[Jason@JacFab]

Originally Posted by xgnxs

From http://www.*********media.com/produc...aro-specs.html

The TR6060 that the 6th gen SS gets has the following gear ratios: 1st - 2.66 2nd - 1.78 3rd - 1.30 4th - 1.00 5th - .74 6th - .5 with 3.73 gears.

The automatic gear ratios are also listed on that site.

Thanks for posting that, I was using mostly the 5th gen as an example because I was unsure of what trans gear ratios the 6th gen would have. Surprised they changed the gear ratios that much on the TR6060! That explains the 3.73 gears.

2.77 on the a8 v6 and v8... Higher than I would have thought.

My guess for mpg ratings

2.0T(a8) 22/33
3.6(a8) 19/31
3.6(m6)-- 18/31
6.2(a8)-- 16/26
6.2(m6)-- 17/26

The 4 banger? The 15 ATS is currently rated at 21/30 but still with a 6 speed auto, (m6 rated at 19/30). I don't think the Camaro will weigh that much less than the ATS, if it does at all. Best case scenario, 50-100 lbs less, add 2 more gears to the auto, hope for better aero than the ATS... 22/33. 21/33 with the stick... However, I think that the 33 might be a stretch, but if there isn't a big enough difference between the 2.0T and the v6, there wouldn't be much of a point in offering a completely different engine. The 2.0T is the new "2LS" of the world to most people.

Regarding the v6... I'm theorizing that they canned the "2LS" option because it's really no longer needed with the addition of the a8 and cylinder deactivation. I'm guessing all v6 optioned models will get at least 30-31 hwy mpg. The current 2015 CTS 3.6 weighs about the same as a 2015 1LT Camaro, and has the 8 speed automatic already and is rated at 18/29, so figure dropping a couple hundred pounds, same trans, add cyl deactivation, boom 19/31 w/ the a8. 18/31 with the m6. I think these are pretty solid numbers for the v6.

The v8? No explanation needed. I'm not expecting anything earth shattering out of it. 17/26(m6), 16/26(a8)

[mt3130]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Not sure where you get this. Highway may be equal with a locking torque convertor but generally a manual will always get better.

8 speed vs. 6 speed auto? About 1 to 1.5

Source documentation if you believe otherwise. And you can only quote a change from 6 speed to 8 speed. You can't include other powertrain or aero (body styling) changes.

All I'm saying is that the C7 is the only vehicle I've seen where the manual numbers are better. The figures in the examples below are all from fueleconomy.gov:

2015 Dodge Challenger 6.4
8-Speed Auto - 15 city/25 hwy
6-Speed Manual - 14 city/23 hwy

2015 Dodge Challenger 5.7
8-Speed Auto - 16 city/25 hwy
6-Speed Manual - 15 city/23 hwy

2015 BMW 435i
8-Speed Auto - 21 city/32 hwy
6-Speed Manual - 20 city/30 hwy

I could list out all the other Chrysler & BMW vehicles where this is also the case, but since the engines and transmissions are shared, i figured there's no point. Additionally listed below is a link talking about the fuel economy improvement of GM's SUVs and trucks, all of which had the same engine and body, but switched from a 6-speed auto to an 8-speed.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/theyve-...kups-and-suvs/

Maybe GM's 8-speed isn't as efficient as the units used around the auto industry, but that doesn't mean my statement is false. The C7 is the exception, not the general rule. My point was auto vs. manual, so that's why I used the examples above. There are a ton of vehicles that use an 8-speed auto, but not many that offer manuals, so that narrowed down the field for comparison as well.

[32valve-snake]

I guess this is the wrong forum for my post so I put it in the design thread that is a sticky. Once again, not a kid. I apologize for that.

[Jason@JacFab]

Originally Posted by mt3130

All I'm saying is that the C7 is the only vehicle I've seen where the manual numbers are better.

I was thinking that myself earlier this morning. However, if you look at the manual vs auto 2015 Camaro, the manual transmission has better city mph than the auto, but the same on the highway... With the v8 engine only. I looked at the c7 numbers, same thing, v8, better in town only with the manual than the automatic...

