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 06-23-2014, 04:15 PM   #71
Twoblindsheep
[COTW 1/6/14]
 
Twoblindsheep's Avatar
 
Drives: 2017 1LE
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Scott AFB/STL
Posts: 2,004
wait i thought they said there will NOT have a 4cylinder turbo...
Twoblindsheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:26 PM   #72
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 halo8hkk View Post
i wont be buying it but, my problem is i dont want any one to buy it. i dont want to walk down the street and listen to a fart can muffler aka pissed off lawn mower sound out of a classic american muscle car. it is just un-american. i respect all cars even if i dont like them. but a 4 cylinder in a Camaro is just wrong.
Well reality is, unless you are subsidizing GM to not make them or paying consumers to not buy them, then you really won't get what you want. There are good sounding 4 bangers out there, and most of the turbo 4s GM make come with pretty quite exhaust. So, it would be individual consumers that would be putting "fart cans" on them.
__________________
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 06-23-2014, 05:01 PM   #73
JacobC1983
 
JacobC1983's Avatar
 
Drives: 2019 ZL1
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Missouri
Posts: 488
An LT4 in a new ZL1 and I might be trading mine in. All depends on the interior room compared to the current car.
JacobC1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:49 PM   #74
radametz
 
radametz's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 CRT 2SS/1LE; 2016 Colorado Z71
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Edison, NJ
Posts: 648
I'm surprised at everyone hating on the 4-cylinder here...I mean, did you really think that GM wasn't going to add one for the 6th gen? Ford did it and GM has to respond...if they introduce a line-up with only the V6 and V8, then C&D, MT, and other outlets would jump all over GM for not having a more fuel-economic engine as an option. And it also allows for more high-end power in the Camaro, since it will raise the average MPG for the Camaro with the impending CAFE regulations. And so what if GM is adding it as an option? It's not like they're forcing everyone to buy a 4-cylinder...

We have enough in-fighting on this forum between the V8 and V6 crews, I'd really not like to see it get worse with the I4 crew coming in.

Onto other topics:

Someone mentioned the order of the engines before; I don't know if that necessarily has any correlation to their power. I just read them as increasing in number of cylinders/displacement: I4, V6, V8, SCV8. I wouldn't read into it too much as there's a chance Chevy will go the same route as Ford. We'll wait and see.

My big thing from this is that the freakin' LT4 is apparently in the 2016 line-up! I was expecting the LT1 SS to be top-dog for a year before introducing a ZL1 successor. Now we get the chance to see a 650 HP, 650 lb-ft monster of a Camaro!
__________________
radametz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:58 PM   #75
blake2010ss

 
blake2010ss's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2ss/rs
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: stone mountain, GA
Posts: 2,228
Send a message via AIM to blake2010ss Send a message via MSN to blake2010ss
Quote:
Originally Posted by x1sniper3x View Post
My big thing from this is that the freakin' LT4 is apparently in the 2016 line-up! I was expecting the LT1 SS to be top-dog for a year before introducing a ZL1 successor. Now we get the chance to see a 650 HP, 650 lb-ft monster of a Camaro!
I've heard of a new ctsv in the making. I don't know what v8 they are using for it..but I'd expect the zl1 would use that motor and not be exactly the same as the z06 motor....unless the V is the same as the z06 motor.


Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
__________________
2010 Camaro 2SS/RS LS3
1093/1066

416, AGP 6262, E85, Cam
blake2010ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:01 PM   #76
ChocoTaco369
145lb Powerlifter
 
ChocoTaco369's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Conshohocken, PA
Posts: 1,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 View Post
If every Camaro built was an SS, prices would skyrocket because GM would have to limit sales to keep its CAFE numbers from plummeting. Why do you think the SS sedan starts at $45k and has little to no advertising outside of NASCAR?

That 2.0T is what's allowing the LT1/LT4 to go into Camaro. Don't like it? Better start writing your representatives.
"Government regulation" isn't an answer.

The V6 fuel efficiency is below the CAFE standards, and the V6's outsell the V8's what, 5:1? Sales of Camaros would plummet in general because far less people are interested in buying a V8-only car ~$4/gal gas, not to mention the significant initial cost increase. With so many less Camaro's sold, it would benefit your "regulations" argument - which isn't an argument to begin with, it's a straw man.

