View Single Post
Old 01-14-2014, 09:15 AM   #29
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,969
I think its an attractive looking coupe, and I'm guessing as usual, video and real photos will look even better than these renderings. I just haven't seen them yet.

Honestly though, I think I might like the sedan version better. I really like it a lot. This one at first glance didn't give me that same vibe. I can't say for sure just yet though.

They keep talking about weight...I really want to know what the weight is!! A very base ATS sedan (non turbo 4) weighs in the mid to high 3,300 lb range. Could this car be low 3,300 or even high 3,200 range? Maybe not, if the driveline is beefed up in this coupe.

But If so, that is a complete win for the 6th gen Camaro (again, assuming they don't use a bigger heavier version of the Alpha chassis). If they use this one, that means we could see a base 6th gen Camaro in the high 3,200 / low 3,300 lb area. How sweet would that be?? (not putting all my eggs in that basket though)

I'm also a bit confused with their 0 - 60 time of 5.6 seconds. I would guess that was with the 2wd 4 cylinder turbo?? But I know for a fact GM's claimed 0 - 60 time for the 2013 ATS V6 is 5.4 seconds (as stated HERE). But with more low end torque on tap (than the V6 and the old turbo), and a supposedly lighter car, shouldn't the turbo be even faster? Maybe the V6 version of this car does 0 - 60 even quicker, but again you'd think the turbo with its higher torque would be quicker to 60.

I don't know...like I said its just confusing to me.

Overall, good stuff. Now bring on the ATS-V
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!)
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote