By on August 30, 2018

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE front quarter

The word Camaro, depending on who you ask, is either French slang meaning “friend” or a Spanish word for shrimp. But GM PR reps, when the name was unveiled in 1966, had a carefully crafted definition for the inevitable question from gullible, likely gin-soaked journalists: “A Camaro is a small, vicious animal that eats Mustangs.”

That’s it right there — for over fifty years, the Camaro has been defined by the competition. But that competition is a bit different now, as there’s a good turbo four-cylinder available from Dearborn. Not content to target the usual opponents, the 2019 Chevrolet Camaro Turbo 1LE has both track-day glory and compact imports in its sights.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE profile

(Disclaimer: Chevrolet flew journalists to Seattle to sample the Camaro Turbo 1LE, as well as the Malibu RS I covered on Monday. Two nights in a hotel and food, of course. Chevrolet did give me a small SD card that recorded my on-track sessions for posterity.)

When Chevrolet debuted the sixth-generation Camaro in 2016, the surprise powertrain was definitely the 275 horsepower turbocharged four-cylinder. Prior, the only application of a four-pot was in the early third-generation model, when the rather awful Iron Duke made its thrashy appearance.

When pressed, Chevrolet spokespeople acknowledged that a generation of enthusiasts have generally eschewed the traditional big displacement cars in favor of compacts with smaller, high-revving four-cylinder engines — often with forced induction either from the factory or from a catalog. Turbocharging offers tuners plenty of headroom for more power with relatively simple, bolt-on changes.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE rear quarter

In other words, Chevrolet is nodding and winking to encourage aftermarket firms to develop ECU tunes and intake and exhaust upgrades for the LTG engine in this 1LE Turbo. There are a few firms already offering various performance bits — I’ve seen quoted numbers of over 380 hp to the rear wheels.

Yeah, I know that the standard V8 in the Camaro SS is more powerful than that. Power isn’t the point of the Camaro Turbo 1LE — it’s all about balance. With a shorter, lighter engine, there is simply less mass atop the front wheels, making the driving experience that much sweeter. I haven’t seen exact figures, but Chevrolet suggests that the front/rear balance is “nearly 50/50.” I’ll let the hardcore track rats get it on cornerweighting scales, though.

The RPO (Regular Production Option in GM-speak) code 1LE is a bit legendary in Chevy road racing circles. Developed originally for the Canadian Player’s Challenge series for showroom stock cars in the late Eighties, the 1LE took a regular Camaro and tossed a bunch of little tweaks at it to optimize it for track performance. Bigger brakes, a lighter driveshaft, a different fifth gear ratio, and an upgraded fuel tank (to minimize fuel starvation on fast sweeping turns) all converged on an otherwise stripped third-generation V8 Camaro to make the car more competitive in hotly-contested racing series both in Canada and the U.S.

That the 1LE package has moved from the V8 and V6 powered cars to the “entry” turbo four means the benefits of a track-tuned car are available to more drivers. The big benefit: a warranty that expressly covers track use. Many manufacturers offer cars that are competent on a race track, but will often hassle owners when evidence of track use appears on a car that needs service — or outright deny coverage altogether. Chevrolet, on all 1LE models no matter the engine, specifically states that warranties will be honored on unmodified cars. That means that the stock Goodyears do need to be maintained. Buy a spare set if you’re all about driving and striving and hugging the turns.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE interior

TTAC staffers — especially my old friend Bark — love to joke about journalists writing about how a car handles “at the limit.” We know that, since they didn’t take their test cars to a race track, they can’t possibly know the car’s behavior at the limits of adhesion unless they seriously risked both their driving privileges and public safety on public roads.

Driving the Turbo 1LE on track is a great experience, as the incredible balance means mistakes are easily corrected. There’s enough power to bring the rear around if needed, but not so much that an errant throttle stab will send you sideways. Handling is neutral, and trailbraking will allow the rear wheels to rotate toward the apex. We ran off and on the track for about two hours — admittedly, only about five hot laps at a time, with a few minutes in the pits between sessions for the obsessive prep team to check the tire pressures — and engine temperatures never wavered on a 85F day.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE PDR Screenshot

That’s where this Camaro Turbo 1LE comes in. By providing a neutral, safe handling car, it allows anyone who has the urge to try performance driving to do so in a safe environment — with a greatly-reduced risk to the wallet due to that performance warranty. Drivers can indeed explore their own limits, rather than that of the car.

