Quote:
Originally Posted by Blast
I'm sure you can name loads of turbo cars that have had engine issues and I'm sure I can name loads of N/A cars that have had engine issues
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham
 All engines undergo the same testing before they're warranted. |
That's all well and good that they are engineered to last until the warranty expires. My concern is what happens after that? Being an Alero owner, I am fully and painfully aware of what happens to certain cars as soon as the warranty period is over. And a turbo failure is a very expensive potential problem that a N/A engine does not have.
Sure, a lot of them may never have any problems over the life of the car. My point was, and there really is no way anyone can deny that every car that ever suffered a turbo failure was turbocharged, while no N/A engine has ever had a turbo fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarFan
Instead of outrage this should be viewed as a great thing. If the 6th Gen Camaro can have a viable turbo 4cyl option then this will be a much lighter and more nimble vehicle than the 5th Gen. That's better for all levels of performance and fuel efficiency.
|
Yes, there are great lightweight, nimble, 4-cylinder sports cars out there, a few of which already exceed in terms of handling, lightweight, and efficiency anything that will come from the ATS platform. If I were interested in that type of car, I could already have one.
Taking away the uniqueness of the Camaro, and instead building it in the template of stuff that's already out there has the potential to backfire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ENV US
So y'all know there was a 4cyl option in the third generation Camaro as well as he Firebird?
|
We are well aware of the 4-cylinder 3rd gen Camaros. That's exactly why some of us are so strongly opposed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angrybird 12
So my question to those not wanting to see a 4 cylinder Camaro, would you rather have a Affordable Camaro with decent performance that gets 40mpg, with a high performance version available to a limited number of people at a premimum price.
|
This is exactly my concern. High performance, high efficiency, low price. You can have two.
If they really wanted to make it more affordable, they'd stay with the N/A V6. N/A is cheaper than turbos. And factoring in the difference between regular and premium gas, N/A is cheaper at the pump too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM
All your choices are worse than what is available right now. So... why are you giving us grief about not being happy about it?
|