Camaro - Rumor has it it will get a 4cyl engine

[Dman877]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Ford doesn't need to make the v8 smaller when they have the eco-boost/twin force line of engines coming along. They just need to convince the mustang crowd that a 3.5l twin turbo v6 making 350hp-415hp and getting better gas mileage is better then a v8 for the mustang.

You're pretty much going to get comments like this:

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Camaro, 4 banger?

gross

Yes, exactly. The Mustang and Camaro have to offer a V-8 for the time being.

Now, if it's a twin-force V-8, that would work. I think a twin-force V6 Mustang would be pretty cool, but non-V-8 Mustangs have not been well received in the past. The SVO Mustang was an interesting idea, but nobody was ready for a turbo I-4 Mustang back in the early 80's.

I understand that the SB Chevy V-8 is compact and light for its displacement. I'm just not so sure that it would need so much displacement if the car were made lighter. I also understand that the actual weight of that particular engine design will not go down that much if all they do is cut the displacement from 6.2 down to something lower since they would just thicken the walls of the block.

There is not as clear of a path for what Chevrolet should do with the engine in my eyes. It would really require an all new engine design. Maybe something similar to the CTS engine, but in a V-8 configuration. The Chevrolet side of this issue should focus more on pure weight loss of the car overall. The problem with that is that if the Camaro loses the weight it needs to lose it will be as good as the Corvette.

Probably the smarter thing for GM to do is just leave the Camaro as it is and build another sports car under another brand like Saturn or Pontiac that uses the turbo 4 from the Solstice, but in a 2+2 configuration. That would actually end up being a more direct competitor for the new Hyundai coupe.

I think it would be pretty cool if Saturn stuck that turbo I-4 into something else in their lineup like the Aura, or Astra. You'd get torque steer from hell, but it would be fast and get reasonably good fuel economy.

Doesn't Ford sell a lot more V6 stangs than V8? Why does everyone keep ragging on the non-V8 muscle cars? They're the meat-and-potatoes for these companies...

 

[shabby]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
Sounds cool and the modding community would surely jump on it.

The modding community is at a stand still right now with the 2.0L turbo engine from the gxp. It doesnt allow you to extract any power from it due to the nazi'ish bosch ecm. Any gains that you get from mods the ecm counters it by lowering the boost. Install a boost controller and it closes the throttle or goes into limp mode once it gets past the torque values its ment to achieve.
I thought when i bought this car i'd be able to extract easy hp from it like on my dsm, but its been nothing but a nightmare. Even my hptuners software is useless because they havent been able to fully unlock the complicated ecm.

The UK Astra VXR has been boosted from 240 to 280hp here.

Thorney motorsports, a well known UK tuner, has options up to 375hp, here.

Those cars dont use the lnf engine found in the solstice/sky.

It's the same engine. Minor differences exist, but they are both 1998cc Ecotec motors and use the same ECU, AFAIK. Your complaint was laid with the ECU and I'm saying it's cracked.

Which software can manipulate it? I know bsr from germany has a tune for it, but who would pay $1000 for that.
Are those engines direct injected too?

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: Dman877

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Ford doesn't need to make the v8 smaller when they have the eco-boost/twin force line of engines coming along. They just need to convince the mustang crowd that a 3.5l twin turbo v6 making 350hp-415hp and getting better gas mileage is better then a v8 for the mustang.

You're pretty much going to get comments like this:

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Camaro, 4 banger?

gross

Yes, exactly. The Mustang and Camaro have to offer a V-8 for the time being.

Now, if it's a twin-force V-8, that would work. I think a twin-force V6 Mustang would be pretty cool, but non-V-8 Mustangs have not been well received in the past. The SVO Mustang was an interesting idea, but nobody was ready for a turbo I-4 Mustang back in the early 80's.

I understand that the SB Chevy V-8 is compact and light for its displacement. I'm just not so sure that it would need so much displacement if the car were made lighter. I also understand that the actual weight of that particular engine design will not go down that much if all they do is cut the displacement from 6.2 down to something lower since they would just thicken the walls of the block.

There is not as clear of a path for what Chevrolet should do with the engine in my eyes. It would really require an all new engine design. Maybe something similar to the CTS engine, but in a V-8 configuration. The Chevrolet side of this issue should focus more on pure weight loss of the car overall. The problem with that is that if the Camaro loses the weight it needs to lose it will be as good as the Corvette.