I especially enjoyed the factory-available performance data recorder, which adds an SD card slot to the dash near the drivers’ left knee. Pop a card in, press a couple of buttons on the center display, and the front cameras will record your track day hero exploits for easy uploading to YouTube.

I realized after the track session that my polarized Oakleys were blocking my view of the HUD — and thus, the shift light. I’d prefer an LED shift-light to supplement the HUD, as I’m almost always in polarized shades.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE gauges

I’m totally enamored with the new blue shade on my test car. Named Riverside Blue after the now-defunct road course in Southern California, it has an incredibly familiar look on this body for any fan (like yours truly!) of the golden era of Trans-Am racing.

When I noted that the color resembled a metallic version of the deep blue finish found on Roger Penske’s Camaro racers of the late Sixties, John Mack, Design Manager for Chevrolet Performance, told me that one of the names considered was “Oconus Blue — Sunoco spelled backwards,” as the Pennsylvania oil company was the primary sponsor of those dominant Mark Donohue-piloted Z28s.

Whatever the inspiration, it’s a magnificent color, and the 1LE-exclusive matte-black vinyl wrap on the hood adds a bit more race-inspired aggressiveness to the look. Other 1LE-specific styling touches include flat-black mirrors, rear spoiler, and front splitter.

While the basic styling of the Camaro hasn’t really changed within the wheelbase, the front and rear have seen some dramatic changes. Up front, the central body-colored beam has lowered a bit, creating a bit more balance between the upper and lower grilles. When you look at the Camaro from the side, there appears to be a touch more rake to the front end. It’s a bit less retro.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE front

Out back, the taillamps appear more traditional, aping the quad oblong lamps so often seen on the classic Camaro. The lenses themselves look clear with grey accents — Chevrolet refers to them as “neutral density” — with red LED lamps behind those lenses.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE rear

I’m not completely sold on the appearance of the RS badge on this 1LE car. Certainly, adding a 1LE badge would be a bit goofy, but RS has traditionally meant style without performance within Chevrolet — see the Malibu RS I looked at on Monday. This Turbo 1LE has performance, with minimal frippery beyond those badges.

The 1LE package consists of the FE3 suspension kit: bigger front and rear sway bars, tuned dampers, stiffer bushings, along with summer-only Goodyear Eagle F1 tires, Track Mode on the drive mode selector, short-throw shifter, and a cooling package for engine oil, transmission, and differential.

Surprisingly for a car so clearly meant for track duty, the Camaro Turbo 1LE was quite comfortable on our drive back into the city. The ride was firm but controlled — the big sway bars might contribute to loud thumps over speed bumps or potholes — but the magnetic shocks kept things reasonable for commuting. I can easily see daily driving this for much of the year.

Interestingly, the 1LE package is available on any trim level of the four-cylinder Camaro – whether you choose the relatively-stripped 1LT Camaro at $25,995, or the plush 3LT with leather seats for several thousand more, the 1LE track package runs another $4,500. The 2LT 1LE pictured here starts at $27,500 plus $995 freight — making this a $32,995 track bargain. The performance data recorder was installed in another Turbo 1LE I took on the track, and is a $1,300 option.

In this track-focused Camaro Turbo 1LE, I’m convinced that Chevrolet has built the more-powerful Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ we’ve been asking for.

2019 Chevrolet Camaro 1LE grille detail

[Images: © 2018 Chris Tonn/TTAC; Screenshot courtesy Chevrolet Performance Data Recorder and poor-driving author]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!


51 Comments on “2019 Chevrolet Camaro Turbo 1LE First Drive – The Perfect Track Rat...”

  • avatar

    Is this the most claustrophobic car ever made? How does anyone see out of that thing?

    • 0 avatar


      Yes. Agreed. Does anyone have one in the TTAC audience? What are your thoughts. It s ok as the months move on? OR It bugs the crap out of you more and more as time goes on?

      Looks like a good price for the performance. But, I would rather live with a Challenger or Mustang.

