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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-06-2013, 10:10 PM   #51
90503


 
Drives: 2011 2SS/RS LS3
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Torrance
Posts: 10,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
I think you're selling the V8 short. Sure, its not as common as it was 30 or 40 years ago, but it still has a niche that is bigger than most give it credit for. That it has lasted longer than anyone expected supports the notion that the demand is stronger than "anyone" thinks. Remember how much GM underestimated V8 demand just 4 years ago when the 5th gens went into production?

Again, you are not giving the V8 enough credit. You are making the small block V8 sound as if it is some kind of exotic specialty engine, when in fact, it is very much mainstream. Because of the huge number of truck sales, the small block V8 is one of the higher volume engine families GM sells, not one of the lower. If you want to see which engine sells in the lowest volume at GM, look at the TTV6.
Oh, for sure they are great motors and have a demand to fill....Don't know all the particulars, but the LT-1s will all have AFM engineered into them...
If they didn't have to dance around all the regs and bs, the V-8 would live forever and never be out of style....but it's still not getting promoted as being "efficient" or desirable for better mpg....

The trucks may get a pass for the needed power with a V-8, as the profit margin for light trucks I believe is significantly higher than passenger cars...Other than the Vette, isn't the Camaro the only GM passenger car that comes with a V-8?...and even so, over half Camaro sales are V-6...

Sure they will always have a niche, and will be built for that...crate motors, warranty replacements, maintenance replacements, etc...but demand won't have V-8s showing up in Cruzes,Malibus or Impalas.....

All the pressures...CAFE, weight, even "perception" as a guzzler, will eventually be the demise of passenger car V-8s...
As I believe what you say, that V-6 turbos may not be as efficient in the real world of driving, but if it gets a higher number for mpg ratings on the rollers for the window sticker, they will get the nod for production...

...Not a perfect world, and not how I'd like to see things go, but I think the writing is on the wall....I always suggest to everyone, enjoy these V-8s for as long as you can while they are plentiful and relatively affordable.

I recall the GM engineers stating they would prefer to put a TTV6 into the Vettes....but it won't fly with the Vette buyers as long as a V-8 is available...How much longer that will be the case, is anybody's guess, especially given they would even consider doing it.....

Last edited by 90503; 05-07-2013 at 03:10 PM.
90503 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 10:15 PM   #52
KaBoom1701
KaBoom1701
 
KaBoom1701's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 2LT RS Camaro
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: I.E. SoCal
Posts: 2,494
Well I'd like a V6 TT option.....
__________________
Performance Upgrades: CAI Intake, VMAX Ported Throttle Body, RX Catch Can, GM Dual mode NPP Exhaust System, 1LE Strut Brace, SS Brembo Brakes w/ Hawk HPS Pads & Goodridge brake lines, DOT4 Motul, 1LE Suspension Upgrade, 1" Eibach lowering springs.
Exterior Upgrades: Ceramic Tint 30%, Axis Allies rims 20x9(front) 20x10(rear), Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperCar G:2 Tries 285 (front) x 305 (rear), ACS T-5 Front Splitter, Oracle Lighted Rear Bowtie, rk sport spoiler.
Audio Upgrades: Image Dynamics 10" Subwoofer w/custom leather box, ID 5 Channel Amp, Audio Control LC 6, Morel 6.5" Coax Speakers
KaBoom1701 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 11:20 PM   #53
Bhobbs


 
Bhobbs's Avatar
 
Drives: 1998 Camaro Z28, 1970 Chevelle
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 2,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by 90503 View Post
I recall the GM engineers stating they would prefer to put a TTV6 into the Vettes....but it won't fly with the Vette buyers as long as a V-8 is available...How much longer that will be the case, is anybody's guess, especially given they would even consider doing it.....

Sorry about screwing up the quote with my posts...lol...they're in there somewhere...

I don't see why they would prefer a TTV6. As seen with the LF3, it duplicates the LS3 with the added issues of heat soak and the complexity of a TT set up.

This may be the last stand of the V8 engine as a common power plant but that is entirely due to government busy bodies forcing THEIR desires on the rest of us. Sure, some emissions regulations are good for us but making the regulations so stringent that companies have to invest huge amounts of money to meet them is entirely outside the bounds of what the government should be doing.

I prefer the V8 engine. I like the sound, the feel and the relative simplicity of it. It's nostalgic and iconic to American cars. If the government didn't force everyone to adopt outrageous mileage standards and let the companies develop the engines they wanted, I bet we would see some amazing V8s and other types coming out.
Bhobbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:21 AM   #54
Taintedveins
Shark attack!
 
