Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro forum, news, rumors, discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-20-2013, 01:07 PM   #51
Mikes SS

 
Mikes SS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 CGM 2SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 945
I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?
Mikes SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 01:58 PM   #52
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by baby02 View Post
AFM on the 2014 stringray with have the option of turning on or off by the owner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikes SS View Post
I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?
Might be getting close to what you mention, if it's true about the 2014 Stingray having that option...No idea how it's actually done, or what mileage gains there would be, but sounds like a good idea...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 02:45 PM   #53
Ken_
Tally Ho!
 
Ken_'s Avatar
 
Drives: 13 2SS/RS 6M, 05 Mitsubishi Evo 8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: KU
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikes SS View Post
I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?
May as well just join the group that hopes for an I-4 turbo Camaro. Not knocking it because I also drive a I-4 turbo car- the EVO VIII, and that thing is a rocket on rails, and I do firmly believe that an I-4 turbo-powered Camaro will be actually more fun that most think. Everybody keeps thinking of an engine from the 3rd Gen Camaro called the Iron Duke (2.4 liter?) and that's what this newer gen I-4 turbo Camaro would end up being like.

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?
__________________
2013 2SS/RS-package Black w/IOM interior 6M
Bone Stock
Ken_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 03:02 PM   #54
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_ View Post
Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?
Not much would be good, other than having the option of being in either one...

...Like it or not, it seems AFM is here to stay...and if it is, and can be capable of significantly better mileage, it might help keep around the availablility of V-8's that don't have AFM...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 03:08 PM   #55
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,345
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_ View Post
May as well just join the group that hopes for an I-4 turbo Camaro. Not knocking it because I also drive a I-4 turbo car- the EVO VIII, and that thing is a rocket on rails, and I do firmly believe that an I-4 turbo-powered Camaro will be actually more fun that most think. Everybody keeps thinking of an engine from the 3rd Gen Camaro called the Iron Duke (2.4 liter?) and that's what this newer gen I-4 turbo Camaro would end up being like.

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?
Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 03:21 PM   #56
steveo9043

 
steveo9043's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th AE 2SS Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
...Good stuff....Yeah, I've never driven a car with AFM....(Doesn't seem to be very popular on these forums with the Camaros)....perhaps its not really a "performance" killer in the big scheme of things...

...But...my gosh...when I shopped for my '11, the L99s with AFM were rated at "1" mpg hwy mileage greater than the manual trans cars..."ONE!"...I could see AFM being the greatest thing since a pocket in a shirt if the mileage gains were vastly greater than those without AFM...

Just seems like a ton of technology and what-not for very little gain in mpg...on top of what is perceived as driving a "performance" car on four cylinders...dunno...
I know back in the day, manual trans cars would get better mileage with the same motor. So maybe an Automatic LS3 would get 2-3 mpg less then a manual LS3 so the increase of 1 mpg over the ls3 manual may be 3-4mpg ls3 auto vs l99 auto... Make sense?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Might be getting close to what you mention, if it's true about the 2014 Stingray having that option...No idea how it's actually done, or what mileage gains there would be, but sounds like a good idea...
Now I understood the LT1 dod/afm on/off was turning on/off the ability for it to go into 4 cylinder mode.

example:
dod off (always V8)
dod on (just like L99 cars, the ability to go into 4 cylinder mode)
steveo9043 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 03:39 PM   #57
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo9043 View Post
I know back in the day, manual trans cars would get better mileage with the same motor. So maybe an Automatic LS3 would get 2-3 mpg less then a manual LS3 so the increase of 1 mpg over the ls3 manual may be 3-4mpg ls3 auto vs l99 auto... Make sense?

I agree with you that manuals have traditionally gotten better mileage than autos...and you are probably correct that the AFM enables the autos to keep close, or better...but 1mpg for highway mileage rating better with the automatic than the manual....seems like it should be much higher than that...


Now I understood the LT1 dod/afm on/off was turning on/off the ability for it to go into 4 cylinder mode.

example:
dod off (always V8)
dod on (just like L99 cars, the ability to go into 4 cylinder mode)
....Good info....then if AFM is also used on manuals, their mpg should be significantly greater than the automatics again, as you state above...

EDIT...screwed up the quote thing...lol...replied to the first part in your quote...sorry...lol
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 03:50 PM   #58
Mikes SS

 
Mikes SS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 CGM 2SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizard1183 View Post
Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?

This^^ plus its not about wanting a 4cyl camaro. I never want that as an option. Its about being able to have the option and ensuring that we can always have a V8 in our cars 10 years from now with crap like CAFE inhibiting our enthusiast crowd. The better the gas mileage a V8 camaro can get, means the more V8's they can sell across the fleet which keeps that rumble in my car!
Mikes SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:27 PM   #59
Ken_
Tally Ho!
 
