quote:

---

Originally posted by RagSS:
...don't know when it was originally going to be cancelled (around '98 seems close). I would safely say it stayed alive for so long due to the efforts (and passion for the car) by one person in particular, ...Scott Settlemire. We have him to thank for keeping the car alive for the last (probably some of it's best) years...

Kevin

---

You're right on the money !

Not bad taking a car designed for 275 hp back in 1993 and the 02's rolled off @ 345 hp
 

---

Posted by HotWheelSS aka HTWLSS (Member # 117) on :
 
According to a really nice article written by Scott in a recent Pacific NW Camaro Club's newletter, '99 could have been the last year. That's why we ordered our '99 in May of '98 and waited through a strike, delaying the build week, etc. We were happy to see a few more years squeezed out though and we don't regret ordering when we did, "just in case" it really had been the last year for the car.
 

---

Posted by 35TH ED/ed (Member # 1709) on :
 
You are correct in the fact that the F-Body was slated to be discontinued in "98.I saw this several years before '98. Since the wife was in the decomishioning (sp) group for GM. A good friend of ours Chris was in charge of the shut down the plant.

Sorry I cant/wont help any further but I wouldnt want the cause any problems for the wife.Lets all hope when All is settled and done the "Next Gen" Camaro/Firebird wont let us down.
 

---

Posted by BrostalSS (Member # 1830) on :
 
The LS-1 also kept the car alive for a few more years among other things.
 

---

Posted by JeffY (Member # 120) on :
 
Don't know where all the mis communication comes from! I was the the F-car 95 1/2 -96, 99 Program Manager. One of my co-workers was the 98 Program Manager. The car was declared dead at the end of the 02 model year in about 97 or so. At that time, they switched the Chief Engineer, the VLE and a few other key people. Scott wasn't around then. He came to the platform a little later. The new facelift was scheduled for 98 for quite awhile, with other changes scheduled for later years. The sales of the SS and WS6 increasing so dramatically helped prolong the life of the car. SLP was as much as a help in keeping the car going. What killed it was the inability of GM to make the car conform to the new safety standard requirements effective with the 03 model year vehicles.
 

---

Posted by WayneSS01 (Member # 734) on :
 
Thanks for the info.
 

---

Posted by chrisL (Member # 97) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by JeffY:
Scott wasn't around then. He came to the platform a little later.

---

quote:

---

FMVSS 201 specifies that a mechanical head-form impacting a seat head rest at 15 mph be stopped without exceeding an 80 G acceleration for more than 3 ms. This test equipment consists of a seat mounting test bed plate, A-frame loading stand with moveable crosshead, and three pneumatic actuator "blow-guns" to accelerate the head-forms into the head rests. All electronic control and data acquisition systems provided by TMSI are integrated completely for control by a single PC with Windows® based software for intuitive operation with minimal operator training.

Background In 1995, the agency amended FMVSS 201 (Occupant Protection in Interior Impact) to set new requirements, or upgrade existing requirements on the energy-absorbing capabilities of the A and B pillars, roof rails, and other vehicle interior components associated with serious head injuries in crashes. The regulation has been phased in for new cars and light trucks over a five-year period, starting with 10 percent of model year 1999 production and concluding with 100 percent of model year 2003 production. As of 2003, most vehicles have received upgraded padding or other energy-absorbing materials. However, an increasing proportion of vehicles are being equipped with special air bags designed to protect occupants from head impacts with roof rails or pillars and to reduce the risk of occupant ejection through side window areas: these will be evaluated separately (see "Side air bags + head air bags," 2004 starts - vehicle safety). Objectives Estimate the effect of the new padding and energy-absorbing materials on the risk of fatal and serious head injuries. Estimate the consumer cost of vehicle modifications in response to (or in anticipation of) the new standard. Proposed Approach The cost of FMVSS 201 modifications (without head-impact air bags) will be estimated from "teardown" analyses. Head injury rates in pre-standard cars and in post-standard cars with energy-absorbing padding will be compared in NASS data and in the enhanced FARS file that includes cause-of-death information. Overall fatality rates will also be compared in FARS data. Status "Teardown" analyses of head-impact areas in FMVSS 201 vehicles without head air bags, and in comparable pre-standard vehicles, are underway. A contract has been awarded to perform head-impact tests, similar to the FMVSS 201 compliance test, on pre-standard vehicles. The evaluation is likely to require at least four years for sufficient crash data to accumulate.

---

UBB.classic™ 6.7.0