Then you look at the v6 5th gen Camaro, and the 2.0T ATS, and then they either flip flop with the city mpg being better with the auto vs the manual, and the hwy being worse, or the city being better with the auto and both manual and auto have the same highway mpg (excluding the 2LS)

[Bizaro]

whatever the official numbers are minus ~15

[JaxChris]

Originally Posted by Jason@JacFab

Yes, there have typically been different gears for the auto vs manual, but in your math you are not taking into account the gear ratios in the transmissions...

For instance, the 8L90 if I'm looking at the correct specs here, has a 4.56:1 first gear ratio. That's NUTS!

A TR6060 manual has a 3.01 first gear ratio. A current 6l80 has a 4.027 first gear ratio.

The manual has lower (numerically higher) gears to compensate for it's higher (numerically lower) first few gears to kind of "equal out" the lower first few gear ratios of the automatic. Also because of these gear differences (or just how it ended up, I'm not sure), the manual TR6060 has a higher 6th gear ratio of 0.57:1, where as the 6l80 has a 0.667:1.

The 8l90 has a 0.65 ratio for eighth gear. That kind of bums me out really, just more gears between first gear and final gear... Great for racing assuming all the shifting doesn't slow you down, I was hoping 8th gear would have a similar ratio to the TR6060.

So based on current 5th gen drivetrain availability, the final drive ratio in OD on the freeway for the manual transmission car is 1.9665:1, while the automatic is 2.1811

Even though the automatic has a "smaller" rear end as you say (gear ratio wise), in theory on the highway the manual with it's "bigger" rear end should mathematically get better fuel mileage.

I really don't expect to see any gear lower than something like s 3.08 in the automatic SS, it may even get 2.92s because that first gear in the 8L90 is SOOO LOW!!! Manual transmission v8, I would say somewhere between 3.27 and 3.45. So if the auto WERE to get 2.92s because of the low first few gears of the 8L90, in 8th gear, it would then have a final drive ratio of 1.898 and would in theory get better highway fuel mileage than the manual with 3.45's

*EDIT* I just looked up the c7 a8 gears, looks like 2.41 for non Z51 cars, and 2.73 for Z51 cars. But it looks like it's ~500-6/700 lbs lighter than the Camaro depending on engine and trim, I don't know if the Camaro could get away with 2.41's being that much heavier???

I think someone cleared up the final drive on the 5th Gen TR6060, but I was doing a compare mostly in the 5th Gen V6's. The difference in comparing the 5th Gen V8's, like in your example, can be explained by AFM. I only intended to give a general/broad reasoning for why most automatics today have better MPG than their similar manual brethren.

But I think we're all on the same page here. =)~

[BigRedViking]

Don't they usually have tiny rear gears in the automatic transmission to make up for the higher parasitic loss of an automatic. I've been wondering about what a 5th generation could do (mpg) with the automatic gears from the V6. Or you could put some 24's on it to change the final drive ratio. But that would effect aerodynamics, handling, and looks...

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Jason@JacFab

However, if you look at the manual vs auto 2015 Camaro, the manual transmission has better city mph than the auto, but the same on the highway... With the v8 engine only.

The 2015 Camaro has a different engine in the auto from the manual. The manual is the LS3 426HP and the auto has the L99 400HP. Not sure you can compare how efficient the transmissions are with two different output engines. Apples and Oranges.

[396ssrat]

Don't leave out the 427 inch 2016 Camaro cuz it's coming.

[StuckInNYForever]

If you are considering gas mileage, don't forget that the LT1 in the 'Vette now requires Premium, whereas the current v8 does not. In my area, premium fuel is 45 cents over the price of regular. That adds 15-20% annually. I would also expect the turbo 4 to perform much better with premium, if not improve mileage.

If you are comparing to the Challenger and Mustang, the challenger 5.7L requires 89, and the 6.4L requires 91. The turbo 4 in the Mustang does not require premium, but loses around 20 hp without it (give or take a few).

[huggercamaro21]

Now that weights are out, what are we thinking? Also when can we expect the numbers to be officially announced?

[bybcous]

The v6 has the start stop technology im thinking 35 hwy.

[KMPrenger]

I enjoy taking stabs at these things:

All automatics

2.0:
21 city / 34 hwy

3.6
18 city / 31 hwy

6.2
14 city / 27 hwy

[bybcous]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I enjoy taking stabs at these things:

All automatics

2.0:
21 city / 34 hwy

3.6
18 city / 31 hwy

6.2
14 city / 27 hwy

14 city lol thats terrible if so lol.