CAMARO6

CAMARO6 (http://www.camaro6.com/forums/index.php)
-   2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro forum, news, rumors, discussions (http://www.camaro6.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=155)
-   -   Could the 6th Gen get the Caddy 3.6L Twin Turbo V6? (http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=293028)

Macky 05-02-2013 03:20 PM

Could the 6th Gen get the Caddy 3.6L Twin Turbo V6?
 
I was reading my new Motor Trend and saw that Cadillac has the new GM twin turbo 3.6L V6 available in some of their 2014 models. It is rated at an SAE-certified 420 horsepower (313 kW) and 430 lb.-ft. of torque (583 Nm). It is the most powerful V-6 ever from General Motors.

Could this be a good candidate for the 6th Gen Camaro?:popcorn:

oklapike 05-02-2013 05:20 PM

Here's my thoughts: No and Yes.

I'm really thinking that GM will keep the TT 3.6 exclusive to Cadillac (at least for the duration of the first ATS generation and third gen CTS), I wouldn't rule out a TT V6 in the 7th gen Camaro (assuming a 7th gen happens).

All that said, I wouldn't mind seeing a TT V6 Camaro to slot between the regular V6 and the V8 models. I think it would expand the Camaro market a great deal.

LIM3 05-02-2013 05:25 PM

Hope not lol

SC2150 05-02-2013 05:27 PM

It might, but thats only 420hp.....you can get a turbo or SC and have 500 plus right now. :thumbsup:

mikeyg36 05-02-2013 05:39 PM

Here's the thing, the LF3 (I think that's the name for it) returns MPG on par or less than the LT1 V8. They produce similar HP numbers as well with the V8 having the slight edge. The V8 is much less complex, which means it costs less, and it is more reliable. With that in mind, I don't see this engine touching the Camaro. Chevy HAS to offer this car with a V8, but they don't have to offer it with a TT V6, since part of their customer base looks for a SB V8. Personally, I think this engine was created to allow similar V8 hp numbers, yet have a more refined engine for the luxury market. A pushrod small block chevy is certainly not refined for a luxury market, so they made the LF3.

fielderLS3 05-02-2013 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyg36 (Post 6497327)
Here's the thing, the LF3 (I think that's the name for it) returns MPG on par or less than the LT1 V8. They produce similar HP numbers as well with the V8 having the slight edge. The V8 is much less complex, which means it costs less, and it is more reliable. With that in mind, I don't see this engine touching the Camaro.

Good reasons not to put it in the Camaro....just as good of reasons not to put it in the Cadillac as well, yet here we are. I don't get the refinement angle in the Cadillac. How is a 60 degree V6 smoother and more refined than a V8?

mikeyg36 05-02-2013 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6497448)
Good reasons not to put it in the Camaro....just as good of reasons not to put it in the Cadillac as well, yet here we are. I don't get the refinement angle in the Cadillac. How is a 60 degree V6 smoother and more refined than a V8?

A DOHC V6 is smoother than a pushrod anything. Sit in a V8 Camaro at idle, and then go sit in a Mercedes V6 at idle. There is a complete difference. The Camaro is louder, and it shakes due to the cam. Of course, if you buy a V8 Camaro, you like these things. If you're buying a cadillac, you won't like these things. Caddy is trying to be more European, and it can't do that with a small block.

Scooter11 05-02-2013 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyg36 (Post 6497483)
A DOHC V6 is smoother than a pushrod anything. Sit in a V8 Camaro at idle, and then go sit in a Mercedes V6 at idle. There is a complete difference. The Camaro is louder, and it shakes due to the cam. Of course, if you buy a V8 Camaro, you like these things. If you're buying a cadillac, you won't like these things. Caddy is trying to be more European, and it can't do that with a small block.

:word: Well put, totally agree!

markas214 05-02-2013 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyg36 (Post 6497483)
A DOHC V6 is smoother than a pushrod anything. Sit in a V8 Camaro at idle, and then go sit in a Mercedes V6 at idle. There is a complete difference. The Camaro is louder, and it shakes due to the cam. Of course, if you buy a V8 Camaro, you like these things. If you're buying a cadillac, you won't like these things. Caddy is trying to be more European, and it can't do that with a small block.

