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 03-20-2013, 01:26 PM   #57
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 3,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by NASTY99Z28 View Post
Yes but that's the only v8 they offer as where this would be the base v8 option sorta like the 305 of the 3rd gens and the 6.2 would be the 350 and make a lot more power then the 5.0.(atleast for now) I think a 1ss with a 5.3 and more mpg friendly gears at a lower cost would help sales and then allow the 2ss to be offered with the big boy 6.2 at a higher cost and better gearing.
We both know that's not the way it will go down. It's not like a 5.3L displacement engine will be cheaper to produce than the 6.2. If both are offered, a 5.3L V8 won't cost less than the current 1SS, it will be the same. You want a 6.2L, you'll have to pay thousands more in the first year of the 6th-gen than in the last year of the 5th gen if they go the 2 different displacements route.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2013, 08:49 PM   #58
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAP'N B View Post
The pushrod is a weak link, the lifters are a weak link and the valve train instability probably cause more total engine failures than probably any other failure. The OHC engine lends itself to better valve train stability and higher performance, higher revving engines.
How many RPMs does your Avatar guy's weekend pushrod car turn all afternoon long at wide open throttle?
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2013, 10:02 PM   #59
OldScoolCamaro


 
Drives: Camaro's, always have, always will.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Home of the brave
Posts: 4,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
How many RPMs does your Avatar guy's weekend pushrod car turn all afternoon long at wide open throttle?
....seriously, what are you saying? Look, take a stand, be factual, hold an opinion, but please stop seemingly taking the position of an antagonist with the overt intent to elicit controversial responses for ones own enjoyment. Sorry, ....
__________________
In Scott We Trust...all others must show proof.
OldScoolCamaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2013, 07:51 AM   #60
Agent orange
socal ht5
 
Agent orange's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro ss
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Valley village CA
Posts: 469
Probably its gonna be the same format. The ss will be the same engine as the base stingray engine.
__________________
Agent orange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2013, 01:57 AM   #61
WHAMMO

 
WHAMMO's Avatar
 
Drives: 13' 1LE
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOWDOWN View Post
Something to keep in mind when comparing Coyotes to other critters is the physical size of Ford's OHC V8s...much larger in width and height than the SBC. Weighs more, too.

So now you run into packaging issues. More boiler room required. Cowl height and frontal area issues. And don't forget a Lincoln 4-dr is supposed to share the next-Gen Stang chassis, too. If so, Lincoln will have input as to body-chassis structure and specs, just as Cadillac has with the Alpha derivatives.

There's an opportunity for GM to create a Gen-6 Camaro that, for once in a long-long time, is the same size or even smaller/lighter than the next-Gen Stang...and the physical size of the SBC plays a part in that overall physicality.
The Coyote weights 430 and the LS3 418lbs. I'm wondering what is the weight of the LT1..

I know the LS3 is smaller in size, but Ford did pretty well because the 5.0 didnt gain any size over the 4.6, if I'm not mistaken. Maybe its even more compact than the 4.6l.
__________________
4th Gen SS/LS2 SB/LS3 heads/N20
WHAMMO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2013, 07:21 AM   #62
NASTY99Z28

 
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
We both know that's not the way it will go down. It's not like a 5.3L displacement engine will be cheaper to produce than the 6.2. If both are offered, a 5.3L V8 won't cost less than the current 1SS, it will be the same. You want a 6.2L, you'll have to pay thousands more in the first year of the 6th-gen than in the last year of the 5th gen if they go the 2 different displacements route.
Never said the 5.3 would be cheaper to build. They could offer it at a lower power level day around 385hp since its going to be in a lighter chassis and then they could charge extra for the 6.2. It will probably never happen but it would be cool to have a budget v8 option.
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
NASTY99Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 12:52 AM   #63
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 3,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by NASTY99Z28 View Post
Never said the 5.3 would be cheaper to build. They could offer it at a lower power level day around 385hp since its going to be in a lighter chassis and then they could charge extra for the 6.2. It will probably never happen but it would be cool to have a budget v8 option.
Exactly.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 04:41 AM   #64
NASTY99Z28

 
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
Exactly.
After thinking about it I take back what I said about the 5.3 not being cheaper to produce. Since it's used more across the GM line up it should cost less overall for GM to build it compared to the 6.2 since its a "premium" engine and they make less of them. Yes I know a lot of the parts are the same but there enough parts that aren't that would allow for cheaper build cost based on the volume of each engine size. Once again I doubt it would happen but I would like to see two different v8 options simply because I think its cool and it allows each buyer to have a choice which is something we haven't had since 92.
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
NASTY99Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 11:00 AM   #65
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
They are putting a 6.2 liter V8 in the New SS sedan, they put 6.2 liters in the Stingray, why would they put a smaller displacement engine in the best selling pony car in the land?

