09-24-2015, 07:23 PM | #29 | ||
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 14,419
|
Quote:
|
||
09-24-2015, 07:25 PM | #30 |
Drives: 2015 1SS/RS Blue Velvet Metallic Join Date: May 2015
Location: Hollister, CA
Posts: 114
|
|
09-24-2015, 07:29 PM | #31 |
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 14,419
|
I think they will sell like hot-cakes....I don't buy the "low-profit" argument...They will be identical to the V-6 except for the motor....and the V-6 is a whopping 1500 more?....There's plenty of profit in the T-4s....
|
09-24-2015, 07:52 PM | #32 | |
Drives: 2000Firehawk Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City
Posts: 131
|
Quote:
I've been beating on my, 350hp 2.0T automatic HHR SS , for 6 years now... I drive it, like I stole it.... My last 2 passes down the quarter mile were back-to-back, 12.33 ETs, with zero cool down, between those 2 runs... 30,000 miles, & no problems at all... I'm torturing the 4t45e automatic, with 1.7 second 60' times, on slicks... Last edited by 2000Firehawk; 09-24-2015 at 08:03 PM. |
|
09-24-2015, 09:00 PM | #33 | |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,170
|
Quote:
GM tried it and couldn't make it live. That's why the GMPP recall resulted in 295
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
|
09-24-2015, 09:33 PM | #34 | |
Drives: 2010 CobaltSSTC Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 515
|
Quote:
No, Just no. As proven by the LNF's long ago. Plenty of 300WHP/350tq running around with 200,000km+(Me at 205,000). Its just a mild 91octane tune with an intake and downpipe. It's still extremely reliable. You have to worry when you get off the stock turbo. |
|
09-24-2015, 09:51 PM | #35 |
Drives: Duramax Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 174
|
GM sold Stage 1 kits for the LNF's back in the day that would raise the HP/TQ to well over 300 at the wheels, still under warranty.
|
09-24-2015, 09:53 PM | #36 |
Drives: Duramax Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 174
|
I bet the 4cyl outsells the v6 2-1, at least. Should make some decent power too. Not a bad deal for what the car will be capable of. Stage 1 tune, downpipe, intake, would make for a fun daily driver.
|
09-24-2015, 10:03 PM | #37 | |
Drives: F350 Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: SC
Posts: 56
|
Quote:
I believe profitability and it's better impact toward meeting the rising CAFE standards and positives weighing heavily in the 2.0T's favor. I love the bigger displacement engines as much as anyone else here but look at the car landscape and small displacement turbocharged engines are the direction all manufacturers are going. I think the 2.3EB and the 2.0T will become this generations small block V8's. Ford is betting on that and looks like GM will be right there with them. |
|
09-24-2015, 10:51 PM | #38 | |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,170
|
Quote:
I said it was likely a less profitable model not a non profitable model. Also said it was likely going to be the lower volume model. But without the financials it's difficult to tell, but spidey sense tells me both are true. It has nothing to do with getting the money back, they will. But GM will ramp up volumes through late fall into the winter. And if you are ramping up why ramp up with units that are even slightly less profitable. Also keep in mind GM was well ahead of Ford in the 2.0T. GM had the first 4 cylinder DI turbo engine and beat Ford to market. Their stronger marketing gives people the idea GM was behind. They weren't. I never said they wouldn't sell enough or they wouldn't recoup then investment. I merely stated the V6 and V8 models would be more popular and that is likely why GM would do the I4 slightly later. If you had 3 engines and could launch 2 which 2 would you pick?
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
|
09-25-2015, 07:02 AM | #39 | |
Drives: 2000Firehawk Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sun City
Posts: 131
|
Quote:
ZZP has been at the fore front ,of the aftermarket GM 2.0T development, & has 'tested', the 'durabilily', limits. I believe that they said that 600 hp ,is the limit, on the very 'robust', GM 2.0T. There's a lot of 'head' room, in all engines. |
|
09-25-2015, 12:04 PM | #40 |
Drives: Camaro LLT Join Date: May 2012
Location: Union City, NJ
Posts: 595
|
We'll my cobalt SS\SC is putting down 378 to the wheel with 333 torque, and I drive it like I stole it also. The only problem I've ever had was my temp sensor going bad. I've owned it since new, and now have 127k on the clock. Still going strong. I also have the foam cast block, not the sand cast that his HHR\SS enjoys. Don't count out the LTG just yet.
__________________
|
09-25-2015, 12:09 PM | #41 |
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9 Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,277
|
No not really. There's a good gap in weight and probably balance with the t4 over the v6. A hand grenade? Really? Never knew that engine to come apart easy and at such low power levels. I'm pretty sure it'll live with bolt ons and more boost.
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
|
09-25-2015, 12:24 PM | #42 |
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06 Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,129
|
I'm not sure we should make inferences about the durability of the LTG based on the LHU or LNF. It is an entirely new engine with a new block, rotocast heads and so on.
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread Last edited by GretchenGotGrowl; 09-25-2015 at 12:40 PM. |
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|