[JaxChris]

The open diff on the A8 LT models will cost them at the track. You try to boost launch that 2.0T with the A8 and stock diff will just result in wheel spin or TCS fighting.

GM should not have put open differentials in the auto LT's. What does it really benefit to the highway MPG, maybe 2.5%?

The track cooling & brake package for the LT's should also upgrade the auto's to LSD's. Why get all the track prep and not really be track ready?

[mr02Z/28]

Upgrading your new Cadillac ATS 2.0T was never easier! Average increases of 50 hp / 50 lb-ft from 3000 rpm – 5500 rpm have been achieved when running our methanol/water injection system with all stock components! This is the most economical upgrade available to achieve massive increases while maintaining stock fuel efficiency on your ATS. Methanol/water injection has the added benefit of reducing carbon deposits on your intake valves, which has been an issue on many direct injected engines resulting in degradation of power in as little as 5K miles

........... check out Vermont tuning llc .......

With 93 octane fuel we observed average increases of 35 hp /35 lb-ft over stock and resulting in a peak engine power rating of 291 hp / 322 lb-ft on the dyno (compared to the stock engine rating of 272 hp / 260 lb-ft) on 93 octane premium fuel. Adding methanol/water injection increased the peak power to 309 hp/332 lb-ft and average increases of 50 hp/50 lb-ft form 3000 rpm to 5500 rpm!

If you want even more power, upgrade your stock turbo to our custom 67 mm XT compressor and HL turbine for 365 hp / 390 lb-ft on E85 fuel or with methanol/water injection. For the ultimate increase add our custom 3" catless downpipe and 3" intake for a massive increase to 390 hp / 410 lb-ft!

Stage 0 93 Octane Vs Stock:
http://www.vtunerperformance.com/wp-...0-vs-stock.png

[mr02Z/28]

I'm still disappointed that GM is neglecting the Automatic crowd again .......... I'm not a Ford fan but at least they offer Limited Slip in every model on the Mustangs with a few different gear ratios to boot ..... Ford offers 3.15 & 3.55 rear gears with LSD with the Automatics ... why can't Chevy do similar ????

[mr02Z/28]

<~~~~~ my 2002 Z28 LS1 runs low 13s, 13.9 must be a bad driver ...... my first run when I got the car was a 13.45 but my best time was a 13.12@106mph ........ haven't raced it in a few years but those LS1s pull hard ...

[2000Firehawk]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

<~~~~~ my 2002 Z28 LS1 runs low 13s, 13.9 must be a bad driver ...... my first run when I got the car was a 13.45 but my best time was a 13.12@106mph ........ haven't raced it in a few years but those LS1s pull hard ...

Maybe my track at 1,200' , was an issue.
A MotorWeek test, of a 98 Camaro SS , got 13.8s , at sea level.
I think that later year Gen4s got a better LS6 intake, & 3.23 gearing, with the automatics.
http://ls1tech.com/articles/mw-1998-...son-road-test/

[ULTRAZLS1]

Slowest possible combo besides a vert.

A 98 with 2.73 gears and automatic.

A strong running stock ls1 6 speed car of any year is going to walk that 4 banger. 01-02 a bit worse they had about 10 more hp.

[Rocco70]

I just can't wait for numbers to come out I think I will hear all the harts brake. The 2ss auto needs to run low 12's to somewhat justify the price but I don't see that happening. As for the 4 banger it will be a 14 second car compare it to the 97 lt1 same hp. close to same weight and they ran low 14's. As for the ss I don't see more then a 1/2 a second faster then the ls3 5th gen we shall see.

[2000Firehawk]

Originally Posted by Rocco70

I just can't wait for numbers to come out I think I will hear all the harts brake. As for the 4 banger it will be a 14 second car compare it to the 97 lt1 same hp. close to same weight and they ran low 14's.

