CAMARO6

CAMARO6 (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/index.php)
-   2016+ Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=155)
-   -   Why would anyone want a 4 cylinder 2016 camaro (https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275580)

camaro-dreamer 02-10-2013 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6143882)
Sort of agree about the 'Vette not being the "same" as the Camaro...on the other hand, the Camaro need not become an "economy" option more that it already is...as you say 20K for entry now, means we need another less expensive entry model?...

I think Camaro's "image" should at least have some respect over multiple other economy models that are already available...

Why do you think a turbo i4 will cost less than the current v6 cylinder entry level car? I would guess a price creep. The turbo i4 will probably cost as much as the current v6. Then, the others will only increase from there.

KMPrenger 02-10-2013 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90503 (Post 6143882)
Sort of agree about the 'Vette not being the "same" as the Camaro...on the other hand, the Camaro need not become an "economy" option more that it already is...as you say 20K for entry now, means we need another less expensive entry model?...

I think Camaro's "image" should at least have some respect over multiple other economy models that are already available...

I think it will keep the respect (as far as performance), b/c I fully expect the T4 in the lighter platform to perform close to, or as well as the current V6. Maybe better if they decide to really put a powerful T4 in there with over 300hp/tq.

But I still hope to see a V6 option as well. More the merrier.

revychevy 02-10-2013 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KMPrenger (Post 6143860)
I'll take a shot lol.

Vette is a $50K starting performance car....period. It definitely stands to have its image tarnished much more than a Camaro would, with a turbo 4 cylinder engine going into it.

Camaro starts in the low to mid 20s, which is a very resonable number for someone that may want a sporty looking car, something fun to cruise around or be seen in, but can't afford a top end model, like the Vette.

But that has always been the case for Camaro and Mustang....you either get great looks at an affordable price, or great looks and performance for a little more.

Vette on the other hand, has stood as a performance car for a very long time. With the Corvette, you get looks and great peformance at the starting price, and if you pay more, you get even better looks and AMAZING performance. Vette is not meant to be something every average Joe can afford to buy.

Because of this, I don't think comparing the Camaro and the Corvette is fair.

I appreciate the answer, I see your point as a difference of degree with the Corvette. This was the point I was making. Some cars have a different image than the econo hybrid, and the family coupe (Camry, Accord, Altima) while the Corvette analogy was the extreme end, I was showing that it DOES matter what's in the lineup of a car that is a legendary Pony/Muscle car. If the Camaro gets watered down to a Sonic or even an Accord I feel (you may not, granted) that its base will suffer.

Bad-assery is what has it outselling Mustang and Challengers in its rebirth. Being compared to a Honda Accord is what they sell a 4 cylinder hybrid Malibu to do. Being compared to a smart car is what they make Sonics and Sparks for.
My first Camaro was a V6 entry level 304 HP car that I modded with long tube headers, CAI, short throw shifter and Hids. It had WAY more 'tude than an Accord. Didn't think of cross shopping Hondas.

( I know everyone ain't me) but can you see cross shopping Sparks and Camaros?

Number 3 02-10-2013 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by revychevy (Post 6144165)
I appreciate the answer, I see your point as a difference of degree with the Corvette. This was the point I was making. Some cars have a different image than the econo hybrid, and the family coupe (Camry, Accord, Altima) while the Corvette analogy was the extreme end, I was showing that it DOES matter what's in the lineup of a car that is a legendary Pony/Muscle car. If the Camaro gets watered down to a Sonic or even an Accord I feel (you may not, granted) that its base will suffer.

Bad-assery is what has it outselling Mustang and Challengers in its rebirth. Being compared to a Honda Accord is what they sell a 4 cylinder hybrid Malibu to do. Being compared to a smart car is what they make Sonics and Sparks for.
My first Camaro was a V6 entry level 304 HP car that I modded with long tube headers, CAI, short throw shifter and Hids. It had WAY more 'tude than an Accord. Didn't think of cross shopping Hondas.

( I know everyone ain't me) but can you see cross shopping Sparks and Camaros?

