Homepage Garage Wiki Register Members List 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

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-12-2013, 09:07 PM   #188
The_Blur
Jayhawk USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: Demon SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,621
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
We can—actually, I'm sure we will—bicker about this for weeks. Please remember that offering a high-performance version of a 4-cylinder engine with forced induction does not require you to purchase it. This would be an option granted to those who want the unique styling of a Camaro above all else.

Start thinking outside of the Camaro-Mustang-Challenger rivalry. GM is winning this rivalry now, but GM doesn't have a product to compete with some of our low-displacement import competition. An Alpha Camaro will weigh less and therefore be a perfect fit for that market with the right pricing and engine options. Camaros will still be available in the traditional V6 and V8 arrangements for the long haul in order to compete with our traditional domestic rivals and to bring enthusiasts what we expect of our favorite car. Of course, not everyone is an enthusiast. Some of these people are just customers wanting something different, and I know a lot of people that want a cool car but don't care how much power it has. A version with a 4-cylinder turbo makes sense for them.

I did notice that a lot of arguments against any 4-cylinder turbo are coming from the V8 crowd. You guys are the heart and soul of high-performance GM drivers, but you are not the market for any 4-banger. Keep that in mind. If you want a 6thgen, then you'll be able to buy one with a V8, as usual. Think of the 4-cylinder model as a stepping stone to convert some ricer kids into real American performance machines. It starts with hot styling, and then they join Camaro5, and ultimately they're so enamored with how awesome Camaro enthusiasts are that they want to show up to a future Camaro5Fest with the V8 they've dreamed of owning since getting their 4-cylinder turbo. It's just something to consider.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2013, 09:56 PM   #189
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Chinese auto market going to 30 million units? I've seen that from GM and from a Ford document discussing their global asperations?
At the rate we are going one day workers in Chinese factories will be driving in to work in new Camaros and Mustangs, while the parking lots in American factories will be filled only with EVs and bicycles.
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams
Lou_Dorchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 12:43 AM   #190
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blur View Post
We can—actually, I'm sure we will—bicker about this for weeks. Please remember that offering a high-performance version of a 4-cylinder engine with forced induction does not require you to purchase it. This would be an option granted to those who want the unique styling of a Camaro above all else.

Start thinking outside of the Camaro-Mustang-Challenger rivalry. GM is winning this rivalry now, but GM doesn't have a product to compete with some of our low-displacement import competition. An Alpha Camaro will weigh less and therefore be a perfect fit for that market with the right pricing and engine options. Camaros will still be available in the traditional V6 and V8 arrangements for the long haul in order to compete with our traditional domestic rivals and to bring enthusiasts what we expect of our favorite car. Of course, not everyone is an enthusiast. Some of these people are just customers wanting something different, and I know a lot of people that want a cool car but don't care how much power it has. A version with a 4-cylinder turbo makes sense for them.

I did notice that a lot of arguments against any 4-cylinder turbo are coming from the V8 crowd. You guys are the heart and soul of high-performance GM drivers, but you are not the market for any 4-banger. Keep that in mind. If you want a 6thgen, then you'll be able to buy one with a V8, as usual. Think of the 4-cylinder model as a stepping stone to convert some ricer kids into real American performance machines. It starts with hot styling, and then they join Camaro5, and ultimately they're so enamored with how awesome Camaro enthusiasts are that they want to show up to a future Camaro5Fest with the V8 they've dreamed of owning since getting their 4-cylinder turbo. It's just something to consider.
I don't mind 4cylinders by the way, I just don't like the idea of the Camaro becoming an econo-box, or even a Honda. If the doom Sayers are right then high gas prices and Govt regulations will turn these cars into sad sack watered down AMC Pacer versions of themselves. I'm old enough to remember the '70s and how Govt regs turned the best muscle cars in the world into catalytic converted 5.7L V8 145 HP having dishrags. I just don't want 2014 and '15 to be like '74 and '75! Where a 4cylinder turbo is the best we can hope for. They did it once, they may do it again. I swear by all that's holy, if they make a turbo 4 Z28 I'll never buy Camaro again.:(
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:22 AM   #191
trademaster
 