Probably the smarter thing for GM to do is just leave the Camaro as it is and build another sports car under another brand like Saturn or Pontiac that uses the turbo 4 from the Solstice, but in a 2+2 configuration. That would actually end up being a more direct competitor for the new Hyundai coupe.

I think it would be pretty cool if Saturn stuck that turbo I-4 into something else in their lineup like the Aura, or Astra. You'd get torque steer from hell, but it would be fast and get reasonably good fuel economy.

Doesn't Ford sell a lot more V6 stangs than V8? Why does everyone keep ragging on the non-V8 muscle cars? They're the meat-and-potatoes for these companies...

Seriously! And since when is 260hp/260lb-ft something bad? Power and fuel economy is something to be proud of.

Here's my ideal Camaro line up:

RS: 260hp/260lb-ft I4 DI Turbo
z/28: 304hp/273lb-ft 3.6 DI
SS: 361hp/385lb-ft 6.0

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: Dman877

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Ford doesn't need to make the v8 smaller when they have the eco-boost/twin force line of engines coming along. They just need to convince the mustang crowd that a 3.5l twin turbo v6 making 350hp-415hp and getting better gas mileage is better then a v8 for the mustang.

You're pretty much going to get comments like this:

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Camaro, 4 banger?

gross

Yes, exactly. The Mustang and Camaro have to offer a V-8 for the time being.

Now, if it's a twin-force V-8, that would work. I think a twin-force V6 Mustang would be pretty cool, but non-V-8 Mustangs have not been well received in the past. The SVO Mustang was an interesting idea, but nobody was ready for a turbo I-4 Mustang back in the early 80's.

I understand that the SB Chevy V-8 is compact and light for its displacement. I'm just not so sure that it would need so much displacement if the car were made lighter. I also understand that the actual weight of that particular engine design will not go down that much if all they do is cut the displacement from 6.2 down to something lower since they would just thicken the walls of the block.

There is not as clear of a path for what Chevrolet should do with the engine in my eyes. It would really require an all new engine design. Maybe something similar to the CTS engine, but in a V-8 configuration. The Chevrolet side of this issue should focus more on pure weight loss of the car overall. The problem with that is that if the Camaro loses the weight it needs to lose it will be as good as the Corvette.

Probably the smarter thing for GM to do is just leave the Camaro as it is and build another sports car under another brand like Saturn or Pontiac that uses the turbo 4 from the Solstice, but in a 2+2 configuration. That would actually end up being a more direct competitor for the new Hyundai coupe.

I think it would be pretty cool if Saturn stuck that turbo I-4 into something else in their lineup like the Aura, or Astra. You'd get torque steer from hell, but it would be fast and get reasonably good fuel economy.

Doesn't Ford sell a lot more V6 stangs than V8? Why does everyone keep ragging on the non-V8 muscle cars? They're the meat-and-potatoes for these companies...

Seriously! And since when is 260hp/260lb-ft something bad? Power and fuel economy is something to be proud of.

Here's my ideal Camaro line up:

RS: 260hp/260lb-ft I4 DI Turbo
z/28: 304hp/273lb-ft 3.6 DI
SS: 361hp/385lb-ft 6.0

It's not a bad lineup.

My post pretty much rambled around until I came to the conclusion that they should leave the Camaro engine lineup like that, but look at some weight reduction if possible.

I doubt that the turbo 4 will make it to production as the base engine. We will get a detuned version of that V-6 like someone else said.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Pariah
What does the topend Taurus have to do with the Mustang? Ford is just about to release a 540HP Mustang, so it's not like they have to wait around for the Taurus to come save the day. Are they going to be able to put that 350HP engine in the Mustang and sell it for the same price as the current V6 or even base V8? Unlikely, so it still has no relevance.

if they've got 350 hp in the taurus as a common engine, there is no way the GT will have less. i wouldn't be shocked if the GT has a 400 hp TT V6.


edit ford used to have a 3.9L V6 that they used in the lincoln LS. it made 280 hp at 6000 rpm and 286 torques at 4000 rpm.


edit2: and using a V6 to build a V8 off of is a bad idea. wrong angle. not to mention, GM already killed a luxury V8 about 3 months ago. so, not likely they're about to start that back up.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Pariah
What does the topend Taurus have to do with the Mustang? Ford is just about to release a 540HP Mustang, so it's not like they have to wait around for the Taurus to come save the day. Are they going to be able to put that 350HP engine in the Mustang and sell it for the same price as the current V6 or even base V8? Unlikely, so it still has no relevance.

if they've got 350 hp in the taurus as a common engine, there is no way the GT will have less. i wouldn't be shocked if the GT has a 400 hp TT V6.

