So what displacement with the base V8 be?

I already read from reliable sources that the 5.3L won't make it into the Camaro and I've also heard that they won't use the LS2 or any other 6.0L either. A 425-450HP 6.2L LS3 will be in the Z28 or what ever top Camaro, but what will the mid level engine (base V8) be if GM doesn't plan to use the 5.3L or 6.0L. A detuned 6.2L doesn't sound like s smart move. It is just too big and thirsty for that crowd.

Have things changed? Holden is using Gen IV 6.0L L98 which are L76's without the DoD. A 370HP L76 DoD 6.0L would make a great base V8. I'd also like to see what the LS4 could do with a less restrictive exhaust setup and maybe a little more aggressive cam. For me the base V8 should be all about the perfect mix of fuel economy with 350HP+

NOBODY KNOWS YET.

Read around the forum.

or maybe the LS3 camaro will be the top model for the first couple model years.. perhaps called SS.. and the Z/28 will come out later with the LS9 :D

i admit this is not based on any facts or inside information.. it's just what i hope will happen ;)

P.S.. the base model will have a 300+hp 3.6L HF V6 with direct injection :D

Well we will see what happens....if they don't come out with something that has some balls I won't buy it. For me this car is not going to be a daily driver. I am willing to go up to 45K for a high HP new camaro. I would prefer that it be a special model that you would have to order, SS or a Z28. (Limited production, high horsepower, heavenly optioned). Anything less than that I will either buy another 1st gen, prob a conv or do the Goodmark conv buildup with a crate. I have been waiting to see what GM comes out with. All comes down to what they come up with.

It would be nice if they would put the Z06 motor in in....maybe I am dreaming......but in order to sell the production numbers they are shooting for they will still need the 6 cyl grocery getter...

IMHO they will still need to have the optional 9.0L.....:D

Methinks either 6.0L or 6.2L

Methinks either 6.0L or 6.2L

Why is everyone discounting the 5.3L has there been reliable information stating that it will in fact not be a 5.3 in the entry level V-8? This option would seem to me to make the most sense in terms of offering a powerful V-8 that competes with the current Mustang GT at a very affordable price. They need to keep the entry level's price as low as possble to hit their sales quota

5.3L would be a possibility, but to my knowledge there are no new 5.3L engines in the pipeline for RWD car applications.
Just because an engine has more displacement and more power doesn't mean it costs a ton more to make. :)

Maybe they'll bring back a 5.7L engine?

Just because an engine has more displacement and more power doesn't mean it costs a ton more to make. :)

Maybe not if you are considering ONLY the cost of raw material and man hours to manufature it; however when you examine the costs associated with R&D and engineering of a new engine, then the costs are high. If a company wants to utilize economies of scale (which every company seeks to exploit) then it would make sense to use the 5.3L which has already had the engineering costs absorbed. The more you can spread out those costs, the cheaper the product becomes.

Maybe not if you are considering ONLY the cost of raw material and man hours to manufature it; however when you examine the costs associated with R&D and engineering of a new engine, then the costs are high. If a company wants to utilize economies of scale (which every company seeks to exploit) then it would make sense to use the 5.3L which has already had the engineering costs absorbed. The more you can spread out those costs, the cheaper the product becomes.
Yes maybe, but you also have to keep in mind that we are talking about the LSx series engines here...They are already engineered, and have already been through years of R&D. So in theory, no matter which LS engine they choose(if thats the route they go), then one engine probably isnt going to cost more than the other.

Now if your talking LS7, or any other hand built. Then yes, it gets to be more expensive.

The 5.3 has gone through R&D, but so has every other LSx engine we know of. So i doubt they will use the 5.3 when they can just use a detuned version of the LS they will have as the higher power version. That would save more money than using 2 completley different engines.

They could go with that "327" gimmic again with the 325 inch 5.3L like they did in the trucks.

Why is everyone discounting the 5.3L has there been reliable information stating that it will in fact not be a 5.3 in the entry level V-8? I thought the Saleen quote debunked the idea of the 5.3L V8 being a possibility. ;)

I would be surprised if there were more than three engine displacements available in the first year of production. (Two of which would be V6s.) :D

They could go with that "327" gimmic again with the 325 inch 5.3L like they did in the trucks.