Taintedveins's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 Camaro LS
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,562
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
Name one factory Honda the puts out 400+hp.
Never said factory. If it can be done aftermarket eventually it will be possible with manufacturing.
__________________
Taintedveins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 06:22 AM   #55
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
Except the TTV6 offers no efficiency advantage over the LT1 (If anything, the LT1 is marginally more efficient). GM's own engineers have said that publicly.
I think you are reading a lot into the statement made by one guy about one car (the Stingray) to come up with this broad generalization. If not, can you provide the quote in full so we can all see?
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 06:44 AM   #56
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I think you are reading a lot into the statement made by one guy about one car (the Stingray) to come up with this broad generalization. If not, can you provide the quote in full so we can all see?
He's right though, look at the mileage numbers in the CTS vsport. It has very similar projected mileage to to the LT1. Therefore, the Vette engineers are correct, it wouldn't have any mileage advantages.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 06:58 AM   #57
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
He's right though, look at the mileage numbers in the CTS vsport. It has very similar projected mileage to to the LT1. Therefore, the Vette engineers are correct, it wouldn't have any mileage advantages.
I haven't seen any mileage numbers for the LT1 in a CTS. You are comparing apples to oranges. The ONE guy talking about the vette didn't say what the mileage was for the two engines, but he implied they weren't much different. It could be the gearing they used was optimal for a NA LT1 and not the turbocharged V6. It makes a difference. There are just too many vehichles out there now where manufacturers have opted for the turbo 6 over the large V8 because they got better gas mileage to make this much of one oblique statement about one car without any real data provided.

Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:24 AM   #58
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I haven't seen any mileage numbers for the LT1 in a CTS. You are comparing apples to oranges. The ONE guy talking about the vette didn't say what the mileage was for the two engines, but he implied they weren't much different. It could be the gearing they used was optimal for a NA LT1 and not the turbocharged V6. It makes a difference. There are just too many vehichles out there now where manufacturers have opted for the turbo 6 over the large V8 because they got better gas mileage to make this much of one oblique statement about one car without any real data provided.

Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
If it produced similar mileage in a lighter car, what makes you think it would be different in a slightly heavier one? The gearing insn't going to be that different between a Vette and a Camaro either, so that argument is invalid.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:08 AM   #59
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
If it produced similar mileage in a lighter car, what makes you think it would be different in a slightly heavier one? The gearing insn't going to be that different between a Vette and a Camaro either, so that argument is invalid.
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:10 AM   #60
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: CARS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 472
The V8 is going to get more premium priced as the Camaro goes through Gen 6. Engines like the TTV6 and others will have to fill in the lineup to replace those sales of V8's that perspective customers no longer want to pay what is expected to be a higher price point than V8's are in the 5th Gen.
KarFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:42 AM   #61
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM LT/RS, 06 Chevy Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 9,296
I think many people just kind of like to forget that the LT1 has to go into 4 cylinder mode to get the gas mileage that puts it on par or slightly better than the forced induction V6. (in the Corvette)

People think "V8 gets the same mileage as TTV6"...but thats not an accurate assessment. Its not a simple V8 vs TTV6 discussion here.

