Homepage Garage Wiki Register Members List Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-08-2013, 08:40 AM   #43
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: 16 SS Camaro, 06 Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 12,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Just an observation....seems like whenever a discussion over this I-4 in a Camaro comes up, it's praises as a respectable performance motor are only made after elaborate modifications have been added....Sure, you can probably mod the heck out of something for greater numbers, but in stock form, as it will probably be made, won't even be close to those...sort of defeats the affordable, entry-level argument...
I guess it depends on the person's views of "respectable performance".

Even at stock numbers with 260 - 280HP/TQ, in a 3,3xx lb car would likely be a low 6 second 0 - 60, and mid 14 second 1/4 mile car. I think thats respectable for a base 4-cylinder car. If they decide to bump the numbers into the 300s, well then it will likely be as fast or faster than todays V6.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!)
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 08:57 AM   #44
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,683
Subaru's Legacy 2.5 GT (3400-ish, 260-ish) is a high 13 second car (and low 5's to 60 mph). At anything above about 2000 rpm where the boost has started to come in, you'd never guess it was "only a 4" by the seat of the pants feel.

Chevy could do far worse than target that range of performance for an I4 Camaro (and as an I4 it would have a far more pleasant exhaust note than Subaru's H4).


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 09:04 AM   #45
Goo

 
Goo's Avatar
 
Drives: Cayman S
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Silverdale, WA
Posts: 825
You guys do realize it wouldn't be the first time Camaro had 4 cylinders?...
Goo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 09:20 AM   #46
MikeSVX
The magic smoke genie....
 
MikeSVX's Avatar
 
Drives: Jewels (2010 RJT 1SS)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 2,294
Ask the guys that were buying 4 cylinder Mustangs in the 80's. Cheap, cheap, cheap. Insurance and fuel......
MikeSVX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 09:35 AM   #47
mikeyg36


 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533, 2016 2SS
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Garden City, NY/Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue10CamaroSS View Post
Of course not. It's just simply any other color Camaro that got old and needs AARP
__________________
“Driving a muscle car fast isn't that fun, it's driving one slowly and making a ton of noise and pissing people off, that's what’s fun.” –Matt Farah
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 11:41 AM   #48
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibroni View Post
That's a ridiculous statement. Here's a no cylinder car that blows the doors off your Camaro:
I get that a lot of you guys like low displacement turbo green cars, but why do you need to attack a guy who says he would only buy the V8? That's what he likes. A lot of us like it. If no one wanted to buy a V8 version of this car we wouldn't need anything but a Malibu. Showing a $150,000 electric super car means nothing. Might as well show a Bugatti.
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 11:54 AM   #49
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Hey, here's an idea. Why not make a small turbo 4 banger like a Cobalt SS with one of their econo cars? Because if they turn the Camaro into a Cobalt or worse a Leaf then I will be in the market for a Mustang, Challenger or whoever is still making muscle cars. There are probably others who think like me. Not knocking your choice however, drive a lawn mower if you want, or a Kia hamster mobile. I like big displacement NA V8. Sue me.
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 11:55 AM   #50
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 11,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
I get that a lot of you guys like low displacement turbo green cars, but why do you need to attack a guy who says he would only buy the V8? That's what he likes. A lot of us like it. If no one wanted to buy a V8 version of this car we wouldn't need anything but a Malibu. Showing a $150,000 electric super car means nothing. Might as well show a Bugatti.
What I see, is if this small displacement I-4 engine is such a great thing, they are a dime a dozen in existing makes of smaller, lighter platforms...If someone is such a fan of these engines, I don't see why they "need" to be put into a Camaro...

...I disagree with the argument that these cars need a small engine for the V-8 to even be available, (as if the fours and sixes were doing us a favor)...I see it the other way around, the V-8 gives the car it's appeal, and the Camaro wouldn't have been built if it weren't for the V-8, not the other way around...

I saw the thread that showed the production numbers for the 2011-2012 Camaros...as I re-call, the V-6 was not a runaway majority, it was fairly even....
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 11:59 AM   #51
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
I can't imagine why anyone would want a 4 cylinder Camaro. I can see wanting a 4 cylinder in a car designed for a 4 cylinder engine, but I really don't see the point in bastardizing a car made for muscle.

A lot of posters seem to think everyone against the 4 cylinder Camaro are neanderthals. We're really pragmatists. We know what introducing a 4 cylinder means for V8 enthusiasts; watered-down performance and bullshit.

And yes, it's been done before. It wasn't good.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 12:33 PM   #52
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
For every person who thinks chevy will make a WRX Sti, 3 more think it will be the Iron Duke.
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 12:54 PM   #53
lbls1


 
lbls1's Avatar
 
Drives: 2002 Camaro SS SOM; 2009 Malibu LT
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibroni View Post
That's a ridiculous statement. Here's a no cylinder car that blows the doors off your Camaro:
How is that a ridiculous statement?? Why would anyone care if a 4 cyl. car could outrun a camaro (such as a porsche.....they've been around for decades)?

