[Normagene]

Those 4 bangers sound just like my husband...... After he eats Mexican food.

[Q'smuscle]

Ouch! Lol..

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

I wouldn't compare a Camaro or any Chevrolet from back then to what we have today. GM has engineered masterpieces worthy of all their names—SS, 1LE, ZL1, and of course Z/28. Do you really expect them to make the same masterpieces and then design a garbage heap with a 4-banger? You'd be both wrong and disappointingly ignorant to think that GM hasn't really thought out this possible outcome.

V8 guys, over here—why do you care? You guys are constantly posting threads about how real enthusiasts don't drive anything with less cylinders.

If you don't understand why V8 lovers dread the idea of a 4 cylinder Camaro, then instead of typing obnoxious drivel and attributing it to us just shut up. It's simple, really.

I think performance cars should focus on performance, not MPG's.

And despite your assurances, every business must constantly focus on adding value through their products or lose their customers. Once a company or industry starts cheapening their product for short-term gains, it's very hard to get back to adding value. And frankly, the 4 cylinder probably won't even be an improvement over the 6 cylinder (higher price, same performance, higher maintenance).

And has been pointed out ad nauseum, if Chevy's turbo-4 is so kick-ass, maybe it belongs in a car with the appropriate weight to actually take advantage of the engine instead of being put in a car that's probably too heavy for it, and where it's the ugly sister in the engine line up.

But naw, let's add 4 cylinders to pony cars and full-size pickups and call it a win!

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

If you don't understand why V8 lovers dread the idea of a 4 cylinder Camaro, then instead of typing obnoxious drivel and attributing it to us just shut up. It's simple, really.

I think performance cars should focus on performance, not MPG's.

And despite your assurances, every business must constantly focus on adding value through their products or lose their customers. Once a company or industry starts cheapening their product for short-term gains, it's very hard to get back to adding value. And frankly, the 4 cylinder probably won't even be an improvement over the 6 cylinder (higher price, same performance, higher maintenance).

And has been pointed out ad nauseum, if Chevy's turbo-4 is so kick-ass, maybe it belongs in a car with the appropriate weight to actually take advantage of the engine instead of being put in a car that's probably too heavy for it, and where it's the ugly sister in the engine line up.

But naw, let's add 4 cylinders to pony cars and full-size pickups and call it a win!

LOL, if you understood the engineering challenges brought about by CAFE you would realize that protecting V8s in Those Pony Cars and Pickups you would know this is a HUGE win. If you want the V8 you may have to accept that your 'Merican Muscle car might have a Turbo 4 little brother. No different than a 6 and in in NO way degrades the image of the 8 cylinder crowd.

[maddoggyusa]

doesn't GM learn from it's mistakes? Don't put a 4 in a camaro. You already screwed over all the Nova lovers with that crappy Nova in the 80's.

http://content.time.com/time/special...658527,00.html

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by maddoggyusa

doesn't GM learn from it's mistakes? Don't put a 4 in a camaro. You already screwed over all the Nova lovers with that crappy Nova in the 80's.

http://content.time.com/time/special...658527,00.html

You apparently haven't driven a 2.0t ATS. Pretty nice package and drives very well. So really hard to see how it could be a mistake. It is essentially equal to the V6 in performance.

[90503]

He (Al Oppenheiser) also added that downsizing the car or the engine too much will stray too far from what the Camaro is all about, and make people question whether the car should continue on.

“We’ve established what the Camaro is. And if the Camaro ceases to become a Camaro, you’ve got to consider, do you take Camaro out in the future.”

....It sounds like the 4cyl idea for a Camaro ^^^^^^ has already been thought about and debated by GM, and determined to be a bad idea that should be avoided in order to keep what image and customer base it appeals to....

[Autonaut]

Well..

Where i live, taxation is so bad, that a v8 camaro would cost 150.000 dollars here for a base model.. True story.
Then comes the annual taxes for actually driving it. 5000 dollar annually, at least. And almost 2 dollar per liter of fuel. A gallon holds 3.8 Liters i think?

So
For some people a turbo 4 makes sense. Taxation is based on weight, emmisions and original purchase price.
A turbo 4 camaro would be much much cheaper. Expensive enough for americans to drop dead. But not more expensive than you dont have to be properly wealthy to own one here.

Often times it seems as if americans forget their cars are sold in the rest of the world. If there will be a turbo 4 banger no one is gonna force you to buy it.