But and a big one the Malibu Hybrid (not sure why you specific about hybrid) does not offer a coupe. Honda does and whether you like it or not the Camaro in V6 trims is a "sporty coupe". Same class the Accord Coupe and Altima Coupe. You can't fall into the trap that for the customer shopping for a sporty coupe you want to include Honda and Nissan. Just my opinion, but if I were still at GM, I would want every single person considering a sporty coupe to want Camaro at the top of their consideration list.

Because you didn't cross a Honda doesn't mean GM shouldn't want the Honda or Altima buyer to cross shop Camaro.

And most people on this website who are inclined to modify their cars don't understand that most people don't. Go look at the % of leases. Do you think anyone leasing a car (Accord or Camaro) is going to mod it like you did?

I'm just trying to say that the next redo of the Camaro sure ought to drop the styling down a notch and get back to making a great coupe. Period.

To get the show car styling (and also use an existing architecture) GM created a styling tour deforce that gave up front and rear visibility, entry egress, trunk space and liftover height and a host of features that are now available in the 3rd and 4th years (height adj. passenger seat, nav, decent steering wheel, hard cheap plastic IP and door trim, etc.).

So what is wrong with GM making a sporty coupe that is sooooooo good that it destroys not just Mustang and Challenger but Accord and Altima too?

leviticus88 02-10-2013 03:32 PM

I would much rather have a factory 4cyl Turbo Camaro than a factory V6 N/A Camaro to drive everyday and enjoy and get reasonable mileage.

But a V8 will always belong in the Camaro in some form or another...

FenwickHockey65 02-10-2013 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldfriend (Post 6143910)
Really , which one ?

LTG in the Cadillac ATS and Malibu Turbo.

nak3dsnake 02-10-2013 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 (Post 6133606)
Yep. It was pretty terrible but the LTG in the ATS and Malibu is down the corner and around the block from that engine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew10 (Post 6133628)
O I know. I had an S-10 in high school that had a 2.5 in it. Over 2K miles on it and it still ran decent. Sounded like a diesel the whole time I owned it though.

Tech IV's were fairly reliable if you didn't drive it like you stole it. Though the early ones with timing gears instead of chains are know for shearing off teeth at high mileages.

revychevy 02-10-2013 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Number 3 (Post 6144225)
But and a big one the Malibu Hybrid (not sure why you specific about hybrid) does not offer a coupe. Honda does and whether you like it or not the Camaro in V6 trims is a "sporty coupe". Same class the Accord Coupe and Altima Coupe. You can't fall into the trap that for the customer shopping for a sporty coupe you want to include Honda and Nissan. Just my opinion, but if I were still at GM, I would want every single person considering a sporty coupe to want Camaro at the top of their consideration list.

Because you didn't cross a Honda doesn't mean GM shouldn't want the Honda or Altima buyer to cross shop Camaro.

And most people on this website who are inclined to modify their cars don't understand that most people don't. Go look at the % of leases. Do you think anyone leasing a car (Accord or Camaro) is going to mod it like you did?

I'm just trying to say that the next redo of the Camaro sure ought to drop the styling down a notch and get back to making a great coupe. Period.

To get the show car styling (and also use an existing architecture) GM created a styling tour deforce that gave up front and rear visibility, entry egress, trunk space and liftover height and a host of features that are now available in the 3rd and 4th years (height adj. passenger seat, nav, decent steering wheel, hard cheap plastic IP and door trim, etc.).

So what is wrong with GM making a sporty coupe that is sooooooo good that it destroys not just Mustang and Challenger but Accord and Altima too?


So what are you saying exactly? It sounds like when you say "drop the styling down..." And put in lower displacement gas economy engines that what you are asking for, and trying to convince Camaro nation of, is that being like a Honda Accord is what we are striving for. I gather you worked for GM, is what you are telling me is the only way to sell. Camaros is to make them Hondas? I would hope not.