The fact is the less options that exist, the CHEAPER the car is to build. It doesn't matter if GM sells it for more - that is called margin. If GM introduces a 4 cylinder Camaro, one of two things will happen:

1.) The overall cost of the Camaro will INCREASE and GM will absorb the loss, taking a smaller margin to keep prices from increasing and keeping sales volume higher.

2.) The overall cost of the Camaro will INCREASE and GM will pass the increase costs onto the consumer, raising prices significantly.

The truth will probably be somewhere in between - GM will probably take a smaller margin AND prices will increase a bit to the consumer in hopes that the 4 cylinder option increases volume sales, leading to a higher net profit due to a larger gross sales figure to tap into. Either way, introducing a whole new motor is increasing the production costs.

8% of $2 million is more profit than 10% of $1.5 million. If you're going to cut your margin, you better be able to make up for it in sales. IMO, a 4 cylinder Camaro is a big mistake because the increased sales will not cover the cost of R&D'ing a car that doesn't fit AT ALL. A turbo 4 banger does not belong in a muscle car, and I think the public will realize this.
__________________
ChocoTaco369 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:06 PM   #77
ChocoTaco369
145lb Powerlifter
 
ChocoTaco369's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Conshohocken, PA
Posts: 1,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
I see your point, and I realize it already, but your original comment seemed to imply that they would be designing a new chassis for this car, which isn't true.

I simply pointed out, that since they are using an existing platform, a huge chunk of the homework is already done. Will they have to make tweaks? Of course, as they will for the V6 and the V8 assuming they want to use to use a different wheelbase that is not the same as the ATS or CTS.

I don't see anything wrong with adding a turbo 4 into the mix.
No. The entire vehicle has to be reconstructed - different transmission pairings, different suspension, different driveshaft lengths, braces, fuel line routing, totally different electronics, totally different programming...it is an entirely new engineering feat. It is massive R&D dollars that will be passed onto other platforms. If you want to buy a 6th gen SS with a V8, you should be starkly AGAINST the turbo 4 cylinder option because you'll be paying for that R&D in your price. It is an unknown, so that vehicle will have to be subsidized with the cars you know will sell (the SS's).

I'm praying this is just BS and there will be no turbo option.
__________________
ChocoTaco369 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:16 PM   #78
FenwickHockey65
General Motors Aficionado
 
FenwickHockey65's Avatar
 
Drives: 2023 GMC Canyon, 2020 Colorado
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 37,371
Send a message via AIM to FenwickHockey65
From what I understand, the turbo has been locked in and has been for months now.
__________________
2023 GMC Canyon Elevation
2020 Chevrolet Colorado W/T Extended Cab (State-issued)
FenwickHockey65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:17 PM   #79
DarkneSS
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS 6MT
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Westchester, New York
Posts: 3,715
IMO they pushed the limit too far with the V6 engines, making them big to squeeze as much HP out as possible. They should have made a smaller, ~3.0L V6 from the get go with a single turbo. That would get great gas mileage and please the tuners. Way more power to be made out of a V6T than a Turbo 4. The current V6s engines are basically maxed out from the factory. Getting a V6 stock turbo means the manufacturer generally built redundancy strength in so there is a lot on the table.
DarkneSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:17 PM   #80
MikeT
 
Drives: 2008 Malibu V6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
A turbo 4 banger does not belong in a muscle car, and I think the public will realize this.
The proof of the pudding will indeed be in the eating. If a 2.0T alpha Camaro is built, and is a sales dud, then you can tell everyone here that you told us so. And you'd be right.

I totally think your instincts are RIGHT with the respect to the Camaro as it now exists... it's relatively big, heavy, muscle-car-ish kind of vehicle... and a 4 cylinder engine just seems wrong for it.

BUT we're talking about the next Camaro, and I haven't seen it yet. If it's a smaller, lighter, sportier sorta car, then maybe it'll work. They say that the ATS 2.0T isn't half bad. If basically we're just talking about that with a Camaro skin, maybe it'll be a huge hit. Give 'em a chance. I'm not going to prejudge things at this point.
MikeT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:19 PM   #81
DarkneSS
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS 6MT
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Westchester, New York
Posts: 3,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
"Government regulation" isn't an answer.

