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


AWE Tuning


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-16-2015, 11:28 AM   #71
90503


 
90503's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 14,403
I believe non V8 Camaro sales overall are more than 2 to 1...I think all Camaro sales of V-6 models were over 70% of the total....Whatever, it's most of them by a lot...lol....

Whether it's a 4 or 6 or both, Camaro needs an entry level car as it's most economical and popular seller....Perhaps it will be both a 4 and 6 of some type...I just hope the 6thGen loses enough weight so the 4 cyl won't be an embarrassment of sorts...

Chevy and GM have had 4 cyl cars for quite a while now in numerous models and makes...but the 6 seems to have worked well for the Camaro...Personally, I hope it stays that way and I believe in his heart Al O. does also.....But if Chevy thinks a 4 will work with the new Gen and boost sales, then we'll probably see it....
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:04 PM   #72
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilirg View Post
The rumor of the engine line up was posted on a bunch of forums a while back, at 2.0T 4 was one of them. Not a fantasy at all, more likely a very high probability.
Yeah, and it amounted to "Since the Mustang is going to have a 4 cylinder, that must mean the Camaro will too!" Which is idiotic. And Al already said they won't so....
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:05 PM   #73
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Posaune View Post
Where is the quote stating there will be a V8?
More illogical arguments. They don't need to state there will be a V8; it's a car built for a V8.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:05 PM   #74
RJZJR
 
Drives: in progress 3rd Gen BBC 4L80e fab 9
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Lansing illinois
Posts: 47
New car new plan... I'm hoping they drop the 3.6 and put the 4.3 in its place cam change could net more hp same parts and engine design 90° 6 and 8 cyl let the bicycle chain 3.6 stay in the fwd constant problems ...if they can get 30 mpgs out of the corvette...why can't they get 36 to 40 out of the v6 25 % less cyl.
RJZJR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:08 PM   #75
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSound View Post
Where is the quote saying there will not be a 4 cylinder? The only quote regarding anything similar simply says they will not follow Ford. But notice how no one has what question was asked specifically. Quotes taken out of context can mean anything, and AutoGuide does not list what they asked him. Hence why a lot of news sources have now back tracked on using his quote as proof there will be no 4 cylinder.

Ford positioned their Ecoboost above the V6. Many believe this is because Ford will move to drop the V6 altogether at a later date (V6 doesn't get Premium trim or Performance Pack, making it an absolute base car). Most believe now this is what Al was referring too. That GM will not have a turbo 4 replace the V6 and Al will fight to keep all cylinder options available. Adding a turbo 4 in addition to V6 and V8 options is not losing anything, but gaining more flexibility in sales.

Also Al's comments were made in 2013, well before Mustang actually went on sale and well before all the good press/reviews the Ecoboost Mustang received. Al is the chief engineer, not the Camaro program chief. In the end like others have said, he may not get a choice on the matter.
A lot of wishful thinking in this post. You keep ignoring Al saying he's fighting for every cylinder as part of the context of not following Ford, and then you bring up Ford's design as "proof" of what GM is doing.

What's relevant here is that Al designs the car, and you guys have nothing to do with it. So his comments carry weight and yours are meaningless.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:24 PM   #76
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
A lot of wishful thinking in this post. You keep ignoring Al saying he's fighting for every cylinder as part of the context of not following Ford, and then you bring up Ford's design as "proof" of what GM is doing.

What's relevant here is that Al designs the car, and you guys have nothing to do with it. So his comments carry weight and yours are meaningless.
1. That GM will not have a turbo 4 replace the V6 and Al will fight to keep all cylinder options available. Adding a turbo 4 in addition to V6 and V8 options is not losing anything, but gaining more flexibility in sales. How did I ignore it? You just aren't bothering to read that as anything other as anything other meaning other than no 4 cylinder.

2. He's the chief engineer. His responsibility is to achieve the design goals. He doesn't get to pick what those goals are. If ones of those goals are international sales, you can bet there will be a 4 cylinder.