So the Camaro SS can get beat by the GT? Again? Put that DI 6.2 in that baby and there is your mpg savings AND your grunt. How do you even argue that the 5.3 liter is better than 6.2 if they are both DI with cylinder deactivation?
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2013, 11:29 AM   #66
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Although I must admit AFM seems like it sucks from all accounts on camaro5 and every other Camaro site I have seen...
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2013, 02:59 AM   #67
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 3,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by NASTY99Z28 View Post
After thinking about it I take back what I said about the 5.3 not being cheaper to produce. Since it's used more across the GM line up it should cost less overall for GM to build it compared to the 6.2 since its a "premium" engine and they make less of them. Yes I know a lot of the parts are the same but there enough parts that aren't that would allow for cheaper build cost based on the volume of each engine size.

The logic could work both ways. Any savings based on the volume of the 5.3L displacement could be offset by differences between the truck engines and car engines. The 5.3L is the volume truck engine, but the volume advantage of the 5.3L displacement may be offset by the volume disadvantage of having a unique version of the 5.3L just for the Camaro. It depends on exactly what is interchangeable.

Ultimately, whatever cost differences there may be between the various displacements and applications of the small blocks is probably fairly small, certainly not anywhere near enough to affect price to the point that another trim can be separated out. So even if a 5.3L SS was offered (and it probably won't be), it will likely be priced where the current 1SS is, not below it. Sure, the 6.2L comes with a price premium in the trucks, but not because it costs GM that much more. It's mostly just marketing (attaching the larger engine to premium trims). The standard models pay for themselves and get people in the door, but the options are where the real money is made.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2013, 03:42 AM   #68
NASTY99Z28

 
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
They are putting a 6.2 liter V8 in the New SS sedan, they put 6.2 liters in the Stingray, why would they put a smaller displacement engine in the best selling pony car in the land?

So the Camaro SS can get beat by the GT? Again? Put that DI 6.2 in that baby and there is your mpg savings AND your grunt. How do you even argue that the 5.3 liter is better than 6.2 if they are both DI with cylinder deactivation?
Never said a 5.3 is better then a 6.2 just liked the idea of multiple v8's. A 5.3 is a great engine and I'm sure it's going to be even better now with di so don't act like it can't be a strong setup when paired up with a lighter 6th gen camaro. A lot of people want a v8 but don't need or want the baddest setup which is why every v8 camaro sold isn't a zl1.
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
NASTY99Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2013, 03:45 AM   #69
NASTY99Z28

 
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
The logic could work both ways. Any savings based on the volume of the 5.3L displacement could be offset by differences between the truck engines and car engines. The 5.3L is the volume truck engine, but the volume advantage of the 5.3L displacement may be offset by the volume disadvantage of having a unique version of the 5.3L just for the Camaro. It depends on exactly what is interchangeable.

Ultimately, whatever cost differences there may be between the various displacements and applications of the small blocks is probably fairly small, certainly not anywhere near enough to affect price to the point that another trim can be separated out. So even if a 5.3L SS was offered (and it probably won't be), it will likely be priced where the current 1SS is, not below it. Sure, the 6.2L comes with a price premium in the trucks, but not because it costs GM that much more. It's mostly just marketing (attaching the larger engine to premium trims). The standard models pay for themselves and get people in the door, but the options are where the real money is made.
Agreed but a man can still dream......
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
NASTY99Z28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:05 AM   #70
Mikes SS

 
Mikes SS's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 CGM 2SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 1,030
Its also the point that that the 5.3L DI will get better gas milieage than the 6.2L...if we all want to keep our V8's in the future, I am all about having an option for a smaller standard V8 to help the company with CAFE ratings, and yes as we say we will pay to play, if you want the bigger engine you will pay for it.
Mikes SS 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 09:55 PM.


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