What people like is that V8 rumble that is still possible with the LT1. If it weren't for that, it would change the argument significantly. I think the argument would be more about reliablity than anything else as some would say they want the TQ of the turbos, while others would say they'd rather have the N/A V8 and avoid costly turbo failure.
__________________
IPF Tune, Custom Magnaflow Exhaust, Vararam intake, MACE Ported Manifold, RX Ported TB, "Black Ice" manifold insulator, Elite Catch Can, ZL1 repro wheels, ZL1 Springs, DRL Harness, Front GM GFX, Heritage grill, Street Scene lower grill, NLP Spoiler, ZL1 rockers and much more!
KMPrenger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 02:21 PM   #62
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
We're talking about the 6th gen Camaro, not the CTS. If the C7 doesn't gain any benefits from the V6, why would it have any gain on the Camaro? The base 2013 Vette has a 3.42 axle ratio, the base SS has a 3.45 axle ratio. If they follow this for the next gen cars, then the TTV6 would be useless in the Camaro, because it is useless in the Vette.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 03:33 PM   #63
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
We're talking about the 6th gen Camaro, not the CTS. If the C7 doesn't gain any benefits from the V6, why would it have any gain on the Camaro? The base 2013 Vette has a 3.42 axle ratio, the base SS has a 3.45 axle ratio. If they follow this for the next gen cars, then the TTV6 would be useless in the Camaro, because it is useless in the Vette.
What I am saying is that we know nothing about the "test" for the C7. I want to see the data.
  • What were the transmission gears used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What was the final gear ratio used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What minimum RPM would the LF3 have to run at to get the same torque as LT1 when it is in V4 mode at say 65 MPH in the top overdrive gear?
Apples to Apples comparision. If they designed the transmission's overdrive gears to work with the powerband available from the LT1 in V4 mode, then just slapped in an LF3 and said "see, no better gas mileage" then it is not a good comparision. They should design the entire drivetrain around the powerplant to get the optimal performance (acceleration and fuel economy). None of that is even discussed in the one little snippet one guy made in an oblique reference about the stingray. Thus my earlier comment that some are reading too much into that one statement.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:14 PM   #64
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
What I am saying is that we know nothing about the "test" for the C7. I want to see the data.
  • What were the transmission gears used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What was the final gear ratio used for the LT1 and the LF3?
  • What minimum RPM would the LF3 have to run at to get the same torque as LT1 when it is in V4 mode at say 65 MPH in the top overdrive gear?
Apples to Apples comparision. If they designed the transmission's overdrive gears to work with the powerband available from the LT1 in V4 mode, then just slapped in an LF3 and said "see, no better gas mileage" then it is not a good comparision. They should design the entire drivetrain around the powerplant to get the optimal performance (acceleration and fuel economy). None of that is even discussed in the one little snippet one guy made in an oblique reference about the stingray. Thus my earlier comment that some are reading too much into that one statement.
We're never going to know about that stuff though. The fuel economy in the CTS vsport is pretty poor anyway, so I really think that the LT1 would produce equal fuel economy. It also comes with all the benefits that I previously talked about. GM HAS to offer an affordable V8 option because people like me won't buy it any other way. I would drive a V8 mustang over a TTV6 Camaro, and I hate Mustangs...
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:23 PM   #65
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyg36 View Post
We're never going to know about that stuff though. The fuel economy in the CTS vsport is pretty poor anyway, so I really think that the LT1 would produce equal fuel economy. It also comes with all the benefits that I previously talked about. GM HAS to offer an affordable V8 option because people like me won't buy it any other way. I would drive a V8 mustang over a TTV6 Camaro, and I hate Mustangs...
So, without knowing all that then we can't really say which one would be more effecient, right?

No one is saying there won't be a V8. Some are saying that eventually we may not find them in cars like Camaros. I don't know about that. Number of cylinders isn't what matters in all of this. A 4.4 L V8 can get just as good fuel econmomy as a 4.3 L V6. You can add turbos to anything, so why not a TTV8 at some point?
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:30 PM   #66
oklapike
 
oklapike's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th Anniversary SS Coupe
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky View Post
It may not be a regular production option...I'm thinking more along the lines of a special edition. Think about it. Every year the Camaro gets numerous "Special Editions" that run for a limited time.

2010 had the Synergy Green, Indy Pace Car, and Transformers
2011 had the XM, Synergy Series, Neiman Marcus, and another Indy Pace Car
2012 had the Honor and Valor, 45th Anniversay, Transformers, and Synergy Sries
2013 has the Dusk and Hot Wheels

Don't you think it is conceivable to have a special edition with the TTV6?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRKnightSS1 View Post
I never actually thought about that but it would make more sense if it came out as a special edition.

Sent using Tapatalk on my Note 2.
Anyone remember this? http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/02/s...ck-day-dreams/

Although it seems as if the 1LE and Z/28 were what grew out of this concept, the name sticks in my mind as a possible TTV6 edition.

On a related note, this is what I would have in mind for a 6th gen Z/28 (referring to the power train).
oklapike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 04:32 PM   #67
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
So, without knowing all that then we can't really say which one would be more effecient, right?

No one is saying there won't be a V8. Some are saying that eventually we may not find them in cars like Camaros. I don't know about that. Number of cylinders isn't what matters in all of this. A 4.4 L V8 can get just as good fuel econmomy as a 4.3 L V6. You can add turbos to anything, so why not a TTV8 at some point?
No we can't know for sure, but I'm taking GMs word that it isn't, because they're pretty serious about fuel economy. I'd take any V8 FI or not, you just won't see me in a 6 cyl of any kind.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 08:14 PM   #68
mpiersd
 
mpiersd's Avatar
 
Drives: '10 ABM 2LT/RS
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Savannah, GA Yorktown, VA
Posts: 611
I'm more interested in the retro-fit-ability(yes, I made that up) of this engine back to the 5th gen Camaro.
Find a wrecked TT3.6 caddy in a salvage yard, grab up the engine, trans, ecu and pcm and start hacking away to put it in a 2010 or 2011 Camaro.
__________________
United States Army Air Cavalry
o~`o

Coquette: ABM, 2LT/RS, #1848 of 3903 and 1 of 29.


