[suplex]

Originally Posted by fbodyauto

I might be wrong, but I remember there being a 4 cyl Camaro back in the 3rd generation. Any one else remember this?

Hmm, so you're talking about somewhere between 1982 - 1992. I had a 1988 Z24 (the V6 upgrade to the Cavalier) and it had a 2.8L V6 that produced 130hp.

I can honestly say I don't remember a 4-cylander engine in the 3rd Gen Camaro, I only remember V6's or V8's.

[GaBoy25]

The third-generation Camaro was produced from 1982 to 1992. These were the first Camaros to offer modern fuel injection, Turbo-Hydramatic 700R4 four-speed automatic transmissions, five speed manual transmissions, 16*inch wheels, a standard 4-cylinder engine,[9] and hatchback bodies. The cars were nearly 500 pounds (227*kg) lighter than the second generation model.....wikipedia

[FenwickHockey65]

There was a four cylinder available in the Camaro for some time. It was a pretty terrible engine.

The 2.0T is down the corner and around the block from the Iron Duke. Much more advanced.

[SlingShot]

If the 2.0T is the same LNF engine GM has been using, they are made for boost and mods. It really won't take much to put 375-400 to the ground with them.

[Quackersacker]

flux capacitor runs on banana peels and beer

[All Star]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

If the 2.0T is the same LNF engine GM has been using, they are made for boost and mods. It really won't take much to put 375-400 to the ground with them.

It should be the same 2.0T that is being put in the ATS. It should still take to mods very well, I would hope.

[PYROLYSIS]

Originally Posted by ShnOmac

Nice start.... now where is the V version?










.

Once the DI V-8 is released in the Corvette all bets are off. They will probably show up in the ATS in some form and that will give us a good idea of the 6th gen Camaro performance.

[PYROLYSIS]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

If the 2.0T is the same LNF engine GM has been using, they are made for boost and mods. It really won't take much to put 375-400 to the ground with them.

I personally have no desire for a Camaro with any type of 4 cylinder. I'm hoping a naturally aspirated V-6 will still be available. That could end up being the new Camaro standard in affordable performance. A 3400 lb V-6 Camaro with a high performing suspension would sit nice next to my 1LE.

[fielderLS3]

The 2.0T will probably be in the lineup somewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if both the 2.0T and 3.6 NA V6 are both available.

As for a TTV6? Not in this car, at least not yet (Maybe the 7th gen or beyond). I think GM knows their base well enough to know that at least in the Camaro, there has to be a V8 in a more mainstream trim level for now, and not just in an exclusive, low volume, very expensive trim like the ZL1.

If you want a good idea of 2016 6th gen engine options, wait and see the 2015 Mustang. If the Coyote stays in the GT, the Gen V will be in the SS. It'll have to be to compete in this particular market niche.

Originally Posted by ShnOmac

2013 ATS 2.5L STANDARD RWD
Standard Equipment
SELECT DRIVE TYPE

Rear Wheel Drive

All Wheel Drive
SELECT TRIM
2.5L Standard
2.5L Luxury
2.0L Turbo Standard
2.0L Turbo Luxury
2.0L Turbo Performance
2.0L Turbo Premium
3.6L Luxury
3.6L Performance
3.6L Premium

Every time the ATS is mentioned, I am still floored by the base engine, the 2.5 NA Ecotec. It's almost like GM is trying to sabotage an otherwise excellent car. The 2.0 Turbo should be the standard engine, period. Pulling the Malibu engine and using it in a Cadillac just reeks of the worst kind of cost cutting, and is an appalling move to make with their flagship brand, which they want to claim is the "standard of the world" again. No one was fooled with the Cimerron, and likewise, no one will be fooled today or in the future if they continue to try to build "premium" or "luxury" cars to a bargain basement budget either. The buyers will see right through it.

Originally Posted by fbodyauto

I might be wrong, but I remember there being a 4 cyl Camaro back in the 3rd generation. Any one else remember this?

We remember. We just try not to. At least those days are never coming back again.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

Every time the ATS is mentioned, I am still floored by the base engine, the 2.5 NA Ecotec. It's almost like GM is trying to sabotage an otherwise excellent car. The 2.0 Turbo should be the standard engine, period. Pulling the Malibu engine and using it in a Cadillac just reeks of the worst kind of cost cutting, and is an appalling move to make with their flagship brand, which they want to claim is the "standard of the world" again. No one was fooled with the Cimerron, and likewise, no one will be fooled today or in the future if they continue to try to build "premium" or "luxury" cars to a bargain basement budget either. The buyers will see right through it.

Actually, Mercedes and Audi both offer base engine options with HP outputs similar to the ATS 2.5L. Granted, both are turbocharged and therefore produce higher torque figures.

And Cimmaron comparisons to the ATS are completely off-base. It's not like GM took a Cruze, slapped Cadillac badges on it and called it a day.

[fielderLS3]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

And Cimmaron comparisons to the ATS are completely off-base. It's not like GM took a Cruze, slapped Cadillac badges on it and called it a day.

Not suggesting that the cars themselves are comparable. All I'm saying is the base engine from a Malibu going into a Cadillac gives me a feeling that the old mentality at Cadillac that took it from standard of the world to standard of GM is still there, and that concerns me.

I agree that the ATS platform and car as a whole are excellent, but if not executed properly, it's potential success will be limited. It's a bit like a football team that can drive 95 years to the 2 yard line, and then kicks a field goal.

For a Cadillac, the NA 4-cyl needs to be scrapped. You won't find a 4-cyl Camry engine in the ES or GS. You won't find a base Fusion engine in any Lincoln. You won't find a base Avenger engine in the 300. You won't find a Mini engine in a 3-series. You won't find a base Altima engine in an Infinity G. You won't find a Jetta 5-banger in an A4. This is what the ATS has to compete against.

[shrinkdoc]

If our cars were 300lbs less the v6 would be turning mid 13s in stock form. With the now available bolt on mods we would be at high 12s to low 13s.
The SS would in the low 12s in stock form. Our v6s pull nicely as well as cruise at highway speed at 17 or 1800 rpm. A 4 cyl I suspect would would require hi rpm and buzz with lots of unecesary shifting!!

[ShnOmac]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

If you want a good idea of 2016 6th gen engine options, wait and see the 2015 Mustang. If the Coyote stays in the GT, the Gen V will be in the SS. It'll have to be to compete in this particular market niche.

Whatever the "V" version of the ATS has under the hood is going to be pretty darn close to what's in the 6th Gen Camaro. We don't know what all the Gen5 engines are going to be like but it's to late in the game to develop a whole new engine. JMO

That's if there is a ATS-V..... If not then who the heck knows!

[meissen]

Only a handful of people really know what's going in the 6th generation Camaro and none of them are going to spill the beans.