Homepage Garage Wiki Register 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


Bigwormgraphix


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-07-2013, 06:58 AM   #57
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
He's right though, look at the mileage numbers in the CTS vsport. It has very similar projected mileage to to the LT1. Therefore, the Vette engineers are correct, it wouldn't have any mileage advantages.
I haven't seen any mileage numbers for the LT1 in a CTS. You are comparing apples to oranges. The ONE guy talking about the vette didn't say what the mileage was for the two engines, but he implied they weren't much different. It could be the gearing they used was optimal for a NA LT1 and not the turbocharged V6. It makes a difference. There are just too many vehichles out there now where manufacturers have opted for the turbo 6 over the large V8 because they got better gas mileage to make this much of one oblique statement about one car without any real data provided.

Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:24 AM   #58
mikeyg36


 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 6,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I haven't seen any mileage numbers for the LT1 in a CTS. You are comparing apples to oranges. The ONE guy talking about the vette didn't say what the mileage was for the two engines, but he implied they weren't much different. It could be the gearing they used was optimal for a NA LT1 and not the turbocharged V6. It makes a difference. There are just too many vehichles out there now where manufacturers have opted for the turbo 6 over the large V8 because they got better gas mileage to make this much of one oblique statement about one car without any real data provided.

Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
If it produced similar mileage in a lighter car, what makes you think it would be different in a slightly heavier one? The gearing insn't going to be that different between a Vette and a Camaro either, so that argument is invalid.
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:08 AM   #59
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
If it produced similar mileage in a lighter car, what makes you think it would be different in a slightly heavier one? The gearing insn't going to be that different between a Vette and a Camaro either, so that argument is invalid.
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:10 AM   #60
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: 2023 SGM Camaro 2SS 1LE 6M
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 575
The V8 is going to get more premium priced as the Camaro goes through Gen 6. Engines like the TTV6 and others will have to fill in the lineup to replace those sales of V8's that perspective customers no longer want to pay what is expected to be a higher price point than V8's are in the 5th Gen.
KarFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:42 AM   #61
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,941
I think many people just kind of like to forget that the LT1 has to go into 4 cylinder mode to get the gas mileage that puts it on par or slightly better than the forced induction V6. (in the Corvette)

People think "V8 gets the same mileage as TTV6"...but thats not an accurate assessment. Its not a simple V8 vs TTV6 discussion here.

What people like is that V8 rumble that is still possible with the LT1. If it weren't for that, it would change the argument significantly. I think the argument would be more about reliablity than anything else as some would say they want the TQ of the turbos, while others would say they'd rather have the N/A V8 and avoid costly turbo failure.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!)
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 02:21 PM   #62
mikeyg36


 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 6,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
We're talking about the 6th gen Camaro, not the CTS. If the C7 doesn't gain any benefits from the V6, why would it have any gain on the Camaro? The base 2013 Vette has a 3.42 axle ratio, the base SS has a 3.45 axle ratio. If they follow this for the next gen cars, then the TTV6 would be useless in the Camaro, because it is useless in the Vette.
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 03:33 PM   #63
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
We're talking about the 6th gen Camaro, not the CTS. If the C7 doesn't gain any benefits from the V6, why would it have any gain on the Camaro? The base 2013 Vette has a 3.42 axle ratio, the base SS has a 3.45 axle ratio. If they follow this for the next gen cars, then the TTV6 would be useless in the Camaro, because it is useless in the Vette.
What I am saying is that we know nothing about the "test" for the C7. I want to see the data.
  • What were the transmission gears used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What was the final gear ratio used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What minimum RPM would the LF3 have to run at to get the same torque as LT1 when it is in V4 mode at say 65 MPH in the top overdrive gear?
Apples to Apples comparision. If they designed the transmission's overdrive gears to work with the powerband available from the LT1 in V4 mode, then just slapped in an LF3 and said "see, no better gas mileage" then it is not a good comparision. They should design the entire drivetrain around the powerplant to get the optimal performance (acceleration and fuel economy). None of that is even discussed in the one little snippet one guy made in an oblique reference about the stingray. Thus my earlier comment that some are reading too much into that one statement.
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:14 PM   #64
mikeyg36


