[Need4Camaro]

If EV’s could be charged to a full 400 mile range charge in say 10 - 15 minutes, I wouldn’t mind buying one but as they are now, I will just pay extra for gasoline. Another thing is EV’s are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be. Lithium mining is damaging to the environment and produces as much Co2 as operating an ICE between 2 and 8 years (depending of the cars compared). They do make more efficient use of energy and are cheaper to recharge than refueling an ICE (although that will change once our power grid is heavily catering to the average commuter) and the production of the car itself also produces Co2. Finally another thing is, most of our Co2 does not even come from automobiles. It comes from sources like agriculture and developing countries who have little in the way of industrial emissions filters and also concrete because it is an affordable building material. We aren’t even really saving the environment.

[jamala00]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

If EV’s could be charged to a full 400 mile range charge in say 10 - 15 minutes, I wouldn’t mind buying one but as they are now, I will just pay extra for gasoline. Another thing is EV’s are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be. Lithium mining is damaging to the environment and produces as much Co2 as operating an ICE between 2 and 8 years (depending of the cars compared). They do make more efficient use of energy and are cheaper to recharge than refueling an ICE (although that will change once our power grid is heavily catering to the average commuter) and the production of the car itself also produces Co2. Finally another thing is, most of our Co2 does not even come from automobiles. It comes from sources like agriculture and developing countries who have little in the way of industrial emissions filters and also concrete because it is an affordable building material. We aren’t even really saving the environment.

EV's are like Hotdogs They are good as long as you don't know how they are made. Before you start flaming me... IT'S A JOKE...!

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

If EV’s could be charged to a full 400 mile range charge in say 10 - 15 minutes, I wouldn’t mind buying one but as they are now, I will just pay extra for gasoline. Another thing is EV’s are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be. Lithium mining is damaging to the environment and produces as much Co2 as operating an ICE between 2 and 8 years (depending of the cars compared). They do make more efficient use of energy and are cheaper to recharge than refueling an ICE (although that will change once our power grid is heavily catering to the average commuter) and the production of the car itself also produces Co2. Finally another thing is, most of our Co2 does not even come from automobiles. It comes from sources like agriculture and developing countries who have little in the way of industrial emissions filters and also concrete because it is an affordable building material. We aren’t even really saving the environment.

Most of this is nuanced, and by that I mean there there are elements of truth but they Lithium mining is damaging to the environment”. That depends on where the lithium is drawn from. A lot of lithium is drawn from lake beds and ocean floor. So reality is some sources of lithium can contribute to environmental damage. Regarding “ the production of the car itself also produces Co2” most if not all of the companies that are pushing forward with manufacture of electric vehicles are also committing to their production operations being Carbon Neutral. It doesn’t mean that there is no CO2 being emitted. It means that they are structuring their processes to also remove carbon dioxide from the environment, resulting in no incremental contribution of carbon dioxide. GM is in the lead in this aspect and it is why they are designating their newer EV manufacturing plants as Factory Zero. Factory Zero #1 in Detroit is up and running. Here’s a snippet from GM’s press material on Factory Zero concept.

Factory ZERO highlights include:

GM reused or recycled almost every material that came out of the facility during conversion, including crushed concrete from the old plant floor, which was repurposed for temporary roads around the facility.
Storm water will be recycled to reduce discharge costs and offset the cost of potable water.
Treated storm water will be used in cooling towers and the plant’s fire suppression system.
The site features a 30-kilowatt solar carport and 516-kW ground-mounted photovoltaic solar array from DTE Energy.
Factory ZERO’s site has a 16.5-acre wildlife habitat that is home to monarchs, foxes and turkeys.
Through Factory ZERO, GM is showcasing its manufacturing leadership capability and readiness for what will be a fundamental shift in mobility as the company transitions to an all-electric future.

As for the part in bold, the nuance here is that the global transportation sector is the 2nd greatest contributor to global carbon dioxide emissions (16%). The largest contributor is general industry (24%). There is work being done to reduce the carbon impact of industry. The stuff I posted above about GM Factory Zero are examples that cross industry lines. The development of electrical vehicles and somewhere down the road, fuel cell vehicles is the transportation industry effort to minimize carbon dioxide emissions. Transportation includes passenger vehicles, commercial vehicles, rail, maritime, and even air transport. All are working on zero emission solutions.