I don;t see the Taurus getting the 350HP TT Duratec. That engine will be reserved for Lincolns flagship MKZ or whatever they call it, which is built on the S80 platform ( AWD & 350-380HP TT V6). Next Gen Taurus will have the 3.5-3.7L Duratec good for 250-280HP. Perhaps they will bring back the SHO with the TT 3.5L or the Fusion SVT with the TT 3.5L.

The Mustang is getting a major facelift for 2010. I would guess the base engine will be the Duratec 3.5L or 3.7L good for 250-270HP mated to a 5spd manual or 6spd automatic.

GT V8 will most likely be bumped up in displacement and 350-400HP with a 6spd manual which is LONG overdue.

Chrylser is bumping base Hemi 5.7L engines from 340HP to 370HP for 2009 so I'd expect SRT engines to rise up to 450HP.

The LS2 is a go for the Pontiac GXP so I'd expect the Camaro to get the 6.2L as well. 400-430HP is expected as that is what the Vette generates.

 

[JackBurton]

I'll take the 6.2L V8 420HP model.

 

[Dman877]

A Ford Fusion SVT would be sweet, AWD, 6-speed, and 350 hp? Yum. Too bad SVT is RIP though

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Fmr12B

I don;t see the Taurus getting the 350HP TT Duratec. That engine will be reserved for Lincolns flagship MKZ or whatever they call it, which is built on the S80 platform ( AWD & 350-380HP TT V6). Next Gen Taurus will have the 3.5-3.7L Duratec good for 250-280HP. Perhaps they will bring back the SHO with the TT 3.5L or the Fusion SVT with the TT 3.5L.

http://forums.thecarlounge.net/zerothread?id=3779501:

As mentioned numerous times before, the new car will include the 3.5l EcoBoost engine delivering about 350 horses without any mileage penalty.

now, while i won't claim that's a standard engine, and i wouldn't be completely surprised to find a SHO badge with the twinforce, ert, ecoboost, it also wouldn't shock me if that was the standard engine for the 'Limited' level model.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
Sounds cool and the modding community would surely jump on it.

The modding community is at a stand still right now with the 2.0L turbo engine from the gxp. It doesnt allow you to extract any power from it due to the nazi'ish bosch ecm. Any gains that you get from mods the ecm counters it by lowering the boost. Install a boost controller and it closes the throttle or goes into limp mode once it gets past the torque values its ment to achieve.
I thought when i bought this car i'd be able to extract easy hp from it like on my dsm, but its been nothing but a nightmare. Even my hptuners software is useless because they havent been able to fully unlock the complicated ecm.

The UK Astra VXR has been boosted from 240 to 280hp here.

Thorney motorsports, a well known UK tuner, has options up to 375hp, here.

Those cars dont use the lnf engine found in the solstice/sky.

It's the same engine. Minor differences exist, but they are both 1998cc Ecotec motors and use the same ECU, AFAIK. Your complaint was laid with the ECU and I'm saying it's cracked.

Which software can manipulate it? I know bsr from germany has a tune for it, but who would pay $1000 for that.
Are those engines direct injected too?

I don't know. Contact Thorney and ask them. You could be the first US tuner to tweak these if you get the info first.

 

[bruceb]

The only choice for a new gen muscle car, is of course
the V8 engine ... especially if it is a rear wheel drive car.
Also, Pontiac will be reintroducing the GTO in either 2009
or 2010 .. again rear drive and with the V8 / manual tranny.

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: bruceb
The only choice for a new gen muscle car, is of course
the V8 engine ... especially if it is a rear wheel drive car.
Also, Pontiac will be reintroducing the GTO in either 2009
or 2010 .. again rear drive and with the V8 / manual tranny.

Nah, no new GTO.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: bruceb
The only choice for a new gen muscle car, is of course
the V8 engine ... especially if it is a rear wheel drive car.
Also, Pontiac will be reintroducing the GTO in either 2009
or 2010 .. again rear drive and with the V8 / manual tranny.