Car & Driver, 2015 ATS 2.0T test = 14.1
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...al-test-review

MotorTrend , also recorded, 14.1 quarter mile times, with a 2015 ATS 2.0T
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...al_first_test/

This guy, got a best of 13.87 , out of his bone stock, 2015 ATS 2.0T automatic, & even posted a
picture of his time slip.
http://www.atssociety.com/threads/my...-runs-13s.243/

The new 2016 Camaro 2.0T will have a better ECM performance calibration,
per GM engineers...
So, soon we'll know for sure, when the mags, start to release, their test reviews.
It sure will be exciting...
My predictions:
2.0T = 13.9s
3.6. = 13.5s
LT1 = 12.3s

[cyberbro]

"with the 275-hp (205) 2.0L Turbo delivering 5.4-second 0-60 performance and a 14.0-second quarter-mile"

Close but no cigar!

[GTIanZ28]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

<~~~~~ my 2002 Z28 LS1 runs low 13s, 13.9 must be a bad driver ...... my first run when I got the car was a 13.45 but my best time was a 13.12@106mph ........ haven't raced it in a few years but those LS1s pull hard ...

The other Gen Six Camaro coupe models are commensurately quick, with the 275-hp (205) 2.0L Turbo delivering 5.4-second 0-60 performance and a 14.0-second quarter-mile, with the six-speed manual. With the available, 335-hp (250 kW) 3.6L V-6 and eight-speed automatic, the Camaro zips to 60 mph in 5.1 seconds and down the quarter-mile in only 13.5 seconds.

FAST FACT: The 2016 Camaro 2.0L Turbo’s 275 horsepower rating matches the output of the 1993-1995 Camaro Z28’s 5.7L V-8 – and offers comparable acceleration performance.

These #'s are plain crazy. The turbo 4 matches the old fbody LT1 and the V6 is comparable to the LS1.

Edit:

I just noticed a subtle nuance in the press release.

Why did they post the turbo 4's numbers with the manual transmission and the V6 with the Auto?

Edit #2:
Was answered in the other thread.
"Because the manual t4 was .10 quicker than the auto t4, its all in the graph at the bottom of the OP."

[2000Firehawk]

Originally Posted by cyberbro

"with the 275-hp (205) 2.0L Turbo delivering 5.4-second 0-60 performance and a 14.0-second quarter-mile"

Close but no cigar!

GM usually understates, the real world figures, as it's good for business, & prevents,
bad mojo, if their numbers, can't be reached.
Remember a few years back, when Ford was sued, because they overstated,
horsepower numbers...

LOL , It's a conspiracy I tell you...
My predictions are based on the real world magazine testing, which has yet to be released.
There's something fishey going on, maybe because of marketing, or insurance concerns, they can't let it be known officially, that the 2.0T , can easily go down the quarter mile in the 13.9s...

I'm really blown away by the low weight of 3,339 lbs , unbelievable..., it's the same weight as my HHR SS automatic...

But, oh my God, all the Gen6 choices,are fantastic...

[GretchenGotGrowl]

Originally Posted by Rocco70

I just can't wait for numbers to come out I think I will hear all the harts brake. The 2ss auto needs to run low 12's to somewhat justify the price but I don't see that happening. As for the 4 banger it will be a 14 second car compare it to the 97 lt1 same hp. close to same weight and they ran low 14's. As for the ss I don't see more then a 1/2 a second faster then the ls3 5th gen we shall see.

I don' think there are many broken h[e]arts, do you?

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by Rocco70

I just can't wait for numbers to come out I think I will hear all the harts brake. The 2ss auto needs to run low 12's to somewhat justify the price but I don't see that happening. As for the 4 banger it will be a 14 second car compare it to the 97 lt1 same hp. close to same weight and they ran low 14's. As for the ss I don't see more then a 1/2 a second faster then the ls3 5th gen we shall see.

A half second is about 80 feet and 5 car lengths in the quarter at these speeds.

Just go enjoy your 5th gen. If you love it so much why are you so sour and trying to dig on the 6th gen all the time?

Just put the car up for sale and get a 6th gen. What's so hard about that? It's obvious you are extremely envious. I wouldn't say that if I thought you were happy. But from all your posts lately it is obvious to everyone you are not.


Oh and btw... the 97 lt1 had 285 hp

[2000Firehawk]

13.9 @ 101
http://www.motortrend.com/news/compa...tang-ecoboost/