Sounds reasonable. The TT would likely be priced as the V8. If I wanted a 6 banger I'd have kept my SGM RS and worked with that insyead of dropping another 20 grand on my SS. For those of us who lived when 4 barrel V8 was common and dirt cheap I might add nothing compars to a crammed up 8 cylinder beast with a deep exhaust note.

KMPrenger 05-02-2013 09:35 PM

I don't think we will see it in the 6th gen either...at least not upon initial release. Maybe sometime down the line.

But it could be awesome. Simple tune and you've got 500HP/500TQ with a very broad TQ range.

fielderLS3 05-02-2013 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyg36 (Post 6497483)
A DOHC V6 is smoother than a pushrod anything. Sit in a V8 Camaro at idle, and then go sit in a Mercedes V6 at idle. There is a complete difference. The Camaro is louder, and it shakes due to the cam. Of course, if you buy a V8 Camaro, you like these things. If you're buying a cadillac, you won't like these things. Caddy is trying to be more European, and it can't do that with a small block.

I don't fully agree. A V6 is inherently rougher than a V8 all other things the same, pushrod or not. In a V6 luxury car, they just put more into things like engine mounts to insulate the rest of the car from the engine. The engine isn't necessarily smoother, the vibration just doesn't get transmitted as much. And the somewhat shakier idle of a higher performance engine has more to do with the cam profile, not the position of it on the engine. And besides, the LT1's VVT will probably mitigate a lot of the "shake" (to the extent it exists) the LS3 has at idle.

I've experienced a lot of reasonably smooth pushrod engines, while at the same time, there have been some notably rough, unrefined DOHC V6 designs. Either can be made very smooth and refined or not so depending on factors having nothing to do with where their cams are placed.

If GM feels it needs both a V8 and DOHC to be competitive in all its various segments, why not build a DOHC V8 like Toyota, Nissan, Ford, Hyundai, Mercedes, and Audi all do. Wouldn't one engine be more cost effective than 2? Don't get me wrong, I love GM's pushrod V8s (as they do have certain advantages over DOHC), but I am still just as happy overall with my DOHC one, too.

MikeT 05-03-2013 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6498748)
If GM feels it needs both a V8 and DOHC to be competitive in all its various segments, why not build a DOHC V8 like Toyota, Nissan, Ford, Hyundai, Mercedes, and Audi all do. Wouldn't one engine be more cost effective than 2? Don't get me wrong, I love GM's pushrod V8s (as they do have certain advantages over DOHC), but I am still just as happy overall with my DOHC one, too.

Well, GM did make DOHC V8s for many years (i.e., the Northstar line in Cadillacs, as well as a few Oldsmobiles & Buicks). For whatever reasons, the Northstar program was ditched.

Of course, one of the best DOHC V8s that GM ever sold was the one in the 1990ish Corvette ZR1. That engine was assembled by Mercury Marine rather than GM, though.

Bottom line... at this point in time in the GM world, it's a DOHC V6 or a pushrod V8. Take your pick.

With the push toward fuel economy, it wouldn't surprise me if GM never sold another DOHC V8. But who knows...

mikeyg36 05-03-2013 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6498748)
I don't fully agree. A V6 is inherently rougher than a V8 all other things the same, pushrod or not. In a V6 luxury car, they just put more into things like engine mounts to insulate the rest of the car from the engine. The engine isn't necessarily smoother, the vibration just doesn't get transmitted as much. And the somewhat shakier idle of a higher performance engine has more to do with the cam profile, not the position of it on the engine. And besides, the LT1's VVT will probably mitigate a lot of the "shake" (to the extent it exists) the LS3 has at idle.

I've experienced a lot of reasonably smooth pushrod engines, while at the same time, there have been some notably rough, unrefined DOHC V6 designs. Either can be made very smooth and refined or not so depending on factors having nothing to do with where their cams are placed.