The "327" was a gimmic? :no: The 327 was a standard displacement in its day. If anything, at the time, the "350" was a gimmic only found in the SS. :D

The "327" was a gimmic? :no: The 327 was a standard displacement in its day. If anything, at the time, the "350" was a gimmic only found in the SS. :D
Ya, my 5.7 liter is really a 346. So its not a 350 like its claimed.

The "327" as in what the dealer brochures used to advertise as the 5.3L motor. The size was 325.

The "327" as in what the dealer brochures used to advertise as the 5.3L motor. The size was 325.

Kinda like the current 427?

Its 427.4 right?

Its 427.4 right?

I thought it was 425.... maybe i am wrong... I will have to look it up now

Kinda like the current 427?

Nope, the 427 (LS7) is actually 427.6 They rounded down instead of up.

427 could equal 426.5-427.9
but 247.5-427.9 could also be rounded up to 428 if they wanted even though it technically isn't 428.

The 5.3L is 325ci, LS1 was a 346ci

Nope, the 427 (LS7) is actually 427.6 They rounded down instead of up.

Beat me to it.... was just getting ready to post this.

So if we have a 300hp V6, and a 450hp V8....thats a lot of uncoverd ground. There has to be a 350-380hp engine to fill the void, soemthing to go head to head with the next Mustang GT.

and ps, when was someone going to tell me that they moved the 5th gen forum to the top. I kept looking in near the Automotive news section/Fourm area. Damn sob's trying to hide this on me!

maybe they will bring back the 5.7 350

and ps, when was someone going to tell me that they moved the 5th gen forum to the top. I kept looking in near the Automotive news section/Fourm area. Damn sob's trying to hide this on me!

LOL, the whole point of moving it to the top was to make it easier to find, for newbies especially.... and it's been up there for a couple months now i think..

i mean, how can you miss it.. you click message board and BAM it's right there in red and white

There needs to be a Mustang GT priced V8 Camaro, and I don't see a 450HP 6.2L Camaro being that car.

5.3L would be a possibility, but to my knowledge there are no new 5.3L engines in the pipeline for RWD car applications.
Just because an engine has more displacement and more power doesn't mean it costs a ton more to make. :)

just use the truck engines. Swap cams, pcm, exhaust, it would be an easy 330-340hp.

LOL, the whole point of moving it to the top was to make it easier to find, for newbies especially.... and it's been up there for a couple months now i think..

i mean, how can you miss it.. you click message board and BAM it's right there in red and white

I have it saved in a favorite file, and I guess it set itself for the Automotive news section.

[/hijack]

They arent going to use a 5.3 for the camaro simple reason why......it would cost more to have yet another engine type then the base corvette of the time LS3 the z06 LS7 and Blue devil LS9 Gm's current trend dictates they arent in there old way of thinking look at the power ratings on the GTO if anything the LS7 will be at 500 in the SS because the z06 will jump up in power and with the mustang redesign around the coner we need that power i feel the power will only go up not take a step back.....

The "327" as in what the dealer brochures used to advertise as the 5.3L motor. The size was 325.

Nope, the 427 (LS7) is actually 427.6 They rounded down instead of up.

427 could equal 426.5-427.9
but 247.5-427.9 could also be rounded up to 428 if they wanted even though it technically isn't 428.

The 5.3L is 325ci, LS1 was a 346ci

They have been doing that for decades. When the 396 was redesigned it in 1970 it went to 402 ci, but they kept the 396 name since it was so recognizable. But I guess shifting down isn't as bad as shifting up.

They arent going to use a 5.3 for the camaro simple reason why......it would cost more to have yet another engine type then the base corvette of the time LS3 the z06 LS7 and Blue devil LS9 Gm's current trend dictates they arent in there old way of thinking look at the power ratings on the GTO if anything the LS7 will be at 500 in the SS because the z06 will jump up in power and with the mustang redesign around the coner we need that power i feel the power will only go up not take a step back.....

How would it cost more to have another engine type if that engine is already in production? There are already reports that the 5.3L will be used in other vehicles, so it is not like they are developing this engine just for the Camaro. There would be absolutely no added cost associated with using the 5.3, and in all actuality, since the 5.3 has been used now for so long, it would be a lot cheaper becasue they are able to spread the fixed costs of producing that engine over all of these vehicles. They have already absorbed all of the R&D and engineering costs, so they would basically only be out the cost of manufacturing the thing - unlike the new LS3 or even the LS7.

