Report: GM Midsize Sedans to Become "4-cylinder Only"
I really wish the industry would find a way to get past the public's focus on peak horsepower and max RPM the primary measures of engine performance. It's all well and good that they're going to continue having a ~250hp version (matching the 3.6L currently available in the Malibu), but what matters to me is that they have the same low- and mid-rpm grunt (or better
).
).I didn't put much stock in V6s until I drove a Thunderbird SC. The Ford Fusion I drove changed my opinion of 4 cylinder midsized cars. The new Mustang V6 at 305 horsepower with the manual (the automatic is notably slower) has acceleration that is much closer to LS1 than LT1.
Performance feel is no longer only about the number of cylinders. If there was a way to get a hamster running on a wheel to generate the same "umph" in accelerating as a V6 or V8 then unless you pop the hood, you wouldn't notice the difference.
Originally Posted by teal98
Not designing the car to accept a V6 made the I4 Hyundai Sonata about 100 pounds lighter than it would have been, according to what I've read. The next Malibu needs to drop at least 300 pounds from the current one.
Originally Posted by guionM
I didn't put much stock in V6s until I drove a Thunderbird SC
The SC 3.8L W-body could hammer out 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. That's decently brisk for a comfy FWD sport sedan of the 90s. The Turbo Cobalt could rocket 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. That's pretty darn fast considering a 2002 Camaro SS also was listed as 0-60 in 5.5 seconds!!!
GM needs to get some sport into the lineup of the Malibu - because there are some people that are still buying the LTZ V6 and like a little oomph. Sticking the 250hp turbo from the Regal GS would fit the bill (though with FWD and not AWD) - but will GM do it? Time will tell.
Well, we know there's the added plastic intercooler piping, intercooler , and turbo (just the big stuff). But full system DOHC V6 versus DOHC turbo I4 they are close in final price - but the warranty costs per vehicle are a lot higher as well and that is the deal breaker. I've heard estimates that as many as 1 in 25 LNFs see warranty work covering the turbocharger. While the engine has some great stats, GM killed the thing for a reason.
Hopefully GM can do the same. Only time will tell - but 300lb would be a dang good start.
Performance factoid:
The SC 3.8L W-body could hammer out 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. That's decently brisk for a comfy FWD sport sedan of the 90s. The Turbo Cobalt could rocket 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. That's pretty darn fast considering a 2002 Camaro SS also was listed as 0-60 in 5.5 seconds!!!
Hopefully GM can do the same. Only time will tell - but 300lb would be a dang good start.
Performance factoid:
The SC 3.8L W-body could hammer out 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. That's decently brisk for a comfy FWD sport sedan of the 90s. The Turbo Cobalt could rocket 0-60 in 5.5 seconds. That's pretty darn fast considering a 2002 Camaro SS also was listed as 0-60 in 5.5 seconds!!!
) the Cobalt turbo SS is quicker around a course than a Camaro SS..... but don't tell any Camaro SS owners (they still think their 2002 SS had more power that run of the mill Z28s and B4Cs).... we'll keep those factoids to ourselves.
Although the 0-60 Camaro SS times I see are around the 5.1 to 5.2 range (but who's counting
) the Cobalt turbo SS is quicker around a course than a Camaro SS..... but don't tell any Camaro SS owners (they still think their 2002 SS had more power that run of the mill Z28s and B4Cs).... we'll keep those factoids to ourselves. 
) the Cobalt turbo SS is quicker around a course than a Camaro SS..... but don't tell any Camaro SS owners (they still think their 2002 SS had more power that run of the mill Z28s and B4Cs).... we'll keep those factoids to ourselves. 
Pretty darn close...Car and Driver got an as-tested 156:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
But Chevrolet's published number was 160.
Pretty darn close...Car and Driver got an as-tested 156:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
But Chevrolet's published number was 160.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
But Chevrolet's published number was 160.

If he federal government had any *****, they would hike up gas prices and try to affect the demand side of the equation. Instead they blame the auto companies and keep trying to affect the supply side. So GM is stuck in the middle trying to meet government requirements and still please their customers who don't want a gutless family hauler.
So basically, if you voted for Obama, no bitching about this. Tell him to grow some ***** and fix the problem, not punish the entire industry.
-Geoff
So basically, if you voted for Obama, no bitching about this. Tell him to grow some ***** and fix the problem, not punish the entire industry.
-Geoff
If he federal government had any *****, they would hike up gas prices and try to affect the demand side of the equation. Instead they blame the auto companies and keep trying to affect the supply side. So GM is stuck in the middle trying to meet government requirements and still please their customers who don't want a gutless family hauler.
So basically, if you voted for Obama, no bitching about this. Tell him to grow some ***** and fix the problem, not punish the entire industry.
-Geoff
So basically, if you voted for Obama, no bitching about this. Tell him to grow some ***** and fix the problem, not punish the entire industry.
-Geoff
Lobby away! Knock yourself out!
I DARE you
BTW Im betting that 11 second Z28 and Silverado do not have 4 cylinder engines.
Why because you believe alternative energy and 4 cylinder vehicles arent priced competitively enough for people to choose it on their own without being priced gouged out of the market via taxes? You think its a good idea to force people to pay more for fuel especially in a tough economy? Some of whom are barely getting by as it is? That is unless they can afford the over pricing.
Lobby away! Knock yourself out!
I DARE you
BTW Im betting that 11 second Z28 and Silverado do not have 4 cylinder engines.
Lobby away! Knock yourself out!
I DARE you
BTW Im betting that 11 second Z28 and Silverado do not have 4 cylinder engines.
It also doesn't matter what the price of gasoline is, you will always have people living beyond their means.
Why because you believe alternative energy and 4 cylinder vehicles arent priced competitively enough for people to choose it on their own without being priced gouged out of the market via taxes? You think its a good idea to force people to pay more for fuel especially in a tough economy? Some of whom are barely getting by as it is? That is unless they can afford the over pricing.
Lobby away! Knock yourself out!
I DARE you
BTW Im betting that 11 second Z28 and Silverado do not have 4 cylinder engines.
Lobby away! Knock yourself out!
I DARE you
BTW Im betting that 11 second Z28 and Silverado do not have 4 cylinder engines.
-Geoff
Actually our gasoline is subsidized. If we took all the tax breaks and subsidies away from oil companies, stopped fighting trillion dollar wars for oil, actually had enough tax on gas to pay for infrastructure like roads and bridges, we would probably be paying closer to $5 a gallon.
It also doesn't matter what the price of gasoline is, you will always have people living beyond their means.
It also doesn't matter what the price of gasoline is, you will always have people living beyond their means.
-Geoff
I cant tell if youre being sarcastic or serious. Again your Z28 and Silverado is no Aveo. By youre own standards your camaro would be a 4 cylinder Aveo if it had been successful years ago. Same with that Silverado in your Sig line.
Last edited by 5thgen69camaro; Sep 7, 2010 at 07:09 AM.



