A 1ltv8 anyone?

Is there anyone else who is interested in GM building a Camaro with a small V8 that uses regular unleaded gas? Use the stock body 1LT car with a V8 option package. How about a 4.8 or 5.3 HO (325 hp) from the Silverado line with a 6 speed auto (6l80E) and 3.08 or 3.23 rear gear. I have not read what size ring and pinion the 6 cylinder car uses, but it should be adequate for a small V8. This setup should be good for 25-26 mpg highway.

My previous Silverado regular cab long bed 2wd had the 4.8, 4spd auto and 3.23 posi and averaged 22 mpg on the highway at 68-69 mph (I drive 110 miles round trip to work and back).

The SS car is a bruiser but not practical for extended driving on premium fuel and I cannot consider buying a Camaro with a 6 cylinder.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not practical for extended cruising on premium fuel". You can run regular in the SS and I have achieved over 24 mpg on the highway without even trying to get decent fuel economy. What you propose (25 to 26) is hardly better than what the 426 LS3 will do in the real world.

So I don't think I'd want 100 hp less for only 1 or 2 mpg more. But having driven the V6 in the Camaro, I really don't think you'll notice the 20 HP more your proposal would give you.

And if when you drive the V6, you will be surprised. You might even rethink your proposal.

I believe you will notice a difference with 20 more HP and the V8 will make more torque and will produce both at a lower rpm range than the V6 engine making it more responsive in everyday driving situations.

I'm not sure why you would want to run regular unleaded fuel in a SS...if you can't afford the gas, don't buy the car. I also find it hard to believe you ran a SS hard and it achieved better than factory rated mpg.

I believe you will notice a difference with 20 more HP and the V8 will make more torque and will produce both at a lower rpm range than the V6 engine making it more responsive in everyday driving situations.

I'm not sure why you would want to run regular unleaded fuel in a SS...if you can't afford the gas, don't buy the car. I also find it hard to believe you ran a SS hard and it achieved better than factory rated mpg.

Believe it.

Believe it.

This man knows. He probably has more seat time in a 2010 Camaro than anyone.

Is there anyone else who is interested in GM building a Camaro with a small V8 that uses regular unleaded gas? Use the stock body 1LT car with a V8 option package. How about a 4.8 or 5.3 HO (325 hp) from the Silverado line with a 6 speed auto (6l80E) and 3.08 or 3.23 rear gear. I have not read what size ring and pinion the 6 cylinder car uses, but it should be adequate for a small V8. This setup should be good for 25-26 mpg highway.

My previous Silverado regular cab long bed 2wd had the 4.8, 4spd auto and 3.23 posi and averaged 22 mpg on the highway at 68-69 mph (I drive 110 miles round trip to work and back).

The SS car is a bruiser but not practical for extended driving on premium fuel and I cannot consider buying a Camaro with a 6 cylinder.

A while back I was hoping that GM would introduce a new performance V8 specifically for the Camaro introduction. I guess they think we should be happy that the L99 is available.

I mean, you jump from a 300hp 3.6L to a 400hp 6.2L? I have to wonder if there is enough room for a ~350hp 4.8-5.3L? I would love to see an LS3 with a 73.75mm stroke.. That could easily make right around 350hp and 340tq with a very mild cam and the LS3/L92 heads. :D

Thats what I'm talking about AdioSS.

If Three has so much time in the seat and is who I think he may be, then lets see some pics and post some numbers or direct me to a string that has them. Until then I'm not buying what he's selling.

Now don't get me wrong and think that I'm putting down the SS because I'm not. I'm sure it's a sweet car, but I believe GM has a void in the middle of the Camaro line up and I hope they fill it. Kind of a sleeper V8 car that would compete directly with the Mustang GT and be cheaper to insure.

if Debler says Three has a bunch of seat time in the Camaro, then I would really suggest you believe him... ;)

I'm wondering if the V6 is the gap in the lineup and if there will be a lower output engine added later that might get better fuel economy?

... and I cannot consider buying a Camaro with a 6 cylinder.

I think this is what the thread is really all about. If the 1LT had a V8 with identical output as the 3.6L DI V6 offers, you probably wouldn't have perceived a gap or created this thread. By all accounts, this V6 rocks and prejudices from past V6 Camaros need to be left in the rearview mirror. It offers great power, MPGs and price. Don't dismiss it because there are 6 cylinders.

It's still a V6. Saying it's cool to drive a V6 american (retro iconic) sports car is like taking a two headed goat to the county fair. It gets some attention but it doesn't win the show and you get laughed at and teased by all your buddies.

Now that some of the guys out there have there cars, maybe they will post some stats (mpg) once they get done having there fun playing.

It's still a V6. Saying it's cool to drive a V6 american (retro iconic) sports car is like taking a two headed goat to the county fair. It gets some attention but it doesn't win the show and you get laughed at and teased by all your buddies.

Now that some of the guys out there have there cars, maybe they will post some stats (mpg) once they get done having there fun playing.

Times have changed. A lot of car companies are dumping V8's for smaller displacement or forced air V6's because they save space/fuel and make just as much HP as older V8's. The only part missing is the sound, but even the newer V6's make their own music. This isn't your daddy's (or your high school) muscle car. It only slightly resembles it in appearance.

When you look at the gap in price between a nicely equipped LT and a base SS with the V8, I don't think it's really worth the trouble of sticking in a V8 with only 46 more horsepower (if you're going for 350hp) versus the base SS' 400.

If you drive 1100 miles a week, the price difference between regular and premium is $12.70 per week.

You could always buy a Mustang 300hp V-8 and there are some screaming deals on 2009 GT's. My brother just purchased one last week, he could not afford a Camaro SS and felt like you about the V-6 it may be quick but its still a V-6. So for less than a V-6 Camaro he picked up a 09 Mustang GT Premium (thats with Leather) for $22,500 +Tax ect. They have a $3500 rebate and dealers are selling them under MSRP around us.

And he has been driving a Camaro for the last 10 years, he just could not see spending over 10k more for a Camaro SS.