Ken_'s Avatar
 
Drives: 13 2SS/RS 6M, 05 Mitsubishi Evo 8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: KU
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Not much would be good, other than having the option of being in either one...

...Like it or not, it seems AFM is here to stay...and if it is, and can be capable of significantly better mileage, it might help keep around the availablility of V-8's that don't have AFM...
I'm all about fuel management. I just didn't want an automatic as an option when I bought my SS. My AFM is me not putting my foot in it every time I am on the road. In actuality, I am probably more gingerly with my SS than I am with my EVO. Reason being, I like the cruise effect and to hear and feel the rumble that only a V-8 can give me.
__________________
2013 2SS/RS-package Black w/IOM interior 6M
Bone Stock
Ken_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:30 PM   #60
Ken_
Tally Ho!
 
Ken_'s Avatar
 
Drives: 13 2SS/RS 6M, 05 Mitsubishi Evo 8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: KU
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizard1183 View Post
Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?
I didn't say that it was bad. It's just all personal preference. I don't think the majority of us have our foot all in the floor whenever we take out our Camaros. We all know a foot in the floor will end up with more fuel demanded to keep up with the foot
__________________
2013 2SS/RS-package Black w/IOM interior 6M
Bone Stock
Ken_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:31 PM   #61
Ken_
Tally Ho!
 
Ken_'s Avatar
 
Drives: 13 2SS/RS 6M, 05 Mitsubishi Evo 8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: KU
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikes SS View Post
The better the gas mileage a V8 camaro can get, means the more V8's they can sell across the fleet which keeps that rumble in my car!
I think we all want better gas mileage, regardless of AFM. If they are doing it to appease the US Govt, then so be it.
__________________
2013 2SS/RS-package Black w/IOM interior 6M
Bone Stock
Ken_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:39 PM   #62
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,345
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_ View Post
I didn't say that it was bad. It's just all personal preference. I don't think the majority of us have our foot all in the floor whenever we take out our Camaros. We all know a foot in the floor will end up with more fuel demanded to keep up with the foot
I don't think preference has anything to do with it. Everyone who owns a V-8 would love to to take a trip on vacation in their cars on 4cyl and then when they get to their destinations, turn on all 8. Or if its your DD on wkends, it's an 8cyl. During the week it's a 4. It's not like it'd replace the 4 or 6cyl because you're deactivating cylinders. Lol. That's preference. By choosing to save gas ALL the time.
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:40 PM   #63
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Not much would be good, other than having the option of being in either one...

...Like it or not, it seems AFM is here to stay...and if it is, and can be capable of significantly better mileage, it might help keep around the availablility of V-8's that don't have AFM...
I agree that AFM/DOD is here to stay on larger displacement engines, and I think it will get better over time. However, I think GM will probably introduce some 5.0-5.7 L engines that don't have AFM/DOD at some point. If the power is there, a lot of people will opt for those instead of the larger displacement versions just to get away from AFM/DOD. Just my opinion.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:41 PM   #64
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken_ View Post
I think we all want better gas mileage, regardless of AFM. If they are doing it to appease the US Govt, then so be it.
I'd say if the LT1 is the Gen6 SS V-8 engine, then definitely an up-grade with more hp and torq...

....If it has AFM on all models, but we have the ability to drive without it, as an "option" of our choice, then that also is a good up-grade...

....If AFM adds better mileage to the V-8s, manual or auto...another good "option" if you "choose" to drive in that mode....
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 05:04 PM   #65
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I agree that AFM/DOD is here to stay on larger displacement engines, and I think it will get better over time. However, I think GM will probably introduce some 5.0-5.7 L engines that don't have AFM/DOD at some point. If the power is there, a lot of people will opt for those instead of the larger displacement versions just to get away from AFM/DOD. Just my opinion.
Could very well be....It seems the AFM engines are somewhat limited, or more problematic when it comes to aftermarket super-charging or turbo-charging with the different valve/rockers, whatever compared to the LS3...(Nothing but love for L99ers...lol...just from what I've seen around here...LS3 "conversions" prior to forced induction)...

Perhaps the 5.0-5.7 engine (LT-4??) may fill that void and satisfy more aftermarket applications...A second V-8 engine option of any kind would be totally awesome, imo...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 02:30 PM   #66
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: CARS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 479
The fact that GM introduced the Gen V LT1 at 6.2L would likely mean they won't be offering a lower displacement performance V8’s, this generation.