CAI, Gen5DIY DRL LED's, Gen5DIY DRL Harness, 35% Tint, RX Catch Can(ABM) & Oil Filler Cap Breather(ABM), ZL-1 Springs, custom blue bow ties
mpiersd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 08:28 PM   #69
mikeyg36
The GT Troll Hundred
 
mikeyg36's Avatar
 
Drives: Cammed '12 2SS/RS LS3 '15 Z/28
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 8,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpiersd View Post
I'm more interested in the retro-fit-ability(yes, I made that up) of this engine back to the 5th gen Camaro.
Find a wrecked TT3.6 caddy in a salvage yard, grab up the engine, trans, ecu and pcm and start hacking away to put it in a 2010 or 2011 Camaro.
Definitely won't be worth it. Just find an LFX and put a TT kit on it.
__________________
Click For Build Thread ***CAI Intake, ARH LTs, FSP Big NA Cam, Tuned By Matt@FSP***
mikeyg36 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 09:02 PM   #70
james347
 
Drives: 2006 Crownline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: .
Posts: 710
Twin turbo yes!
james347 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:14 PM   #71
Cam#7

 
Cam#7's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2LT IBM / SIM stripe 6M
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I haven't seen any mileage numbers for the LT1 in a CTS. You are comparing apples to oranges. The ONE guy talking about the vette didn't say what the mileage was for the two engines, but he implied they weren't much different. It could be the gearing they used was optimal for a NA LT1 and not the turbocharged V6. It makes a difference. There are just too many vehichles out there now where manufacturers have opted for the turbo 6 over the large V8 because they got better gas mileage to make this much of one oblique statement about one car without any real data provided.

Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.

Does the TT have the advantage of using regular gas versus one of the V8s ? Camaro made a big break through when introducing the 2010 V6 with 29mpg and regular gas.
__________________
Cam#7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:29 PM   #72
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: `12 LFX/`11 EB F-150/`13 Sonic RS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 5,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam#7 View Post
Does the TT have the advantage of using regular gas versus one of the V8s ? Camaro made a big break through when introducing the 2010 V6 with 29mpg and regular gas.
Nope, the LF3 requires premium gas.
__________________
EFR Twin Turbo LFX-GPI Tune-ZL1 fuel pump-10:1 CR forged pistons-3.45 gear-Meth Injection-BMR Trailing Arms, Bushings & Sway Bars-CircleD 4000 Stall-GPI Fuel Enrichment System
647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ @18.5 psi on 93 Octane (locked converter)
1/8 mile -- 7.158 @ 102.10 (20psi); old build
Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2013, 01:47 PM   #73
Cam#7

 
Cam#7's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 2LT IBM / SIM stripe 6M
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
Nope, the LF3 requires premium gas.

Then I agree it makes no sense to use in the Gen6. Maybe a Europeon version since that seems to be a draw there.
__________________
Cam#7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 10:35 PM   #74
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
I think you are reading a lot into the statement made by one guy about one car (the Stingray) to come up with this broad generalization. If not, can you provide the quote in full so we can all see?
The statement wasn't just make by "one guy"...it was made by the Corvette chief engineer, who was quoted in Hotrod magazine as saying "the LT1 is faster, more responsive, and more efficient than a twin-turbo V6"


Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
Show me the data where a TTV6 gets better fuel economy than a V8.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
I don't know how gearing adds anything to this debate. It's not like the TTV6 and NA V8 would have much if any difference at all in gearing. They'd probably run within 100 rpm of each other at 70. The compression ratio differences between FI and NA would have more effect on efficiency than that. And if they didn't, if the V8 was able to run significantly slower than the TTV6 without lugging, wouldn't that seem to contradict the low RPM torque argument turbo proponents always make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
What people like is that V8 rumble that is still possible with the LT1. If it weren't for that, it would change the argument significantly. I think the argument would be more about reliablity than anything else as some would say they want the TQ of the turbos, while others would say they'd rather have the N/A V8 and avoid costly turbo failure.
Exactly...I'd also like to add the more linear response/power delivery of a NA engine compared to a turbo engine.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 11:20 PM   #75
Bhobbs


 
Bhobbs's Avatar
 
Drives: 1998 Camaro Z28, 1970 Chevelle
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 2,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
I think many people just kind of like to forget that the LT1 has to go into 4 cylinder mode to get the gas mileage that puts it on par or slightly better than the forced induction V6. (in the Corvette)

People think "V8 gets the same mileage as TTV6"...but thats not an accurate assessment. Its not a simple V8 vs TTV6 discussion here.

What people like is that V8 rumble that is still possible with the LT1. If it weren't for that, it would change the argument significantly. I think the argument would be more about reliablity than anything else as some would say they want the TQ of the turbos, while others would say they'd rather have the N/A V8 and avoid costly turbo failure.
The LF3 and LS3 put out similar power while getting similar MPG.
Bhobbs 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 11:12 PM.


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