The problem I have with that statement is that you are firmly keeping a car in the past. If it is indeed going to be 'new gen' then maybe some new thought is required. I fail to see how a powerful 4 is worth less than a V8, except only in aural thrills.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: bruceb
The only choice for a new gen muscle car, is of course
the V8 engine ... especially if it is a rear wheel drive car.
Also, Pontiac will be reintroducing the GTO in either 2009
or 2010 .. again rear drive and with the V8 / manual tranny.

The problem I have with that statement is that you are firmly keeping a car in the past. If it is indeed going to be 'new gen' then maybe some new thought is required. I fail to see how a powerful 4 is worth less than a V8, except only in aural thrills.

A turbo 4 will get worse gas mileage

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: bruceb
The only choice for a new gen muscle car, is of course
the V8 engine ... especially if it is a rear wheel drive car.
Also, Pontiac will be reintroducing the GTO in either 2009
or 2010 .. again rear drive and with the V8 / manual tranny.

The problem I have with that statement is that you are firmly keeping a car in the past. If it is indeed going to be 'new gen' then maybe some new thought is required. I fail to see how a powerful 4 is worth less than a V8, except only in aural thrills.

A turbo 4 will get worse gas mileage

Depends on the situation.

A chevy V8 in a lightweight setup like the Vette gets very good fuel economy.

But a Turbo 4 can make excellent fuel economy in moderate-weight vehicles IF you drive it under the boost. SRT-4, WRX, C30, etc, can easily get ~30mpg highway, and mid-20s city, by keeping the revs under 2500. Not the most exciting way to drive a turbo vehicle, but them's the breaks.

Any V8 in a ~4,000lb setup = EPIC FAIL for fuel economy.

 

[exdeath]

And nobody will buy the 4 cyl version, and someone will say "there needs to be more laws to force people since obviously the free market isn't working and people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices"

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: exdeath
And nobody will buy the 4 cyl version, and someone will say "there needs to be more laws to force people since obviously the free market isn't working and people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices"

Then they should make a ~3000lb V8, and there won't be any reason to complain about fuel economy or make a 4-banger version in the first place

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Dman877

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: thedarkwolf
Ford doesn't need to make the v8 smaller when they have the eco-boost/twin force line of engines coming along. They just need to convince the mustang crowd that a 3.5l twin turbo v6 making 350hp-415hp and getting better gas mileage is better then a v8 for the mustang.

You're pretty much going to get comments like this:

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Camaro, 4 banger?

gross

Yes, exactly. The Mustang and Camaro have to offer a V-8 for the time being.

Now, if it's a twin-force V-8, that would work. I think a twin-force V6 Mustang would be pretty cool, but non-V-8 Mustangs have not been well received in the past. The SVO Mustang was an interesting idea, but nobody was ready for a turbo I-4 Mustang back in the early 80's.

I understand that the SB Chevy V-8 is compact and light for its displacement. I'm just not so sure that it would need so much displacement if the car were made lighter. I also understand that the actual weight of that particular engine design will not go down that much if all they do is cut the displacement from 6.2 down to something lower since they would just thicken the walls of the block.

There is not as clear of a path for what Chevrolet should do with the engine in my eyes. It would really require an all new engine design. Maybe something similar to the CTS engine, but in a V-8 configuration. The Chevrolet side of this issue should focus more on pure weight loss of the car overall. The problem with that is that if the Camaro loses the weight it needs to lose it will be as good as the Corvette.

Probably the smarter thing for GM to do is just leave the Camaro as it is and build another sports car under another brand like Saturn or Pontiac that uses the turbo 4 from the Solstice, but in a 2+2 configuration. That would actually end up being a more direct competitor for the new Hyundai coupe.

I think it would be pretty cool if Saturn stuck that turbo I-4 into something else in their lineup like the Aura, or Astra. You'd get torque steer from hell, but it would be fast and get reasonably good fuel economy.

Doesn't Ford sell a lot more V6 stangs than V8? Why does everyone keep ragging on the non-V8 muscle cars? They're the meat-and-potatoes for these companies...

Ford does sell a lot more V6 Mustangs than V8 models. But the V6 (and before that, the I4 and I6) cars have never been the performance variants. The I6 and V6 Mustangs have always been "secretaries' cars". They look good and have reasonable power. This is one reason that the Camaro/Firebird died (albeit temporarily) while the Mustang continued on. Ford understood that the people buying the V6 Mustang weren't after a performance car, they just wanted a good-looking commuter car. Chevrolet and Pontiac tried to make the V6 cars more performance-oriented and they just never sold as well as the V6 Mustangs.

