I wonder how that would work comparison wise? I just can't see magazines testing a 4 cylinder Mustang vs a V6 Camaro and a 4 cylinder Camaro vs a V6 Mustang. It will be interesting for sure to see how this will play out. I wouldn't go for a 4 cylinder Camaro but I don't have a problem with it entering the lineup. I would like to see them go more for fuel economy with that model.

I would be surprised to see another LTx engine let alone one developed specifically for the Camaro.



That's exactly what I expected to see for the engine line up. Let's hope they don't gut the power for the Camaro LT4.

That would be odd considering Al Oppenheiser said himself there would be no 4 cylinder.

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329009

Al Oppenheiser said he doesn't want a 4 cylinder.

What Al wants and what GM orders him to do are two different things.

Sounds perfectly reasonable considering the current engine hierarchy. The only question is how much will GM detune the LT4 for the high end Camaro model? If indeed the 6th Gen Camaro weighs in the 3600 lb range as speculated (which isn't too far off the C7 ZO6), then I would think the engine will be detuned to keep a safe distance from the ZO6.

That article has been misquoted many times. All he said was he would fight for every horsepower and cylinder he can. Not sure how that ended being taken as there would be no four cylinder.

Looks like this means no Z/28 in 2016.

Same engine lineup as we have now except the LS7 is now a 4 banger

Just because there is nothing between the LT1 and LT4 doesn't mean there couldn't be in the future.

The person that posted up the information on the GMI website appears to be the same individual that posted up the thread on there "confirming" the LGX V6 in the 6th gen Camaro.

In case anyone wants to see more on that, see this thread: http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=362124

Its not copying...its a different approach than Ford. Ford is offering the V6 as the base engine, and the 2.3 as an option. Its clear that Ford is wanting to phase out the V6, as many options available on the 2.3 are not available on the V6, thus it will probably be the weakest seller over time, and give Ford a reason to axe it.

GM will likely offer the 2.0 as the base engine, unless they ramp up the power in it more than it has in other applications. So I see one of two things happening here: 1) 2.0 turbo as base, and V6 as option for slight price bump, but that's only if the 2.0 doesn't get a power bump. 2) Otherwise bump the 2.0 power a bit, and offer it for the same price as the V6, giving the buyers two good options based on their own preference. Frankly I'd love this approach.

The V6 will likely offer more power, and efficiency than the current LFX, which is already doing well in both areas. It will compete well with Ford's 2.3 stock to stock.

Who cares? I say mix it up. Give us options! It was Fords decision to change up the mix and make the 4 cylinder the option, while GM may take a more traditional approach. I say get both 4 cylinders, and both V6s and take em all out and do one big comparison. Would be awesome.

Exactly.

I think this quote from that thread was pretty cool...at least I thought it was lol

I would not scoff too loudly at a turbo 4. GM makes a hellavu 4 cyl engine. The turbo version has 260ftlb torque at 1700 rpm. Perhaps more torque down low than many of their V8's.

If the '16 Camaro makes 36xx lb curb or lower, the turbo 4 will outperform the existing V6, especially when it comes to mileage.

To put things in perspective, if the 6.2L Supercharged engine could make Cadillac Turbo Four power per ci, it would have 837HP at 5500rpm, and 806ftlb of torque at 1700 rpm.

GM currently does not make either a diesel or gas transmission that could handle that reliably.

I thought that was the whole reason we wouldn't see the LF3 in the Camaro? More expensive to produce with inferior HP, torque, and fuel economy compared to the LT1. It would be a different motor that would be fun to drive but the average Camaro owner is still stuck on rear drive V8 performance. I guess how they build and end up placing the turbo 4 will answer that. I'm all for options but they keep telling us about development costs driving up the overall price of the Camaro regardless of what model you choose.

That's exactly why I said 2016..;)

So excited to see these in production spec :)