What exactly do you mean that "current trend dictates they arent in there old way of thinking look at the power ratings on the GTO" I hardly think this is applicable. The GTO had 1 engine option and was not intended to sale 100,000 units.

How would it cost more to have another engine type if that engine is already in production? There are already reports that the 5.3L will be used in other vehicles, so it is not like they are developing this engine just for the Camaro. There would be absolutely no added cost associated with using the 5.3, and in all actuality, since the 5.3 has been used now for so long, it would be a lot cheaper becasue they are able to spread the fixed costs of producing that engine over all of these vehicles. They have already absorbed all of the R&D and engineering costs, so they would basically only be out the cost of manufacturing the thing - unlike the new LS3 or even the LS7.

What exactly do you mean that "current trend dictates they arent in there old way of thinking look at the power ratings on the GTO" I hardly think this is applicable. The GTO had 1 engine option and was not intended to sale 100,000 units.


I have it straight from the horse’s mouth on a digital recorder that the 5.3L will not be used.

I have it straight from the horse’s mouth on a digital recorder that the 5.3L will not be used.

prove it :D

j/k... i don't think a 5.3 will be used either.

I have it straight from the horse’s mouth on a digital recorder that the 5.3L will not be used.

I probably should have clarified my argument. I was not arguing that the 5.3L would be used. I was arguing that it would in NO WAY be more expensive for GM to use it.

Sorry if I was unclear.

prove it :D



If I even released that tape I prob wouldn’t be posting here and more seeing how I would be on the run form the black Suburbans the rest of my life.

I probably should have clarified my argument. I was not arguing that the 5.3L would be used. I was arguing that it would in NO WAY be more expensive for GM to use it.

Sorry if I was unclear.

Oh no prob ;)

Probably 6.2.

prove it :D

j/k... i don't think a 5.3 will be used either.

how about 4.8L? I dislike the idea of a 6.2L as entry level V8

how about 4.8L? I dislike the idea of a 6.2L as entry level V8

why? really, it costs just as much to put a 6.2L in there as it does a 5.3L... the engines probably cost just as much to produce as well, or at least will after the engineering and design of the engine is paid for..

basically what I'm saying is, it seems most of the people who don't want the 6.2L as the base v8 say that because they think it'd be too expensive compared to something like the mustang's base v8.. but I'm pretty sure price would not depend on the displacement or horsepower of the engine

ultimately i think that if they did have two different v8 engines it might cost more for them because they'd have to engineer the car, and the production line, to handle two different engines

why? really, it costs just as much to put a 6.2L in there as it does a 5.3L... the engines probably cost just as much to produce as well, or at least will after the engineering and design of the engine is paid for..

basically what I'm saying is, it seems most of the people who don't want the 6.2L as the base v8 say that because they think it'd be too expensive compared to something like the mustang's base v8.. but I'm pretty sure price would not depend on the displacement or horsepower of the engine

ultimately i think that if they did have two different v8 engines it might cost more for them because they'd have to engineer the car, and the production line, to handle two different engines
*more HP
*worse mpg



i'd like to see the 5.3 used and then have a stand alone option for the 6.2.

*more HP
*worse mpg



i'd like to see the 5.3 used and then have a stand alone option for the 6.2.

from what I've heard the LS4 gets pretty similar mpg to the LS2 and LS7

from what I've heard the LS4 gets pretty similar mpg to the LS2 and LS7

which vehicle has two or more of those engines?

which vehicle has two or more of those engines?

well on separate vehicles, sure.. but.. i have heard the LS4 guys bitching that they aren't getting nearly the mpg that the EPA rates em at, and i hear the LS2/7 guys always bragging about getting better than EPA..

