2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia All 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - 2015 Camaro news, photos, and videos
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Not Done Yet: Lutz says 'perhaps' to twin-turbo Camaro

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-23-2009, 04:30 PM
  #61  
Registered User
 
SSbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
Originally Posted by graham
Wouldn't it be easier to do an all-aluminum small block with 427ci, 525hp, 500tq, and naturally aspirated? Put headers on it instead of manifolds and lightweight exhaust.
Probably (you don't need to convince me! ).

But it would be good to offer customers the choice. Let them decide which is the better performance alternative (though I'm sure the V8 will still outnumber the V6/TT by a good margin) I say.
SSbaby is offline  
Old 11-23-2009, 04:45 PM
  #62  
Registered User
 
HAZ-Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: TX Med Ctr
Posts: 4,000
Originally Posted by jg95z28
I think you're missing the point of Leno's TTV6. The point is performance plus fuel economy.
Yeah but I some of the things that Leno has said about it aren't exactly correct. If you watch his video on Jay Leno's Garage he says "It's lighter, it's got more horsepower, and it's not a V8." He also said there was a lot less weight off the front end.

There was the comment about the V6 cars being more successful in autocross, which I doubt is true, but was attributed to various un-named reviews of the car. I know there has been a lot of speculation about the lower mass of the base car leading to more responsive handling, just as some people would make the argument during the era of the 4th gens. But regardless, adding turbos would create slightly worse weight distribution and overall a slightly heavier package. I honestly doubt the 3.6L + turbos + piping + intercoolers is lighter than an all aluminum LS3. It's too bad he didn't quantify the difference in mass.

At any rate as far as the fuel economy goes, I think it is possible to get better economy out of the turbo six at low throttle and everyday driving compared to the V8. I think a twin turbo V6 would be a hot setup, but you never get something for nothing.
HAZ-Matt is offline  
Old 11-23-2009, 05:24 PM
  #63  
Registered User
 
SSbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt
But regardless, adding turbos would create slightly worse weight distribution and overall a slightly heavier package. I honestly doubt the 3.6L + turbos + piping + intercoolers is lighter than an all aluminum LS3. It's too bad he didn't quantify the difference in mass.

At any rate as far as the fuel economy goes, I think it is possible to get better economy out of the turbo six at low throttle and everyday driving compared to the V8. I think a twin turbo V6 would be a hot setup, but you never get something for nothing.
I'm in agreement. When you consider there is only a 30kg penalty on the LS3 over the HFV6 normally aspirated engine, then you'd think that advantage would be nullified quite easily with all the additional plumbing a TT setup takes.

As far as weight distribution is concerned... that depends on the location of the huffers relative to the engine... the TT V6 might actually have a lower COG compared to the LS3.

In regards to Leno, I don't think he knows his cars as well as he thinks he does.
SSbaby is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
F'n1996Z28SS
Cars For Sale
8
08-23-2023 11:19 PM
CARiD
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
01-14-2015 04:00 AM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
01-11-2015 06:10 PM
ChrisFrez
CamaroZ28.Com Podcast
2
12-07-2014 06:01 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
12-03-2014 12:30 PM



Quick Reply: Not Done Yet: Lutz says 'perhaps' to twin-turbo Camaro



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:50 AM.