Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl (Post 6181666)

Very similar to what we are doing. When all else fails, go old school.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by 1973Camaro (Post 6185005)

In regards to AFM, we have an 08 Impala w/3.9 v6 AFM. You set the DIC for instant fuel mileage & watch it change back & forth between 3 & 6 cyl mode. It changes back to 6 with the slightest of throttle pressure increase whether accelerating or a slight increase in grade. I don't see how you could experience a lack of performance at any time, just hit the throttle. Also the switch back & forth is almost imperceptable. The only way I can feel it is if I lean my head against the window glass. I would think a v8/v4 would be even smoother.

Originally Posted by baby02 (Post 6176972)

AFM on the 2014 stringray with have the option of turning on or off by the owner.

Originally Posted by Mikes SS (Post 6185478)

I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?

Originally Posted by Mikes SS (Post 6185478)

I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?

Originally Posted by Ken_ (Post 6185932)

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?

Originally Posted by Ken_ (Post 6185932)

May as well just join the group that hopes for an I-4 turbo Camaro. Not knocking it because I also drive a I-4 turbo car- the EVO VIII, and that thing is a rocket on rails, and I do firmly believe that an I-4 turbo-powered Camaro will be actually more fun that most think. Everybody keeps thinking of an engine from the 3rd Gen Camaro called the Iron Duke (2.4 liter?) and that's what this newer gen I-4 turbo Camaro would end up being like.

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6185183)

...Good stuff....Yeah, I've never driven a car with AFM....(Doesn't seem to be very popular on these forums with the Camaros)....perhaps its not really a "performance" killer in the big scheme of things...

...But...my gosh...when I shopped for my '11, the L99s with AFM were rated at "1" mpg hwy mileage greater than the manual trans cars..."ONE!"...I could see AFM being the greatest thing since a pocket in a shirt if the mileage gains were vastly greater than those without AFM...

Just seems like a ton of technology and what-not for very little gain in mpg...on top of what is perceived as driving a "performance" car on four cylinders...dunno...

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6185718)

Might be getting close to what you mention, if it's true about the 2014 Stingray having that option...No idea how it's actually done, or what mileage gains there would be, but sounds like a good idea...

Originally Posted by steveo9043 (Post 6186133)

I know back in the day, manual trans cars would get better mileage with the same motor. So maybe an Automatic LS3 would get 2-3 mpg less then a manual LS3 so the increase of 1 mpg over the ls3 manual may be 3-4mpg ls3 auto vs l99 auto... Make sense?

I agree with you that manuals have traditionally gotten better mileage than autos...and you are probably correct that the AFM enables the autos to keep close, or better...but 1mpg for highway mileage rating better with the automatic than the manual....seems like it should be much higher than that...


Now I understood the LT1 dod/afm on/off was turning on/off the ability for it to go into 4 cylinder mode.

example:
dod off (always V8)
dod on (just like L99 cars, the ability to go into 4 cylinder mode)

Originally Posted by Wizard1183 (Post 6186061)

Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6186024)

Not much would be good, other than having the option of being in either one...

...Like it or not, it seems AFM is here to stay...and if it is, and can be capable of significantly better mileage, it might help keep around the availablility of V-8's that don't have AFM...

Originally Posted by Wizard1183 (Post 6186061)

Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?

Originally Posted by Mikes SS (Post 6186260)

The better the gas mileage a V8 camaro can get, means the more V8's they can sell across the fleet which keeps that rumble in my car!

Originally Posted by Ken_ (Post 6186435)

I didn't say that it was bad. It's just all personal preference. I don't think the majority of us have our foot all in the floor whenever we take out our Camaros. We all know a foot in the floor will end up with more fuel demanded to keep up with the foot:D

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6186024)

Not much would be good, other than having the option of being in either one...

...Like it or not, it seems AFM is here to stay...and if it is, and can be capable of significantly better mileage, it might help keep around the availablility of V-8's that don't have AFM...

Originally Posted by Ken_ (Post 6186440)

I think we all want better gas mileage, regardless of AFM. If they are doing it to appease the US Govt, then so be it.

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl (Post 6186469)

I agree that AFM/DOD is here to stay on larger displacement engines, and I think it will get better over time. However, I think GM will probably introduce some 5.0-5.7 L engines that don't have AFM/DOD at some point. If the power is there, a lot of people will opt for those instead of the larger displacement versions just to get away from AFM/DOD. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by KarFan (Post 6216627)

The fact that GM introduced the Gen V LT1 at 6.2L would likely mean they won't be offering a lower displacement performance V8’s, this generation.

There wouldn't be a business case to develop a smaller displacement performance V8 purely to circumvent their AFM/DOD technology.

Lots of speculation as to what the higher performance variations of the LT1 will be but it's not likely to be any less displacement than the 6.2L.

GM is in the business of building cars and trucks for profit. Not in the business of supplying street cars with engines capable of big aftermarket HP. Despite what we enthusiasts want.

Originally Posted by KarFan (Post 6217435)

The key word I used is Performance. There have been and will be many different displacement V8's for many applications in GM (cars and trucks)

However for NA performance applications, Camaro, Corvette and now SS I'm saying that it wouldn't seem likely that GM would develop another V8 of lower displacement for use in these vehicles.

Originally Posted by KarFan (Post 6217435)

The key word I used is Performance. There have been and will be many different displacement V8's for many applications in GM (cars and trucks)

However for NA performance applications, Camaro, Corvette and now SS I'm saying that it wouldn't seem likely that GM would develop another V8 of lower displacement for use in these vehicles.

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6217462)

I found it interesting that Dodge offers 2 different Hemi's for the Challenger...Don't know why GM would need to "develop" a new engine, instead of offering say the LT1...(450 hp, with AFM) as well as the LS3 (426 hp, without AFM)...just sayin'...