There wouldn't be a business case to develop a smaller displacement performance V8 purely to circumvent their AFM/DOD technology.

Lots of speculation as to what the higher performance variations of the LT1 will be but it's not likely to be any less displacement than the 6.2L.

GM is in the business of building cars and trucks for profit. Not in the business of supplying street cars with engines capable of big aftermarket HP. Despite what we enthusiasts want.
KarFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 03:28 PM   #67
Mikes SS

 
Mikes SS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 CGM 2SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 945
I agreee but disagree also. If they produce a car that takes kindly to after market enhancing, one might be more apt to purchase it over another less modifyable car.

Last edited by Mikes SS; 02-27-2013 at 03:49 PM.
Mikes SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 03:36 PM   #68
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarFan View Post
The fact that GM introduced the Gen V LT1 at 6.2L would likely mean they won't be offering a lower displacement performance V8’s, this generation.

There wouldn't be a business case to develop a smaller displacement performance V8 purely to circumvent their AFM/DOD technology.

Lots of speculation as to what the higher performance variations of the LT1 will be but it's not likely to be any less displacement than the 6.2L.

GM is in the business of building cars and trucks for profit. Not in the business of supplying street cars with engines capable of big aftermarket HP. Despite what we enthusiasts want.
Here's a list of the Gen 4 engines and displacements. Are you seriously suggesting the will go from a range of 4.3L to 7.0 L in the Gen 4 to a 6.2 - 6.2+ displacement in Gen 5?

LS2 - 6.0
L76 - 6.0
L98 - 6.0
L77 - 6.0
Vortec 4800 - 4.8
Vortec 5300 - 5.3
Vortec 6000 - 6.0
LS4 - 5.3
LS7 - 7.0
L92 - 6.2
LS3 - 6.2
L99 - 6.2
LS9 - 6.2 SC
LSA - 6.2 SC
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:11 PM   #69
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: CARS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 479
The key word I used is Performance. There have been and will be many different displacement V8's for many applications in GM (cars and trucks)

However for NA performance applications, Camaro, Corvette and now SS I'm saying that it wouldn't seem likely that GM would develop another V8 of lower displacement for use in these vehicles.
KarFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:20 PM   #70
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarFan View Post
The key word I used is Performance. There have been and will be many different displacement V8's for many applications in GM (cars and trucks)

However for NA performance applications, Camaro, Corvette and now SS I'm saying that it wouldn't seem likely that GM would develop another V8 of lower displacement for use in these vehicles.
I found it interesting that Dodge offers 2 different Hemi's for the Challenger...Don't know why GM would need to "develop" a new engine, instead of offering say the LT1...(450 hp, with AFM) as well as the LS3 (426 hp, without AFM)...just sayin'...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:20 PM   #71
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarFan View Post
The key word I used is Performance. There have been and will be many different displacement V8's for many applications in GM (cars and trucks)

However for NA performance applications, Camaro, Corvette and now SS I'm saying that it wouldn't seem likely that GM would develop another V8 of lower displacement for use in these vehicles.
But the LS2 and LS4 were performance engines. The LS4 5.3L came after the LS2 6.0L. Take the LS4, which had DOD, and give it DI/VVT and you may be able to get more HP and greater MPG without having to use DOD/AFM. Those same people buying GXPs, Impala SSs and Monte Carlos SSs back in the mid 2000s would probably buy something with those characteristics again.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:42 PM   #72
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: CARS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
I found it interesting that Dodge offers 2 different Hemi's for the Challenger...Don't know why GM would need to "develop" a new engine, instead of offering say the LT1...(450 hp, with AFM) as well as the LS3 (426 hp, without AFM)...just sayin'...
And as we have seen with the introduction of the 2014 LS3 powered Chevy SS. This may very well be the case for some time to come.

But again the bottom line is GM Powertrain spent years and many millions of dollars developing the Gen V V8 with DI, AFM and DOD for performance cars like the C7.
KarFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:44 PM   #73
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,333
...I must have missed it somewhere...(senior moment, perhaps)...what's DOD?...lol
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:48 PM   #74
Mikes SS

 
Mikes SS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 CGM 2SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 945
Well don't forget the trucks...all that money they spent went into a ton of different setups, it only makes sense that they would have a lower displacement HP motor because that would be like putting an LS7 into caddys, trucks, and even the SS and Camaro..the LT1 was "specifically" designed for the corvette but the need for HP and MPG's is needed in many other applications.
Mikes SS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 07:19 PM   #75
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
...I must have missed it somewhere...(senior moment, perhaps)...what's DOD?...lol
Displacement on Demand. The precursor to AFM.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
 
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 03:46 PM.


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