Although i will endorse it if you decide to punch men in tje head if they try and make the exhaust loader. A 4 cylinder sounds horrible. No amount of fart cans or turbo noise is gonna change this.
In fact. The ecoboost mustang aftermarket exhaust companies shpuld focus on developing LIGHTER exhaust that sound the same or less. Have any if you tried to listen to those eco stangs? They sound lile shit like any other 4 cylinder car.

Also. I GM plays fake engine sounds through the speakers, i will cry. That shit is the worst ever. Mustang crowds must be embarassed:/

[nester7929]

Originally Posted by maddoggyusa

doesn't GM learn from it's mistakes? Don't put a 4 in a camaro. You already screwed over all the Nova lovers with that crappy Nova in the 80's.

http://content.time.com/time/special...658527,00.html

That was over 30 years ago. GM would only have failed to learn from their mistakes if the 4-cylinder was still as anemic as it was back then. Considering that the Mustang Ecoboost posts similar times as a 05-10 GT, a 4-banger Camaro could probably get similar results.

It wouldn't even be close to the V8 powered cars, but it'd still be quicker than most things on the road.

[Posaune]

Originally Posted by Autonaut

Well..

Where i live, taxation is so bad, that a v8 camaro would cost 150.000 dollars here for a base model.. True story.
Then comes the annual taxes for actually driving it. 5000 dollar annually, at least. And almost 2 dollar per liter of fuel. A gallon holds 3.8 Liters i think?

So
For some people a turbo 4 makes sense. Taxation is based on weight, emmisions and original purchase price.
A turbo 4 camaro would be much much cheaper. Expensive enough for americans to drop dead. But not more expensive than you dont have to be properly wealthy to own one here.

Often times it seems as if americans forget their cars are sold in the rest of the world. If there will be a turbo 4 banger no one is gonna force you to buy it.

Although i will endorse it if you decide to punch men in tje head if they try and make the exhaust loader. A 4 cylinder sounds horrible. No amount of fart cans or turbo noise is gonna change this.
In fact. The ecoboost mustang aftermarket exhaust companies shpuld focus on developing LIGHTER exhaust that sound the same or less. Have any if you tried to listen to those eco stangs? They sound lile shit like any other 4 cylinder car.

Also. I GM plays fake engine sounds through the speakers, i will cry. That shit is the worst ever. Mustang crowds must be embarassed:/

If GM truly intends to take the Camaro globally, then the 4 cyl makes sense for those markets that tax by displacement (which is silly IMO). Easy enough to then offer it in N.A. as well, as much as it irks me.

[Autonaut]

Originally Posted by Posaune

If GM truly intends to take the Camaro globally, then the 4 cyl makes sense for those markets that tax by displacement (which is silly IMO). Easy enough to then offer it in N.A. as well, as much as it irks me.

Anything below 300hp will be too little i fear.. We have ecoboost 1 liters pushing 170 easily here.. Surely a 2.x liter turbo 4 can surpass 300hp. A NA version? I dont think that is feasable in a camaro. It will be too slow.

And, if GM does not go global, they may be left behind by ford.

I agree, btw. Our taxation rules suck if you are a car lover. God knows i'd buy a new v8 car if i had the dough. But house kids wife etc mandates me to buy a 4 cyl if im lucky, and restoring old chevy's people have given up on. When cars turn 25 and 35 taxation rules changes and cars become affordable!!

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by Number 3

You apparently haven't driven a 2.0t ATS. Pretty nice package and drives very well. So really hard to see how it could be a mistake. It is essentially equal to the V6 in performance.

Nobody cares about a Cadillac having a 2.0 in it! So comparing the ATS to the Camaro isn't a good comparison! I would get a ATS with a 4 cylinder but definitely not a pony/ muscle car!

[Autonaut]

Originally Posted by Q'smuscle

Nobody cares about a Cadillac having a 2.0 in it! So comparing the ATS to the Camaro isn't a good comparison! I would get a ATS with a 4 cylinder but definitely not a pony/ muscle car!

Do you consider the existing v6 camaro a muscle car?
No?

Then whats the problem with a turbo four. You dont have to buy it.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by Autonaut

Do you consider the existing v6 camaro a muscle car?
No?

Then whats the problem with a turbo four. You dont have to buy it.

Lol... I consider a Camaro a pony/ muscle! And a V6 is part of the Pony/ muscle car history not a 4 cylinder! Sorry! It was a straight 6 but still a 6 ! Not a 4 but hey , I'm not giving up my Gen 5 either way! But hey , I understand and there's nothing wrong! As long as it's a Camaro since where you live messes that up! And FYI I had a 2013 V6