Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016 Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro forum, news, rumors, discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-16-2013, 02:34 PM   #301
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,333
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
You have it ALL WRONG.

The real questions is: At what point has the government FINISHED their transporation regulations?

You would think that after 100 years of cars and car regulations, that they would have figured out what lights we need, how many MPH our bumpers must take, and what MPGs we should have, don't you?

A common misconception or intentional misrepresentation of certain politiicians is that people who argue for less regulation are "anti regulation" and those who argue for smaller government are "anti government". This is totally wrong. There are roles for regulation and government that are clearly defined. People reject the OVERREACH beyond those definitions.

The problem is that the regulators NEED to keep regulating and re-regulating, because even though the number of things that can be regulated is finite, they will be out of a job if they ever finish the task.

Therefore, we have regulations on top of regulations ammending regulations, and updating regulations. Same for laws too. There's no end. The job of the regulator is FIRST to protect their own jobs by constantly rewriting regulations.

Did you know that in the past 3 months the governernment has put our nearly 6,000 regulations?

Regulations put a drag on the economy be the sheer work needed to keep up with them and follow them. The private sector spends $500 BILLION a year just in regulation compliance. This is dragging the economy into the mud.

We regulate things and then change the regulations the next year, and people waste tremendous time becuase nothing is ever the same and so more time and money is wasted.

There's a certain finite number of regulations we need, and the rest are just regulators trying to protect their jobs, plus a certain amount of regulations being created because the party in control wants to use them as a tool to change the society. WE DO NOT NEED THIS.

Most, if not all of the regulations you cited are completely unnecessary because they would be done voluntarily by carmakes because of consumer demand or as the result of lawsuits long since decided.

Do we REALLY need backup sensors on every car? Do we REALLY need stability control on every car? Do we really need CHMSL on every car?
You'd think with all the regulations being passed, insurance companies would re-assess their premiums? I mean, should'nt they? Nahhh their mentality is that of the regulatory commissions. To suck the economy dry.
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 02:39 PM   #302
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Once you've bought it, it's yours. Hence what you're hinting at clearly runs afoul of the 4th Amendment (unreasonable search and seizure).
Apaprently, you are not paying attention to the world around you.

Where I live we now cannot own certain scary looking firearms, and accessories even though we bought them legally. This is currently the law, but the courts may uphold the 4th ammendment. There's a chance they will NOT, and therefore the constitution is shredded a bit more.

Even if there's no outright BAN on something, they can find ways to make it useless. For example, they get around the 4th ammendment not by actually confiscating your V8, but instead by putting a $10K per year registration fee on any car with more than 4 cylinders.

This is effectively a de-facto "ban", without violating the 4th ammendment. Same result.

They're dumb, but they have learned over time how to circumvent the protections of our rights in the constitution.
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 02:43 PM   #303
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizard1183 View Post
Well, who cares how much illegal acvtivity was going on? Ive never seen a straightlaced corporation. Have you?
Just recently some UAW workers were busted smoking weed and drinking while on break, THREE times. And they weren't even fired!

http://freebeacon.com/uaw-wins-jobs-...-on-the-clock/

But we all know change is good. Without the changes the unions brought, those poor guys would have been fired.
__________________
'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 02-16-2013, 02:46 PM   #304
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,333
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen View Post
Just recently some UAW workers were busted smoking weed and drinking while on break, THREE times. And they weren't even fired!

http://freebeacon.com/uaw-wins-jobs-...-on-the-clock/

But we all know change is good. Without the changes the unions brought, those poor guys would have been fired.
Well obviously its one of 2 things: Either those workers produced too exceptional of work to fire, or there's no one to replace them! I wonder if politics played a part?
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 02:49 PM   #305
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizard1183 View Post
Well obviously its one of 2 things: Either those workers produced too exceptional of work to fire, or there's no one to replace them! I wonder if politics played a part?
Dont worry, the auto plants and their workers are better now than they used to be. Remember, change is good. SlingShot told us so.
__________________
'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 02-16-2013, 03:04 PM   #306
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,333
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen View Post
Dont worry, the auto plants and their workers are better now than they used to be. Remember, change is good. SlingShot told us so.
If politics werent a no-no on this board, I'd give my thoughts on this "change" thing.
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 03:27 PM   #307
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen View Post
The BellSouth/IBM Simon Personal Communicator was released in 1993. The Simon Personal Communicator was the first mobile phone to add PDA features. It was a phone, pager, calculator, address book, fax machine, and e-mail device in one package, albeit a 20-ounce package that cost $900.