    • 0 avatar

      Its like any other car, you get used to the visibility over time. In this case (and in the Challenger), I would opt for blind spot monitoring. Other than that, visibility isn’t bad at all over time. I am basing it on a couple weeks of rentals – perhaps an owner can chime in here.

      BTW I think this was a well written review and this version of the Camaro will sell like hotcakes. Especially with the track-friendly warranty.

      • 0 avatar

        I own a 2017 SS 1LE. I bought it primarily as a track car. It has also become my primary weekend car and occasionally heads to work as well. I LOVE this car. It is fabulous at the track. In touring mode it is actually more comfortable than my other cars for city driving.

        Yes, the side windows are small. Forget about hitting a drive up ATM or drive through. But with properly positioned mirrors I NEVER have blind spot issues.

        My neighbors probably hate this car though. Starting it up at 6:00 am it is LOUD even when in the quiet mode. For some reason it starts with baffles open and THEN closes them. Stupid. But the engine noise makes me feel like a teenager every time I rev it up and it burbles. I think I would like this car way less with a 4cyl turbo.

  • avatar

    “In this track-focused Camaro Turbo 1LE, I’m convinced that Chevrolet has built the more-powerful Toyota 86/Subaru BRZ we’ve been asking for.”

    No, not really its bigger and 500lbs heavier (20%).

    • 0 avatar

      Could one of our resident “numbers geeks” (I say that with love) please crunch the power to weight ratio for the BRZ and Camaro 4cyl turbo? Oh and the F/R weight distribution for each?

      • 0 avatar

        From Car and Drive test sheets of 2016 versions of each

        2016 Camaro FA=1782 lbs; RA=1628 lbs; WD 52.3/47.7; 12.4 lbs/hp
        2016 BRZ FA=1522 lbs; RA=1255 lbs; WD 54.8/45.2; 13.5 lbs/hp

        So Camaro has less weight per hp to move around and better weight distribution (by a decent amount).

        I always though the RWD BRZ would prove to the Subbie faithful that AWD is needed since its mediocre weight distribution would kill it in snowy conditions. For comparison a Mustang GT is 53.8/46.2 almost right between the Subbie and the turbo Camaro (the SS Camaro is 53.7/46.3)

    • 0 avatar

      ….. And more powerful. And specced with much meatier and stickier rubber. All of which drives up cost of consumables.

      As well as the “seriousness” of any track outing.

    • 0 avatar

      Well your not going to get much more out of a Toyobaru in terms of performance at that weight without using more exotic materials if you want to retain a fairly light vehicle or go some other route like shrinking the car to where only Lilliputians are the only ones mildly inconvenienced.

      Modern pony cars are more or less the personal luxury cars from the 70’s in a sexier wrapper. Thunderbird and Monte Carlo went away and the pony car grew to accommodate not only the pony car crowd but the personal luxury crowd as well and at least its allowed them to remain in the increasingly shrinking car market as people wholesale embrace the brodozer and mini brodozer craze.

      • 0 avatar

        Raph, I’ve always thought the same thing. Although unlike most PLCs, only the Challenger has a back seat that approaches usefulness.

        Up front though, I think my Mustang is more PLC (especially the Premium trim) than sports car.

  • avatar

    Another TTAC review, 4th this week, where reviewer is flown to Seattle (or other place), put up at boutique hotel, for two nights, no less, fed haute cuisine breakfast lunch and dinner (multiple times), and blown hard by the Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM) Media & Press people in tow.

    The result: Another positively glowing review of what many have argued is a cheaply built, cheaply trimmed, claustrophobic pillbox of a car, that does a couple things well, in a strictly controlled environment, yet falls down in nearly every other area, particularly in the real world.


    And Guangzhou-Guadalajara Motors (GM) suppliers send love and kisses <3 from Chinese Lowest Cost Bidder Provinces of Harbin, Heilongjiang, Fujian, and Changchun!

    • 0 avatar


      Hum. Right on! Why do all these press reveals take place in cool- far flung places.
      San Diego

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      The real-world aspect is why we book loans for our home environment as much as possible. And believe me, liking or not liking a car has little to do with the wining and dining.

