[Staves]

Originally Posted by HCI2000SS

Factor in the 75 cents difference between 93 vs 87 octane,

Huh? It's a 30 cent difference here.

[2SS Capt]

Originally Posted by HCI2000SS

I'm really surprised to hear the comments of the V8 being almost as good as the V6 on gas mileage. Case in point is my buddy's A8 SS vs my A8 RS V6. Doing very similar type of driving I'll get a solid 3-4 mpgs better. His best recorded highway was 29 and my best has been 34 so far. Factor in the 75 cents difference between 93 vs 87 octane, and that adds up a lot. But on the flip side getting almost 30 mpgs from a 455 hp V8 is very impressive

At Costco here in San Diego there is only a $0.20/gal difference between 87 octane and 91 octane (91 is about as high as we can get here without going to specialty fuel)

[HCI2000SS]

Originally Posted by 2SS Capt

At Costco here in San Diego there is only a $0.20/gal difference between 87 octane and 91 octane (91 is about as high as we can get here without going to specialty fuel)

Must be nice. Even 89 octane is still 30-40 cents more than 87 here.

[HCI2000SS]

Originally Posted by Staves

Huh? It's a 30 cent difference here.

It's crazy how much it varies across the country. 89 is about 30 cents more than 87 here

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

The great low-end torque helps a lot. That's why you see a lot of turbocharged family cars nowadays - better low-end torque than their naturally aspirated predecessors, which means you don't have to rev as high. My friend's Mazda6 2.5T that I am borrowing can make 310 lb-ft at 2000 RPM. Not bad at all and that's stronger than a lot of NA V6 engines.

Even in the M6 form without AFM, V8 has a very economical 6th Gear. Going at 75 MPH/120 km/h and I am only revving at 1800 RPM.

I think a smaller engine mostly helps with idling since a smaller engine needs less fuel to idle, and it could be better when cruising at slow highway speeds. The V6 would need to rev higher to get going at the same rate as the V8, though. LT1 makes more torque at 1200 RPM than the LGX is capable of. Even the LTG will have more torque, though I would still pick the V6 between it and the 2.0T because I prefer an NA engine.

Both LT1 and LTG preferably take premium fuel. They will run on 87 but will lose power and fuel economy. I believe LT1 on 87 drops it to LS3 level power, which is still plenty for DD.

My friend claims that his Mazda6 2.5T runs a little rough on the Costco premium gas versus Shell or Chevron. This is in Canada and I don't know how it is in the States. Being a single guy, a Costco membership isn't worth the saving so it's out of consideration anyway for me.

Sent from toaster or something

I'm guessing you're commenting on the RPM's based on automatic transmission? I don't believe the manuals rev that low at 75MPH due to a different gearing ratio (I know my M6 doesn't rev that low at that speed).

WRT Fuel: 91 recommended, but I believe at least 89 is required. If you had to run 87 in it to get from point A to point B because you couldn't get anything else, well, that's one thing. Running it all of the time, however, is likely to lead to issues with the engine or its parts. Plus, not running premium prevents all of the timing advance that generates a lot of the power in these engines. Once you start dropping the octane levels, the sensors are going to pick up pre-detontaion and back off on the timing. And your nice 455HP V8 is going to start feeling like a V6. That's the best case. Worst case is that the sensors don't detect all of it in time, the timing doesn't get backed off properly, and pre-detonation damages your motor.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by ember1205

I'm guessing you're commenting on the RPM's based on automatic transmission? I don't believe the manuals rev that low at 75MPH due to a different gearing ratio (I know my M6 doesn't rev that low at that speed).



WRT Fuel: 91 recommended, but I believe at least 89 is required. If you had to run 87 in it to get from point A to point B because you couldn't get anything else, well, that's one thing. Running it all of the time, however, is likely to lead to issues with the engine or its parts. Plus, not running premium prevents all of the timing advance that generates a lot of the power in these engines. Once you start dropping the octane levels, the sensors are going to pick up pre-detontaion and back off on the timing. And your nice 455HP V8 is going to start feeling like a V6. That's the best case. Worst case is that the sensors don't detect all of it in time, the timing doesn't get backed off properly, and pre-detonation damages your motor.

Yes, I am talking about the M6 as I own one. 75 MPH is about 1800 RPM in 6th. I don't think the tire diameter is that different between SS and SS 1LE.