I'll be going to my 30 year high school reunion next year. I have owned quite a few 1st gen and 2nd gen camaro's/firebirds and a couple GTO's since then so I would prefer to stay with GM. My truck is a '07 Silverado Classic ext. cab 4x4 and not fuel efficient/practical for the miles I drive. The used Bonneville I picked up a few years ago was a nice riding car and averaged 28 mpg but it just had the 3.8 bottom end let loose at 120k and it was the first and last FWD car I'll own. After a fall at work (telco lineman) severly injured my left shoulder and left hip I could no longer comfortably drive my '96 LT1 Formula 6spd car so I sold it to a family member and any new purchase as a daily driver will have to be an automatic. I have been waiting like everyone else for the arrival of the new Camaro's and will go check them out and probably will let them talk me into test driving an SS :-) but I am also going to look at the 2010 mustang gt. Lets face it, in a year or two when the economy turns around we will be paying between 3.00 to 4.00 a gallon for fuel, especially premium. Now, trips is saying in this thread that the SS will run on regular unleaded, maybe so, but everything I am seeing says to run premium unleaded in it. I have heard to many horror stories of guys buying new vehicles with these high compression engines and trying to get by with running regular unleaded in them and damaging the engines. Will the warranty cover that...I wonder. Thats my arguement for a Camaro with a 325 HP, 9.8:1 5.3 V8 car.

from what you just said, before you drive an SS, try out the V6 first. It just might surprise you :D It weighs about 200 pounds less and has a very, very good V6 that should be able to get 30MPG on the highway while performing about as good as a stock LT1 F-body. Or, eventhough you hate FWD, look into the Cobalt SS ;)

I don't see why you would want a small V8 when the V6 makes 305 rwhp. If there is a gap in the lineup then it is not having a 200 hp 4 cylinder, and that is a good gap to have.

For the record, the truck V8's - 4.8 V8 makes 295 HP and the 5.3 makes 315 HP. In the Impala SS, the 5.3 V8 is rated for 303. I just got all this info from the Chevy website. Why would GM spend the time and money to engineer that car when they are comparable to the V6?

-Geoff

If you all are happy with driving a v6 car then it looks like GM market research did there job.

If you all are happy with driving a v6 car then it looks like GM market research did there job.

If you want a V8 car, then you get a V8 car. If you want a V6 car, then you get a V6 car. The only thing it looks like they missed was people who wanted a V8 that made the power of a V6.

-Geoff

The only thing it looks like they missed was people who wanted a V8 that made the power of a V6.

They missed a V6 that makes the power of a V6.

They missed a V6 that makes the power of a V6.

:yes:

No, what they missed out on is a whole group of guys who will not buy a Camaro because they want an entry level V8, not some girly v6 that boasts some fair hp and torque numbers when you twist it up to 7k rpm, but an entry level V8 that will run on regular unleaded.

It's still a V6. Saying it's cool to drive a V6 american (retro iconic) sports car is like taking a two headed goat to the county fair. It gets some attention but it doesn't win the show and you get laughed at and teased by all your buddies.
In my garage (and my sig) sits a 22-year-old, show winning car. It has a V6 with V8-like performance.

So, let me be blunt: you're wrong.

I don't see why you would want a small V8 when the V6 makes 305 rwhp.

The V6 makes 304 hp at the flywheel. Numbers at the wheels are still pending AFAIK, but should be more in the 255-260 range.

So you have a one year special production GNX with a 3.8 90 degree v6 with a turbo on it, hardly comparable to the 60 degree non-turbo v6 in the Camaro.

He has a "regular" Buick Grand National. He was just saying that a 300hp V6 is not normally considered "girly", especially in this day and age when people are leaning toward the "green" mentality, even sporadically.

But anyway, I can understand what you are saying and there is nothing wrong with wanting what you are looking for. However, I am thinking that the amount of people who want the same combination that you do is very small and it simply wouldn't be cost effective for Chevrolet to make it.

Yep,

Check out the 3500lb FWD Grand Prix in my sig that runs the next generation of the same V6. And check out the 8, 9, and 10 second grand prix's that are on the same stock bottom end. GM sure doesn't know how to make a good V6. /sarcasm

In my garage (and my sig) sits a 22-year-old, show winning car. It has a V6 with V8-like performance.

So, let me be blunt: you're wrong.

you con't compare a forced induction car to a NA car....

I would see the V-8 getting better fuel economy b/c it has more tq at a lower rpm..... but once you romp on it a few times all your fuel economy is gone.

They'd have to mod a 5.3L to get 345-350 hp to make it worth while advatnge over the V6. And then could they sell enough to justify the cost?

All of your arguments are dumb. And entry v8 with 20hp over a v6 with the same weight as the v8 would be slower than the v8 more likely. Thats not girly, or are you just not secure enough to drive a quick v6? GM didnt miss anything on this car because you are the only one who wants a low hp v8.

Three has a HUGE amount of seat time onsidering he owns both V6 and V8 models....so...you should believe him

Three may have seat time, but I'm not seeing anything posted that would lead me to believe other than what I said earlier. That's ok though. The cars are out and all the mags will be testing them and the High-Tech mag I subscribe to will run numbers and then I'll have more facts. I have talked with the Chevy salesperson I bought both my Silverado's off of and he confirmed "recommended premium fuel for the SS".

LS4! time for GM to make it RWD, give it some juice and let it be an option. Think about it. the Challenger has 3 model engines. 3.5 V6, 5.7 V8, and 6.1 V8.

The 5.7l has active fuel management..... LS4 has it too, itd be a good compare. (As long as it gets pumped to 350-375ish hp range not 303hp)

LS4! time for GM to make it RWD, give it some juice and let it be an option. Think about it. the Challenger has 3 model engines. 3.5 V6, 5.7 V8, and 6.1 V8.

The 5.7l has active fuel management..... LS4 has it too, itd be a good compare. (As long as it gets pumped to 350-375ish hp range not 303hp)

Then with the cost of the retrofit and retune it would cost as much for the ls4 as the ls3. Great idea.

So you have a one year special production GNX with a 3.8 90 degree v6 with a turbo on it, hardly comparable to the 60 degree non-turbo v6 in the Camaro.
On the contrary, I think the performance (in a straight line, anyway) is quite comparable. C&D tested a 1LT at 14.5@99 -- my GN runs the same MPH.

you con't compare a forced induction car to a NA car....
Of course you can. :think:

Seeing that it says you can run regular in the driver's manual, I would think they would warranty it if anything happened. I have not heard any horror stories of late model cars that are totally stock where people have run regular in premium engines and had catastrophic failure, or even problems at all. A weak sauce v8 would be redundant, and unlikely to get much improved fuel economy.

I have no problem believing the new car gets better than advertised mpg. My 4th gen does all the time, especially highway mileage. Want a weak v8? Drive with a weak foot, or put something under the gas pedal. Problem solved.

Then with the cost of the retrofit and retune it would cost as much for the ls4 as the ls3. Great idea.

How bout Make a lightweight, Direct Injection (to save gas) version of the LS1?

Because the LS1 has been out of production for half a decade.

Because the LS1 has been out of production for half a decade.

Still one of the most successful engines... I mean Ford is going to bring back the 5.0. GM could easily resurrect the 5.7. and drop it into the camaro to narrow the gap LS to SS. It's just a thought...

Still one of the most successful engines... I mean Ford is going to bring back the 5.0. GM could easily resurrect the 5.7. and drop it into the camaro to narrow the gap LS to SS. It's just a thought...

Whcih GM would have to charge more for the R&D causing the price to be the same as the ls3/l99. Why is that hard to understand?

Ford is bringing back the 5.0. They are making a DOHC modular motor that displaces 5 liters. Not the old 5.0

Its just a thought! Gosh, you have no imagination........