The V8 model is necessary in the Mustang (and Camaro) lineup as the performance variant or they simply won't be able to sell the Mustang (or Camaro) as a "Muscle car" anymore. A Mustang without a V8 might as well be a Probe.

ZV

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: exdeath
And nobody will buy the 4 cyl version, and someone will say "there needs to be more laws to force people since obviously the free market isn't working and people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices"

Then they should make a ~3000lb V8, and there won't be any reason to complain about fuel economy or make a 4-banger version in the first place

Meh, 3,000 pounds is still a little portly. My full-size Volvo sedan weighs in at only 3,200 pounds. A 2-door 2+2 coupe ought to weigh in between 2,500 and 2,750 pounds. Like the original Mustangs did in the 60's.

ZV

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: exdeath
And nobody will buy the 4 cyl version, and someone will say "there needs to be more laws to force people since obviously the free market isn't working and people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices"

Then they should make a ~3000lb V8, and there won't be any reason to complain about fuel economy or make a 4-banger version in the first place

Meh, 3,000 pounds is still a little portly. My full-size Volvo sedan weighs in at only 3,200 pounds. A 2-door 2+2 coupe ought to weigh in between 2,500 and 2,750 pounds. Like the original Mustangs did in the 60's.

ZV

That'd be even better, but I'm taking into account the necessity of things like air bags, crumple zones, onboard black box crap, abs, etc.

 

[bruceb]

Yes, the new GTO is not definite yet. But it is highly likely.
A friend of mine who works for a GM expects them in 2 years
or so. And see this link;

http://www.autothing.com/funth...10%20Pontiac%20GTO.htm

http://www.caranddriver.com/re...rebird_or_gto_car_news

 

[shabby]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: shabby

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
Sounds cool and the modding community would surely jump on it.

The modding community is at a stand still right now with the 2.0L turbo engine from the gxp. It doesnt allow you to extract any power from it due to the nazi'ish bosch ecm. Any gains that you get from mods the ecm counters it by lowering the boost. Install a boost controller and it closes the throttle or goes into limp mode once it gets past the torque values its ment to achieve.
I thought when i bought this car i'd be able to extract easy hp from it like on my dsm, but its been nothing but a nightmare. Even my hptuners software is useless because they havent been able to fully unlock the complicated ecm.

The UK Astra VXR has been boosted from 240 to 280hp here.

Thorney motorsports, a well known UK tuner, has options up to 375hp, here.

Those cars dont use the lnf engine found in the solstice/sky.

It's the same engine. Minor differences exist, but they are both 1998cc Ecotec motors and use the same ECU, AFAIK. Your complaint was laid with the ECU and I'm saying it's cracked.

Which software can manipulate it? I know bsr from germany has a tune for it, but who would pay $1000 for that.
Are those engines direct injected too?

I don't know. Contact Thorney and ask them. You could be the first US tuner to tweak these if you get the info first.

That software that they sell is simply a device that uploads the tunes to the ecm, it doesnt actually allow you to edit anything. Thats the problem here, there is no software out there that allows the average joe to manipulate the bosch ecm at all, the car has been out since fall 06 and no one can edit anything themselves.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Well if that bump to 300HP does come, that would place the entry level 4cyl within a wiff of the outgoing Z/28/SS power levels (325 I think). Thats actually really neat and totally blows the old V6 out of the water, but I doubt the average Camaro fan would even think about a 4cyl and would just mutter something along the lines of "no replacement for displacement".

2.0T pushing 2900lbs is great.. 2.0T pushing 3500-3600lb Camaro... you have fun witht hat.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: TheSlamma

Originally posted by: nismotigerwvu
Well if that bump to 300HP does come, that would place the entry level 4cyl within a wiff of the outgoing Z/28/SS power levels (325 I think). Thats actually really neat and totally blows the old V6 out of the water, but I doubt the average Camaro fan would even think about a 4cyl and would just mutter something along the lines of "no replacement for displacement".

2.0T pushing 2900lbs is great.. 2.0T pushing 3500-3600lb Camaro... you have fun witht hat.

VW's 2.0T = 200hp/200ft-lbs

GM's 2.0T = 260/260....


the turbo four has as much HP/TQ as many sixes. nuff said.

 

[SoundTheSurrender]

I thought the Solstice engine is one of the worst engines out there? At least the car was rated to be the worst due to it breaking down so much.