The Owner's Manual states that 87 is required for LT1 and LTG. I believe some dynos show that the LT1 loses about 30 HP on 87 gas. I always fill up mine with PetroCanada and now Chevron 94, so I wouldn't know what the car feels like on 87.

Sent from toaster or something

[CamaroSSStlfan]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

Yes, I am talking about the M6 as I own one. 75 MPH is about 1800 RPM in 6th. I don't think the tire diameter is that different between SS and SS 1LE.

The Owner's Manual states that 87 is required for LT1 and LTG. I believe some dynos show that the LT1 loses about 30 HP on 87 gas. I always fill up mine with PetroCanada and now Chevron 94, so I wouldn't know what the car feels like on 87.

Sent from toaster or something

I have a 2016 SS and it says 91 Octane on up in the manual. The LT1 is the same engine so why only 87?

[JFWJR179]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Really? What they told us would happen is happening already, that the mfgs would make it impossible to tune cars in the future

Yes Really.

The future is the present at GM. (New Hummer EV)

I expect that soon other manufacturers (Ford, Dodge) may follow suit which
will kill the aftermarket high performance industry and serve as a segue to
all electric non-tuneable vehicles.
And after that, all electric self-driving non-tuneable vehicles.


https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-pu...184400008.html

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by CamaroSSStlfan

I have a 2016 SS and it says 91 Octane on up in the manual. The LT1 is the same engine so why only 87?

91(or for a 19+, 93) octane is recommended for LT1 and LTG, while 87 is the minimum(or you can say, required minimum) you can run in these engines with some loss of power and fuel economy.

V6 will run at the rated power at 87 octane.

Sent from toaster or something

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by JFWJR179

Yes Really.

The future is the present at GM. (New Hummer EV)

I expect that soon other manufacturers (Ford, Dodge) may follow suit which
will kill the aftermarket high performance industry and serve as a segue to
all electric non-tuneable vehicles.
And after that, all electric self-driving non-tuneable vehicles.


https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-pu...184400008.html

Thing is, this should be up to the consumers if they want this or not, not mandated.

Don’t get me started. I got a high horse on this garbage

[LT4Greg]

Oh yeah Petrol Head, me too on that subject!

[PnCRedJwl2SS]

Originally Posted by NYJets12

Love the last one actually I saw 2 .
Center console all I got in is a usb cable I never disconnect for car play, a small flashlight ( a bigger one in the glove box), a pair of clip ons, owners manual what else do you need. I leave the phone in one cup holder when the cable is on it.

I added these two bins to help with storage space. Passenger side holds my sunglasses. Driver side holds my wallet and mini hand sanitizer container when not in my pocket.

The magnetic mount keeps my phone out of the cup holders so both driver and passenger can have a place for drinks.

Inside the center console is the other end of the usb cable for Android Auto (plugged in) and a mini USB drive (also plugged in) with my tunes on it. Also, I stuffed in a few paper napkins and extra charging cable with a wall outlet ac plug as a backup in case I'm away from home with low battery and don't want to have to sit in the car while charging.

Works great! Plenty of storage space now.

[Cedar]

Originally Posted by gtfoxy

Wow man, talk about getting a shock.

MiL was diagnosed with sarcoma in her left shoulder. It’s been a long road.

I bet it has. I hope everything is well!

[Zr8000]

Originally Posted by JT58

I love my 2016 Camaro 1LT and have 0 Cons- except that I am contemplating upgrading to a 1LT or an SS. It has "only" a V6 but it eliminates a couple of cons some of you have mentioned. It is dirt cheap to own and operate, fun to drive with decent performance and handling. Regular 87 gas, 334 HP and i average 33 MPG with the 6 speed manual and insurance is cheap.

You get used to the seating and visibility and it's super comfortable. I am 6' 1" with 34" inseam. I cannot get comfortable in a lot of cars as the seat does not go back far enough or the steering wheel does not telescope enough. I am super comfy in the Camaro and daily drive it 35 miles each way back and forth to work.

I really want a V8 but some concerns about increase in operating cost. If you want a really fun Camaro on the cheap the V6 is the way to go. Even the turbo 4 requires premium fuel, increasing operating cost. So the only con I see is that you will at some point want a V8.

The increased fuel cost is an non issue on 87 vs 92. I put 7000 miles on mine this summer. The cost difference would have been a 179 Dollar savings if I ran straight 87 instead of 92. I don’t see the the insurance being any cheaper on the v6 vs ss. My ss is 30 dollars less a month than my pick up truck insurance wise. My v8 gets about 30mpg driving it like a normal car.