[Hops]

Does anyone have a sense for how GM will treat announcing the last year of the 6th gen? Will they be loud about it, hoping to completely satiate the demand for the last GM ICE manual coupe.... or will they quietly announce in the middle of the production year there will be no more.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by m6z

I guess government mandated is progressive..

So is it official, the six gen dies in 2023?

Originally Posted by Hops

I don’t think anything is official, but the consensus is 2023/2024

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

If EV’s could be charged to a full 400 mile range charge in say 10 - 15 minutes, I wouldn’t mind buying one but as they are now, I will just pay extra for gasoline. Another thing is EV’s are not as environmentally friendly as they are made out to be. Lithium mining is damaging to the environment and produces as much Co2 as operating an ICE between 2 and 8 years (depending of the cars compared). They do make more efficient use of energy and are cheaper to recharge than refueling an ICE (although that will change once our power grid is heavily catering to the average commuter) and the production of the car itself also produces Co2. Finally another thing is, most of our Co2 does not even come from automobiles. It comes from sources like agriculture and developing countries who have little in the way of industrial emissions filters and also concrete because it is an affordable building material. We aren’t even really saving the environment.

Today you have the technology for 80% charge in 15 minutes (Porsche and Audi). It will only get better as battery technologies improve and they will significantly year over year.

As for the impact to the environment? It depends on if you are buying or selling. Most of what I've read is that to start, due to batteries, an EV starts out worse for the environment day 1. But a few years out there is a cross over point where an EV is better for the environment.

You correct. I've researched it a bit and transportation is something around 24% of the problem. However, if you think having to buy an EV is a pain, how about a law that says you have insulate your home, buy an energy efficient HVAC system and put in new windows, et al. That won't happen and probably can't happen. And it's true, food production is a big one as is the beef industry. Give up steak? I'll take a silky smooth and quiet EV before I give up beef, but that's JMO.

EVs alone can help for sure. But for me, I doubt we as Americans want to do anything. We are, sadly, a lazy bunch. I can't go for a walk and not find bottles, cans, paper wrappers, cigarette butts, etc. simply because it's easier to throw stuff out the car window than deal with it properly.

Regardless of where your politics are, we are impacting the environment. The often quoted data that said 95% of Scientists agree. What they agreed on was we ARE impacting the environment. What they did not agree on is by how much.

Some will say we've past the tipping point others say no, but regardless one IS coming. And it may not impact us, or our kids, but it's coming. So pushing technology now is what we should be doing. Sorry if that triggers anyone but at some point we need to start taking better care of the place.

[TXCSSU]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Can you please elaborate what you mean by mid-level EV's?

I can only think of a few EV's that can 'embarrass' an ICE V8 and they are not affordable to the masses where comparatively you can get an ICE V8 for much less.

EV's such as the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Bolt, Hyundai Ioniq, ect at their max put out between the 190 to 230 HP range. Those vehicles are costing between $25k - $35k range. A comparable ICE in that price range typically has just as much (if not more) power and ALSO has more fuel range. Even a 4 Cyl Turbo or V6 Camaro can make quick work of those let alone a V8 SS.

EV's such as the Tesla Model 3 BASE comes with a base cost of $44k MSRP and does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds, comparably a Camaro SS has a base cost of $37k AND runs that 0-60 in 4 seconds flat, is built for track use with multiple radiators, a large oil capacity, a more powerful suspension and a warranty that even covers track use.... The SS is besting the car that base for base by over a full second 0-60, what is even funnier is the SS actually has more fuel range as well. This Tesla would have a close race with a stock V6 Camaro, not much else though.

EV's such as the Tesla Model 3 PERFORMANCE is where things get quick, with a 0-60 of 3.1 seconds which is heavily respectable, but its not a bargain mid-level car by any means... It is knocking on the door of $60k unconfigured.. ..know another car that is similar in price range? A 1LT C8 Coupe (not barring Pandemic related price surges and lack of inventory) which does 0-60 in 2.8 seconds and is pretty comparable in base unconfigured MSRP, although it probably has a higher ceiling.