Drives: 06 Maserati gran sport, 12 z06
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Detroit/NYC
Posts: 691
Turbo 4 > v6. The naturally aspirated v6 is on the way out in my opinion. The 4s can make more torque earlier and are more flexible as far as packaging is concerned. The v6 just doesn't make as much sense anymore. A 2.5l DI turbo could easily make as much power as the current v6 with more torque and a flatter power curve while getting better fuel efficiency when out of boost. It would be very cool also if GM were to bring back the stage kits they offered on the cobalts.
trademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 01:36 AM   #192
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by trademaster View Post
Turbo 4 > v6. The naturally aspirated v6 is on the way out in my opinion. The 4s can make more torque earlier and are more flexible as far as packaging is concerned. The v6 just doesn't make as much sense anymore. A 2.5l DI turbo could easily make as much power as the current v6 with more torque and a flatter power curve while getting better fuel efficiency when out of boost. It would be very cool also if GM were to bring back the stage kits they offered on the cobalts.
I really don't think Turbo 4rs are significantly more fuel efficient than NA V6s. And why compare FI V4s to NA V6s? Why not compare their torque and power to other FI engines? Turbo V6 or Turbo V8? Once you start boosting things it's just a matter of money anyway.
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:15 AM   #193
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
That having the Chinese market and an Indian market growing while ours is not? Check the data. We are well below historical volumes and eve when it recovers fully we will be no more than where we've been years ago.
There's a reason our market is not growing... and instead of bickering about what China and India are going to do to our prices, let's say you instead focus your attention on getting rid of the radicals with their boot on the throat of the car companies and oil companies and the economy in general?

If we were not de-industrializing the country with these crackpot ponzi energy schemes, Ford and GM would not be looking elsewhere for business.
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:23 AM   #194
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
I really don't think Turbo 4rs are significantly more fuel efficient than NA V6s. And why compare FI V4s to NA V6s? Why not compare their torque and power to other FI engines? Turbo V6 or Turbo V8? Once you start boosting things it's just a matter of money anyway.
A lightly boosted V6 will run circles around a lightly boosted I-4, so the I-4 will need more radical components to handle higher boost just to keep up with the V6. That means for the same level of performance you will shell out more money for the I-4, and have less headroom to tune it because it will already be pushed closer to the limit just to feel like a mildly boosted V6.

Why is it that everyone who claims how a boosted I-4 is so awesome acts like an I-4 is the only engine that gets better with boost?
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 03:35 AM   #195
Ken_
Tally Ho!
 
Ken_'s Avatar
 
Drives: 13 2SS/RS 6M, 05 Mitsubishi Evo 8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: KU
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
A lightly boosted V6 will run circles around a lightly boosted I-4, so the I-4 will need more radical components to handle higher boost just to keep up with the V6.
I call BS on this one. How much experience do you have with boosted 6 and 4 cylinders? Again, you miss the power:weight ratio.

I read your posts, and you do make people think, but on this, I call BS.
__________________
2013 2SS/RS-package Black w/IOM interior 6M
Bone Stock
Ken_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 04:40 AM   #196
trademaster
 
Drives: 06 Maserati gran sport, 12 z06
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Detroit/NYC
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
I really don't think Turbo 4rs are significantly more fuel efficient than NA V6s. And why compare FI V4s to NA V6s? Why not compare their torque and power to other FI engines? Turbo V6 or Turbo V8? Once you start boosting things it's just a matter of money anyway.
You seem to have answered your own question. Unless for some reason cost isn't an important determining factor for GM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
A lightly boosted V6 will run circles around a lightly boosted I-4, so the I-4 will need more radical components to handle higher boost just to keep up with the V6. That means for the same level of performance you will shell out more money for the I-4, and have less headroom to tune it because it will already be pushed closer to the limit just to feel like a mildly boosted V6.

Why is it that everyone who claims how a boosted I-4 is so awesome acts like an I-4 is the only engine that gets better with boost?
Radical components? Most of the factory turbo 4s run hypereutectic cast pistons just like a lot of the n/a engines, but with lower compression. Besides that the turbo 4 will have 2/3 the internal components of the 6 by definition. 2/3 the pistons, valves, rods, 1/2 the head(s), less exhaust piping, etc. GM's LNF has hypereutectic pistons and there are dozens of folks pushing 320+whp out of them with just a tune and exhaust. GM even offered upgrades to around 300hp that maintained the warranty. I don't see why anyone would compare turbo 4 and turbo 6 when it comes to factory equipment as cost difference is going to be significant. GM isn't going to compare an n/a v6 and a turbo v6 directly for the same trim level because the cost difference is too great, but a turbo 4 can cost about the same and offer better performance with packaging advantages. A turbo 4 like the LNF could replace the current v6 without adding cost while offering greater torque at an earlier rpm and higher efficiency.

Last edited by trademaster; 02-13-2013 at 05:09 AM.
trademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:28 AM   #197
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
Why is it that everyone who claims how a boosted I-4 is so awesome acts like an I-4 is the only engine that gets better with boost?
Of course you can boost engines of any cylinder count or arrangement. That's not the point here.