Today I can buy a Galaxy SIII mobile phone with a 16GB memory, TouchWiz interface, it's S Voice feature can recognize 8 languages, it can play music, TV programs, podcasts, audiobooks, and surf the Internet. It also has a 1.9 megapixel camera that can also shoot HD video at 720p @ 230 frames/s.

Despite the added cost of technology improvements that weren't available back then the Galaxy SIII retails for $699.99.

So now we have a product that has numerous technological advancements and yet is cheaper in real dollars than it was 2 decades ago (when you factor in inflation, the price gap gets even bigger).

How did this happen? I have an idea! Maybe it was because the Gov't wasn't mandating to cell phone companies how long battery life had to be, drop test ratings, size and weight, what applications must be put on the phones, nor mandating what cameras must be on the phones, etc. When the private sector is unmolested, and when consumer demand drives the market, the advances in technology and drops in price will amaze you.
You are correct and you notice I also made a similar comment that you didn't include.

However, even if Bluetooth connectivity is on $1 (and it is much more than that in your car) that is $1 more than you could have spent "back in the day". That is all the point I was trying to make.

And the example I gave on the door beams in the Japanese market must not have hit home.

But the question is, without government intervention would we have what we have today.

Remember the first airbags? GM introduced them long before they were required. No one bought them. Expensive, yes. But no sales.

It is likely that without regulations, all cars would have lights, turn signals, good brakes and accelerators that don't stick. Most of these regulations (if you understand the process, which I do) come from people complaining to the government. And all NPRMs are sent to the manufacturers for comment and it's a lengthy process.

The bigger issue seems to be emissions and fuel economy. Without regulation, would we be on the right path if left to our own devices?

Should the government play a role or any role for that matter in protecting us from ourselves? That's what most laws are intended to do. The ones that make it illegal for someone to break into your home and take your stuff we tend to like. The ones that influence what you can buy, not so much.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley Link to Every Camaro photo I've taken in Hi-Resolution
Number 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 04:19 PM   #308
Wizard1183

 
Wizard1183's Avatar
 
Drives: ABM SS2/RS M6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lafayette,LA
Posts: 1,333
Send a message via Yahoo to Wizard1183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
You are correct and you notice I also made a similar comment that you didn't include.

However, even if Bluetooth connectivity is on $1 (and it is much more than that in your car) that is $1 more than you could have spent "back in the day". That is all the point I was trying to make.

And the example I gave on the door beams in the Japanese market must not have hit home.

But the question is, without government intervention would we have what we have today.

Remember the first airbags? GM introduced them long before they were required. No one bought them. Expensive, yes. But no sales.

It is likely that without regulations, all cars would have lights, turn signals, good brakes and accelerators that don't stick. Most of these regulations (if you understand the process, which I do) come from people complaining to the government. And all NPRMs are sent to the manufacturers for comment and it's a lengthy process.

The bigger issue seems to be emissions and fuel economy. Without regulation, would we be on the right path if left to our own devices?

Should the government play a role or any role for that matter in protecting us from ourselves? That's what most laws are intended to do. The ones that make it illegal for someone to break into your home and take your stuff we tend to like. The ones that influence what you can buy, not so much.
Well what about the laws of criminals that rob your home and die in the back yard and family gets to sue you and win? Too much regulation is NOT a good thing. It's like patches for software. You try to fix one problem and create another.
__________________


Life is short, drive it like you stole it!
Wizard1183 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 04:21 PM   #309
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,787
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Thread title is:

"Why would anyone want a 4 cyl Camaro"

As much as I'm 'enjoying' reading the sidebar conversation that's taking place, I'm afraid that I must insist we put this thread back on its rails or face closure.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 05:13 PM   #310
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Should the government play a role or any role for that matter in protecting us from ourselves? That's what most laws are intended to do.
So, you agree with them when they say you're too stupid to protect yourself from yourself...