If GM feels it needs both a V8 and DOHC to be competitive in all its various segments, why not build a DOHC V8 like Toyota, Nissan, Ford, Hyundai, Mercedes, and Audi all do. Wouldn't one engine be more cost effective than 2? Don't get me wrong, I love GM's pushrod V8s (as they do have certain advantages over DOHC), but I am still just as happy overall with my DOHC one, too.

They did. The Northstar V8 line was an OHC family of engines, but GM cut it in 2010. The point that I'm trying to get across is that if you want to get 400+ HP out of a small block, it won't be as smooth as a DOHC V6 with turbos. Plus, the snobby import drivers wouldn't want to drive around with pushrods under the hood. If you look at the CTS segment, you see that the top models are all powered by turbo 6 cylinders. Caddy followed the rest of the segment, and blew them away with an excellent engine.

GretchenGotGrowl 05-03-2013 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6498748)
A V6 is inherently rougher than a V8 all other things the same, pushrod or not. In a V6 luxury car, they just put more into things like engine mounts to insulate the rest of the car from the engine. The engine isn't necessarily smoother, the vibration just doesn't get transmitted as much.

Yes, it is inherently hard to balance a 60* V6 than a 90* V8. Luxury car companies just puts a lot of money into reducing the vibrations...money GM is just starting to invest. It will always be more expensive to get the V6 to run as smoothly as the V8, push-rod or not. With new technologies for block casting, piston/rod production, we are seeing some of that cost offset in other areas when there are fewer cylinders. I-6 engines, however, do balance very easily.

attymf 05-03-2013 08:02 AM

Irregardless of the pros and cons of a TTV6 or N/A V8, GM will put a V8 in the Camaro for the simple reason that Camaro owners would rather have a V8 than a 6. It's all about sales. I know 95% of the current V8 owners would rather see a V8. Hell, I'm on my 5th Camaro and I'd go buy a Ford or Dodge with a V8 before I buy a Chevy with a 6!!!

That's my 2 cents.

GretchenGotGrowl 05-03-2013 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by attymf (Post 6499715)
Irregardless of the pros and cons of a TTV6 or N/A V8, GM will put a V8 in the Camaro for the simple reason that Camaro owners would rather have a V8 than a 6. It's all about sales. I know 95% of the current V8 owners would rather see a V8. Hell, I'm on my 5th Camaro and I'd go buy a Ford or Dodge with a V8 before I buy a Chevy with a 6!!!

That's my 2 cents.

Well, some Camaro owners would rather have a V8.

Macky 05-03-2013 09:40 AM

Thanks for all of the responses!

I was thinking that this engine could find its way into the Camaro as part of a special package. Maybe it could be a Berlinetta?

Bhobbs 05-03-2013 10:07 AM

There is no benefit to putting the LF3 in the Camaro.

GretchenGotGrowl 05-03-2013 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bhobbs (Post 6500152)
There is no benefit to putting the LF3 in the Camaro.

In the global market there is a big benefit to using the LF3. Lower taxes in Europe.

Bodih 05-03-2013 10:37 AM

I believe Car and Driver also mentioned the TT V6 may end up in a new version of the Buick Grand National.
Wondering if that would be based on the Alpha platform as well?

oklapike 05-03-2013 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodih (Post 6500245)
I believe Car and Driver also mentioned the TT V6 may end up in a new version of the Buick Grand National.
Wondering if that would be based on the Alpha platform as well?

Based on a few rumors I've heard, I think GM is indeed considering an Alpha Buick or two. If it does happen, I'd bet on a Grand National sharing platform with the 6th gen and the ATS.

fielderLS3 05-03-2013 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeyg36 (Post 6499425)
Plus, the snobby import drivers wouldn't want to drive around with pushrods under the hood. If you look at the CTS segment, you see that the top models are all powered by turbo 6 cylinders. Caddy followed the rest of the segment, and blew them away with an excellent engine.