There are faster EV's, yes - but they are not obtainable to the average bread winner.

Also keep in mind that Tesla still has not fully solved the battery heat issue which both:

-- Causes EV's 1/4th mile times to be inconsistent and slower after each pass after about 3 passes.
-- Causes EV's to take substantially longer to charge after reaching approximately 80% charge.

Also - In colder climates, EV's significantly lose drivability range and their charging time increases. ICE vehicles are impacted by cold weather as well but not as significantly as EV's are. This is a big issue for people who live in northern states.

That and also people who do not have the ability to put their car in the garage are heavily inconvenienced by the charging factor and there are alot of Americans in this category.

EV's are not for everyone and I'm sorry but you are inaccurate in assuming that EV's are besting ICE vehicles in dollar per dollar value, ICE vehicles are still beating EV's by a fair margin in this category and its a BIG reason as to why many "knuckle draggers" are not being so quick to jump on the bandwagon. I personally respect people who use their head, not the hype.

The ones I bolded are what I consider "entry level" EVs, and yes those are not embarrassing V8s now nor anytime in the near future. The Model 3 Performance is where I put the "mid-level" bar and I'm not talking about affordability, I'm talking about price point. Sure it's about $50K which isn't exactly "affordable" (which I never said, as affordability is subjective), but when you consider the high end of the spectrum is $150K+ then $50K seems "mid-level".

And again, you're putting words in my mouth with "dollar per value", which I never compared. Not sure why everyone is attempting to make these types of arguments while injecting falsehoods from the other side, but if you think it helps, continue. But, since you brought it up I'll add that the cost of ownership for an EV isn't as volatile as it is for ICE, in the near future and in the distant future. This is obvious just in the way that manufacturers are shifting production to EVs. Like I said, I am not so sure why so many people are willing to die on this hill, our beloved ICE vehicles' days are numbered.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ectric-by-2040

And from that article...

Internal combustion engine vehicles have already peaked, while electric cars are getting cheaper and going farther.

Originally Posted by Number 3

To quote GM, "we do not comment of future product programs".

No, it is not official. I'm kind of chuckling reading through this thread again. OP said "rumors". LOL there are no rumors, just our speculation.

And we need to keep in mind, the EV discussion, for me anyway, is simply the hope that the Camaro continues and NOT as an SUV. GM even announced this week that their HD pickups had been moved up in their timing. GM as an EV company is going to happen. Holding out that GM would somehow make a Gen7 Camaro that isn't an EV is just hope and nothing more.

The Camaro has a shot to continue, but only as long as the Cadillac Alphas stay in production. When GM announces the CT4/5 move to an EV platform the Camaro now become no more viable than it was in 2001. It will be a low volume orphan on a high cost platform. So as much as many are showing true hate for EVs (not sure why it comes across as hate, dislike I can see but hey, that's the internet today) it's coming.

I'm pretty sure i've posted it, but with the onslaught of EVs coming, it's only going to get "worse". The development costs for an EV are MUCH smaller than an ICE. That's why startups are popping up everywhere from LMTD Vans and other cars and SUVs. The cost to tool up, develop and calibrate an ICE and transmission AND meet the emissions standards can run you up to a BILLION $ or more. A start up could never pay that back. Now simply sourcing a battery and a electric motor???? No tooling and much lower cost to calibrate (still a ton of calibration by the way which is why GM is hiring Computer Engineering and Computer Science Majors like crazy. So is my company so if interested PM me). 5 years from now the market will look wildly different. And for GM? If the market is going to have so many EV choices, well better get on board and make the best EVs possible. The market is driving this guys. As much as you want to be evil government (California excluded as CARB is now trying to figure out how to stay funded in a world of EVs) it is now market driven. At one point it was California. Their CARB Credit system alone made Tesla a Trillion $ company but now they are actually making money selling cars. Go figure.

Also you need to understand that ICE development is at the end of the road. To meet increasing FE and Emissions standards (same thing now as CO is directly related to fuel burned) it is costing HUGE amounts of money for incremental improvements. For example, go look at the indexing cam system on the GM 2.0 and 2.7L L4 Turbos. Huge cost for at best .25 mpg (or so i've heard). Hyundai/Kia (same company for those that didn't know) just shut down future ICE development.