When was the last time the same motor was not used in both the Z/28 and SS models in one variation or another?

why? really, it costs just as much to put a 6.2L in there as it does a 5.3L... the engines probably cost just as much to produce as well, or at least will after the engineering and design of the engine is paid for..

basically what I'm saying is, it seems most of the people who don't want the 6.2L as the base v8 say that because they think it'd be too expensive compared to something like the mustang's base v8.. but I'm pretty sure price would not depend on the displacement or horsepower of the engine

ultimately i think that if they did have two different v8 engines it might cost more for them because they'd have to engineer the car, and the production line, to handle two different engines

perhaps but I am not refering to cost ;)

Just the way I see things with a base Camro V8 going head to head against a Mustang GT, in terms of price and performance. It would not take 6.2L to match or slightly exceed the hp of a Mustang

I would expect to see the NA 6.2L in the SS and the blown version in the Z28.

why? really, it costs just as much to put a 6.2L in there as it does a 5.3L... the engines probably cost just as much to produce as well, or at least will after the engineering and design of the engine is paid for..

Marketing?

Base model = 5.something
Top shelf model = 6.something

6 > 5 = better upsell potential.
5 < 6 = Doesn't guzzle as much gas.

Keep in mind that 90% of the potential customers don't actually care how fast it is or how much horsepower or MPG it really has.

how about 4.8L? I dislike the idea of a 6.2L as entry level V8

A DOD 6.2L V-8 would get just as good gas mileage as a 4.8 with more power on tap. Anything smaller than a 6.2 would be pointless.

Marketing?

Base model = 5.something
Top shelf model = 6.something

6 > 5 = better upsell potential.
5 < 6 = Doesn't guzzle as much gas.

Keep in mind that 90% of the potential customers don't actually care how fast it is or how much horsepower or MPG it really has.

that's the "90%" that will buy a V6. If someone spends the money on a V8 they want to say "i have XXXhp". It's the same reason some people buy a V8 mustang. After all no one would buy one if they really wanted to go fast :p .

Heck I'm not even confident there will even be a "base" V8 now. But there will be two V8 models... eventually. ;)

that's the "90%" that will buy a V6. If someone spends the money on a V8 they want to say "i have XXXhp". It's the same reason some people buy a V8 mustang. After all no one would buy one if they really wanted to go fast :p .

The stats have been posted here many times before, but with the Mustang, V8s outsell V6s.

Having a V8 will goes along with the image of the car, so I think there will be quite a few weekend cruisers that just want a "V8 Camaro" without being overly concerned with the horsepower. Even the base V8 will be plenty fast. And my gut instinct is that the average buyer puts more weight on displacement than horsepower.

The stats have been posted here many times before, but with the Mustang, V8s outsell V6s.
All of the stats I've seen posted, whether they were for the Camaro or the Mustang, indicated that V6s outsell V8s.

If you have seen otherwise, please post.

The stats have been posted here many times before, but with the Mustang, V8s outsell V6s.

Are u sure about this??

The stats have been posted here many times before, but with the Mustang, V8s outsell V6s.



Nope. V6'ers are the bread and butter cars that sell in volume. Look up those sales stats during the 4th gen and SN95 Mustang runs, V6's sold a helluva lot more than V8's. Hence why everyone wants to see a good base model car and not a throw away car, so more Camaros can be sold in volume.

Back on topic, I was kind of hoping for the SS and Z28 to have different motors but a 6.2 in the SS and a blown 6.2 in the Z would work for me. A N/A V8 in the Z28 would be even better (heritage and weight savings) but we shall see.

A N/A V8 in the Z28 would be even better (heritage and weight savings) but we shall see.

Personally, in the Z/28, I'd rather see an LS3 which got the 'LS6 treatment', (as compared to the LS1), than a version of the blown LSA or LS9.

Does anyone think that the coming news of a 5.0 V8 Mustang will impact the base V8 to be chosen?

Personally, in the Z/28, I'd rather see an LS3 which got the 'LS6 treatment', (as compared to the LS1), than a version of the blown LSA or LS9.


100% agree. No s/c V8s

Personally, in the Z/28, I'd rather see an LS3 which got the 'LS6 treatment', (as compared to the LS1), than a version of the blown LSA or LS9.