You make it sound like all GM's R&D projects cost the same.... the 5.7 has already been produced. To modify it, test it, and put it in production would be cheaper than creating a whole new small block.

Its just a thought! Gosh, you have no imagination........

You make it sound like all GM's R&D projects cost the same.... the 5.7 has already been produced. To modify it, test it, and put it in production would be cheaper than creating a whole new small block.

Do you have any idea how much it would cost to put a motor that hasnt been produced in 5 years back into production, retrofit it for drive by wire, and tune it for the new application would cost? It isn't a simple bolt up.

Spending lots of money to make a car slower is a dumb idea.

you haven't even thought about what possibilties could be done, and thats a failure I can't bring out of you.

you haven't even thought about what possibilties could be done, and thats a failure I can't bring out of you.

That the dumbest statement ever. It WOULD cost GM money they have to charge the customer, It WOULD run slower than the same price larger v8. How do you not understand this concept? The possibilty is a v8 that doesnt sell because there is no point in it. If anything the ls3 is the mid v8 and the top of the line isnt here yet. Why do you think they havnt released a z28 yet? Because the cost of retrofitting the ls9, a motor already in production, would not be benificial to GM at the moment.

The only possibilty is that you actually have less intelligent thought about this than the OP. You would bring anything out of me, just make me dumber by believeing a low powered v8 that cost the same would be a good move for GM.

Its just a thought! Gosh, you have no imagination........

You make it sound like all GM's R&D projects cost the same.... the 5.7 has already been produced. To modify it, test it, and put it in production would be cheaper than creating a whole new small block.
Imagination is one thing, but you're suggesting something that will simply never happen. The LS1 is gone forever from new production cars, and saying that they should "add direct injection to an LS1" grossly oversimplifies the production engineering process behind creating a new engine. It's possible that a Gen5 (or later) LS engine will displace 346ci and have direct injection, but I suspect that even that is unlikely (since the bore on the LS1 is too small to support the L92 head design, which is GM's best to date). Then again, Gen5 will have entirely redesigned heads (to add support for direct injection), so there's no way to be sure.

Why do you think they havnt released a z28 yet? Because the cost of retrofitting the ls9, a motor already in production, would not be benificial to GM at the moment.

This is completely incorrect.

They haven't released a Z28 yet because they don't have the money to spare to start production. The car is designed and ready to go -- GM has said so publicly. It uses the LSA (which is a variation on the LS9, making 556hp in the CTS-V).

Building and selling a Z28 would almost certainly be beneficial to GM right now -- high-end performance cars generally make a higher profit per vehicle. However, there are significant costs that must be incurred before they can begin selling Z28s, and for now they still can't get credit to take on such expenses.

Besides, even if GM was not in the financial toilet right now, historically with the pony/muscle cars, the top model is typically introduced a year after the remodeled car has started selling. This of course is not a hard and fast guideline, but it should come as no surprise to anyone that we don't have a top v8 Camaro at the moment.

there are some closed minded people in this thread...

This is completely incorrect.

They haven't released a Z28 yet because they don't have the money to spare to start production. The car is designed and ready to go -- GM has said so publicly. It uses the LSA (which is a variation on the LS9, making 556hp in the CTS-V).

Building and selling a Z28 would almost certainly be beneficial to GM right now -- high-end performance cars generally make a higher profit per vehicle. However, there are significant costs that must be incurred before they can begin selling Z28s, and for now they still can't get credit to take on such expenses.

Ok that makes sense. Just trying to make an easier comparison because obviously they dont get my other arguments on why a small v8 would cost too much.

there are some closed minded people in this thread...

Over the idea that a small v8 is a poor idea? Obviously GM thought it was as well, as their market research showed too little regard for it to labor the production costs of an as of yet totally undeveloped Camaro v8. This isn't the 80s, and the new Camaro isn't a 3rd gen. The idea of a mid level v8 has a place, and it is 3 decades ago. A 300 horse v6 and a 325 horse v8 are totally redundant.

I have heard about a million times more people psyched about the fact that a base v8 car that has 426 hp over the "problem" of a weak v8. If fact, I only seem to hear the argument for a midlevel v8 from guys on this board.

stop letting your facts and logic get in the way of your imagination! haha... I can understand someone not "getting it" at first about how creating a lower powered v8 would make GM incurr upfront cost and not allow them to charge less for the vehicle once produced. What I can not understand is why people hold on to their initial thoughts and even praise their own thoughts as imaginative even when the facts of the matter are layed out so clearly by some of the more knowledgable members of this site. It's okay to learn from people here. you don't have to fight your side of an argument to the bitter end out of pride.

I can understand the argument people are trying to make, but I don't think it would actually flourish in a real world situation. The popular argument, at least on this website, was that the 3rd gen 305s sold really well, so why not have something similar with the 5th gen? Problem is, now is not then. Assembly lines are not structured the same, and v6s are not as weak as they were once upon a time.

Another popular argument was that horsepower scared people away from the 4th gen, which was a total load of crap. The 4th gens were rated at a very modest "305" and later 310 hp in their base form. When the redesigned S197 Mustang GT came out with a 300hp rating, it sure didn't seem to scare anyone away at all. The G8 boasts 362hp in V8 trim, and that isn't hurting it's sales either. The reason I bring this up is that the logic was a milder v8 would keep people from being frightened away from the Camaro (which as I stated I have serious doubts about), but even if a low power v8 came out, it would still be above the 4th gens rated hp values. Probably would have to be at least 350hp, or it would risk being redundant with the v6.

Guys, the v6 car doesn't suck anymore. It is putting out more power than a stock LT1, and almost double what a 305TBI(the low power 3rd gen v8) back in the day was putting out at peak. No need for another v8, except in the eventual top Camaro model.

While I can not back up this opinion with any facts whatsoever, I think the seating position/view of the road hurt 4th gens. The windshield has such a rake and the hood slopes down to the point where you can't easily judge where the front of the car is. I know the first time I drove one, it took some getting used to. I can see a lot of buyers that cross-shopped the Mustang V6 to be turned off by that. I also agree with your thoughts about why the 305 worked in the 80s and early 90s, but doesn't serve a purpose now. this V6 doesn't appear to be lacking like previous ones did at all... I'm expecting good runs against them with my LT1 powered 3rd gen.

While I can not back up this opinion with any facts whatsoever, I think the seating position/view of the road hurt 4th gens. The windshield has such a rake and the hood slopes down to the point where you can't easily judge where the front of the car is. I know the first time I drove one, it took some getting used to. I can see a lot of buyers that cross-shopped the Mustang V6 to be turned off by that. I also agree with your thoughts about why the 305 worked in the 80s and early 90s, but doesn't serve a purpose now. this V6 doesn't appear to be lacking like previous ones did at all... I'm expecting good runs against them with my LT1 powered 3rd gen.