      We go on the trips because it gives us a chance to drive the cars — a chance we may or may not get at home. But at the end of the day, it’s about the car. I’ve never liked a car because of the meals or hotel…only because of the car itself. That extends to everyone here.

      • 0 avatar

        I can’t get upset about that. If its’ a normal production car, it gets dropped at the writer’s home with a full tank. If it is some sort of new intro, where they don’t have many, or they want to show off track prowess, or toss in an interview with designers or such, then a get-together in a far flung place makes sense. OK, in the depth of winter, a trip to the South of France, (and bring your spouse !) might be very, very nice, but in today’s age, there isn’t the control there used to be. C/D once mentioned a Fiat intro in the 80’s where the ink stained wretches found a fur coat on the bed of the hotel “in case the wives got cold”. You can’t get away with that any more, probably…..

    • 0 avatar

      OK, so press junkets bother you guys. Fair enough. But explain to me how TTAC a) gets its’ hands on a new-for-2019 vehicle that’s not being sold yet, and b) gets to drive it hard on a track so it can give its’ readers a good idea how it performs?

      What are they going to do – show up at a dealership and say “hey, mind if I hoon around in a Camaro for about five hours on public roads and not buy it”? Bon chance, mon ami.

      Or maybe TTAC just sticks to reviewing rentals (and if that’s the case, good luck finding one of these with the performance package on the lot at Enterprise), or just skips car reviews altogether?

      I’m interested in how you guys would solve this quandry.

    • 0 avatar

      DW, are you saying this car would not be a good track day car to have fun in?

  • avatar

    1. Who’s buying this? Yeah, it handles well and all, but it’s still a 4 cylinder Camaro. If you have to drive this claustrophobic machine might as well have V8 noises.

    2. The styling update is just plain horrible. That weird grinning almost NC MX5 front just makes me feel uncomfortable.

    3. For the love of God stop with the retro. Imo, the old taillights looked much better. These fat, wannabe retro ones look bad and even worse in the tinted-clear look lens look here.

    • 0 avatar

      Re #3: I actually think the clear/greyish tail lamps work really well here with the blue and the black accents (wheels, hood, spoiler, badges, etc). Not sure it would work with every color though or for more normal looking Camaros.

      • 0 avatar

        I may have spoke too soon, looking at it some more, I think you’re right. They would look better than the red. I’m still not a fan of the size compared to the sleek outgoing model’s rear lights

    • 0 avatar

      #1 People who either cannot afford or don’t want a V8 car. In the case of the latter I know plenty of people who dont care for or are intimidated by a 400+ horsepower V8 and then you have a smattering of contrarians who either are gunning to take the V8 crowd down (can’t argue sometimes since a sampling of the V8 only crowd shows what chewing on a little too much red meat will do for you >>yes I’m aware of research that shows eating meat can actually calm people down but it paints a good enough picture << ) or just see owning a V8 car as buying into the herd mentality.

      • 0 avatar

        Lower monthly payment and lower insurance rates means more money to spend on other stuff.

        I prefer small block muscle cars from the classic muscle car era because they tend to be better balanced and less nose heavy. Other guys wouldn’t be caught dead in less than a BOSS 429 or 440 6-pack or Big Block GM.

        Different strokes for different folks.

        • 0 avatar

          “Different strokes for different folks”

          I agree, nothing wrong with having options..but outside of a few track rats, will anybody be buying these?

          I can’t even imagine dealers stocking these 4 cylinder 1LE’s. I would think a large majority of people would rather have a less equipped V8 or cheaper V6 than this performance pack.

          I guess we will see and I cannot be upset at GM for wanting to expand their performance line.

          • 0 avatar

            Being the shortest engine, the V6 has the best weight distribution.

            For 2016 manual models:
            4T – 52.3/47.7
            V6 – 51.9/48.1
            V8 – 53.8/46.2

            With a proper set of tires, the extra mass of the V8 probably doesn’t harm the handling much. It is an aluminum small-block, after all.

            A set of properly wide front tires should cure the additional understeer. They use 245s on the front of the SS, with 275s rear, encouraging understeer relative to the others that have 245s all around.

            To me, this car is interesting with the V8 but not the turbo 4. It’s just too impractical of a car to not go all the way with the engine.

