That is true! The reason we havent converted to E85 yet is because it does in fact burn quicker than gas and in such gets worse mileage, so far E85 has been around 50 cents cheaper than gas but when compared mileage-wise gas would go farther on less money, the people behind E85 have been trying to refine the process of creating it to simplify it and make it cheaper so they can sell it cheaper and eventually the cost of MPG will balance out or hopefully surpass gasoline. Im not exactly sure on it but i think the lose in MPG is 2 to 3 miles per gallon by switching, but at $2 a gallon and gas slowely on the rise now (im not speculating cause last year everyone said gas was going back to $4 and i told them they were full of it haha) but if gas keeps rising and E85 stays at about $2 it should surpass gas soon

But i did learn however that the reason you use 3 or so more MPG on E85 is because you would be using it in a motor optimixed for gasoline, Jay Leno did an interview with a guy who built an E85 hot rod and said he built the motor optimized for E85 rather than gas and he gets the same mileage with both, though he makes a good bit more power on E85 cause of the higher octane, you can convert any car though easily but you will suffer a few MPGs, i wonder if GM has taken this into account and if the MPG loss will still be there on this motor if its optimized for both?

These are interesting times indeed haha

Guess the world is really coming to an end in 2012.

One year in the vette, then we'll have it.

I’m sorry, but there Is a Replacement for Displacement
 

Yes, a 5.5 liter won’t have the torque of a 6.2 liter, but it will likely have more torque per liter, and it will likely be geared to use it more effectively. Bottom line, torque to the rear wheels should be as good or better. If I have to drop it 500 rpms higher, I’ll live with that to get the better economy.
Hopefully they will put the car on a 200lb diet when they release it with the new motor. That should do it.

I was speaking hypothetically with the GM team at the Carlisle show about what I thought would be a good next gen motor. I received an answer from one to the effect that there was no need to guess, he had already seen it :confused0068: ( I also believe he was piloting one of the Camaro Convertibles during the 5 car excursion earlier in the month.) BTW, I’m sure Fbodfather knows as well, he runs in the same pack. Obviously that was as much detail as I was going to get. When talking to another GM team member on the broader picture (across all the model line) he indicated an increasing shift to forced induction. Hey, maybe we might see a FI 5.5 for the Z28 one day??? (BTW- when I asked when we would see a Z28 convertible, the reply was there has to be a Z28 coupe first) :facepalm:
So those of you (like me) who are old school, “there is no replacement for displacement” have to realize, it’s going to be replaced if we like it or not. Face it, like Mad Max, we have the “last of Big V8s”. :headbang:
Hell, It could be worse, GM could be planning to have a volt derivative for the Camaro. (Don’t get me wrong, I’m excited about the serial electric power train,……just not excited to see it in a Camaro :cry: )

I think that gm has some serious v8 firepower headed our way within the next few years. I also think that the new ford 5.0 motors output is great but is not that impressive given that it is a clean sheet ground up designed dohc v8. you only have to look at fords 6.2 v8 raptor f150 to compare gm ls 6.2 v8 for output. The ford is ohc and the ls is ohv but the output is similar. The ls engines go back to '97-'98 with the newer dodge hemi being a loose copy of the ls engines and the new ford v8's just starting to hit the street to give our ls engines a run for it's money. This competition will only make gm better in the long run.

The next gen v8 will come in various displacement, do not read too much into the 5.5 ltr v8 for c7 corvette hype. This is what gm is using in new gt2 class c6r corvettes per the new american le mans series (alms) rules that take effect next year on engine displacement/hp restrictions. Corvette racing is using the upcoming next gen v8 but the displacement is not production spec, per Corvette racing's head Doug Fehan.