Only time will tell how well they run against an LT1. I know a lot of the LT1 4th gen owners on here get irritated at even the possibility of the new v6 running with one, but there really aren't any solid numbers on the v6 cars to make any conclusions. In theory they seem like a good run with an LT1, although the LT1 would probably more forgiving of driver error.

I would also speculate that you are at least somewhat correct. The 4th gens more "extremist" attitude probably pushed a lot of potential buyers away.

The arguement for a mid level V8 that runs on regular fuel, may save you a whopping $12 a week in fuel costs (see my post earlier), and offers no savings on insurance; makes my head hurt.

Exactly right. They have no argument besides they want one.

Oh and I started as an LT1 guy, well i still am an lt1 guy, and i think it is awesome how GM is putting out these numbers with a v6. I have no problem with it.

They have no argument besides they want one.

Nothing wrong with wanting something. I myself would like to see a "budget" C6 Corvette. Basically, a stripper 'Vette that has no frills, no leather, all performance for thousands less than the ordinary one. I won't hold my breath, though.

Nothing wrong with wanting something. I myself would like to see a "budget" C6 Corvette. Basically, a stripper 'Vette that has no frills, no leather, all performance for thousands less than the ordinary one. I won't hold my breath, though.

Very true. But dismissing all logical reasons against it because you want something is different.

Over the idea that a small v8 is a poor idea? Obviously GM thought it was as well, as their market research showed too little regard for it to labor the production costs of an as of yet totally undeveloped Camaro v8. This isn't the 80s, and the new Camaro isn't a 3rd gen. The idea of a mid level v8 has a place, and it is 3 decades ago. A 300 horse v6 and a 325 horse v8 are totally redundant.

I have heard about a million times more people psyched about the fact that a base v8 car that has 426 hp over the "problem" of a weak v8. If fact, I only seem to hear the argument for a midlevel v8 from guys on this board.

Most guys on this forum don't think like normal customers out there. We think about power/cost, and things like that. Most people see V8 camaro = Poor MPG's and expensive 93 octane. They see V6 camaro and they think, why not just buy a malibu. The reason many of us think that there should be a 360ish hp V8 is so that there is a mid-priced camaro between 1SS and LS.

Running on 87 is a plus, and good MPG's from the V8 is a plus. I know that the 25mpg (on the SS) is exceptional in todays tougher EPA requirements, but we know d*** well GM can do more. All of us on this forum know 30mpgs on a 2 ton car can be done with V8 making 360hp.

Whether you agree or disagree on a lower level V8 is another thing. GM has the man power to do this. The cost can be up to them, so much waste goes on in this company its a shame that they can't be able to put some R&D in stuff that really matters.

Most guys on this forum don't think like normal customers out there. We think about power/cost, and things like that. Most people see V8 camaro = Poor MPG's and expensive 93 octane. They see V6 camaro and they think, why not just buy a malibu. The reason many of us think that there should be a 360ish hp V8 is so that there is a mid-priced camaro between 1SS and LS.

There is a mid priced Camaro. It is called the SS. Price a Mustang GT. The cars are mostly similar in price. The Camaro (and Mustang) cost more now then their previous generations did. Call it bad economy, poor dollar value, whatever. The SS is NOT the top level Camaro. That has yet to be announced. Your Malibu line strikes me as pretty ridiculous. People buy v6 Camaros for the same reason they buy v6 Mustangs, Tiberons, etc., because they think they look cool. They are two completely different demographics.


Running on 87 is a plus, and good MPG's from the V8 is a plus. I know that the 25mpg (on the SS) is exceptional in todays tougher EPA requirements, but we know d*** well GM can do more. All of us on this forum know 30mpgs on a 2 ton car can be done with V8 making 360hp.

You just stated people see v8 and think 93+ octane (don't know anyone who actually thinks that), and bad mpgs(this one is a gimme). The stigma is going to be the exact same on a midlevel v8. v8s are v8s.

I am not at all convinced a detuned 360hp v8 is going to get significantly better gas mileage than the ls3 anyway, at least in driving around town. The EPA numbers could largely be the same. If GM could make a 2 ton sedan run 30mpgs with a v8 making 360hp with the way the EPA rates their cars now, the G8 would do so. It falls pretty far.


Whether you agree or disagree on a lower level V8 is another thing. GM has the man power to do this. The cost can be up to them, so much waste goes on in this company its a shame that they can't be able to put some R&D in stuff that really matters.

I agree with the waste comment. And a "midlevel" v8 doesn't really matter. It would probably cost similar to an LS3 to produce the thing (assuming volume for this particular motor could be shared on other platforms, and what would use it?), would have to be certified (another pain in the ass), and likely return less money on each purchase, as the brunt of the LS3 powertrain will likely remain on the midlevel, and one would assume GM would have to charge much less for a midlevel v8 to help encourage it's purchase. GM has the man power to do a lot of things, but this has been talked about to death, likely considered many times within GM, and dismissed.

Exactly right. They have no argument besides they want one.

Oh and I started as an LT1 guy, well i still am an lt1 guy, and i think it is awesome how GM is putting out these numbers with a v6. I have no problem with it.

Exactly. Progress is progress. Can't hold on to the past forever. The LS1 was awesome for it's time, and it is still pretty good, but stuff is catching up to it. Nissan's Z car is right behind it. Wonder how long for the CTS gets a boost in power. It is only a matter of time. Although until I see times for the v6 cars, I am reserved in my judgement of a heads up race between one and an LT1 car.

Most guys on this forum don't think like normal customers out there. We think about power/cost, and things like that. Most people see V8 camaro = Poor MPG's and expensive 93 octane. They see V6 camaro and they think, why not just buy a malibu. The reason many of us think that there should be a 360ish hp V8 is so that there is a mid-priced camaro between 1SS and LS.

Running on 87 is a plus, and good MPG's from the V8 is a plus. I know that the 25mpg (on the SS) is exceptional in todays tougher EPA requirements, but we know d*** well GM can do more. All of us on this forum know 30mpgs on a 2 ton car can be done with V8 making 360hp.

Whether you agree or disagree on a lower level V8 is another thing. GM has the man power to do this. The cost can be up to them, so much waste goes on in this company its a shame that they can't be able to put some R&D in stuff that really matters.

Yes most guys here do think as normal customers. Just because we are gearheads doesnt mean we dont. 360 hp in this car wont give you 30mpg. At most it would gain one or two. No one cares if you know d*** well GM could do it. Where are yopur facts to back this up? And as stated, why doesnt the G8 GT with its 362hp do that? If GM may have been able to make an v8 Camaro that got 30mpg they would have. But they didnt, they made a great powered v6 that gets 29 and a mid level v8 that gets 26, and a top level that has yet to be released. Once again you arnt using any facts to support your 30mpg in a 2 ton v8 car can be done argument.

