[Camarolover85]

Originally Posted by Bongos2U

Only a few places in California sell any 93 octane or above. Looks like most people in Cali and everybody in Colorado can't experience the full power of the LT1 ??

All this time I thought the Turbo 4 and LT1 were made to run on 91 octane (which is plentiful in California). Guess I was wrong.

I think it’s the same due to the altitude. But it would be nice if the owners manuals took everyone into account, I could see uneducated people being concerned by that

[mdhopt36]

2.7 = long stroke engine. Offset crank to reduce side load on the pistons/cylinder walls during the power stroke.
This is a torque motor, plain and simple. Modifying it to "scream" is the wrong way to go. Won't last!
As to vibration, look at the Lycomings in aircraft- they are relatively huge flat-opposed engines, and they don't shake the airframe to any appreciable degree.
Not sure this would be a viable engine choice for a Camaro. GM has that pretty well covered with the outstanding V6 workhorse.
Though it might be viable as an aircraft engine........??!!

[JT58]

Originally Posted by fastball

It’s still common to see V8 F150s and Silverados from the 90s with 200,000 miles on the clock.

Fuel economy be damned. If you want a reliable workhorse truck you buy the V8.

Agreed- I can't fathom buying a full size truck- a Silverado with a turbo 4 cylinder. The V8's last along time and are so proven. And yes the sound- of a V8 cannot be matched. My GF has a Silverado with a 4.8 V8, I installed a MRB CAT back dual exhaust- and the sweet sound of the V8 is incredible.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Michael2000

A big 4 cylinder engine like that would shake a Camaro to pieces. Trucks are heavy, and have a separate frame the engine is mounted to. In the Camaro, hang on to your tooth fillings. That sounds miserable.

absolutely not, it would be a much better choice than the current 4 banger turbo in the Camaro.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

absolutely not, it would be a much better choice than the current 4 banger turbo in the Camaro.

More powerful, sure. But you'd be paying for that with a coarse, low-revving nature that's out of character for most any car, let alone a Camaro. It's a classic truck-duty motor.


Norm

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

More powerful, sure. But you'd be paying for that with a coarse, low-revving nature that's out of character for most any car, let alone a Camaro. It's a classic truck-duty motor.


Norm

That's because of the truck biased cam and tune set up. That engine would have a diff cam and tune to be a high rev and maybe less torgue for a performance car.

[MackSteelPrivateEye]

a 4 banger will still sound crappy. I'd get an N/A 5.3 before the 4 banger.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by MackSteelPrivateEye

a 4 banger will still sound crappy. I'd get an N/A 5.3 before the 4 banger.

I agree 100 %, I hate 4 cyl cars period. But because Camaro and Mustang have turbo 4 cyl cars, lets have more bang for the buck with a better 4 cyl turbo. I still would take a good N/A v8 any day.

[Camarolover85]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

I agree 100 %, I hate 4 cyl cars period. But because Camaro and Mustang have turbo 4 cyl cars, lets have more bang for the buck with a better 4 cyl turbo. I still would take a good N/A v8 any day.

I’m happy I’m not the only one.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by mdhopt36

2.7 = long stroke engine. Offset crank to reduce side load on the pistons/cylinder walls during the power stroke.
This is a torque motor, plain and simple. Modifying it to "scream" is the wrong way to go. Won't last!
As to vibration, look at the Lycomings in aircraft- they are relatively huge flat-opposed engines, and they don't shake the airframe to any appreciable degree.
Not sure this would be a viable engine choice for a Camaro. GM has that pretty well covered with the outstanding V6 workhorse.
Though it might be viable as an aircraft engine........??!!

The lycoming’s redline at 2700 RPM due to their massive size.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by JT58

Agreed- I can't fathom buying a full size truck- a Silverado with a turbo 4 cylinder. The V8's last along time and are so proven. And yes the sound- of a V8 cannot be matched. My GF has a Silverado with a 4.8 V8, I installed a MRB CAT back dual exhaust- and the sweet sound of the V8 is incredible.

Plus the fact that even with AFM, variable valve timing, and direct inject, pushrod V8 engines are still very simple, proven designs. They don't break.

[SecondZ28]

Originally Posted by fastball

Plus the fact that even with AFM, variable valve timing, and direct inject, pushrod V8 engines are still very simple, proven designs. They don't break.

The Gen V LT1's aren't exactly known for being bulletproof. Plenty of early failures since being introduced in 2014.

[dotfiles]

I really hope they put this engine in the refreshed Colorado ZR2 that may be arriving this year. I'd probably have to pick one up as a daily

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

That's because of the truck biased cam and tune set up. That engine would have a diff cam and tune to be a high rev and maybe less torgue for a performance car.

It still can't get away from the fact that it's a big-displacement significantly undersquare, long-stroke engine that is not inherently balanced. It's going to shake. You may be able to get the big power and more revs, but you might not like what comes with it when you try to use it all. One guideline involves mean piston speed, which for this 2.7L four is above 4000 ft/min at 6000 rpm.


Norm