But everyday big and small companies are going to work every day to fix every problem people keep listing for EVs. Today those issues are real. Apartment dwellers, city folk and country folk today have charging issues. But GM just announced with the new Silverado EV you can charge to 100 miles in 10 minutes. Porsche system is 80% in 15 minutes. And the cost and availability of those will come down with scale, further investment and continued development. Did you see the Michigan company that put their battery in a Tesla Model S and drove to the Mackinac Bridge and back last week? 750 miles on a single charge using the same size battery as Tesla. Now halve the size and weight of that battery and you have 375 miles range and a much lighter car. Wild stuff coming.

It ONLY comes down to NVH and manual shifting. And manually shifting is also dying. Look at the Corvette. They picked the best solution and abandoned both autos and manual manuals. If you don't believe it, you haven't driven a DCT. But the engagement factor changes for sure. But driver engagement is so much more than NVH and having to use your right arm and left leg to drive. Now credit to Honda for having a manual in the new Civic. Even as Honda moves to EVs (first ones using GM platform) they still recognize the enthusiast and historic Civic customer, so hats off to Honda on that one.

As an engineer and leader in the industry (sorry according to one person I am stroking my ego when I say things like that) I'm excited to see where we are in 5 and 10 years. Yes, I'm working on EVs and ADS products. School buses for example are THE perfect use case for EVs. Go drive 20 miles, come back to base and charge, go drive another 20 miles and come back and charge overnight. Ultimately you will probably be hard pressed to find an ICE school bus.

I get the passion on both sides of this. We just need to step back and appreciate each other views more but we also have to accept reality. A future Camaros best chance is as an EV. So what does that look like?

This is essentially what I'm getting at, I love my ICE but considering everything they are a dying breed. Hell, that's one of the reasons I have one on order with a manual. We can kick and scream about preserving the ICE, but even auto magazine editors have thrown in the towel. If you look at the past few issues of Car and Driver, Motor Trend, they've all had at least one EV on their cover in the past 2-3 issues. I'm not even trying to argue for EVs, as has been pointed out numerous times, they sound like damn washing machines for crying out loud. But, I'm getting my one last ICE purchase and will hoard gasoline and wait for the Zombie/Alien Apocalypse to render all charging stations inoperable, and I'll get one last fun drive in my ICE....

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Definitely not government mandated. Companies are declaring their intent to go mostly or totally electric long before mandated by CARB or anybody else. Most of these declarations were made when Trump was president and both houses under Republican control.



Number 3 has already covered this in this thread, but I will reiterate and add one more piece of information. Camaro is built on the same platform, in the same plant as CT4/CT5. Cadillac has already said they are going all electric. When Cadillac stops making ICE versions of those cars, Camaro also goes away.

Now the new information… in December the Detroit Free Press reported “ GM is eyeing the Lansing area for a new battery plant, based on city records, a statement from the mayor, and a source familiar with company plans who did not wish to be identified.”

Why would GM build a battery plant in or near Lansing? To support production of an electric vehicle factory in or near Lansing. There are two GM vehicle plants in the Lansing area. Grand River (Cadillacs and Camaros) and Delta Township (CUVs). One battery plant could support both, as well as nearby Orion Township which already produces Bolt and Bolt EUV.

Some people will insist that EVs are being "shoved down our throats" by "big government" because that's the way they've been programmed. You look around and see the things that have been politicized, and it just has you scratching your head. Of course, I also remember when seatbelt mandates were enacted, but there wasn't nearly as much push back. I guess because it didn't cost manufacturers as cars were already equipped with seatbelts, they didn't spread as much propaganda about how wearing seatbelts was "killing muh freedumz!" Oh well, I just hope we don't have crazed individuals going after 5G towers here like they have in Europe.