The people who want mere transportation and care nothing for cars as we do can buy Camaros but shouldn't control the image of what it is. If they do, I predict the Camaro will be gone in two generations. I know I won't buy a watered down Vanilla version knockoff of a Honda Accord. I think a lot if Camaro drivers agree with me.

Fbodfather said to keep the faith, the way I see it if the Camaro becomes synonymous with Honda accord then Chevy has broken faith with me.

Taintedveins 02-10-2013 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 (Post 6144363)
LTG in the Cadillac ATS and Malibu Turbo.

270 hp for a stock tune out of a turbo 4 is great, comparing it to 10 years ago the solstice gxp was 260 on a non conservative tune.

If the stock tune is at 5-6psi then 270 is great! If a GM performance tune is released I don't think 320+ would be that hard to achieve in either one of those vehicles.

revychevy 02-10-2013 06:12 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I like Turbo LS7s better than Turbo 4

revychevy 02-10-2013 06:15 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Here's the competition

2010-1SS-IBM 02-10-2013 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Number 3 (Post 6143906)
Here is the puzzle. If gas prices hit $5, $6 per gallon people will go more and more to those economical cars and abandon Camaro as a potenial choice. I have strong recollections what happened to the Camaro back in 2000 or so when the total Camaro/Firebird sales dropped to very low levels. Took us years (Fbodfather cough, cough) of effort to get one back.

Volume drives the business case plain and simple. So without a viable entry level Camaro, the SS/ZL1 can't exist unless you get it up to Corvette $$. And I'm not sensing a strong desire on this website to have a Camaro starting at $50,000.

It's not a puzzle, though. Chevy has fuel efficient cars already. And I wouldn't bet the farm on gas going to 5 or 6 dollars a gallon.

Norm Peterson 02-10-2013 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM (Post 6143820)
If the weight comes down, the fuel economy & performance improves for all engine types. That's not an argument for the 4 cylinder, it's a moot point because it applies to everything.

It's not a moot point because a little lower on the absolute power scale would then become more acceptable. Maybe only marginally so, but that's still acceptable to many.

Of course everything more powerful that stays at least roughly the same power output improves its position, but they've already been justified and further demonstration of that is not necessary.


Quote:

So what? There's plenty of sporty economical cars around, GM should sell them one of those.
Fine. Find me a 2-door model that's no taller than 56" and available with a manual transmission. Then we can get into the sort of power requirements and what-not that it would take to siphon potential entry-level Camaro sales over into it. Please don't suggest anything that looks like a shrunken SUV, crossover, or odd little box on wheels.


Quote:

The Camaro has a market that it earned, and it wasn't for fuel efficiency. Trying to "convince" their customers that GM knows what they "really" want is going to lose them their customer base.
As long as you can get your version, why does it matter what version GM can sell to somebody who doesn't have the gotta-have-performance gene? GM is not trying to convince you that you must evolve away from yours.

Anybody whose own choice is to walk away from the Camaro line before the V8 becomes completely unavailable just because an I4-T shows up is making that choice all by himself. That's cutting your nose off to spite your face over a perception that's more imagined than real.

If/when the V8 does disappear from the line entirely and no V8 represents an absolute deal-breaker for you, abandoning ship then does become the only option. I know this, because I've already been down a similar road over manual transmission availability in family sedans - more than once. The point is that I do know the difference between me abandoning a car company and them abandoning me. The question is, do you?


Norm

Number 3 02-10-2013 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM (Post 6144795)
It's not a puzzle, though. Chevy has fuel efficient cars already. And I wouldn't bet the farm on gas going to 5 or 6 dollars a gallon.

Ok, I'll post it again. The Chinese auto market is expected to triple by early next decade. Do you think the Chinese market going from 12 million per year to 30 million per year in the next 8 to 10 years won't impact the price of gas in the upward direction?

Our market and population is not growing, but China and India are. The number of people reaching the income level to buy cars in both countries is growing and fast. They will need gas.

The only hope you have is if in the near term EVs take over and no one wants gas.

So yes, I'd bet the farm, mine, my families and my friends that gas will hit 5 or 6 per gallon in the not too distant future.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.