[Number 3]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

As long a the turbo-4 is in addition to, and not replacing or affecting the V6 price point, I'm fine with it being offered for those who really want to go that route. However, my concern, which has yet to be answered by anyone, is if that is possible. A turbo-4 would be at least as or somewhat more expensive than the V6. So, if it is introduced as a base model, either GM will have to "subsidize" it, or it will push up the price point of the entire lineup. Which is it? Or would it be offered as an extra-cost option, not a base model?




Believe me, I get the European angle, where as I understand, cars are often taxed heavily based on engine displacement, meaning a turbo-4 is actually significantly cheaper to purchase, unlike in the US. I understand the desire appeal to and sell to Europe, but they are walking a fine line....it still has to have (more) appeal in the US to succeed as well.

On further thought, the real place they may need to appeal to is China, India, or similar if they need a world car. (What buyers want, and what the regulations are there, I don't have a clue.) The European car market is in the tank and in decline. Shouldn't the global focus be concentrated on growing markets, not declining ones?

China taxes on displacement as well. Big time.

Originally Posted by 90503

Was saving it, but now's as good a time as any...Please don't kill "the goose that laid the Golden Egg"...lol...

The golden egg will wither unless it meets/enables CAFE standards and maintains the ability to sell in a world of every increasing fuel costs.

Originally Posted by MikeT

Well, in the ATS, the turbo-4 is slotted below the V6 (the very same V6 that's in the current base-model Camaro). Not sure how they could turn around and market the turbo-4 as a premium upgrade in the Camaro... unless they bump up its hp to something like 350+. Assuming that they don't do that, yeah, I have to agree that it'll likely push up the cost of the entire lineup.

It probably won't be. But in the ATS, the 2.0T is a premium upgrade over the 2.5L NA 4 cyclinder.

Originally Posted by 90503

Don't know if you guys saw it, but the "CEO orders 15% diet" thread in this forum, one of the first things out of the gate..."Engineers say eliminating the V-6 for the 4cyl would save 200lbs..."...or something to that effect....(Just FYI, thought it might be relevant)...

Mass reduction enables improved drivability and city FE improvments.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Hard to believe that. Take for instance the ATS weights:

2.5L RWD / Auto – (3315/ 1503)
2.0 Turbo RWD / Auto – (3373/ 1530)
2.0 Turbo RWD / Man – (3403/ 1543)
2.0 Turbo AWD / Auto – (3543 / 1607)
3.6L RWD / Auto – (3461/ 1570)
3.6L AWD / Auto – (3629/ 1646)


Thats less than 100 lbs difference between the rwd turbo and rwd V6. Sounds about right, b/c I find it hard to believe there is a 200 difference between the 3.6 V6 and the 2.0 turbo. Maybe if they compare the turbo to the new 4.3 V6...maybe??

You can't say that the extra lbs is removed from the chasis either, b/c GM would be dumb to use a weaker chasis to support the turbo 4, when the torque it produces isn't much less.

Edit: just read that part of the article. He was comparing V6 to I4. not a turbo 4.

Yep, Turbo alone weighs 20 pounds, plus intercooler, plus coolant. Adds up to the extra 100 pounds.

Originally Posted by The_Blur

I see that you're an owner of a classic Chevelle. That's an awesome car. Certainly, a 4-banger of any car is not a likely vehicle for your garage. The car I'm suggesting is not for you or me. It's for the guy who wants a stylish vehicle, but doesn't care about performance the same way that you and I do.

Look at the price of a BRZ. It's already in the Camaro price range for significantly worse performance.

No one has confirmed the Code 130R as a production vehicle. It's a design concept. There is no redundancy.

I struggle to call any car with over 100k sales a niche. The Camaro is a mainstream production car with an opportunity to increase sales. Let's get some!

The Camaro was previously killed due to poor sales. It stuck to a formula for too long without any changes to keep up with the market. Let's avoid that this time.

Finally, the new cars coming out of GM have top marks in reliability. I don't need to hear that import supremacy garbage anymore. GM vehicles are superior in almost every category to similar imports.

Camaro won't increase sales unless it can compete with a wider segment. It would need to be an all aroun car as well which would take a lot of Camaro out of it. That is a very tough balance.