[Need4Camaro]

Dollar for Dollar has to be compared because if you are going to state that EV's are out performing V8's, you have to compare each model at their price point per performance, --noone in the market for a pony car costing @ $40k is going to suddenly fork over $30k more because the car shockingly outruns the car he's considering, that is a given... ...otherwise it would be no different than me saying a Aston Martin DBS Volante blows the doors off of most V8's.. ..well duh.. ..it also costs a good deal more than most of them as well. Likewise I could compare a Mustang GT and a Camaro SS and it performance to dollar value would be much closer. Dollar for Dollar determines what buyer market the car resides in and puts it in a category of performance class of vehicles. A EV costing in the ballpark of $40k is not going to outperform a Camaro SS or Mustang GT, in fact it would be doing well to be able to handle a V6 trim level.

Problem is that $60k car (and I still use the term -- mid-level -- subjectively in this context as I personally do not consider a $60k car as a mid-level vehicle for the average American, that is knocking on the door of entry level high-end car.) weighs like a pig and is not going to run a ZL1, C8, ect around a road course. It may give a C8 a run for its money at the 1/4th mile but when competing against cars in its price league, it does not out right destroy most of them, in some cases it does not even win.

Originally Posted by Number 3

Today you have the technology for 80% charge in 15 minutes (Porsche and Audi). It will only get better as battery technologies improve and they will significantly year over year.

As for the impact to the environment? It depends on if you are buying or selling. Most of what I've read is that to start, due to batteries, an EV starts out worse for the environment day 1. But a few years out there is a cross over point where an EV is better for the environment.

You correct. I've researched it a bit and transportation is something around 24% of the problem. However, if you think having to buy an EV is a pain, how about a law that says you have insulate your home, buy an energy efficient HVAC system and put in new windows, et al. That won't happen and probably can't happen. And it's true, food production is a big one as is the beef industry. Give up steak? I'll take a silky smooth and quiet EV before I give up beef, but that's JMO.

EVs alone can help for sure. But for me, I doubt we as Americans want to do anything. We are, sadly, a lazy bunch. I can't go for a walk and not find bottles, cans, paper wrappers, cigarette butts, etc. simply because it's easier to throw stuff out the car window than deal with it properly.

Regardless of where your politics are, we are impacting the environment. The often quoted data that said 95% of Scientists agree. What they agreed on was we ARE impacting the environment. What they did not agree on is by how much.

Some will say we've past the tipping point others say no, but regardless one IS coming. And it may not impact us, or our kids, but it's coming. So pushing technology now is what we should be doing. Sorry if that triggers anyone but at some point we need to start taking better care of the place.

It is coming and I personally think we've already passed the tipping point, and while I personally am for saving the environment, some of the propaganda for EV's and how suddenly and vastly they are being seemingly rushed on consumers just doesn't add up to me and it feels like there is more to this than what meets the eye. We would have needed to have started on something like this back in the 80's to have truly made a good transition if they really cared about the environment but suddenly they woke up and now its a big problem..

..The first issue is they are pushing out the cars and tax incentives for the cars much faster than they are preparing the electrical grid to handle them
..The second issue is even though charging stations are becoming more abundant, they are still nowhere near the levels needed to suitably sustain most drivers using EV's
..Third issue is they are not being transparent on the environmental impacts EV's produce, most users have to dig for that information themselves.
..Fourth issue is they are also not being transparent on other large sources of Co2 and how they are going to combat them. Air Travel being another fairly large one.

Not saying ICE is the holy grail, but I personally feel there is more to this.

[Hops]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Problem is that $60k car (and I still use the term -- mid-level -- subjectively in this context as I personally do not consider a $60k car as a mid-level vehicle for the average American, that is knocking on the door of entry level high-end car.) weighs like a pig and is not going to run a ZL1, C8, ect around a road course. It may give a C8 a run for its money at the 1/4th mile but when competing against cars in its price league, it does not out right destroy most of them, in some cases it does not even win.

Yes! Totally agree! I'm so tired of using 0-60, 1/4 mile times as the only metric to compare performance.... i feel like i'm back in the 80's, magazine racing cars with that reference page in the back of Road and Track. It's so.. so boring.

The gen 6 Camaro was NOT designed to be a drag car, the alpha platform targets the BMW e46 chassis. It's amazing! I mean a ZL1 1le does the ring in 7:16! The much more expensive, 1000hp + plaid does it in 7:35. Now it's probably not fair because the plaid we never intended to be taken to a road course.... well in the same way, it's doesn't mean much to say the plaid smashes the Camaro in 0-60, 1/4 mi... or whatever acceleration metric.