Exactly. Progress is progress. Can't hold on to the past forever. The LS1 was awesome for it's time, and it is still pretty good, but stuff is catching up to it. Nissan's Z car is right behind it. Wonder how long for the CTS gets a boost in power. It is only a matter of time. Although until I see times for the v6 cars, I am reserved in my judgement of a heads up race between one and an LT1 car.

Exactly right, 07 up 350s run pretty good with LS1's and i believe it is only a matter of time before a v6 comes out that takes a stock LS1. The old guys used to think these new muscle cars didnt hold a candle to their monster motor cars, now v6's are turning better times stock than they did.

Only time will tell how well they run against an LT1. I know a lot of the LT1 4th gen owners on here get irritated at even the possibility of the new v6 running with one, but there really aren't any solid numbers on the v6 cars to make any conclusions. In theory they seem like a good run with an LT1, although the LT1 would probably more forgiving of driver error.

I would also speculate that you are at least somewhat correct. The 4th gens more "extremist" attitude probably pushed a lot of potential buyers away.

I just finished modding the hell out of my LT1 for this exact reason. Granted, the LS3 isn't any trouble for her either........so long as they don't mod it :shame:

There is nothing wrong at all with a 304hp v6. Hell, I'm considering one myself.

Nothing wrong with wanting something. I myself would like to see a "budget" C6 Corvette. Basically, a stripper 'Vette that has no frills, no leather, all performance for thousands less than the ordinary one. I won't hold my breath, though.
This might be sacrilege, but I'm wondering if there might ever be a V6 Corvette? I've read on here that the LLT has the capacity to reach or exceed 4L, so it would probably make at least 330 horsepower. In the 3100# Corvette that would still be a very fast car.

This might be sacrilege, but I'm wondering if there might ever be a V6 Corvette? I've read on here that the LLT has the capacity to reach or exceed 4L, so it would probably make at least 330 horsepower. In the 3100# Corvette that would still be a very fast car.

I dont we will ever see it. It would be a decent performing car but i think v6 and Corvette together would be too much for people to handle lol. I dont think it would ever find a demographic either. Most Corvette buyers, when new, are older men or younger guys who are making enough to get a cool first toy, niether one of those would want a v6.

Yes most guys here do think as normal customers. Just because we are gearheads doesnt mean we dont. 360 hp in this car wont give you 30mpg. At most it would gain one or two. No one cares if you know d*** well GM could do it. Where are yopur facts to back this up? And as stated, why doesnt the G8 GT with its 362hp do that? If GM may have been able to make an v8 Camaro that got 30mpg they would have. But they didnt, they made a great powered v6 that gets 29 and a mid level v8 that gets 26, and a top level that has yet to be released. Once again you arnt using any facts to support your 30mpg in a 2 ton v8 car can be done argument.

What facts do you want? Its not like you don't know its going to happen. Within this decade there will be a 30+mpg V8, and you and I both know it. Whether GM will make is another thing. To drop it in the camaro, would just be another way for GM to bring its image up. Which they have been trying to do for 2 decades.

Nothing wrong with wanting something. I myself would like to see a "budget" C6 Corvette. Basically, a stripper 'Vette that has no frills, no leather, all performance for thousands less than the ordinary one. I won't hold my breath, though.

It could happen.... V6's twin turbo's were in small talk, of course by the negative response it was shot down, but a lightweight, low option, corvette could pop out the blue. I mean did you honestly think GM was going to release the ZR-1 when you saw it as a Blue Devil Concept.

What facts do you want? Its not like you don't know its going to happen. Within this decade there will be a 30+mpg V8, and you and I both know it. Whether GM will make is another thing. To drop it in the camaro, would just be another way for GM to bring its image up. Which they have been trying to do for 2 decades.

How do you know they can, right now, make a 30mpg v8 Camaro? You say they can, but a car at close to the same weight, with a v8 powered the same you want, cant. Nobody knows if that is going to happen. You say the car companies are but Ford is already going towards its Ecoboost v6 instead of a more fuel efficiant v8 and with the CAFE standards, i bet you will see more of that soon. I dont see how you are arguing with me when i say you dont have facts by saying, Everyone knows it will happen someday.

And besides what they do in the future has no bearing on the argument here that bringing back an old v8 with new changes would sell and be cost effective.

It could happen.... V6's twin turbo's were in small talk, of course by the negative response it was shot down, but a lightweight, low option, corvette could pop out the blue. I mean did you honestly think GM was going to release the ZR-1 when you saw it as a Blue Devil Concept.

I dont think it will happen because a Corvette isnt the premier american sports car anymore, its been turned into the premier luxury sports car. GM is much more concerned with pleasing the "I want to go fast and be comfortable" crowd than the "I wanna go fast" crowd.

How do you know they can, right now, make a 30mpg v8 Camaro? You say they can, but a car at close to the same weight, with a v8 powered the same you want, cant. Nobody knows if that is going to happen. You say the car companies are but Ford is already going towards its Ecoboost v6 instead of a more fuel efficiant v8 and with the CAFE standards, i bet you will see more of that soon. I dont see how you are arguing with me when i say you dont have facts by saying, Everyone knows it will happen someday.

And besides what they do in the future has no bearing on the argument here that bringing back an old v8 with new changes would sell and be cost effective.
I'll place a $5 bet on it, if you want to ;)

Maybe in the short term there be a V6 push. But the V8 didnt go away in the 1970's. And its not going to go away now.

I dont think it will happen because a Corvette isnt the premier american sports car anymore, its been turned into the premier luxury sports car. GM is much more concerned with pleasing the "I want to go fast and be comfortable" crowd than the "I wanna go fast" crowd.
Yeah, this one I'm not going to argue about... Srry Jason, but if you want a cheap fast slimmed down sports cars you can always check out GT-R's :)

If you drive 1100 miles a week, the price difference between regular and premium is $12.70 per week.
Exactly. I just did the math for someone who bought a V6 due to fuel economy and he only drove 540/wk. Difference was like $4 if all highway or $9 if all city, based on manufacture suggested MPG and $2.50/gal gas.

I'll place a $5 bet on it, if you want to

OK once again, facts. Im not asking an opinion or what you think will happen. You say they can, Im saying show me.

OK once again, facts. Im not asking an opinion or what you think will happen. You say they can, Im saying show me.
Don't need to. Its going to happen, and when it does I'll make sure you know.

Don't need to. Its going to happen, and when it does I'll make sure you know.

Wow. You still dont get it. Do you think i said all of that because i dont think a v8 30mpg car will ever come out? You are dense.

Wow. You still dont get it. Do you think i said all of that because i dont think a v8 30mpg car will ever come out? You are dense.

No I dont get you, your like my Ex, uber complicated. I though you did all of this just to say GM won't make a 360hp 30mpg car, within the next decade.

You brought this to the last statement because every legitimate response you answered with a statement that didnt really answer the last question and took it a little farther away from them. A small v8 wont give the Camaro 5 more mpg, it wont be a free retrofit that wouldnt be passed to the customer(meaning it would cost as much as the ls3/l99), and it would run about the same time as the v6 because of the added weight/lower hp.

