[cleoent]

Originally Posted by MiamiBlueCamaro

Is this a V6?

Yes. With two extra cylinders.

[MiamiBlueCamaro]

I am not bashing at the V8 but this is a thread for the turbo-4.

[Michigan1LTRS]

Originally Posted by MiamiBlueCamaro

I am not bashing at the V8 but this is a thread for the turbo-4.

Turbo 4!!!
In all seriousness, the engine is an amazing balance between power and mpg. 295 foot lbs torque and I just got 35.6 mpg highway.

[Corner carver]

Originally Posted by Michigan1LTRS

Turbo 4!!!
In all seriousness, the engine is an amazing balance between power and mpg. 295 foot lbs torque and I just got 35.6 mpg highway.

Seriously, this engine is a weapon even in stock trim... If it was in anything but a 'muscle car' people would be singing it's praises and thanking GM for it; i do anyways

This engine with a few bolt ons will have lots of haters eating crow i predict

No hate here either for the V8... I sat in one at the dealership, fired it up and immediately got all goose bumpy Then i turned it off and walked away, i knew a test drive would've been a huge mistake! No regrets with the 2.0T though, just means i can stay WOT more often on my favorite twisty roads.

[Corner carver]

Have any peeps ran their 2.0's down the 1/4 mile in anger yet?

Anyone try a 'topspeed' run in a 2.0?

[Evil-Bee-NH]

Originally Posted by Corner carver

Have any peeps ran their 2.0's down the 1/4 mile in anger yet?

Anyone try a 'topspeed' run in a 2.0?

Not yet was going to do this this past sunday but new England decided to dump rain on the 2nd day of the super chevy show so no drag strip yet... I really should get one in for fun sometime. I know my car topped at 157-158 on the Dyno stock I think that's great honestly not many times you'll be above that in real life or road course situations stock.

[Evil-Bee-NH]

Originally Posted by MiamiBlueCamaro

I am not bashing at the V8 but this is a thread for the turbo-4.

completely agree we need to get a few LTG 1/4 mile stickies up there.

[Corner carver]

Originally Posted by Evil-Bee-NH

Not yet was going to do this this past sunday but new England decided to dump rain on the 2nd day of the super chevy show so no drag strip yet... I really should get one in for fun sometime. I know my car topped at 157-158 on the Dyno stock I think that's great honestly not many times you'll be above that in real life or road course situations stock.

I've gotten 210km/hr... Around 137mph i think, not on the dyno mind you
Edit: i can see that math isn't my strong point... More like 130mph

Obviously on a closed course asphalt was rough, that's as fast as I was comfortable to go... Some good quality dampeners would do alot for this car

It felt like it had a bit more, but not much... 140mph maybe?... I guess on the dyno aerodynamis don't count for much lol.

[Corner carver]

Looking up some ecoboost 'stang times... Looks like the camaro with the LTG might take it, even with the significant power disadvantage in the 0-60 and the quater mile

Anyone care to disagree?

[Evil-Bee-NH]

Originally Posted by Corner carver

Looking up some ecoboost 'stang times... Looks like the camaro with the LTG might take it, even with the significant power disadvantage in the 0-60 and the quater mile

Anyone care to disagree?

The Ecoboost Mustang while not a terrible car isn't all that Ford really hasn't worked out handling with the mustang with IRS not saying they are terrible cars but pound for pound chevy is still miles ahead on suspension in the Camaro with IRS.

[Nate...]

Originally Posted by Corner carver

Looking up some ecoboost 'stang times... Looks like the camaro with the LTG might take it, even with the significant power disadvantage in the 0-60 and the quater mile

Anyone care to disagree?

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/...tang-ecoboost/

Camaro is over a second faster to 60mph!

[Corner carver]

Originally Posted by Nate...

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/...tang-ecoboost/

Camaro is over a second faster to 60mph!

Yeesh! No way our Camaros' should be over a second faster to 60mph... They must be right about the ecoboost pulling power for some reason on hard upshifts; just seems like too large a gap...
The ecoboost closing the gap some by the end of the quater just enforces this therory I'd think. Really surprises me that the 'stang beat the camaro around the road course, never would've guessed that!... Just one more excuse to burn up those stock run flats and get some real performance oriented summer tires on these suckers!

[Nate...]

Originally Posted by Corner carver

Yeesh! No way our Camaros' should be over a second faster to 60mph... They must be right about the ecoboost pulling power for some reason on hard upshifts; just seems like too large a gap...
The ecoboost closing the gap some by the end of the quater just enforces this therory I'd think. Really surprises me that the 'stang beat the camaro around the road course, never would've guessed that!... Just one more excuse to burn up those stock run flats and get some real performance oriented summer tires on these suckers!

The magazine version of the article talks about them putting stock SS tires (fronts all around so it's still square) on the LTG and it beating literally every measurement against the Mustang. With comparable tires the Camaro wins EVERY TIME.

[Corner carver]

Originally Posted by Nate...

The magazine version of the article talks about them putting stock SS tires (fronts all around so it's still square) on the LTG and it beating literally every measurement against the Mustang. With comparable tires the Camaro wins EVERY TIME.

Similar summer tires gets the 2.0 around Willow over 1.5secs faster than the ecoboost?! Ouch is about all i can politely say about that outcome... Be cool to know if that $1500 put into the ecoboost would level the playing field again

Unless I'm looking at the wrong times, the 2.0 on those summer tires also beats the new mustang gt around the track?! That's just amazing IMO!

Edit: sorry, I think i may have been looking at the 5th gen GT's time, my bad... Still impressive, the 'streets of willows' fast times is a bit confusing to read (would be nice if the car's year of manufacture was included)