 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 6,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
What I am saying is that we know nothing about the "test" for the C7. I want to see the data.
  • What were the transmission gears used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What was the final gear ratio used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What minimum RPM would the LF3 have to run at to get the same torque as LT1 when it is in V4 mode at say 65 MPH in the top overdrive gear?
Apples to Apples comparision. If they designed the transmission's overdrive gears to work with the powerband available from the LT1 in V4 mode, then just slapped in an LF3 and said "see, no better gas mileage" then it is not a good comparision. They should design the entire drivetrain around the powerplant to get the optimal performance (acceleration and fuel economy). None of that is even discussed in the one little snippet one guy made in an oblique reference about the stingray. Thus my earlier comment that some are reading too much into that one statement.
We're never going to know about that stuff though. The fuel economy in the CTS vsport is pretty poor anyway, so I really think that the LT1 would produce equal fuel economy. It also comes with all the benefits that I previously talked about. GM HAS to offer an affordable V8 option because people like me won't buy it any other way. I would drive a V8 mustang over a TTV6 Camaro, and I hate Mustangs...
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:23 PM   #65
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
We're never going to know about that stuff though. The fuel economy in the CTS vsport is pretty poor anyway, so I really think that the LT1 would produce equal fuel economy. It also comes with all the benefits that I previously talked about. GM HAS to offer an affordable V8 option because people like me won't buy it any other way. I would drive a V8 mustang over a TTV6 Camaro, and I hate Mustangs...
So, without knowing all that then we can't really say which one would be more effecient, right?

No one is saying there won't be a V8. Some are saying that eventually we may not find them in cars like Camaros. I don't know about that. Number of cylinders isn't what matters in all of this. A 4.4 L V8 can get just as good fuel econmomy as a 4.3 L V6. You can add turbos to anything, so why not a TTV8 at some point?
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:30 PM   #66
oklapike
 
oklapike's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Anniversary SS Coupe
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky View Post
It may not be a regular production option...I'm thinking more along the lines of a special edition. Think about it. Every year the Camaro gets numerous "Special Editions" that run for a limited time.

2010 had the Synergy Green, Indy Pace Car, and Transformers
2011 had the XM, Synergy Series, Neiman Marcus, and another Indy Pace Car
2012 had the Honor and Valor, 45th Anniversay, Transformers, and Synergy Sries
2013 has the Dusk and Hot Wheels

Don't you think it is conceivable to have a special edition with the TTV6?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRKnightSS1 View Post
I never actually thought about that but it would make more sense if it came out as a special edition.

Sent using Tapatalk on my Note 2.
Anyone remember this? http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/02/s...ck-day-dreams/

Although it seems as if the 1LE and Z/28 were what grew out of this concept, the name sticks in my mind as a possible TTV6 edition.

On a related note, this is what I would have in mind for a 6th gen Z/28 (referring to the power train).
oklapike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:32 PM   #67
mikeyg36


 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 6,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
So, without knowing all that then we can't really say which one would be more effecient, right?

No one is saying there won't be a V8. Some are saying that eventually we may not find them in cars like Camaros. I don't know about that. Number of cylinders isn't what matters in all of this. A 4.4 L V8 can get just as good fuel econmomy as a 4.3 L V6. You can add turbos to anything, so why not a TTV8 at some point?
No we can't know for sure, but I'm taking GMs word that it isn't, because they're pretty serious about fuel economy. I'd take any V8 FI or not, you just won't see me in a 6 cyl of any kind.
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 08:14 PM   #68
mpiersd

 
mpiersd's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM #2041
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Yorktown, VA
Posts: 1,554
I'm more interested in the retro-fit-ability(yes, I made that up) of this engine back to the 5th gen Camaro.
Find a wrecked TT3.6 caddy in a salvage yard, grab up the engine, trans, ecu and pcm and start hacking away to put it in a 2010 or 2011 Camaro.
__________________
Retired United States Army

Bernadette: 2LT/RS, ABM #2041 of 3903
ZL-1 Springs | CAI | Muffler delete | Magnaflow resonator | LED DRL | DRL harness | RX Catch Can | Mini me


Cortana: 2015 Harley Davidson Road Glide Special
V&H Power Duals Headers & Oversized 450 Raider mufflers | Screamin' Eagle Stage 1 Chisel Extreme intake | Screamin' Eagle Stage 1 programmer | Klock Werks 12" Pro-Touring windscreen


Own an Aqua Blue Metallic Camaro?
Click here to join us on Facebook and help us in establishing the Aqua Blue Registry to locate all 3903 of these beautiful Camaros!
mpiersd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 08:28 PM   #69
mikeyg36


 
Drives: 2015 Z/28 #533
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: NY
Posts: 6,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpiersd View Post
I'm more interested in the retro-fit-ability(yes, I made that up) of this engine back to the 5th gen Camaro.
Find a wrecked TT3.6 caddy in a salvage yard, grab up the engine, trans, ecu and pcm and start hacking away to put it in a 2010 or 2011 Camaro.
Definitely won't be worth it. Just find an LFX and put a TT kit on it.
mikeyg36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:02 PM   #70
james347
 
Drives: 2006 Crownline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: .
Posts: 700
Twin turbo yes!
james347 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 09:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.