I believe gm will have a ohv and dual cam engines built from the next gen v8 that will serve various mission/applications based on the info below:

http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/new...eunionuaw.html

econd United Auto Workers Agreement Reveals General Motors' Potential Future Truck Plans
By: Mike Levine Posted: 10-01-07 12:30 PT
© 2007 PickupTruck.com

Page: [1]

Update #1: 10-01-07 12:55 PT

I've clarified my comment about SIDI being similar to a diesel. Both diesels and SIDI engines directly inject fuel into the combustion chamber. I've added text that diesels rely on high compression ratios to auto-ignite the fuel-air mixture, whereas SIDI motors still use a spark plug.

A reader also brought to my attention that Honda uses cylinder deactivation in its 3.5-liter SOHC V6 engine. My point - and it should have been stated more clearly - is that cylinder deactivation hasn't seen fuel economy returns worth the investment necessary for a full size truck's overhead cam V8 - or else Toyota and Ford would have offered this in their OHC V8s already.

------

This is the toughest story I've written.

On Friday afternoon I watched the newswires and Wall Street Journal break information about GM's future product plans that were revealed in the "White Book" agreement between GM and the UAW settling last week's strike.

One of the items that caught my attention was the name of GM's next full size truck platform, C3XX. So, I went and did some more background searching on the 'C3XX' identifier, using Google.

To my surprise a second, internal UAW-GM document appeared in Google's search results. The document can be found on the Future of the Union website and Google's publicly available search cache.

On Friday the document ranked much higher in the search results, before the "White Book" news containing the 'C3XX' term at more popular websites moved up in Google's page rankings.

The information about what's contained in that document is in the story below.

After wrestling with this decision, and consulting with several colleagues, I've decided to publish this story because I believe it's relevant to the "White Book" news and GM's current state of affairs with the UAW.

- M.L.

A document found online (using Google) at the Future of the Union website suggests that General Motors is preparing to substantially overhaul the engine lineup used in its next generation full size trucks.

Future of the Union has published an internal memorandum of understanding that contains detailed information about contract negotiations that took place in June 2007 among the United Auto Worker (UAW) union, General Motors (GM), and GM’s largest supplier, Delphi.

The document contains GM’s future product commitments to UAW-represented employees at Delphi, similar to the future product timelines that emerged from the recent strike settlement contract between GM and the UAW.

Most notable are the powertrain components that Delphi is expected to supply for use in the C3XX truck program, starting in 2011. The C3XX platform will replace the current GMT 900 architecture that underpins the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra full size pickups.

According to the document, C3XX pickups will feature a new 'Gen V' 6.2-liter dual overhead cam (DOHC) V8 engine - a major departure from GM's traditional overhead valve (OHV) pushrod engine design used in its trucks, like the ‘Gen IV’ 403-horsepower / 417 lb-feet L92 6.2-liter V8 under the hood of the GMC Sierra Denali. The only DOHC V8 GM currently offers is Cadillac’s 4.6-liter Northstar engine.

The Gen V 6.2 motor will use variable valve timing (VVT) like the Gen IV 6.2, but the use of dual overhead cams holds the promise of four valves per cylinder instead of the current two valves, for better intake and exhaust flow and increased power. This is a similar setup to the 5.7-liter i-Force V8 used in the Toyota Tundra, but the Gen V 6.2 will also offer GM's active fuel management (AFM) system. AFM shuts down half the cylinders during steady state running for improved fuel economy – a feature not currently available for the i-Force. Up until this point, it’s been conventional wisdom that implementing cylinder deactivation on OHC engines is impractical for reasons of cost and complexity.

Pushrod engines won’t be disappearing entirely from GM’s truck line. A new ‘Gen V’ OHV V8 will replace the current 320-hp / 340 lb-feet 5.3-liter V8. Apparently the final displacement hasn’t been determined yet, because it’s referred to as 5X.

The new 5X gasoline engine will feature spark ignition direct injection (SIDI), similar to a diesel's fuel injection setup but still using a spark plug to ignite the fuel instead of diesel's high compression ratio that causes the fuel air mixture to auto-ignite. SIDI places the fuel injector right inside the combustion chamber, so fuel can be directly mixed with air entering the chamber during the intake stroke instead of before it enters the chamber, like in a conventional multi-port fuel injected gas engine. This approach enables a leaner burn of the fuel at higher compression ratios than current gas engines, resulting in greater fuel economy, cleaner emissions, and more power.