Not complicated, The orginal question has been answer time and time again, you and the OP just dont seem to want to accept it.

I know that... I was thinking of posibilities and "what if's". But all my thoughts were in reasonable range, and they could be done. The question on this thread was "could there be a mid-level V8 engine in the camaro." And I said yes, and you said no. Everything else we've bickered about comes from that.

I know that... I was thinking of posibilities and "what if's". But all my thoughts were in reasonable range, and they could be done. The question on this thread was "could there be a mid-level V8 engine in the camaro." And I said yes, and you said no. Everything else we've bickered about comes from that.

They "could" bring back an iron carburated v8 and put in the camaro. The question in this thread is why doesnt GM. The answer is isnt cost effective,it wouldnt create a great mpg increase, and it would be dumb making a v8 with a marginal power increases with a weight increase that makes it slower than a v6. The what ifs were from you not understanding that. With that im done with arguing with you, because you obviously will never understand that.

Yeah, we oviously both are blinded by our own points. My point is it could be done. There can be a light V8, that can make 360hp, run 87, and have good MPG's. and be the fill in gap between the LS and 1SS. My points were not based on cost effectivness, nor were they based on actuallity of the engines existance. You and me kept argueing points that never intersected between our views.

Yeah, we oviously both are blinded by our own points. My point is it could be done. There can be a light V8, that can make 360hp, run 87, and have good MPG's. and be the fill in gap between the LS and 1SS. My points were not based on cost effectivness, nor were they based on actuallity of the engines existance. You and me kept argueing points that never intersected between our views.

V8 engines don't get much lighter than the LS series engines. The engine comes in just under 400lbs dry. Running 87 octane is irrelevent. It may be an incentive, but it is not a deal breaker.

What gap are you talking about? There is an over 100hp gap between the v6 Mustang and the Mustang GT, and Ford doesn't seem to have much of a problem with it. The 4th gen f-bodies have a 100hp gap between v6 and v8, and we didn't hear anyone complain about that. There is no gap that needs to be addressed. It is simply not a problem.

GM could certainly build a v8 car to get over 30mpgs for an EPA fuel raing. But it won't be in a 2 ton Camaro. The car would need to be A LOT lighter, and more aero-friendly. Not even the Vette rates 30mpgs on the highway EPA, and it has less frontal area, a better coefficient of drag, and isn't a fat ass like the new Camaro. GM could do lots of things. Possibilities are typically tempered to disregarded due to reality though, and in reality there is no need for a redundant v8 motor.

I remember reading on here years ago from some guys "in the know" that there were four hypothetical engine options: 2 v6s and 2 v8. A base 250hp 3.9L v6. The 3.6 DOHC v6 was an upgrade. The 2 v8s were the SS v8 and the blown v8 coming out with the Z28 whenever that car decides to show it's head. Why don't we need a weaker v6 to help make the car more accessible? Why isn't anyone arguing that point? Didn't the original 1st gen Camaro have two different flavors of straight 6? That business model worked, didn't it. Even though it is a 40 year old business model.

No I dont get you, your like my Ex, uber complicated. I though you did all of this just to say GM won't make a 360hp 30mpg car, within the next decade.

Next generation Camaro could. Don't know much about it. Almost no one does. It isn't going to be done on the current architecture though. Saying putting a lower displacing v8 in the current car and nailing 30mpgs is an extreme gross oversimplification.

Right on Moose.

Next generation Camaro could. Don't know much about it. Almost no one does. It isn't going to be done on the current architecture though. Saying putting a lower displacing v8 in the current car and nailing 30mpgs is an extreme gross oversimplification.

I'm a pretty simple guy.... but thats basically what I was tryin to say. But everyone wants facts, and I don't have them, but its bound to happen. And I don't think (no matter what anyone else says) that the camaro will only have the V6 and V8 option very long, another engine will find its place in there. (Not including the Z/28's LSX)

Right on Moose.

I'm a pretty simple guy.... but thats basically what I was tryin to say. But everyone wants facts, and I don't have them, but its bound to happen. And I don't think (no matter what anyone else says) that the camaro will only have the V6 and V8 option very long, another engine will find its place in there. (Not including the Z/28's LSX)


:rolleyes: How do you guys still not get it? It isnt bound to happen. None of the companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8. Maybe you two should buy an ls3, put 87 and pull one spark plug wire off. Then you guys can have your slower than a v6 v8 that runs on 87.

:rolleyes: How do you guys still not get it? It isnt bound to happen. None of the companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8. Maybe you two should buy an ls3, put 87 and pull one spark plug wire off. Then you guys can have your slower than a v6 v8 that runs on 87.

Would it improve gas milegas, cause that one spark plug does save weight. ;)

You think none of the other companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8? Have you looked at the ford line up in the past 5 years.....base v6, GT, Cobra/Shelby/Roush & 500KR. Not to mention limited production versions like the Bullitt cars and Shaker cars and Hertz cars that sell out before they hit the showrooms. WAKE UP.

None of the companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8?

Look at the mustang lineup....base v6, GT, Shelby/Rousch & 500KR.

Ford. 4.0, 4.6, 5.4. Several tuners do different versions, adding significant costs.

Dodge. 3.5, 5.7, 6.1.

Chevy 3.6, 6.2, LSA.

You think none of the other companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8? Have you looked at the ford line up in the past 5 years.....base v6, GT, Cobra/Shelby/Roush & 500KR. Not to mention limited production versions like the Bullitt cars and Shaker cars and Hertz cars that sell out before they hit the showrooms. WAKE UP.

Ill requote because you changed. 4.0 4.6 5.4. All others you just put go against what you said you want, because you wanted a smaller cheaper v8. Bullit is more expensive package with apperange and different exhaust, Shaker isnt a Mustang package, if you mean the Pony Package, that is a v6 apperance package i believer, and Hertz is for a rental company. 500kr is the same 5.4 with a different intake/exhaust/ tuning package. I have woke up. I have looked at Mustangs and Camaros for the last 20 years. The have one v6 one mid (aside from Bullit edge mustangs that was the same 4.6 with an intake and the dohc Mach 1 that was still a 4.6) and one top. You have stated several more expensive options to show that other companies make a cheaper v8? Those cars support nothing that you have said you want. You are going to have to get a better argument.

You think none of the other companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8? Have you looked at the ford line up in the past 5 years.....base v6, GT, Cobra/Shelby/Roush & 500KR. Not to mention limited production versions like the Bullitt cars and Shaker cars and Hertz cars that sell out before they hit the showrooms. WAKE UP.