          • 0 avatar

            My preference would be for the V6. But big power increases are easily available for the turbo (with corresponding loss of engine life). Turbo is (according to C&D testing) ~120 lbs lighter than the V6 (which is 200 lbs lighter than the V8).

            Weight distribution on the turbo and the V6 will depend on options. Again C&D has them at
            2016 RS Turbo MT 52.3/47.7 245 tires all around
            2017 1LE V6 MT 52.4/47.8 245 Front tire 275 rear

            The turbo with the 1LE would get the fatter rubber and WD would likely be close to that of the V6 with the 1LE package.

        • 0 avatar

          Exactly. This is why a LA series 340ci powered Darts or Dusters had tons of street creed. I’ve deriven big block vets around a track, talk about understeer!

  • avatar

    Interesting- I just noticed this.

    The 2 newer articles have more comments than this one. That’s just odd. (as of 10.50 AM EST)

    This is a review on an affordable historic performance car. >>>LOW reaction on this a ‘car’ site.


  • avatar

    If only they would have spent some $$ instead to make a sedan version of this.. I.e. update the old Chevy SS sedan. Make it available with the turbo-4 and 6-cyl and V8, starting around $30k.

    It was just a bit too much of a leap to jump in for a $50k GM sedan when I’d never owned a domestic before. I did briefly (for a day or so) have a line on one with the 20% off that landed around $37k, and now I wish I’d taken the plunge..

  • avatar

    It’s better looking than the SS version at least. I had to double check that this was the new ’19 version and not an ’18.

  • avatar

    The Camaro doesn’t so much need less mass up front — although that’s no bad thing — as less mass overall. These are not light cars.

    As for the gun slit windows all round, no thanks.

  • avatar

    People bag on these four-cylinder pony cars, but before you do, consider this: they got performance game. And they’re bargains. Thirty grand (before the inevitable cash on the hood) for something that performs like the car in this story is a screaming deal.

    I wouldn’t consider the Camaro – I don’t like the styling and the lack of visibility would make this a very difficult car to live with – but I’d take an Ecoboost Mustang with a stick.

    • 0 avatar

      They lost me on “4 cyl. Turbo.” The Camaro (I’ve owned 4) addresses the “I want” part of the ownership equation, rather than the “I need.” At least it should- in my case, it doesn’t. Between the bodystyle and the powertrain, I’m sticking with something attractive with the iconic American V8 rumble.

      My last Camaro was a ’91 T-Top with a V8, 5 spd. I honestly lost interest after that.

      • 0 avatar

        Would I prefer a V-8? God, yes. But that box on the option sheet costs over ten grand to check.

        Meanwhile, this thing goes out the door for well under thirty grand, and has all the performance you could even need on a public road. For a guy who’s 55 and needs to get his kids through school and build up the 401k, that’s a tempting proposition.

        • 0 avatar

          $10K more for the V8 is definitely walking around money, but the V6 is only a $1400 option.

          With the 3.6L you get a car a few tenths faster, runs on regular octane gas (the 2.0T recommends premium), has a vaguely exotic exhaust note, and IMO has a more appropriate power delivery for a “sporty” car.

          • 0 avatar

            You’re right, the six would also be a good option. Track rats might want the four, though – better weight distribution.

          • 0 avatar

            @ FreedMike & ajla – Interesting point about the pricing, and it’s also interesting that Chevy is going with an I4T < V6 < V8 strategy whereas Ford (when it was available) had gone with a V6 < I4T < V8 hierarchy.

            For either car, I'd consider the V6 as the best of the three engines for my real world use. Yes, I'd like the V8, but only for a small price increase. All six engines in question are powerful enough that I wouldn't want to pay much of a premium for additional power I can't really use outside of a race track.

          • 0 avatar

            @ FreedMike & ajla – Interesting point about the pricing, and it’s also interesting that Chevy is going with an I4T < V6 < V8 strategy whereas Ford (when it was available) had gone with a V6 < I4T < V8 hierarchy.

            For either car, I'd consider the V6 as the best of the three engines for my real world use. Yes, I'd like the V8, but only for a small price increase. All six engines in question are powerful enough that I wouldn't want to pay much of a premium for additional power I couldn't really use outside of a race track.