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It ONLY comes down to NVH and manual shifting. And manually shifting is also dying. Look at the Corvette. They picked the best solution and abandoned both autos and manual manuals. If you don't believe it, you haven't driven a DCT. But the engagement factor changes for sure. But driver engagement is so much more than NVH and having to use your right arm and left leg to drive. Now credit to Honda for having a manual in the new Civic. Even as Honda moves to EVs (first ones using GM platform) they still recognize the enthusiast and historic Civic customer, so hats off to Honda on that one.

I've driven a DCT in a brand new Audi R8 V10. I can tell you it still isn't anywhere as fun or engaging as a real manual transmission is. Is it cool how fast and hard it shits? Yes. But it's still no substitute for a real manual transmission.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

I've driven a DCT in a brand new Audi R8 V10. I can tell you it still isn't anywhere as fun or engaging as a real manual transmission is. Is it cool how fast and hard it shits? Yes. But it's still no substitute for a real manual transmission.

IIRC the 11th Gen Civic doesn't offer a manual trans on the sedans outside of the Si variant, which is becoming a very hard bargain at this point since competitors like GTI is faster and cheaper, not to mention more practical due to the hatchback form factor. 200 BHP for that kind of money is not appealing anymore. Honda needs to wake the f up. The hatchback might keep the stick shift, need to double check.

Regarding manual trans and DCT, this was a heated discussion I had at Corvette Forum. One thing that was brought up is that there are basically two types of people that convert from manual to DCT: the type that think DCT is fun long term and never look back, and the type that thinks DCT is fun for a little while, and when the honeymoon is over, they miss the manual trans. I think I will be the latter. I don't mind a change of pace with driving a shiftable auto, but eventually, I will need a manual trans.

I know it doesn't make up for the entire driving experience, but everyone is different and I think it definitely makes up a significant part of it, and heh, in the car community, people still generally give more respect to manual trans cars.

Originally Posted by Hops

Yes! Totally agree! I'm so tired of using 0-60, 1/4 mile times as the only metric to compare performance.... i feel like i'm back in the 80's, magazine racing cars with that reference page in the back of Road and Track. It's so.. so boring.



The gen 6 Camaro was NOT designed to be a drag car, the alpha platform targets the BMW e46 chassis. It's amazing! I mean a ZL1 1le does the ring in 7:16! The much more expensive, 1000hp + plaid does it in 7:35. Now it's probably not fair because the plaid we never intended to be taken to a road course.... well in the same way, it's doesn't mean much to say the plaid smashes the Camaro in 0-60, 1/4 mi... or whatever acceleration metric.

0-60 is dumb nowadays because most performance car is at the point where they are being traction-limited rather than power-limited. Again, C8 Stingray is less powerful than C7 Z06, but C8 Stingray does better 0-60 because of the traction advantage offered by MR layout. Basically, any AWD/MR/RR car will destroy FF/FR cars in 0-60 times. While rolling start is "lamer" according to some, the data provided by rolling start is a bit more meaningful IMO.

This video is pretty good at demonstrating my point. The ZL1 got gapped by 911 Carrera S when launched from a standstill, but with a rolling start, the ZL1 kept up a lot better. It still lost, but considering the price difference between a ZL1 and a 911 Carrera S, that's not bad at all.

https://youtu.be/30J0z0XkHYc

Single-speed EV is actually notorious for this: sure, they have great low-end torque and AWD allows them to pull off good 0-60, but after 60 MPH, things do start to change. They will drop out of their optimal RPM range and since there is no gear to shift, energy consumption and power get worse and worse at higher speeds. There is a reason why Taycan uses a 2-speed gearbox.

[Altered Carbon]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

I've driven a DCT in a brand new Audi R8 V10. I can tell you it still isn't anywhere as fun or engaging as a real manual transmission is. Is it cool how fast and hard it shits? Yes. But it's still no substitute for a real manual transmission.

Exactly how fast and hard does it shit?

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Hops

Yes! Totally agree! I'm so tired of using 0-60, 1/4 mile times as the only metric to compare performance.... i feel like i'm back in the 80's, magazine racing cars with that reference page in the back of Road and Track. It's so.. so boring.