100% agree. No s/c V8s

Sorry, but I disagree. :D

Personally, I want the Z/28 to be the top performance Camaro and quite frankly I want a supercharger. Having lived with a supercharged car in the past (96 Mustang) I can say they really are fine as daily drivers yet still offer that needed "boost" when you mash the accelerator. My only complaint would be that it wasn't covered by a factory warranty. (Aftermarket Vortech) If GM offered a supercharged Camaro, that would solve my one complaint. ;)

Sorry, but I disagree. :D

Personally, I want the Z/28 to be the top performance Camaro and quite frankly I want a supercharger. Having lived with a supercharged car in the past (96 Mustang) I can say they really are fine as daily drivers yet still offer that needed "boost" when you mash the accelerator.

you needed then"boost" of power BECUASE it was a Mustang!:D Besides those 96 4.6L were really slow anyhow;)

I just think a blown V8 does not fit in with the Camaros image. They have never needed a S/C to go fast! They have such great NA engines to do that!

427, 427!!!

you needed the "boost" of power BECUASE it was a Mustang!:D Besides those 96 4.6L were really slow anyhow;)

I just think a blown V8 does not fit in with the Camaros image. They have never needed a S/C to go fast! They have such great NA engines to do that!

427, 427!!!

I was originally in the same boat, however if you can make as much power (or more) with a smaller displacement and a supercharger AND get better gas mileage, I'd think that most buyers would want that alternative.

What is/isn't the Camaro's image anyhow? GM needs up update the Camaro's image, otherwise we'll be forever associated with mullets, mall-hair and 80's hairband metal. A supercharger would do the trick IMHO.

BTW, the Mustang was my stepson's. You're right. My bone stone LT1/Z28 would eat it for breakfast! :D

I would like to see the 6.2 being mid engine, the LS9 being an up option a year later, and the base V8 being 5.3-5.4. The number 5.0 is associated with mustangs, but would be OK with me. Recammed/tuned LS4 maybe...
With the 3.9L VVT V6 being the base engine. 240, 325, 425, ~540 as the power levels.

I would like to see the 6.2 being mid engine, the LS9 being an up option a year later, and the base V8 being 5.3-5.4. The number 5.0 is associated with mustangs, but would be OK with me. Recammed/tuned LS4 maybe...
With the 3.9L VVT V6 being the base engine. 240, 325, 425, ~540 as the power levels.

Isn't it looking more like the base V6 will be closer to 300hp with the base V8 making around 400?

V6 family sedans are increasingly getting closer and closer to 300hp. (Avalon&Camry- 268, Altima- 250-260, Maxima- 255, Accord- 244, RL- 290, TL- 258-286) A base V8 Camaro better be pushing more than 325... In 2 years those same family sedans will probably be at the 300 mark if not possibly more.

What is/isn't the Camaro's image anyhow? GM needs up update the Camaro's image, otherwise we'll be forever associated with mullets, mall-hair and 80's hairband metal. A supercharger would do the trick IMHO.


I agree. I found this little tidbit on mulletsgalore.com.:no:

http://www.mulletsgalore.com/assets/images/classifications/01/camaromullet.jpg

2. CamaroMullet: The CamaroMullet used to have full reign over the mullet brethren, but that was back in the 70's and 80's. This species has fallen from grace since, but can still be seen enjoying NASCAR events and shopping at Kragen, or up in the attic cooking up crank.

Distinguishing features include: a molester mustache (peach fuzzy), tight-fitting acid wash jeans, and an ever-present key ring hanging from the belt loop.

Feel the mulletude emanating through your computer screen from this rare pic.

It is not recommended you confront the CamaroMullet, for they are very aggressive and cannot be hurt (this might be due to the frequent use of methamphetamines, angel dust, etc.).

Mulletude: 10

Aggressiveness: 10

Hobbies: primering cars, bar fights, picking scabs, losing teeth.

<Sightings: Kragen, Grand Auto, working on a Camaro on their front lawn.

Favorite Band: AC/DC

I had seen that picture on a powerpoint slide show on a mullet email chain. Hilarious. There are some fads that should not be rehashed, as trends typically come back around in cycles. I submit to you - bell bottoms, disco, rat tails, popped collars, tight rolling jeans, afros, acid wash jeans, parachute pants and mullets. Please, I repeat, please if you're going to drive a camaro and find any fad appealing, take a picture of yourself with the fad, don't do it again for a month, look at your picture a month later and ask yourself "Do I want to go down in history looking like that?" In fact I don't think it even matters if you're going to drive a camaro; don't do it at all.