Ford has had three consistent Mustangs. The v6, GT, and GT500, or earlier Cobra. Roush and Saleen (they are gone now anyway) are not Ford models. Bullitt was a one year limited edition, like the Hertz car. Let Chevy make plenty of special editions. Usually there are plenty of idiots to pay top dollar for a low level option package i.e. special edition. Wake up from what? The fact that Ford has three different engines in their lineup, and has had three different engines in their lineup for a very long time. It seems to be working for them.

The GT500KR is hyper limited, and can be completely omitted from discussion. Ford does not offer a mid level v8 to bridge the 100hp gap between their v6 and their GT. No need. If Ford was your example for a mid level v8 or low level v8 or whatever you want to call it, you didn't do your homework.

What about Dodge? the challenger has 3 levels thats what I was refering to for my mid-level V8.

You think none of the other companies have a v6, low v8, mid v8, and high v8? Have you looked at the ford line up in the past 5 years.....base v6, GT, Cobra/Shelby/Roush & 500KR. Not to mention limited production versions like the Bullitt cars and Shaker cars and Hertz cars that sell out before they hit the showrooms. WAKE UP.

Looks like the camaro is going to have a line up similar

Base v6, SS, and maybe Z/28

Then Hennessey and I belive Lingerfinger will have the 3rd party ones.

The mid-level V8 would be more of a 5.7L challenger comparison

What about Dodge? the challenger has 3 levels thats what I was refering to for my mid-level V8.

The mid-level V8 would be more of a 5.7L challenger comparison

That is compared to the Camaros 6.2. It is their mid line and the SRT8 is top. Chevy just hasnt released a top line yet.

That is compared to the Camaros 6.2. It is their mid line and the SRT8 is top. Chevy just hasnt released a top line yet.

OHHHHH, now I finnally get it. lol :). whups Z/28, completly forgot.

Thats not fair though. Our SS is better than there SRT-8, but its soppose to compete with there R/T.

OHHHHH, now I finnally get it. lol :). whups Z/28, completly forgot.

Thats not fair though. Our SS is better than there SRT-8, but its soppose to compete with there R/T.

Dodges fault, not Chevys.

Ford has had three consistent Mustangs. The v6, GT, and GT500, or earlier Cobra. Roush and Saleen (they are gone now anyway) are not Ford models. Bullitt was a one year limited edition, like the Hertz car. Let Chevy make plenty of special editions. Usually there are plenty of idiots to pay top dollar for a low level option package i.e. special edition. Wake up from what? The fact that Ford has three different engines in their lineup, and has had three different engines in their lineup for a very long time. It seems to be working for them.

The GT500KR is hyper limited, and can be completely omitted from discussion. Ford does not offer a mid level v8 to bridge the 100hp gap between their v6 and their GT. No need. If Ford was your example for a mid level v8 or low level v8 or whatever you want to call it, you didn't do your homework.

I proved my point and you re-stated it, but let me spell it out for you all one last time. base v6 mustang. GT mustang (mid-level V8 runs on regular unleaded) Shelby,Roush,Saleen upper mid level HP v8's still sold thru Ford and backed by Ford. GT500KR top level mustang....and, if you think this car is hyper-limited what do you think the Z-28 is going to be?

So Ford has three levels of engines working for them as you stated and Chevy has two...sounds like a mid level package to me! My point all along.

As for the difference in the price of gas to run regular instead of premium fuel (.25 cents per gallon difference where I live) figure it out over five years at 30k miles per year at 24 mpg.....almost $1600.00...that may be spare change to you, but not me. Not for a daily driver.

I proved my point and you re-stated it, but let me spell it out for you all one last time. base v6 mustang. GT mustang (mid-level V8 runs on regular unleaded) Shelby,Roush,Saleen upper mid level HP v8's still sold thru Ford and backed by Ford. GT500KR top level mustang....and, if you think this car is hyper-limited what do you think the Z-28 is going to be?

So Ford has three levels of engines working for them as you stated and Chevy has two...sounds like a mid level package to me! My point all along.

As for the difference in the price of gas to run regular instead of premium fuel (.25 cents per gallon difference where I live) figure it out over five years at 30k miles per year at 24 mpg.....almost $1600.00...that may be spare change to you, but not me. Not for a daily driver.

Roush and Saleen are not Mustang trims. The dealer has to be certified by Roush to work on their car. Saleen isn't even around anymore. They are tuner cars, not trim levels. The GT500 and the GT500KR are two different cars. GT500KR is a hyper limited run model. The GT500 is the "Cobra", Fords top leel car. Both of them have the name Shelby on them, but the GT500 is the conventional top model volume car. The GT500KR doesn't even come with a warranty.

You need to do some more research.

Ford's line up:
Mustang v6 4.0L SOHC v6
Mustang GT 4.6L SOHC v8
Mustang GT500 "Shelby" 5.4L DOHC supercharged v8

3 engines in that line.

Chevy's up and coming lineup
Camaro v6 3.6 DOHC v6
Camaro SS 6.2 OHV v8
Camaro Z/28 6.2 OHV supercharged v8

3 engines in that line.

Making the Camaro SS the midlevel engine. Competition for the Mustang GT. The Z28 car is not going to be hyper unlimited. It is competition for the Mustang GT500, and will likely have projected sales volume in the same neighborhood. Ford sells several thousand GT500s a year.

Maybe the confusion started when GM swapped the SS and z28 trim levels from the 4th gen fbody. SS is not the top trim any longer. It is the competitor trim level to the Mustang GT.


Premium over standard fuel is not enough of a inhibitor as to harm sales, especially over a car like a Camaro. People click off boxes for useless junk at the dealer that easily adds more than that to the payment of the car all the time. If I stopped drinking as much milk as I do I am sure I could save a few thousand bucks over five years, but the fact is that is a useless statistic. The amount premium costs of standard gas a week is largely insignificant, especially in this buying bracket.

I proved my point and you re-stated it, but let me spell it out for you all one last time. base v6 mustang. GT mustang (mid-level V8 runs on regular unleaded) Shelby,Roush,Saleen upper mid level HP v8's still sold thru Ford and backed by Ford. GT500KR top level mustang....and, if you think this car is hyper-limited what do you think the Z-28 is going to be?

So Ford has three levels of engines working for them as you stated and Chevy has two...sounds like a mid level package to me! My point all along.

As for the difference in the price of gas to run regular instead of premium fuel (.25 cents per gallon difference where I live) figure it out over five years at 30k miles per year at 24 mpg.....almost $1600.00...that may be spare change to you, but not me. Not for a daily driver.

why dont you go to Fords website and look what motors the Mustang offers before you say that again. And dont look at power output, thats not what it is judges by. They have a base v6, a base v8, and the high output v8. 4.0, 4.6, 6.2. If you cant afford an ls3, dont get one.

As for the difference in the price of gas to run regular instead of premium fuel (.25 cents per gallon difference where I live) figure it out over five years at 30k miles per year at 24 mpg.....almost $1600.00...that may be spare change to you, but not me. Not for a daily driver.

You can run regular gas in the car, you just won't get as much timing. You are definitely not going to hurt it by running regular.