Initial production of both engines is slated to start in 2011 with full production in 2012.

Of course, it's possible that because this information is still approximately three years out in time, plans detailed in this document for the full size truck powertrains could still change.

Contacted for comment, a GM spokesperson told PickupTruck.com that GM doesn't make statements about documents like this.

There was no phone number or names listed to contact the Future of the Union website for comment.

Page: [1]

I'll mod mine and it will have more displacement more hp & more TQ
then i shall kick 5.0 mustang + 6.4 challenger + ( 5.5 camaro :P ) ass

Corn Ethanol is such a farce, sugarcane is much better, like 7X better. One big problem is to process Ethanol, you waste more energy to make it, LOL/
-bobby

it better live up to the ls name plate i dont want anoter 80"s repeat

You get more power out of ethanol because it has a very high octane rating, so you can go crazy with compression and timing when using it.

You are right about energy content. Ethanol has about 2/3 as much energy per gallon than gasoline. An engine that gets 20 mpg on gas would get about 14 mpg on E85 if all other factors were the same.

If you are all worried about torque i bet gm will throw in a gear option in there
a high winding engine that makes torque up higher in the rpm range is very fun
its a step in the right directions if they do a 5.0 to compete with ford all the better
as LONG as they make it lighter

I still don't understand why people think the new engine will produce less torque. Isn't it just going to be a slightly downsized version of the current engine, plus VVT and DI? I'd be willing to bet the torque curve on the new engine will be very similar to the LS3 (who knows, with the variable valve timing, low-end torque may actually improve), and that given the lighter chassis, the 6th gens will be relatively faster than the current car at any given RPM.

It is kind of funny that so many are coming out to say what is wrong with the 2015 Camaro 4 years before it is launched. The engineers at GM don't even know what will be "wrong with it" yet.:laugh:

sounds like a plan.. and its a good lookin number.. would be a kool badge haha. 5.5 NIIIIIIICE

"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races." - Carroll Shelby

TQ is what you want for racing. It's want pulls you out of the corners and is what gets you moving.

Sounds like the 6.4L motor and cosmetic changes are only going to make your Challenger heavier...which is too bad because its already a fat slob. But yes they do look good on the outside, but they need that inside less rent-a-charger like.

Thankfully GM's design team tackles problems by lightening our car with a smaller 5.5 (or 5.7L) motor, yes upping the HP, lightens the new chassis, and will make an even better Camaro than what is already awesome.
Can Dodge not up the HP without upping the displacement?

I'd rather see a 7.0 LS7, a 6.2 LSA, or a 6.2 LS9
 

I would not want a 5.7 instead of a 6.2. :thumbdown: Who would ?

I'd rather see a 7.0 LS7, a 6.2 LSA, or a 6.2 LS9. :thumbup:

You can always get more out of a bigger engine. Scew smaller motors.
I didn't buy my camaro for gas milage. I bought it for pleasure !

I think so.

Ya know..whatever.

The Challenger isnt going to be gaining any real weight, if any. Its going to have more HP and TQ than the other two (except the GT500) and will have a performance edge on the LS3 Camaro's.

Done.

So, can you clarify, you're saying the 2011 R/T Challenger will have a performance edge on the 2010 LS3's?, because that would be the real apples to apples comparison right? Shouldn't the SRT-8 challenger be reserved for our top of the line camaro - the Z28?

But if instead you are trying to say your top of the line 2011 challenger will be better than a 2010 camaro ss, well...it almost should shouldnt it? It would be sad if a 6.4 L 475hp blah blah blah challenger failed against a Camaro that debuted when the challenger was a 6.1L...

No..I'm saying the SRT's will.

The R/T's arent getting touched. And the Z-28 doesnt even exist, so its compared to the SS because that is the top of the line.

I've read this in a magazine and I believe it myself and it said theres no replacement for displacement.