Putting a 4 cyl. engine in a camaro variant that has historically been themed as a v8 performace car (such as an SS or a Z28) to me is ridiculous because it is a compromise on the heritage of the car. The performace camaro is more (believe it or not) than just sheer numbers. The v8 camaro represents a sound, feel, persona of camaros past and present that has been characterized by their v8 motors, and as such, that persona would have very slim or no odds of being equally replicated by a different engine configuration. Its my opinion, and to me it is not a ridiculous statement.

Your reply, however, leaves a lot to be desired.
__________________
'02 CAMARO SS SOM; 5.7L LS1/FLS6B
'08 TBSS AWD Black Granite Metallic
'09 Malibu LT Dark Gray Metallic

'14 CAMARO ZL1 Blue Ray Metallic
lbls1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 01:07 PM   #54
Cymaro
 
Cymaro's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro LT2/RS
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ames, IA
Posts: 240
This thread makes me want to start a "Why did you get a V6 Camaro?" thread
Cymaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 01:23 PM   #55
meissen
Founder - Michigan FBody
 
meissen's Avatar
 
Drives: 1994 Camaro LT1, 2014 Camaro 1LT
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Chesterfield Twp, MI
Posts: 2,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
I get that a lot of you guys like low displacement turbo green cars, but why do you need to attack a guy who says he would only buy the V8? That's what he likes. A lot of us like it. If no one wanted to buy a V8 version of this car we wouldn't need anything but a Malibu. Showing a $150,000 electric super car means nothing. Might as well show a Bugatti.
No one is attacking anyone for liking v8 cars... People are defending the idea of there being a variety of engines in the Camaro. No one said to get rid of v8s, no one said you couldn't buy your v8. People are trying to explain to the people on this forum who are close minded that if it weren't for the variety of engine packages that the business justification for a Camaro model at all would not be enough to support the production of the car alone. At the very least, you NEED a base model engine to sustain the justification of the car. With the 6th gen, alpha based, Camaro possibly having the much needed weight reduction it needs combined with the performance capabilities of the I4 that GM is making today, many of us are open to the idea of an I4 being one of the choices for engines. It makes no impact on someone who wants to buy an SS with a v8.


Simply put, if adding an I4 engine to the 6th gen lineup means they sell 100,000 cars instead of 90,000 cars (pulling easy numbers out my ass) then why not? It just means that we ALL have a better chance of seeing a 7th gen, 8th gen, 9th gen Camaro... a win-win for all of us. It simply will not affect anyone who only wants to buy the SS, Z28, ZL1, whatever model.

Another classic example - for all the hate people give on the v6s. How many people on this site bought a v6 and then upgraded to an SS? If they hadn't bought that v6 to fall even more in love with the Camaro, for all we know they could have gone with a Mustang or some other car entirely. Because they offered the v6 GM got two sales out of them...
__________________
2014 Camaro 1LT M6 - "Cherry Bomb" - Cold Air Inductions CAI, VMAX Ported Throttle Body, MGW Short Throw Shifter
1994 Camaro LT1 A4 - "Red Alert" - v6-to-LT1 Swapped Cruiser; Cammed, Stalled, Enjoyed


Last edited by meissen; 02-08-2013 at 01:36 PM.
meissen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 02:22 PM   #56
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
I can't imagine why I would ever want a 4 cylinder Camaro. I can see wanting a 4 cylinder in a car designed for a 4 cylinder engine, but I really don't see the point in bastardizing a car made for muscle.
Fixed that for you. The whole point is that you don't have to. Same as people who don't give a rat's ass about "muscle" or exhaust aren't forced to buy it in V8 trim.

Look around your neighborhood. On my block, there are exactly two V8 cars other than mine, and there might be a couple more cars in top-of-the-model-line performance trim other than my other 3. Most people really do just buy point A to point B transportation.


Quote:
A lot of posters seem to think everyone against the 4 cylinder Camaro are neanderthals. We're really pragmatists. We know what introducing a 4 cylinder means for V8 enthusiasts; watered-down performance.
It's an unfounded fear that 4-cylinder levels of performance will drag down the performance levels for V8 versions. A V8 version will still need to be competitive with V8 versions of the Mustang and Challenger/Cuda/whatever ChryCo decides to call it next.

I'd fear upcoming mpg standards far, FAR more than 4-cylinder powerplants as far as maintaining or further improving performance is concerned. Fighting against availability of a four is picking the wrong battle.


I know about Iron Dukes (and Chevy's 153 CID fours 10 or 15 tears before that). Neither of those adversely affected V8 development, and we're anywhere from 20 to 50 or so years removed from the state of tune that those engines were built to.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Tags
2015 camaro, 2015 camaro forum, 2015 camaro forums, 2015 chevrolet camaro, 2015 chevy camaro, 2016 camaro, 2016 camaro forum, 2016 camaro forums, 2016 chevrolet camaro, 2016 chevy camaro, 2017 camaro, 2017 chevy camaro, 6 gen camaro, 6th gen camaro, 6th gen camaro forum, 6th gen camaro forums, 6th gen camaro info, 6th gen camaro news, 6th gen camaro rumors, 6th gen chevrolet camaro, 6th gen chevy camaro, 6th gen chevy camaro forum, 6th generation camaro, 6th generation camaro info, 6th generation camaro news, 6th generation camaro rumors, 6th generation chevy camaro, camaro 6th gen, camaro 6th generation

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.