I can't believe you are even still arguing about this!

-Geoff

As for the difference in the price of gas to run regular instead of premium fuel (.25 cents per gallon difference where I live) figure it out over five years at 30k miles per year at 24 mpg.....almost $1600.00...that may be spare change to you, but not me. Not for a daily driver.


Over 5 years?

$320 a year?

$26 and change a month?

Holy god nobody can afford that.

Over 5 years?

$320 a year?

$26 and change a month?

Holy god nobody can afford that.

Lol, genius.

I see the point that they are trying to make. A cheaper 8 that us broke guys can get cheaper and run for less. But im going to have to agree with supernova and the others. The 6.2 is the mid level v8. It gets decent gas mileage, and it whomps on all of its competition. If you want to run 87 fine, get the 6. If you want the 8, 26 bucks a month is the price you will pay for the v8 thunder.

on another noteI am an lt1 guy and i am totally fine with the 6 being faster, it far more advanced. period. But my car sounds better:p

If you dropped the rear gears down to say a 2.72:1 like in my 86 Monte Carlo, you might get over 30mpg in the. SS. Just kidding about that though. In the seat of the pants, torque is what u feel during stop and go traffic. A mid level V8 is going to FEEL stronger during city driving where u can't run it up to 6000. An old 1998 Camaro LS1 in the new SS is gonna feel peppier then the V6 because it has almost 50ft-lbs more torque at its peak. That engine only makes 1hp more then the V6. Prolly run exactly the same time in the quarter with worse gas milage then the V6. But it would win you all the 0 to 50mph races against the V6 with equal drivers.

If you dropped the rear gears down to say a 2.72:1 like in my 86 Monte Carlo, you might get over 30mpg in the. SS. Just kidding about that though. In the seat of the pants, torque is what u feel during stop and go traffic. A mid level V8 is going to FEEL stronger during city driving where u can't run it up to 6000. An old 1998 Camaro LS1 in the new SS is gonna feel peppier then the V6 because it has almost 50ft-lbs more torque at its peak. That engine only makes 1hp more then the V6. Prolly run exactly the same time in the quarter with worse gas milage then the V6. But it would win you all the 0 to 50mph races against the V6 with equal drivers.

The LS1 makes in the area of 50 more hp than the new v6. GM's ratings on the LS1 fbodies were kept deceptively low. They routinely dyno stock in the 300hp at the wheels range.

When you drive, torque is the only thing you feel, ever. You don't feel horsepower. Torque is the force the engine produces, and the gearing in the tranny and rear manipulate.

Let me use the 4.8L then as a better example. It makes 270hp and 285ft-lbs of torque. But it makes those numbers at a lower RPM. While the V6 would prolly take the V8 in the 1/4mi, the V8 is gonna feel stronger of the line.

A 5.3 isn't going to be any cheaper than a 6.2 either. It has all the exact same parts, just different sizes. So it would cost the same for GM to manufacture.

-Geoff

I stayed out of the cost portion of this argument because I already know that it would be more expensive to add a third engine to the line & I was merely stating that IF you compare two engines of similar output, the V8 would feel stronger in the lower RPM's that are used mostly during stop and go driving.

The real cost would be certification and such. The 5.3 is a much higher produced engine along many vehicle lines, therefore spreading engineering and development costs. Also the per part costs are reduced when you buy more at a time. Making the 5.3L cheaper to produce.

The real cost would be certification and such. The 5.3 is a much higher produced engine along many vehicle lines, therefore spreading engineering and development costs. Also the per part costs are reduced when you buy more at a time. Making the 5.3L cheaper to produce.

By and large LS series engine dimensions are fairly universal. Cam journal, exterior dimensions, and such. Assuming the same block material; the difference between a 5.3 and a 6.2 is crank, rods, pistons, and bore. Heads basically just have a different port program and valve size. The cost difference should be exceptionally small.

Those two engines produced side by side, 1 for 1 if you will, probably do have an exceptionally small cost difference. But when you talk about the volumes the engines are produced at the 5.3 becomes the clear winner in the cheap cattigory. That would help offset some of the certification and validation, but I don't know what that costs or if it would really offset it much.

actually, the 5.3 and 6.2 share the same stroke and probably the same rods. Only the bore size, pistons, rings, camshaft, and port size would be different.

The 5.3 is making 315hp@5200 & 338tq@4400 (326hp/350tq on E85) with old cathedral port heads, truck intake, and 9.9:1 CR. Swap to shrunk down square port heads with smaller combustion chambers (bumping CR up to at least 10.5), matching intake, and a new camshaft, then you would easily have a 350hp engine.

But then again, a 5L DI engine would probably make similar horsepower while greatly improving fuel economy.

I've said for a while that GM should build a base model v8 Camaro. Nope, lets just build a car many people can't/won't spring for and doom the car from the start.

I've said for a while that GM should build a base model v8 Camaro. Nope, lets just build a car many people can't/won't spring for and doom the car from the start.

:rolleyes: That must be why they can't sell them. And you guys know that Ford's new 5.0 is around 400hp? 325hp has no place in these cars if GM wants to win the new muscle car wars.

You say they wont "spring" for the ls3/l99, but the production costs would be very, very close between them and a retuned for the Camaro 5.3. These arnt cheap cars, the new DOHC 5.0 GT is going to creep up in price right next to the Camaro and Challenger. This is a new era of horsepower wars, if you cant afford the v8, GM gave you a nice, cheap, powerful v6 that is laying down mid 14's already, and i bet with a few bolt on and gears will be a solid high 13s car for low $20ks new.

I've said for a while that GM should build a base model v8 Camaro. Nope, lets just build a car many people can't/won't spring for and doom the car from the start.

Chevy's base car IS the SS. The base cars just cost a sh*t load more than then did at the beginning of the decade. It's unfortunate, too. Ford's base Mustang v8, the GT, is exactly the same way.

Sucks that someone could get a bare bones z28 in 2000 for the same price as a bare bones 5th gen v6. That's the way it is though. Blame inflation, the economy, the weak dollar, or whatever.

Chevy's base car IS the SS. The base cars just cost a sh*t load more than then did at the beginning of the decade. It's unfortunate, too. Ford's base Mustang v8, the GT, is exactly the same way.

Sucks that someone could get a bare bones z28 in 2000 for the same price as a bare bones 5th gen v6. That's the way it is though. Blame inflation, the economy, the weak dollar, or whatever.

When you look at average inflation rates, the 5th isnt that bad. Especially when you factor in what you get in it performance and comfort wise. I mean lets face it, you can now get close to lt1 performance, 29mpg, great ride, great looks, great comfort for under $23k.

It is't the 1960s anymore.. or the 1990s. No good business case can be made for having eight different or even four different engine combos available in the Camaro.

The 5th Gen V6 is comparable in performance to the 4th Gen V8 when it first appeared. And we want more? Wow.