3. You ignore all my other points. In the end we are making assumptions based on speculations and hearsay. No one has proof yet of anything.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:32 PM   #77
MikeT
 
Drives: 2008 Malibu V6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJZJR View Post
New car new plan... I'm hoping they drop the 3.6 and put the 4.3 in its place cam change could net more hp same parts and engine design 90° 6 and 8 cyl let the bicycle chain 3.6 stay in the fwd constant problems ...if they can get 30 mpgs out of the corvette...why can't they get 36 to 40 out of the v6 25 % less cyl.
I don't think that your idea is realistic. Let's not forget that GM is building the ATS & CTS on the same lines at Lansing GR. There's really no way they're going to put the pushrod 4.3 in those Cadillacs, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to ship (and fit) two completely different V6s into the alpha models built at Lansing. Sorry, the LGX V6 it will be for the Cads... and the Camaro.
MikeT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:37 PM   #78
Z/284ever
 
Z/284ever's Avatar
 
Drives: A few Camaros
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 205
The context of Al's remarks had to do with the rumors of a higher performance turbo 4 Mustang, some even called it the SVO, which would have slotted above a base turbo 4 version. That's what he meant about not following Ford.

Also, at the time, Ford had no plans for a V6. That item was a last minute addition and it is also a carryover engine.
Z/284ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:40 PM   #79
SuperSound


 
SuperSound's Avatar
 
Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 5,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z/284ever View Post
The context of Al's remarks had to do with the rumors of a higher performance turbo 4 Mustang, some even called it the SVO, which would have slotted above a base turbo 4 version. That's what he meant about not following Ford.

Also, at the time, Ford had no plans for a V6. That item was a last minute addition and it is also a carryover engine.
Do you have a source? That would make perfect sense for his response based on the situation.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3

"Voices in your head are not considered insider information."

3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!)
6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)
SuperSound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:51 PM   #80
Posaune
 
Drives: Four wheels and an engine
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Garage
Posts: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeT View Post
I don't think that your idea is realistic. Let's not forget that GM is building the ATS & CTS on the same lines at Lansing GR. There's really no way they're going to put the pushrod 4.3 in those Cadillacs, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to ship (and fit) two completely different V6s into the alpha models built at Lansing. Sorry, the LGX V6 it will be for the Cads... and the Camaro.
I don't think he was suggesting Cadillac use the 4.3, just the Camaro. I would actually like to see the Camaro get the 4.3 and leave the OHC V6 to Cadillac...but there is a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Posaune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 12:53 PM   #81
Z/284ever
 
Z/284ever's Avatar
 
Drives: A few Camaros
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSound View Post
Do you have a source? That would make perfect sense for his response based on the situation.
The actual interview is the source. It sounds like some people merely read someone else's interpretation of it, rather than the actual text.
Z/284ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 01:52 PM   #82
ilirg

 
ilirg's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 Camaro 2ss
Join Date: May 2013
Location: nj
Posts: 1,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
Yeah, and it amounted to "Since the Mustang is going to have a 4 cylinder, that must mean the Camaro will too!" Which is idiotic. And Al already said they won't so....
Just curious what side you would like with your crow?
ilirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 02:10 PM   #83
MikeT
 
Drives: 2008 Malibu V6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Posaune View Post
I don't think he was suggesting Cadillac use the 4.3, just the Camaro. I would actually like to see the Camaro get the 4.3 and leave the OHC V6 to Cadillac...but there is a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Yes, I realize that he was suggesting it for the Camaro and not the Cadillacs. My point was that it doesn't make sense for the cars, built on the same platform on the same line, to use two completely different V6s.
MikeT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2015, 02:56 PM   #84
fradaj

 
Drives: RS
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSound View Post
One big reason, fuel economy. The TT-V6 I've heard would be on par with LS V8 economy. Couple that with the disappointing economy of the 2.0T (at least in the forms we have seen, 31MPG is the best it can do) and you can be sure the TT-V6 will not replace the V6. The current LFX makes more power with the same fuel economy than the 2.0T, and the proposed LGX will improve on that in all respects. GM is likely setting up the 2.0T to be the poor man's Camaro, with it being at the bottom of the price list. I personally don't believe we will see the TT-V6 in the Camaro, but if anything it would be a special option, not a replacement for any current engine.

Has there ever been any official word on a LGX?
fradaj is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

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 08:30 AM.


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