Anyone that believes that is too stupid to vote.

Quote:
The ones that make it illegal for someone to break into your home and take your stuff we tend to like. The ones that influence what you can buy, not so much.
This is a bizarre argument.

First of all, breaking into a house to take things is theft. This is against the law. Restricting freedoms under the pretense of doing good things is called "regulation" it is often done in order to enrich donors or constituents, and is also theft, but since those who make and enforce the laws are the same people writing the regulations that are perpetrating this theft, there's nobody to hold them accountable.

The system is broken.

As for the topic title and subject, I can see reasons people would want a 4 cylinder Camaro, and I think the topic as such is silly and meant to provoke people who like those engines. I don't mind the offering of a 4 cyclinder camaro because it was done before in the 80's for basically the same reason and it was a disaster. I believe history will repeat itself and there's a good potential that it will self correct down the road. If it's not a disaster, then that's a good thing as long as we don't continue down this path to making the V8 Camaro the "elite only" version and the "masses" have to accept "change" and "live with" their harsh, expensive, noisy I-4.
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 05:36 PM   #311
Lou_Dorchen
 
Lou_Dorchen's Avatar
 
Drives: Jeep
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
But the question is, without government intervention would we have what we have today.

Remember the first airbags? GM introduced them long before they were required. No one bought them. Expensive, yes. But no sales.
I actually believe we would have it better that we do now if the Gov't had stayed out of regulating what automakers must produce.

Yes, airbags used to be very expensive and so few bought cars with them. Microwaves and DVD players were at one time expensive and few people had them. As market forces were allowed to guide things, the prices came down. Now almost everyone has DVD players and microwaves. New features in cars would have done the same thing.

Do you think if the Gov't stayed out of forcing higher MPGs the automakers would have never tried to get better MPGs? Of course not. If GM could make a ~400HP V8 muscle car that got 35MPG, while Ford's 400HP muscle car only got 20MPG, common sense says GM would be selling alot more of their muscle cars and thus Ford would be investing R&D resources to close the gap. And GM would be trying to keep their advantage. Sounds like a cycle where enthusiasts and environmentalists both win to me.

Just like the cell phone makers keep making better and cheaper phones. They are tring to one-up the competition and market their products to the consumer. They aren't having to meet Gov't imposed regulations at the same time. I firmly believe the automakers could have made bigger strides if they could have simply designed and built cars while focusing solely on the consumer, without being forced to put R&D resources where the Gov't forced them to.

Back to a 4-cylinder Camaro. I don't hear large groups of people clamoring for one in the 6th Gen lineup. But I sure hear alot of people hoping that the 6th Gen Camaros get more power though....
__________________
'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 02-16-2013, 07:46 PM   #312
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham View Post
Thread title is:

"Why would anyone want a 4 cyl Camaro"

As much as I'm 'enjoying' reading the sidebar conversation that's taking place, I'm afraid that I must insist we put this thread back on its rails or face closure.
...Shouldn't be too hard figuring out why it's being de-railed...Instead of closing threads, use the "you know what"...lol
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 09:23 PM   #313
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,787
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
...Shouldn't be too hard figuring out why it's being de-railed...Instead of closing threads, use the "you know what"...lol
It's been collecting dust...


__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 09:44 PM   #314
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,303
Even though I've posted "against" an I-4, believe it or not I've tried to keep an open mind about it...I think part of it is that it's easier to picture the engine, than it is the car it will be in...An I-4 in the style of the Gen5 (regardless of weight) I think would have been a disaster....Not a "platform" expert at all, but I hope the I-4 doesn't dis-enfranchise or disappoint Camaro "enthusiasts" for the sake of "new" customers....just sayin'...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 10:08 PM   #315
Stealthpanda

 
Stealthpanda's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS L99
Join Date: May 2011
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
It does sound good, but....

