMW M6. It beat the 2000 M3, not the new M3, the new M3 does it in 8 minutes, 5 seconds. The 335i, Cayman S, 350Z, Lotus Exige, Jag XKR, and the old Skyline GT-R are in the 8 minute 20-28 seconds range. It beat some fast cars and that is a good time for what the car will cost.

The weight and handling probably holds it back a little bit, because many of the cars that were just a bit slower are in the 280-330 hp range, the Lotus Exige is only 240 hp. And cornering matters most on the Nurburgring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a good time, for it to be 10 seconds quicker it would have to be as fast as a BMW M6. It beat the 2000 M3, not the new M3, the new M3 does it in 8 minutes, 5 seconds. The 335i, Cayman S, 350Z, Lotus Exige, Jag XKR, and the old Skyline GT-R are in the 8 minute 20-28 seconds range. It beat some fast cars and that is a good time for what the car will cost.

The weight and handling probably holds it back a little bit, because many of the cars that were just a bit slower are in the 280-330 hp range, the Lotus Exige is only 240 hp. And cornering matters most on the Nurburgring.

I definitely would blame it on weight. If the Camaro beat the Turbo SS and those other cars while weighing in at 3860 (plus driver and gas.. so 4100ish), it's gotta handle pretty damn well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely would blame it on weight. If the Camaro beat the Turbo SS and those other cars while weighing in at 3860 (plus driver and gas.. so 4100ish), it's gotta handle pretty damn well.

Aerodynamics no doubt play a part also...the Camaro is rather blocky and upright compared to the sleeker Corvette and CTS-v...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...

Model Cd Weight HP Ring Time

08 Corvette 0.28 3179 lbs 436 HP ???

Z06 0.34 3132 lbs 505 HP 7:40

ZR1 0.34 3324 lbs 638 HP 7:24

CTS-V 0.355 4200 lbs 567 HP 7:59

Camaro SS 0.35 3860 lbs 422 HP 8:20

Edited by NOS2006
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely would blame it on weight. If the Camaro beat the Turbo SS and those other cars while weighing in at 3860 (plus driver and gas.. so 4100ish), it's gotta handle pretty damn well.

just think what it would turn in if it was ~150lbs lighter, like some of us really hoped for..~3750 or so. ok, so maybe 100lbs lighter. think that would be good for 6secs?

edit: we are assuming it's the ls3/stick combo for that time. that would be awesome if it was the L99/auto combo for that time.

Edited by loki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the CTS-V is a car capable of sharing magazine

pages with M-Bimmers and AMG Benzes... not exactly

the same price range as the Camaro.

That's like saying I'm a slow runner because it takes

me 30 seconds longer to run the Boston Marathon

than that crazy guy from Kenya who's won a bunch

of times.

I bet Jessie Owens would kick my butt in the 100m too!

---h, and if they just eliminated those BULKY B-pillars

that $h! would lap the 'RING in like 7.45 :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprising the Cobalt SS turned in such a good time....I usually don't think of FWD and handling in the same sentence...

Guy doing local autox got one of the new turbo Cobalt SS's, and has been kicking some major butt, and it's still stock. Last event, I think there was one vette and a couple karts ahead of him, that's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, to eliminate the B-Pillars they'd have to add even more weight to make up for the structural integrity the B-Pillars provide.

Have you heard of sarcasm? :mellow:

...did you take the 7.45 sec. time seriously too?

I know it takes extra round-'bout weight to

reinforce the lack of a direct up & down pillar.

4200 lbs. is a bit of an exageration Moltar. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you heard of sarcasm? :mellow:

...did you take the 7.45 sec. time seriously too?

I know it takes extra round-'bout weight to

reinforce the lack of a direct up & down pillar.

4200 lbs. is a bit of an exageration Moltar. :rolleyes:

Well, if the production V8 is 4000, I figure a hardtop would be about the same as a convertible (4200?). Or maybe I'm a couple hundred pounds high for each...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprising the Cobalt SS turned in such a good time....I usually don't think of FWD and handling in the same sentence...

I am not a FWD fan but after driving the HHR SS with the same parts as the Cobalt SS I came away impressed.

The HHR SS did a 8:44 at the ring. Not bad for a box.

The only problem with the HHR SS and Cobalt SS is under hard acceleration the traction control makes the steering feel like it is hunting a little to prevent torque steer. Other wise the ride and handling is great

The Camaro did well but the Cobalt SS is just that good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way the Ring is set up, its slow corners support the FWD biased or AWD cars. That is why you can argue the GTR with its good AWD system can bring down the time so much despite being at a weight disadvantage. However, I am surprised why the the 911 Turbo has posted a lower number. A heavier RWD car can really slow down on the ring. I definitely can believe in the 8:20 timing of the Camaro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings