[kevint]

Originally Posted by mickss

It`s actually closer to 40 MPG, there's also is a mid-term review scheduled for 2019 that could also change that requirement, but I suppose that doesn`t stop some from trying to make a political statement without all the known facts to consider.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...lly-mean-54-5/

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...--not-54-5-mpg

Get out of here with your facts. There's no room for rational, informed discussion on the internet.

Plus, I'm not sure why people talk about increasing mileage like its a bad thing.

[102SS]

Originally Posted by rebelyell22

They run 13.7 stock, lol. They run high 12's with a tune, CAI, and radials

I know what I saw and seen the kid was pitted next to me and we talked.

The air wasn't great that day DA was 1400 ft at a track with a 630 ft altitude.

My 99 TA runs 12.2's in great air and 12.4's and 12.5's in the summer.

My Camaro went 13.08 in great air but runs 13.2 to 13.4 in the summer

[KJS]

Originally Posted by kevint

Get out of here with your facts. There's no room for rational, informed discussion on the internet.

Plus, I'm not sure why people talk about increasing mileage like its a bad thing.

Ah, yea!!!!!

[two_wheel_mayhem]

Originally Posted by 102SS

I know what I saw and seen the kid was pitted next to me and we talked.

The air wasn't great that day DA was 1400 ft at a track with a 630 ft altitude.

My 99 TA runs 12.2's in great air and 12.4's and 12.5's in the summer.

My Camaro went 13.08 in great air but runs 13.2 to 13.4 in the summer

Here's to real world results !!! Things go a little differently when someone is actually out there doing it instead of quoting magazine times and believing lies such as a CAI, tune and some tires is gonna turn a 14 second car into a high 12 second car.

Then the chips fall where they may, which is usually right where they should fall.

[Homeless Man]

I was messing around with a 4banger mustang and it sounded good. It wasn't loud but u could hear it and u could hear the turbo also so I don't think it was stock exhaust.

[roorback]

Yeah new turbo 4s are def junk. That's why EVERYONE is using them. It's not the old days...

[MikosV6]

I'd never buy a 4-cyl Camaro no matter how fast it was. At least with the V6, it sounds like an exotic car/indy race car at high revs. Boosted 4-cylinder engines sound like crap and even more so when modified. And, forget about running a dual exhaust setup like the GM NPP or MRT v2.

Yeah, I realize the "mod potential" is greater on a turbocharged platform because you can simply turn up the boost. However, that will obviously come at the cost of reliability and longevity compared to a N/A V6 or even a boosted V6. Even with VVT and D.I., I'm sure the I4 will feel more sluggish at part throttle than the V6. Even in this case, there's no replacement for displacement all things being equal.

[Ruebernard]

Originally Posted by mickss

It`s actually closer to 40 MPG, there's also is a mid-term review scheduled for 2019 that could also change that requirement, but I suppose that doesn`t stop some from trying to make a political statement without all the known facts to consider.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...lly-mean-54-5/

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...--not-54-5-mpg

+1 thank you!

[Moto-Mojo]

I rented a 2015 non descript Jeep 3 weeks ago. It was a four cyl. It was gutless and dangerously slow. I rented a Chevy Malibu (I think, I don't look too hard) last week in Vegas for SEMA. Same dealio. Only this one had an "auto stop" mode when you pulled up to a light. Sounded like it turned the engine off. Even the heater fan went half speed.

I simply have zero use for them.

[USAFS197]

I for one welcome the onset of these new 4 cylinder options. Everyone will bitch and complain about this and that but, if it allows us to keep other options, like our SS or higher around because of the ever restricting standards, then I think everyone should play it smart and support it, too. I can't just sit here with my nose in the air, while pounding on my chest and boastfully proclaiming that I will never conform. That really offers nothing to the underlying issue.

As mentioned before, a 4 cylinder doesn't have to sound like crap. That all depends on the packaging. A more constructive look at things would be, how can we (manufacturer) make the vehicles we love more viable with the power plants that are available? Sounds like it's a tough deal considering the added weight that keeps getting tacked on for additional safety standards. So, you could go the route of GM with the alpha platform and start going to various measures to reduce the weight but the end cost is absorbed by the consumer.

You gotta pick your poison. Hope that these little engines sell well. That way more development is put into them and maybe, they won't suck as some of you traditionally think.

[2013 ZL1 #7860]

These "new" 4 cylinder cars are not new and are here to stay...

[maddoggyusa]

just read an article where turbo 4's in the midsize cars aren't getting any more performance or fuel economy than the naturally aspirated V6's (like the 3.5's in the japanese cars). in the end I think they just doing it cause it's cheaper... or hopefully with more R&D there will be some advantage.

[Immortan]

Turbo 4's have come along way, look at VW's line up. The EA888 is remarkable, I have owned a 2014 GLI ed30 and it was impressive for what it was. I actually had fun driving it.

The Cobalt SS in 08+ was recorded as best bang for buck less than $30k, it had that 260 horse LSJ.

But, take notice, these were small cars, weighing less than 3100lbs. I think turbo 4's have come to stay, but there is places they don't belong. In my opinion, that being a 3500lb+ sports car.

[oldfriend]

Originally Posted by ChrisBlair

My 2.0L Ecotec put out 290bhp and 340 lb/ft, and the torque curve was a wet dream.



And BTW, It is my opinion that dealer service centers are intended to perform maintenance at a profit, not to fix up the completely unreliable cars they sell.

I'm not an engineer , nor a weather man , but I didn't get that one about the 340 lb/ft and dream wet curve , can you put that in plain English please !?