It's about ways to achieve a satisfactory amount of power and torque for the entry-level end of the Camaro line. Traditionally, this has been done with NA sixxes, but that's not the only way those power and torque targets can reasonably be achieved.


On other engine configurations and boost.

We already have a boosted V8, and there is no V10, V12, or whatever above that for the LSA to be competing against. Nothing more to discuss here.

Given the resistance to turbo-4's solely on the basis of cylinder count, this thread probably shouldn't get hijacked down any forced induction V6 detour . . . the resulting uproar once people figured out what would then be at stake would make the opposition to fours of any description sound like crickets chirping in the night.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:38 AM   #198
The_Blur
Jayhawk USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: Demon SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,621
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
If we were not de-industrializing the country with these crackpot ponzi energy schemes, Ford and GM would not be looking elsewhere for business.
It's only fair to point out that there are a lot of people in China, and GM saw this as an opportunity to get into a market before a culture of buying cars became mainstream. As a result, GM has expanded into an untapped business market. It has nothing to do with Camaros. It has to do with expanding the sales end of a big business.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 09:07 AM   #199
trademaster
 
Drives: 06 Maserati gran sport, 12 z06
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Detroit/NYC
Posts: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
If we were not de-industrializing the country with these crackpot ponzi energy schemes, Ford and GM would not be looking elsewhere for business.
It would be incredibly stupid for GM and Ford to ignore the fastest growing economies and populations on the planet, especially considering they are publicly traded companies with a responsibility to shareholders to pursue expansion opportunities.
trademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 09:18 AM   #200
revychevy
 
revychevy's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2SS RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: St Louis mo.
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Of course you can boost engines of any cylinder count or arrangement. That's not the point here.

It's about ways to achieve a satisfactory amount of power and torque for the entry-level end of the Camaro line. Traditionally, this has been done with NA sixxes, but that's not the only way those power and torque targets can reasonably be achieved.


On other engine configurations and boost.

We already have a boosted V8, and there is no V10, V12, or whatever above that for the LSA to be competing against. Nothing more to discuss here.

Given the resistance to turbo-4's solely on the basis of cylinder count, this thread probably shouldn't get hijacked down any forced induction V6 detour . . . the resulting uproar once people figured out what would then be at stake would make the opposition to fours of any description sound like crickets chirping in the night.


Norm
So are you referencing the idea to get rid of V8s in favor of twin turbo V6s?
__________________
2SS RS bone stock for now...
revychevy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 09:41 AM   #201
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by revychevy View Post
So are you referencing the idea to get rid of V8s in favor of twin turbo V6s?
Scary thought, isn't it?

I really don't want to see all of the essence of the "musclecar" end of the ponycar lineups bred out of them. They're too refined as it is.

The entry level is already "compromised" by definition.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 09:51 AM   #202
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Scary thought, isn't it?

I really don't want to see all of the essence of the "musclecar" end of the ponycar lineups bred out of them. They're too refined as it is.

The entry level is already "compromised" by definition.


Norm
As long as their is sufficient demand for the V8 I don't see it going away. Displacement may go down though. I do think we may see both a FI V6 and a V8 in the lineup at some point. If the FI V6 proves to be popular to the performance-oriented buyers, then it may put the V8 in jeapordy, but more from a price point than existence standpoint. I can't see even that happening anytime soon. The LT1 will be around for a while, and GM didn't take the time and money to develop that with plans for it to be obsolete in a few years.
__________________
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 02-13-2013, 10:26 AM   #203
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
As long as their is sufficient demand for the V8 I don't see it going away.
If something is banned (or regulated out of existance) by the Government, it's gone. Regardless of consumer demand.

People buy Big Gulps and Happy Meals by the millions, but that didn't stop places in the US from banning them. Courts have ruled cities can ban foods, plastic bags, and sugar drinks. They've also said that the EPA can regulate Greenhouse Gasses. If the EPA decides that certain engines must be banned, they are gone.
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams
Lou_Dorchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 10:31 AM   #204
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I can't see even that happening anytime soon.
If I told people 20 years ago cities in America would ban smoking on private property, Big Gulps, and Happy Meals I'd have been labelled a crackpot. Certain people just like telling other people how to live their lives. What they will go after next, no one can say. But they openly admit they dont like gas-guzzling internal combustion engines....
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams
Lou_Dorchen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Tags
2015 camaro, 2015 camaro forum, 2015 camaro forums, 2015 chevrolet camaro, 2015 chevy camaro, 2016 camaro, 2016 camaro forum, 2016 camaro forums, 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 08:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.