        • 0 avatar

          “Would I prefer a V-8? God, yes. But that box on the option sheet costs over ten grand to check.”

          OMG. There was about a $3K difference in V6 and V8 Chargers, everything else being equal. But last year, a R/T Road and Track with every option you could hang onto the thing went out the door in the mid 30’s after incentives and discounts. Looking back, not a bad value.

    • 0 avatar

      Well If you grew up in the 80’s and lusted after the performance machinery in the 90’s then the modern T4 pony cars are pretty bad ass!

      For people born later and having grown up when 300 horsepower is/was poverty spec its a different picture.

      Of course all these guys seem to think they were imbued by preternatural driving skill by dent of growing up along side such machinery and think nothing of switching off esc/tsc or finding a way to permanently defeat it with predictable results.

  • avatar

    Glad they let you track the car to find out how it really handles. I’ve yet to track my C7 but the mag ride suspension is downright amazing so far. It can go from decent touring car to rock hard track rat with a twist of a knob. In Sport its very similar to my previous 350Z with upgraded sway bars in terms of suspension and steering firmness. Putting it into track mode makes it feel like someone welded the springs, its very stiff, can’t wait to experience it on track.

    In the image posted of the PDR (Performance Data Recorder) the car was in Sport, not Track so it could have been firmed up even more. The settings effect suspension, steering, exhaust note and throttle sensitivity. Each mode feels and sounds different, plus changes the digital dash on the C7. Beyond that Track mode (on the ‘Vette) has a further 5 different traction control settings.

    On the C7 there is a very similar (if not the same) color called Laguna Blue… its the color I got. Not fan of the Camaro’s styling, those tail lights in particular are something awful.

    • 0 avatar

      I find the mag ride to be the single most impressive feature on my GT350 – 5.2 Voodoo and massive brakes included!

      • 0 avatar

        Is that something Ford licensed from GM? I was never quite clear on that point, whether it was the exact same system.

        It’s now available on lesser Mustangs. Something I’d definitely select, were it not attached to the expensive track pack. About $6,500, I think? Remember when the S550 came out, and the track pack was only $2,500?

        • 0 avatar

          Per Wikipedia the tech was originally developed and owned by Delphi Automotive but now belongs to Beijing West Industries. So I assume Ford is sourcing it from them these days. Audi, Acura, Land Rover, Ferrari and Lambo also have it, so its no longer a GM only thing.

          One interesting thing is like all computer controlled car systems (IE: ECU) an aftermarket or OEM tune can be applied so the suspension can be “updated” to change its characteristics. Its really impressive tech and makes complete sense in a car where suspension harshness is very subjective.

  • avatar

    I am amazed these things have not killed more people. The absolute worst outward visibility of any car I have driven.

  • avatar

    Re: visibility
    I had a ’13 convertible from 2012-15. The drop-top has a smaller rear window so the blind spot is even bigger than a coupe. I could not see at all from the front seats back to the rear window.That and the punishing ride made me get rid of it and get a Challenger. I’m on my second one now, a ’16.

  • avatar

    High curb weight + turbo engine = bad track car

    I feel like a BRZ with 20% or so more power would be just as fast while halving the consumable costs and not having to deal with stuff like heat soak

  • avatar

    This sounds like a decent road/track car for the casual race driver. I had the grandaddy to these cars, a 1980 Mercury Capri RS turbo. It was a great car when it ran and I still love the concept. The actual execution of the Mercury was not so great.

    Fast forward almost 40(!) years and it seems that technology has arrived to make the concept work. I’d like to try one of these out, but it’s really not what I’m looking to buy next time around. Bummer.

  • avatar

    Get free crap, praise crap. Needs more Ford bashing. Thanks.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • 28-Cars-Later: Despite water levels rising and even things like crop failure I would love to see 7+ billion beings on...
  • R Henry: My thinking exactly! My 2015 Mazda6, while no limousine, is much more roomy and comfortable inside, has more...
  • THX1136: I get what you’re saying and agree. I should have been a bit more specific in my comment as I was...
  • 28-Cars-Later: Then please explain why then VP Cheney in his secretive Energy Task Force had a map of Iraq oil fields...
  • 28-Cars-Later: God what a POS.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote


  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States