2012 Camaro in the NHRA Classguide

[zracer305]

This is the killer statement for me.

"We won't compete "against" ourselves. That is a no-win situation. Whether you agree with that strategy or not, that is our plan."

GM wants no competition for the new Camaro. The Cadillac 2013 CTS-V would blow the doors off that Camaro and they know it.

Chime in Gump!!!

[zracer305]

For all the non-believers:
The Mustang has several upgrades and Drag Radials the CTS-V is showroom stock.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIW9j_J_izQ"]650 HP Shelby GT500 Mustang vs 556 HP CTS-V Drag Race Video - Heads Up - Road Test TV - YouTube[/ame]

[Rat Raceway]

IMO by the time you buy a Coupe CTS-V and make all the changes to be a true stock class racer you would spent a lot more then a COPO from a privet owner at 120K!

The V coupe starts at $70+K then add another easy 50K to make it a contender. If the LSA was a better setup the COPO 2.9 Whipple car would have been made that way. The TVS1900 is a good street blower but way too small for drag racing. All the top dog V's have put a BIG huffers or turbos on to make big power.

[Michael Beard]

Why ?
Just curious.

4250# / 556 HP = 7.64 which would make it a natural CC/SA car. 10.60 index < 12.01 E.T. Is there 2 seconds in the car? Mebbe. Not cheap.

[zracer305]

I'm not trying to defend myself, I know what this car is capable of doing and so does GM and the NHRA. The point that I was trying to make was this is a new car that no one is running, looks very nice with very clean lines. However, GM doesn't want any competition for the Camaro. You can't build and run any car that you like. NHRA has give GM the authorization of to tell us what we can and cannot build. This is not how it use to be and should not be IMO.

Someone asked is there 2 seconds in the CTS-V. Well, the Mustang GT (which is in the video) a like car just qualified #10 at Cordova Ill. with a very impressive 8.910 in AAA/SA trim on a 9.70 index. Do the math. Oh, BTW he won the event too!!!

[Michael Beard]

Someone asked is there 2 seconds in the CTS-V. Well, the Mustang GT (which is in the video) a like car just qualified #10 at Cordova Ill. with a very impressive 8.910 in AAA/SA trim on a 9.70 index. Do the math.

Math: The COPO is rated at 435, making it about 900 pounds lighter in the same class.

While it would be nice if every single car combination ever built was in the Guide and available for racers to decide for themselves what they do and do not want to race, realistically it is the factory's ball (ie., finances, marketing, etc.). While the CTS-V is not 'in competition' with the COPO, it would not show itself in a favorable light in S/SS competition. The factories choose to market their different products in different venues.

As a sidebar, one of my all-time favorite Stockers is Ray Golanka's Q/SA Cadillac.

[Rat Raceway]

Originally Posted by zracer305

I'm not trying to defend myself, I know what this car is capable of doing and so does GM and the NHRA. The point that I was trying to make was this is a new car that no one is running, looks very nice with very clean lines. However, GM doesn't want any competition for the Camaro. You can't build and run any car that you like. NHRA has give GM the authorization of to tell us what we can and cannot build. This is not how it use to be and should not be IMO.

Someone asked is there 2 seconds in the CTS-V. Well, the Mustang GT (which is in the video) a like car just qualified #10 at Cordova Ill. with a very impressive 8.910 in AAA/SA trim on a 9.70 index. Do the math. Oh, BTW he won the event too!!!

The two mustangs your talking about are about as apples to oranges comparison as it gets. Just like a COPO compared to a SS or a ZL1, not at all.

Until you have taken a long look and understand what it takes to make a true stock class racer, it is very under estimated by the average person.

At this point I don't see anyone else Dodge or Ford adding another fighter to there card. IMO.

[D.Johns]

If NHRA put it in the guides and mandated the factory pulley sizes(like they do on the Cobra Jets and COPOs) the platform would not be very competitive. A lot of what the aftermarket does to the CTS-V would not be allowed per the rulebook.

No pulley changes, No blower swaps, No Throttle Body changes, No mass air housing changes, No high lift cams, these are all things that people that are running fast with the CTS-V are doing.

A car that I would think would have been competitive never really did much. I heard of one person building one but sold it. The 03 Cobra(its in the guide) 3400# at 390HP. These cars were under rated from the factory. The IRS could be swapped for a 4 link the rule book says nothing about pulley size in the blueprint section, the 4.6s architecture lends itself well to amazing RPM and the Heads are really good. The car is a natural F/S which is an 11.80 index IIRC. This car could run the number needed under the rules. If NHRA said nope stock pulleys required then it just became a whole lot more expensive to build. I heavily considered pulling off my aftermarket supercharger on my 03 Cobra that's my daily driver to go run at one time. But decided the CJ was the route and I wanted to go faster then my daily driver with a purpose built racecar.

I'm not trying to be discouraging. If you want to build one submit everything to NHRA its a long uphill battle to get new items in the guide. If you want to do it chase after it. Don't give up just because its hard or people discouraging it. People who say it can't be done should not interupt those that are doing it.

[GUMP]

Originally Posted by zracer305

Chime in Gump!!!

First, I have to say that I love the CTS-V and would like to see it in the guide with a reasonable classification. But, reallity says that won't happen any time soon.

I have said it before on here, but the current Stock Eliminator rules have gone in a direction that is totally opposite from what the factories are producing for the street. That is why the current factory race cars came into being. Like them or not, they are built according to the current rules.

For the CTS-V to be a good combination it would need a weight break that reflects the items that can legally be removed (maybe 3500 lbs). It would also need a realistic HP number (maybe 425-450). GM could submit this, but as your e-mails point out, they won't.

To suggest that it is a good idea to build a 4250 lb CTS-V for CC/SA is crazy. Just a little research would tell you how badly it would be out gunned (as others have pointed out). Keep in mind that the LS3 based cylinder heads are pretty good, but not anything like the LS7 heads used on the blown COPO's. Add the small blower and you have a hard uphill road to climb.

Sorry for the late reply, but I was in El Salvador working when I posted my last comment and haven't had much in the way of internet time until now.

[zracer305]

Well said GUMP! And with that being said, IMO this is one of the biggest reasons Stock and Super Stock is a dying breed. Along with Super Street, Super Gas and Super Comp, all of these classes are bracket racing and not drag racing. Boring to drive and boring for fans. Whatever happened to drag racing where you try to go faster than the last pass? It's in Comp and all the Pro Categories and they seem to do well. That's real drag racing!!! If we want to save the sport IMO we need to go back to the old days allowing aftermarket parts for blocks and heads. Quit this index stuff do away with all the timers and get back to driving the cars.

Originally Posted by GUMP

First, I have to say that I love the CTS-V and would like to see it in the guide with a reasonable classification. But, reallity says that won't happen any time soon.

I have said it before on here, but the current Stock Eliminator rules have gone in a direction that is totally opposite from what the factories are producing for the street. That is why the current factory race cars came into being. Like them or not, they are built according to the current rules.

For the CTS-V to be a good combination it would need a weight break that reflects the items that can legally be removed (maybe 3500 lbs). It would also need a realistic HP number (maybe 425-450). GM could submit this, but as your e-mails point out, they won't.

To suggest that it is a good idea to build a 4250 lb CTS-V for CC/SA is crazy. Just a little research would tell you how badly it would be out gunned (as others have pointed out). Keep in mind that the LS3 based cylinder heads are pretty good, but not anything like the LS7 heads used on the blown COPO's. Add the small blower and you have a hard uphill road to climb.

Sorry for the late reply, but I was in El Salvador working when I posted my last comment and haven't had much in the way of internet time until now.