So in other words, it doesn't matter whether the Cadillac engine is better than the Chevy engine or not...what's important is whether it can be marketed with more expensive sounding words or not? Or put another way, luxury car buyers will pay more for not necessarily a better product, but rather for the privilege of paying more just so they can prove that they can pay more?:rolleyes:

I'm being facetious and joking around there, but I think there may be at least some small grain of truth in there somewhere. Reason I got a bit of a laugh out of this is Angus MacKenzie basically said the same thing in his editorial on the last page of MT last month (May 2013 issue for anyone who cares to look it up). Your comment immediately made me think of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl (Post 6500161)
In the global market there is a big benefit to using the LF3. Lower taxes in Europe.

That statement and the implications behind it was sad for me to read, mostly because I know it is accurate.

Have we really gotten to the point where European tax policy is dictating product engineering and availability here? After fighting a war way back when so we would no longer have to concern ourselves with which direction the European elite decided to fart on any given day, do we once again find ourselves in a position where that affects us? Have we been forced to cede pursing what we want, and instead accept only what an aristocracy an ocean away wants and allows us to have? That the answer may well be "yes" should make us all stop and think.

mikeyg36 05-03-2013 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6502334)
So in other words, it doesn't matter whether the Cadillac engine is better than the Chevy engine or not...what's important is whether it can be marketed with more expensive sounding words or not? Or put another way, luxury car buyers will pay more for not necessarily a better product, but rather for the privilege of paying more just so they can prove that they can pay more?:rolleyes:

I'm being facetious and joking around there, but I think there may be at least some small grain of truth in there somewhere. Reason I got a bit of a laugh out of this is Angus MacKenzie basically said the same thing in his editorial on the last page of MT last month (May 2013 issue for anyone who cares to look it up). Your comment immediately made me think of that.



That statement and the implications behind it was sad for me to read, mostly because I know it is accurate.

Have we really gotten to the point where European tax policy is dictating product engineering and availability here? After fighting a war way back when so we would no longer have to concern ourselves with which direction the European elite decided to fart on any given day, do we once again find ourselves in a position where that affects us? Have we been forced to cede pursing what, and instead accept only what an aristocracy an ocean away wants and allows us to have? That the answer may well be "yes" should make us all stop and think.

That's EXACTLY what I was going for :sm0: Angus is great. It is BS that the global market is affecting our market. I can understand why they would do it for economy cars, but keep it away from true American cars.

GretchenGotGrowl 05-03-2013 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3 (Post 6502334)
So in other words, it doesn't matter whether the Cadillac engine is better than the Chevy engine or not...what's important is whether it can be marketed with more expensive sounding words or not? Or put another way, luxury car buyers will pay more for not necessarily a better product, but rather for the privilege of paying more just so they can prove that they can pay more?:rolleyes:

I'm being facetious and joking around there, but I think there may be at least some small grain of truth in there somewhere. Reason I got a bit of a laugh out of this is Angus MacKenzie basically said the same thing in his editorial on the last page of MT last month (May 2013 issue for anyone who cares to look it up). Your comment immediately made me think of that.



That statement and the implications behind it was sad for me to read, mostly because I know it is accurate.

Have we really gotten to the point where European tax policy is dictating product engineering and availability here? After fighting a war way back when so we would no longer have to concern ourselves with which direction the European elite decided to fart on any given day, do we once again find ourselves in a position where that affects us? Have we been forced to cede pursing what, and instead accept only what an aristocracy an ocean away wants and allows us to have? That the answer may well be "yes" should make us all stop and think.

Nope.

Like many, I won't believe the LF3 will be in a US Camaro until GM announces it.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

DRKnightSS1 05-04-2013 11:18 AM

I personally don't think GM would ever do this. Main reason being that it would hurt their V8 sales and the HP/TQ numbers would be too close to the SS. Furthermore if someone was looking for that increase in HP why wouldn't they just look to the naturally aspirated V8 anyhow. No offense to the V6 owners but the Camaro is meant to be driven with power; V8 all the way baybay!

Sent using Tapatalk on my Note 2.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.