The V6 fuel efficiency is below the CAFE standards, and the V6's outsell the V8's what, 5:1? Sales of Camaros would plummet in general because far less people are interested in buying a V8-only car ~$4/gal gas, not to mention the significant initial cost increase. With so many less Camaro's sold, it would benefit your "regulations" argument - which isn't an argument to begin with, it's a straw man.

The fact is the less options that exist, the CHEAPER the car is to build. It doesn't matter if GM sells it for more - that is called margin. If GM introduces a 4 cylinder Camaro, one of two things will happen:

1.) The overall cost of the Camaro will INCREASE and GM will absorb the loss, taking a smaller margin to keep prices from increasing and keeping sales volume higher.

2.) The overall cost of the Camaro will INCREASE and GM will pass the increase costs onto the consumer, raising prices significantly.

The truth will probably be somewhere in between - GM will probably take a smaller margin AND prices will increase a bit to the consumer in hopes that the 4 cylinder option increases volume sales, leading to a higher net profit due to a larger gross sales figure to tap into. Either way, introducing a whole new motor is increasing the production costs.

8% of $2 million is more profit than 10% of $1.5 million. If you're going to cut your margin, you better be able to make up for it in sales. IMO, a 4 cylinder Camaro is a big mistake because the increased sales will not cover the cost of R&D'ing a car that doesn't fit AT ALL. A turbo 4 banger does not belong in a muscle car, and I think the public will realize this.
Agreed either axe the V6 option all together or axe the 4 banger and offer a turbo 6.
DarkneSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:25 PM   #82
McRat

 
McRat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 ZR1 "Satan"
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Norco, CA
Posts: 1,183
News Flash!

Scientists have discovered that over 90% of car buyers don't know squat about engines.

They do not want to open the hood, and do not care what is under it.

Even Camaros.

The following is NOT intended to be an insult, but...

I drove a 2014 V6 Camaro on Saturday. If you think a turbo 4 sounds like ass, then you'll really hate the NA six-banger.

It was fun to drive, and comfy, but that six didn't sound like a muscle car engine. More like farm machinery.

YET... The base Camaro is the bread and butter. And always has been.

If the base becomes a turbo four, the base will sell. It sounds better, but that's not why. Most people get plenty of power from all modern engines. The GM Ecotec turbo makes more power than most of the 454 ci Big Blocks did. Yes indeedy. And nobody was crying about how slow their 454 Chevelle was with it's whopping 235HP (1973).

People are HAPPY with the Prius powertrain. Holy cow. And the Camry.

Most people are buying a Mustang or Camaro for it's looks, and it's youthful image.

It's only us crazys that think a Camaro with an automatic or sixbanger is a crime against nature.
__________________
2002 Z06 "Blue Meanie" 11.36 ET
2003 Z06 in progress
2009 CTS-V "Spooky" 12.36 ET, bone stock at 1600 mi. Rainy day in Sacramento. Sadness.
2010 ZR1 "Satan" no times yet.
2013 Volt SCCA Solo2 #771 HS3.
And a bunch of Duramaxes.
McRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:42 PM   #83
oklapike
 
oklapike's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Anniversary SS Coupe
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 522
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRat View Post
Bizarre Fantasy, based on existing GM parts and tech -

Camaro Ecotec, Area 51 Special Edition.

Color - Gloss black with flat black and red accents. Ghost Shark fender art from SR-71.

Dual 210HP ELR traction motors, front+back.
Nose contains switchable E85 turbo 4 with 270hp on gasoline.
16kwh traction battery.

Cost: $65k.
Seating: 4
Mileage: >100eMPG, or 30 gas MPG.
Electric-Only Range: 40mi.
Gas range: 300mi.
Weight: 3900lb
Performance: Top Speed - 190mph. 1/4mi - 12.50@108mph, 12.0@125mph E85 TurboMode.
HP: Eco - 210HP, Sport - 420HP, Competition - 690HP (60 seconds), TurboMode(E85) - 750HP.
Transmission: None.
Drive: AWD, all wheel regen.
Skidpan: >1.01g
Braking: >1.4g.

The CG would be lower than any existing performance GM product. The weight balance would be 50/50.

