08-19-2018, 11:02 PM | #85 | |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Menifee
Posts: 821
|
Quote:
And that in stop n go traffic means what? So, you want to be 1 sec. faster to the next red light?
__________________
Interior: Adrenaline Red. SS/2SS, M6, NPP, Sun Roof, 8" Nav. Black 5 Spoke Wheels.
|
|
08-19-2018, 11:22 PM | #86 |
Drives: 2017 2ss, m6 Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Iowa
Posts: 231
|
I would probably stay far away from a turbo 4 cylinder after my previous experiences with them. If all you're doing is stoplight to stoplight driving its probably just fine but putting one out on the open road with a lot of hills is a killer. Larger NA engines deal with it well, small turbocharged engines...not so much. Sadly this is all coming from a fuel economy standpoint, not a standpoint of what it costs to operate, properly maintain, and repair over the engines service life.
|
08-20-2018, 05:21 AM | #87 |
Drives: '17- 1ag37 V6 traded, for 1SS 2018! Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: MA
Posts: 469
|
So after what Jim said, this whole thing ain't any proof at all---just a lot of crap about nothing. Figured pulling the 6 didn't make sense.
|
08-20-2018, 06:36 AM | #88 |
Drives: Former 2016 Camaro 1LT Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Naples, FL
Posts: 760
|
For the more economy minded people or people who use the car for commuting, or who don't like to buy premium gas- the V6 is/was the only option. I don't mind a turbo 4 for a commuter car but I would not want to put in premium fuel. I like the V6 for that reason and others. If the 4 can run on 87 octane and make 350+ HP, available in a manual I would consider it- but not for a track car, commuter only. Track car V8 all the way.
__________________
2006 C6 Corvette Manual, 2019 Silverado, 1997 Jeep Wrangler
|
08-20-2018, 06:43 AM | #89 |
Drives: Former 2016 Camaro 1LT Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Naples, FL
Posts: 760
|
I would choose the 4 cylinder gas but with the exception that I'd want 87 octane fuel, NOT 93 for a commuter. V8 gas for track or weekend car. So my two choices would be gas.
__________________
2006 C6 Corvette Manual, 2019 Silverado, 1997 Jeep Wrangler
|
08-20-2018, 06:59 AM | #90 |
Drives: Love the one you're with Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Downtown Charlie Brown
Posts: 11,850
|
Im not a fan of this current trend to move to small displacement turbo motors. More parts to fail and higher stress on parts. They did this before and ended up getting away from turbos. Its all a smokescreen. We now have a Sorento because its just about the only vehicle in its size that still offers a V6. I loved the new Equinox except for the motor options. We drove both and was not impressed with either.
|
08-20-2018, 07:29 AM | #91 | |
Drives: 2017 Mosaic Bk ZL1 M6 Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South of Raleigh, NC
Posts: 9,456
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
08-20-2018, 07:58 AM | #92 |
Drives: rally green LT1 manual Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Indiana
Posts: 282
|
The LGX V6 is a really good engine. It likes to rev and makes a great sound. It pairs nicely with the manual. Problem is, so may people (myself included until recently) have a really bad impression of a V6 Camaro (or Mustang). It isn't thought of as a performance option, or even a good engine, even though it is smooth as silk and makes more power than the old LT1 and about the same as an LS1. I sure hope they keep it and improve it. I wouldn't mind seeing a small TT setup to bump it to 420HP and plenty of torque though .
If you compare the specs of the LGX V6 Camaro against what we think the new Supra will be, they line up almost exactly. 335HP, ~3300lbs, roughly same dimensions plus the Camaro has a manual option and costs about half what we think the Supra will cost. Seems like it would make sense to keep it for competitive reasons. |
08-20-2018, 08:23 AM | #93 |
Drives: rally green LT1 manual Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Indiana
Posts: 282
|
This sums up the V6 pretty well:
https://jalopnik.com/a-basic-2016-ch...ing-1745827833 It is actually a pretty good sports car, if not a muscle car in V6 form. |
08-20-2018, 08:32 AM | #94 |
Drives: 2018 Camaro SS Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Ca.
Posts: 168
|
My opinion here is they will probably keep the 6. The questions are maybe the future for the 4 banger and v8.
|
08-20-2018, 08:59 AM | #95 |
Drives: 2018 Hyper Blue 2SS convertible Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: S.E.Wisconsin
Posts: 182
|
filled out the survey this morning and didn't get the feeling that the v6 was on it's way out not sure what the op is talking about.
__________________
2018 HBM 2SS CONVERTIBLE A8 |
08-20-2018, 09:01 AM | #96 |
Drives: 23 LT1/22 Colorado TB/69 Chevelle Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Greenville, Tx
Posts: 4,966
|
|
08-20-2018, 09:27 AM | #97 |
I wouldn't put too much faith on these surveys, I got one a year or so ago and remember the engine options then were different, of course nothing changed with 2019 except horrible design changes.
I do get where a V6 sounds better (not really literally, but figuratively) than a 4 cyl, but you can do more with a turbo 4 than you can a V6, just look at the aftermarket for the current 6th Gen 6cyl vs 4cyl. Unfortunately much of the move 4 cyl engines is due to emissions regulations and maybe there is a stigma about owing a 4cyl Camaro, but if you consider that it can handily out perform a V6, I don't see why they'd keep the V6 around. I do think they should offer a mid level 5.3L V8 engine option, they won't but I don't think it would hurt for those that want the sound and more power without paying higher end V8 prices. Likewise, they should make the 6.2L more powerful (525+ HP/TQ) or move up to a bigger liter engine, which isn't going to happen either, but I like the thought of 7L+ Camaros. I've said it before, but the base Camaro can be a turbo 4cyl, then in the middle you have an "RS" 5.3L V8 then you have the "SS" 6.2L (or bigger) V8. Basically the 4cyl stays, the 5.3L replaces the 3.6L V6 and the 6.2L gets a good power bump.
__________________
2017 Camaro 1SS - Bright Yellow - 6spd
|
|
08-20-2018, 09:44 AM | #98 |
Drives: 2016 Camaro 1LT Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: California
Posts: 3,491
|
ICE engine variety is just going to dwindle and dwindle rapidly within our lifetime as electric supplants all personal vehicles.
that's not a crazy hypothetical possibility, it's guaranteed barring some crazy war that sets quality of life back decades. No sense in getting worked up over it. I'd be more concerned about the likelihood of computer controlled cars causing insurance to skyrocket for anyone wanting to drive the car themselves - leading to nobody being able to afford to drive a car themselves, leading to nobody caring about buying a car leading to cars become a service on-demand no different from air travel ...leading to car companies collapsing into one or two companies providing boring but functional vehicles that nobody will remember, like how you remember the type of plane you last traveled in. Without something to replace the fun and excitement of driving around yourself, it is a bleak possibility that's actually worth being concerned about. The loss of ICE engines isn't. If anything, their eventual demise can make car enthusiasts much more empowered since there's far less going on in an electric car so it's all much more accessible at less of a price point for home mechanics. Though i'm sure they'll put laws on the books to keep things from getting too DIY friendly. Gotta protect the big corps. |
|
|
Post Reply
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|