What you are describing is basically what the BRZ turbo will be once it comes out, which would make the Camaro a similarly powered car, but with a lot more mass and without the driving dynamics of the BRZ. So for those among us whose reason for buying the Camaro would be something other than it is named "Camaro," what would be the selling point?
The same selling point, whatever it may be , that the Hyundai Genesis Coupe has. Why pay for the 3.8 in even base form, at a starting price of 29k?

edit: curb weight will be interesting if/when the 6th gens come out in I4 form, I suppose... then you'd be more right than ever, fielder.
Stealthpanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 10:14 PM   #316
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,787
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
Even though I've posted "against" an I-4, believe it or not I've tried to keep an open mind about it...I think part of it is that it's easier to picture the engine, than it is the car it will be in...An I-4 in the style of the Gen5 (regardless of weight) I think would have been a disaster....Not a "platform" expert at all, but I hope the I-4 doesn't dis-enfranchise or disappoint Camaro "enthusiasts" for the sake of "new" customers....just sayin'...
Good point...glad you brought it up. I firmly believe that it'll be up to the enthusiasts to "disappoint", or "disenchant" themselves on this one. There will always be a potent performance model available in Camaro, so it's not as though the offering of a good four cylinder will take that away from the brand. Imho, why get bent out of shape over a car we aren't likely to buy anyways?

That all said...I'd like to entertain a daily-driver Turbo 4 6th-gen to replace my Cobalt and park alongside the ZL1...
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 10:17 PM   #317
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham View Post
I firmly believe that it'll be up to the enthusiasts to "disappoint", or "disenchant" themselves on this one. There will always be a potent performance model available in Camaro. So, imho, why get bent out of shape over a car we aren't likely to buy anyways?

That all said...I'd like to entertain a daily-driver Turbo 4 6th-gen to replace my Cobalt and park alongside the ZL1...
My kid wants to get a car right after he gets out of college...been going back and forth on Cruze or Sonic...Might wait and add a Gen6 to the equation...lol...(He's got his heart set on a "turbo" of some kind)...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 10:18 PM   #318
SlingShot


 
SlingShot's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 7,030
I can only base my opinion with my experience on the Kappa platform, and in that application the 2.0T works great.
__________________
SlingShot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:14 AM   #319
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
...Shouldn't be too hard figuring out why it's being de-railed...Instead of closing threads, use the "you know what"...lol
I like the kinder, gentler, Dragoneye.
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:18 AM   #320
Captain Awesome
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham View Post
Imho, why get bent out of shape over a car we aren't likely to buy anyways?
If the R&D budget or packaging considerations for the I-4 compromise the V8 version in any way, it's worth speaking out against it before they go too far down that rabbit hole.
Captain Awesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 01:55 AM   #321
tramtwo


 
tramtwo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LE
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N'Awlinz
Posts: 6,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
If the R&D budget or packaging considerations for the I-4 compromise the V8 version in any way, it's worth speaking out against it before they go too far down that rabbit hole.
Speak out but with no voice really... That there is still room for any excess in this world is kind of amazing. I guess as long as the minimalist (read militant environmentalist) keep having kids the rest of us have a chance.

It is hard to know whether technology drives the auto regulations or if it is the other way around. If my car didn't have seat belts not sure that would be high up on my mod list.

I think the practical nature of a lighter more efficient Camaro flies in the face of its current non practical nature (yes even in the v6 variant).

Be honest do you know anyone or have you yourself shed weight off your current Camaro to gain economy or speed?

To do my own derailing... this is at the root of the wholesale downward spiral.

Good news is that today will be full of sun and about 60 degrees, I have a full tank of gas and plenty of rubber!!

No Camaros were harmed in the production of this post.
__________________
tramtwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 08:18 AM   #322
SlingShot


 
SlingShot's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 7,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
If the R&D budget or packaging considerations for the I-4 compromise the V8 version in any way, it's worth speaking out against it before they go too far down that rabbit hole.