The drive system would work thus:

In Eco mode, either electric or gas powers just the front wheels.
Sport mode permits both electric motors to operate in AWD for 420HP.
Competition mode allows both electric motors to run, and the i4 to operate direct drive at 15psi boost on gasoline once road speed allows 2000rpm.
TurboMode requires E85 and boost levels increase to 25psi.

The additional weight comes from the battery and second electric motor.

Think of this as a V8 Camaro with a permanent nitrous bottle that is refilled automatically each night.

It will probably kill a GT-R at the dragstrip, but have a lower CG and all the goodness that comes with it.

But, you can also use it as an economy commuter if you wish. A driver who puts 12,000 miles a year on their car will use little if any gasoline.
That sounds extremely badass. Though I'll be honest, that sounds more like the car Cadillac should have built as a Tesla competitor rather than the ELR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by x1sniper3x View Post
I'm surprised at everyone hating on the 4-cylinder here...I mean, did you really think that GM wasn't going to add one for the 6th gen? Ford did it and GM has to respond...if they introduce a line-up with only the V6 and V8, then C&D, MT, and other outlets would jump all over GM for not having a more fuel-economic engine as an option. And it also allows for more high-end power in the Camaro, since it will raise the average MPG for the Camaro with the impending CAFE regulations. And so what if GM is adding it as an option? It's not like they're forcing everyone to buy a 4-cylinder...

We have enough in-fighting on this forum between the V8 and V6 crews, I'd really not like to see it get worse with the I4 crew coming in.

Onto other topics:

Someone mentioned the order of the engines before; I don't know if that necessarily has any correlation to their power. I just read them as increasing in number of cylinders/displacement: I4, V6, V8, SCV8. I wouldn't read into it too much as there's a chance Chevy will go the same route as Ford. We'll wait and see.

My big thing from this is that the freakin' LT4 is apparently in the 2016 line-up! I was expecting the LT1 SS to be top-dog for a year before introducing a ZL1 successor. Now we get the chance to see a 650 HP, 650 lb-ft monster of a Camaro!
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake2010ss View Post
I've heard of a new ctsv in the making. I don't know what v8 they are using for it..but I'd expect the zl1 would use that motor and not be exactly the same as the z06 motor....unless the V is the same as the z06 motor.


Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
I wouldn't be surprised that they both end up being variations on the LT4, just tuned and plumbed differently to make in the neighborhood of 630~640 hp and torque.
oklapike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 06:57 PM   #84
McRat

 
McRat's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 ZR1 "Satan"
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Norco, CA
Posts: 1,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by oklapike View Post
That sounds extremely badass. Though I'll be honest, that sounds more like the car Cadillac should have built as a Tesla competitor rather than the ELR.
...
I cried when I found out what they did with the ELR.

It's an upscale Chevy Volt with a tuning bump.

I love my daughter's Chevy Volt. It will kick to the curb all the other pretenders. It violates a 2014 Prius so bad that you could be charged with rape.
It puts up a pretty good show against a lot of FWD "performance" cars.

With me at the helm, I was cutting about the same AutoX lap times with the Volt as I did with our CTS-V (556HP). Seriously. I'm not an expert, but I don't totally suck either.

The ELR could have been SO GOOD. GM knows Electric. They KNOW 4-banger. But why they had to do that to the ELR is beyond comprehension. WHAT where they thinking?

That a Luxury Volt would be a show stopper? ARE YOU HIGH???? They should have learned their lesson with the Cimarron. You can't sell an econobox to a Caddy buyer by dressing it up.

To sell the ELR, all they had to do was to put the i4 Turbo in as the backup engine, and all would be OK.

But to kill the Tesla, they needed to put a second traction motor in the rear.

It would have increased the price about $15,000 to bump to i4 Turbo + 2nd traction motor, but it would have had 420++ HP. And killed the Tesla.
__________________
2002 Z06 "Blue Meanie" 11.36 ET
2003 Z06 in progress
2009 CTS-V "Spooky" 12.36 ET, bone stock at 1600 mi. Rainy day in Sacramento. Sadness.
2010 ZR1 "Satan" no times yet.
2013 Volt SCCA Solo2 #771 HS3.
And a bunch of Duramaxes.
McRat is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Tags
2016 camaro, 2016 camaro forum, 2016 camaro forums, 2016 camaro spy, 2016 camaro spy photo, 2016 camaro spy photos, 2016 camaro spy pics, 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 04:01 PM.


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