12-07-2012, 05:11 PM | #267 |
Drives: 2013 2ss se/ 2009 cobalt ss Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Washington State
Posts: 241
|
|
12-07-2012, 05:45 PM | #268 | |
7 year Cancer Survivor!
Drives: 17 Cruze RS, 07 G6 GT, 99 Astro Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 21,547
|
Quote:
Sorry this went off topic... But the whole thread has gone to pot anyway
__________________
Cancer's a bitch! Enjoy life while you can! LIVE, LOVE, DRIVE...
The Bird is the word! Last edited by Angrybird 12; 12-07-2012 at 06:53 PM. |
|
12-08-2012, 02:06 AM | #269 | |
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0 Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,049
|
Quote:
When did this shift to an argument that the Camaro shouldn't have any base engine at all? I agree it needs the base engine to make the car high enough volume to be affordable (and clearly, that base engine needs to be a V6).
__________________
2022 1SS 1LE (Arrived 4/29/22)
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." . 2022 1SS 1LE (Coming Soon) |
|
12-08-2012, 02:26 AM | #270 | |
Shark attack!
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
12-08-2012, 02:47 AM | #271 | |
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0 Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,049
|
Quote:
And in terms of CAFE, the averaging is not that simple. They take the average of all the cars they sell. So if one engine is rated at 20 and one is rated at 30, the average is weighted based on the sales of each model, not just the availability of the model. In other words, if GM offers a lower performance, high economy version, but no one buys it, it doesn't help their CAFE average much. So what they will likely do is artificially raise the price of the V6 and V8 to "encourage" more people to buy the lower performance model. Also, the averaging of the mileage ratings is not linear. For the average to be a linear function, what is being averaged must be taken over the units in the denominator (gallons), not the numerator (miles). For example, driving two cars the same distance, one getting 30 mpg, the other 20 mpg, the average is 24 mpg, not 25. To make the average linear at 25 mpg, the two cars have to get their respective economies over the same number of gallons, not the same number of miles.
__________________
2022 1SS 1LE (Arrived 4/29/22)
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." . 2022 1SS 1LE (Coming Soon) |
|
12-08-2012, 03:04 AM | #272 |
Drives: 2015 c7 Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: MI
Posts: 7,462
|
Its really the way the world is going. can not stop it from happening. Lets hope they will keep making v8s for the ones who want one.
its not even a thing about power either, its sound. |
12-08-2012, 12:07 PM | #273 | |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,957
|
Quote:
Maybe it will perk you up to know it makes the most HP and TQ in the Camaro, even if it is just slightly more. Now..feel better? Man I'd love to know how many more buyers would have bought the V6 if it sounded just like a V8 in every way. Yes I know it isn't possible, but lets just pretend. I think it would be a huge difference.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|
12-08-2012, 01:50 PM | #274 | |
Shark attack!
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
12-08-2012, 06:30 PM | #275 | |
Drives: 2009 SAAB 9-5 Aero Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 105
|
Quote:
I was averaging 28 on the highway though. // Stefan |
|
12-08-2012, 06:52 PM | #276 | |
Drives: 2016 Mazda6, 2011 Mustang 5.0 Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,049
|
Quote:
Based on what I'm seeing, the downsizing and turbocharging trend is not netting significant economy gains as promised, at least not in the real world. Companies doing it, Ford with Ecoboost in particular, like to advertise the turbo-4 as some miracle engine, with the power of a V6, but the economy of a 4. Well, no, they more closely end up with the power of a V6 with the economy of a V6. Just because the turbo engine may have the displacement and cylinder count as a base Ford Focus certainly does not mean it will get the same mileage as one. If you want the base Focus mileage, you have to accept the base Focus tune and power level, too. Also, I must have a similar driving style to you, because I too have no problem beating EPA estimates in anything I drive. During the warmer months, I can consistently get upper 30s out of my Alero, and I even got 31 a couple of times out of my 5.0 last summer. One interesting thing I've noticed from experience about EPA ratings from driving many different vehicles is how consistently inconsistent they seem to be, where whole classes of vehicles seem to be underrated more than others, while others seem to get better ratings than they deserve. For example, A typical "car" will usually beat the EPA highway estimate by 15-25% or sometimes more for me, while crossover SUVs with the same driving style usually average out to 5-10% above their rating at best. I suspect the turbo engines are the same way...i.e. they put up impressive numbers within the narrow parameters of the EPA test, but in the real world, don't perform as well as a N/A engine with the same rating when you start using the gas pedal. A lot of car mags and online reviews post real world fuel economy in reviews now, and it seems that when driven hard (as a sports car like the 6th-gen Camaro will likely be more often than other cars), turbo engines (at least gas ones, diesels seem to do better) end up missing their EPA targets by more than N/A engines. The EcoBoosts seem particularly bad. (I know, we're discussing GM, but the Fords offer the most available data for turbos, and if those are supposed to be mainstream turbos....why would someone else's mainstream turbo be much different?)
__________________
2022 1SS 1LE (Arrived 4/29/22)
"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive." . 2022 1SS 1LE (Coming Soon) |
|
12-08-2012, 08:03 PM | #277 |
Drives: 2013 2ss se/ 2009 cobalt ss Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Washington State
Posts: 241
|
My Turbo Cobalt with a 22psi tune only averages about 24 in town and 28 on the hway. I do drive it fairly aggressive.
I want to say I love this car and I am happy I bought it. The motor is so impressive my hat is off to gm for really giving people like me a chance to buy an american 4cl car that can be tuned and run with the import crowd. I do not care if they ever put this motor in a camaro or not, but I can honestly tell you that you would not be disappointed if they did. I wanted the best of both worlds so I know have a 2ss Camaro with supercharger on the way. I would love to take some of you on a ride in my car as the handling is also second to none. |
12-09-2012, 01:07 AM | #278 | |
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
|
Quote:
So many people parse quotes though just to make "gotcha" arguments that it tends to screw up the conversation. |
|
12-09-2012, 03:10 AM | #279 | |
Drives: 2012 Camaro LS Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Scott AFB
Posts: 597
|
Quote:
|
|
12-09-2012, 08:12 AM | #280 |
Drives: 2010 2SS/RS black 6 speed Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Mead, CO
Posts: 48
|
I agree with the above. The first muscle cars (GTO, Mustang) were pony cars with a bigger engine. If there's a market for a 4 cyl I don't see an issue with filling it.
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|