The gen 6 Camaro was NOT designed to be a drag car, the alpha platform targets the BMW e46 chassis. It's amazing! I mean a ZL1 1le does the ring in 7:16! The much more expensive, 1000hp + plaid does it in 7:35. Now it's probably not fair because the plaid we never intended to be taken to a road course.... well in the same way, it's doesn't mean much to say the plaid smashes the Camaro in 0-60, 1/4 mi... or whatever acceleration metric.

They are pretty transparent. A lot of my learning has come from government websites. The Breakdown of carbon emission sources is easily found on .gov websites.

As for the overall impact? Tons of articles on that as well, just haven’t found those on the government websites.

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

I've driven a DCT in a brand new Audi R8 V10. I can tell you it still isn't anywhere as fun or engaging as a real manual transmission is. Is it cool how fast and hard it shits? Yes. But it's still no substitute for a real manual transmission.

Never said it was as engaging but did say it’s better . For me, I’ll take a DCT over a manual or true auto all day long, but I get why peopl3 like to row the shifter and us3 a clutch. That is just getting to be fewer and fewer people. My worst driving experience was a trip from Detroit to Cleveland several many years ago in a Z06. Nthe several hour traffic jam coming home I was reallllllly wishing for an automatic. And I really don’t care to be that engaged on my drive to work but JMO. If you go to the track or have access to some enjoyable roads different discussion. In the Chicago suburbs I don’t have that access. Didn’t in the Detroit suburbs when I lived there. It’s why I no longer have motorcycles :(

Respect your position!

[SS_Don]

IMHO going total EV is still way off. The infrastructure to support them is simply not in place. Every house, every apartment complex, every parking garage, every parking space on a city street, and charging stations on the roads in place of gas stations, still needs to be built. All the electric companies will need to run additional power lines to meet the increase in demand.

Replacing ICE with EV is supposed to be better for the environment but nobody thinks about how to generate all the additional electricity needed to power an EV nation and what pollution the additional generation will cause. Current supply can hardly keep up with demand in the summer months when air conditioners are in use. Add to that recharging cars and you will have rolling blackouts to keep the distribution from crashing.

So how do we get additional capacity?

• Nuclear - Too expensive to build and maintain, too long to build, what to do with the nuclear waste, and too dangerous. Anyone remember Chernobyl, Fukushima, Kyshtym, Windscale, and Three Mile Island?
• Wind farms - Possible, but they are only about 30% efficient. They would also need to be placed where there is constant wind.
• Solar - Possible, but the most efficient solar panels on the market today have efficiency ratings as high as 22.2%, whereas the majority of panels range from 15% to 17% efficiency rating. So not as good as wind.
• Coal - Too much pollution from the mining and the burning of the coal. There is finite supply of coal.
• Natural gas - While it produces less pollution than coal it still produces a lot. There is a finite supply of gas
• Fusion reactors - promising, but the technology is long way off.

Let's not forget the pollution caused by the additional mining of the minerals needed to produce the batteries and the recycling and/or disposal of the batteries themselves. This has not been a major impact as the EV numbers are small right now but going up every year. Nuclear, coal, and gas plants can be built close to the demand. Solar and wind farms need to be built where there is sufficient sun and wind year-round. This is not necessarily near the demand. This means you need to build infrastructure to get the power from the source to the demand over long distances which leads to power loss. Also, solar doesn't work well covered in snow or at night at all. All of these options have a huge Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) attitude from people.

So where does that leave us? I think it leaves us a long way off from becoming a totally EV nation. There are a lot of hurdles to overcome. I also think that we are trading one source of pollution for another. Until we produce 100% of our electric needs with renewable resources we will still be polluting. Will I like an EV Camaro? Maybe, maybe not. I won't know until I drive one. I know I will like my ICE Camaro if it ever gets built!

The preceding is my personal opinion and you are free to agree or disagree.

[redcoats1976]

@ martinjim...so should we count out a really bold new design,something 2 door,maybe hatchback,with no radiator needed,something swoopy and sexy enough to make even the diehard ICE fans look twice? is the next harley earl already rising in the GM styling ranks and getting ready to blow our socks off?i want to believe...