Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3
Sorta agree. I thought this thread was an argument between whether a turbo-4 or N/A V6 would be the better base engine. For the record, most of my comments here have more or less been based on a dislike of turbos, and concern that a turbo-4 would net less performance for more cost than a N/A V6.
When did this shift to an argument that the Camaro shouldn't have any base engine at all? I agree it needs the base engine to make the car high enough volume to be affordable (and clearly, that base engine needs to be a V6  ). |
But are they really looking at performance cost in the next gen when you get to the Turbo? I mean if we have a v6 putting out 340 and a v8 putting out 350 with a small price difference between the 6 and the 4 gm could just be pushing the 4 to balance out the line. I mean if the 4 can get 40 highway on a stock tune with the v6 pulling 33 (highest I have achieved with stock tune and no mods) again and the 8 pulling 26(again highest I have seen) then it would make sense. 40+33+28= 101 average that and the it would be around 34 instead of the current 28.