Based on the Kappa platform, packaging is not an issue because a small block Chevy slides right in there ...
__________________
SlingShot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 09:23 AM   #323
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
My kid wants to get a car right after he gets out of college...been going back and forth on Cruze or Sonic...Might wait and add a Gen6 to the equation...lol...(He's got his heart set on a "turbo" of some kind)...
Just teach your son that turbo doesn't mean what he thinks it does. It means take a smaller engine and put an exhaust driven compressor on it to make more power than it otherwise would and still get the rough FE of the base engine. Worked great on the Buick 3.8L V6 which was awesome. I was going to get a plate that said Trbo gln or something like that because 3.8L is a gallon LOL. Sounded cooler at the time I guess.

But today it means take an anemic 1.4L and boost it so it has decent drivability and great FE. So the 1.4L T in the Sonic and Cruze has a whole different meaning. 2.0T on the other hand is no better than a good V6 for performance. You just have lighter weight and better FE than the 6.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingShot View Post
I can only base my opinion with my experience on the Kappa platform, and in that application the 2.0T works great.
Mine looked just like the one in your sig. Had the GMPP calibration. Wish I still had it. Maybe you have mine, when did you buy it? LOL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
I like the kinder, gentler, Dragoneye.
I watched Dragoneye dissapear over burgers on my back deck after C5Fest. It was an amazing sight. It might take something pretty powerful to bring Dragoneye back. Mr. Wyndham is driving around in a ZL1. Dragoneye had one on order and was lusting after one for many years.

So it's kind of like wishing the butterfly could be a caterpillar again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Awesome View Post
If the R&D budget or packaging considerations for the I-4 compromise the V8 version in any way, it's worth speaking out against it before they go too far down that rabbit hole.
The only way that happens is if you don't package for the V8 in the first place. V8 is bigger, needs more radiator and needs a bigger transmission just for starters. So if the V8 is considered from the begining this isn't an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingShot View Post
Based on the Kappa platform, packaging is not an issue because a small block Chevy slides right in there ...
I thought Mallet had to use a hammer in a few places
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley Link to Every Camaro photo I've taken in Hi-Resolution
Number 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 09:52 AM   #324
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 3 View Post
Just teach your son that turbo doesn't mean what he thinks it does. It means take a smaller engine and put an exhaust driven compressor on it to make more power than it otherwise would and still get the rough FE of the base engine. Worked great on the Buick 3.8L V6 which was awesome. I was going to get a plate that said Trbo gln or something like that because 3.8L is a gallon LOL. Sounded cooler at the time I guess.

But today it means take an anemic 1.4L and boost it so it has decent drivability and great FE. So the 1.4L T in the Sonic and Cruze has a whole different meaning. 2.0T on the other hand is no better than a good V6 for performance. You just have lighter weight and better FE than the 6.

That's sort of what I thought, but then I've been hearing that the turbo now is more of a factor at all speeds, not just when you "get on it"...that they are more reliable than before...dunno...but if you gotta get your foot into it to feel the turbo, probably kills any economy...
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 10:12 AM   #325
Number 3
Hail to the King baby!
 
Number 3's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 ATS 2.0T & '14 Chevrolet SS
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 8,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
That's sort of what I thought, but then I've been hearing that the turbo now is more of a factor at all speeds, not just when you "get on it"...that they are more reliable than before...dunno...but if you gotta get your foot into it to feel the turbo, probably kills any economy...
That's about how they work. Under normal driving you only have a moderate loss of economy due to the exhaust driven compressor.

But the smaller Turbos, under 1.5L you are simply getting equivalent performance to the base engine. Using Cruze/Sonic as the example you can get the same HP in either a 1.4L Turbo or a NA 1.8L. But the Turbo is the higher FE engine. So in this case you aren't getting any more driving performance.

So it really is about the equivalency the Turbo adds. Look at the 1.6L Turbo GM uses on Opels. That is still not quite the HP as the new NA 2.5L GM has in the Malibu and ATS. But it will get better FE.

Ford uses this even more. They have a 1.6L Turbo they put in the new Escape and Fusion. In the Escape that is 178 Hp which is actually higher than the base 2.5L and also gets better FE. Then they add the 2.0L T as the top end choice at 240 HP. The 1.6L T is the best for FE.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley Link to Every Camaro photo I've taken in Hi-Resolution
Number 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
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 07:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.