Originally Posted by Ray86IROC

These two lines are standard per the spec sheet http://www.chevrolet.com/camaro/pdf/...aro+Order.pdf:
- "Audio system: AM/FM stereo with CD-ROM, MP3 playback, music navigator and Graphic Information Display, includes outside temperature display"
- "Center console: floor with armrest and auxiliary input jack"

Originally Posted by CLEAN

I'd like to say something about these 2 quotes. I don't know that you can fairly compare a 2LT w/ an L76 w/ a no option 1SS. The difference in equipment is pretty great. As GM has forced us to go all or nothing w/ things like leather, ambient lighting, console gauges, ipod/bluetooth compatibility, ect, I think it's only fair to compare what we're talking about w/ a 2SS, which adds up to a significantly higher cost for the consumer. To address your question, a 2LT w/ an L76 would be a higher profit car in our case because we (wifey anyway) will not be considering a SS, so GM won't be making that money. And on the truly alarming side, she's not happy w/ the lack of real interior colors (carpets, headliners, ect) as black interiors in Texas aren't a good mix. Couple that w/ the fact that she's not thrilled about being stuck w/ a V6, no matter how good it is, and for the first time yesterday, mentioned not getting one because of the compromises she would have to make and it not being worth the premium price (to her) to get a V8 w/ the options she wants and an interior color that she not just doesn't care for, but truely dislikes.

As to the second statement, I don't know what to say. There were A LOT of 305 TBI cars sold in the 80's and early 90's, in fact, I think it was the most popular engine choice during those times. It was only when GM decided to go all or nothing w/ the 4th gens that you saw this move of everyone to the high end car, which I'm sure was GM's intent. However, since GM hasn't offered a mid-V8 in almost 20 years, I'm not suprised that todays auto show enthusiasts (and I agree that a disproportionate number of them are probably performance enthusiasts, which is not a bad thing, I'm one!) would want the biggest most powerful engines. But that doesn't mean that theres not a segment that would go for a 350ish hp V8 JUST to get that SOUND, and a bit more torque than the V6 can provide. Especially if they could do it for the same price as they can w/ a G8, where you can go from a 3.6 A5 to a 6.0 A6 for $3500. That same move in a Camaro is $6500. Too much IMO if you're just looking for a torquey, good sounding engine at a competitive price (i.e. $2x,xxx) to the Mustang and you don't need/want 400+ hp and Brembo brakes.

Originally Posted by 1fastdog

Give me the non-negotiable points for both sides. Give me the actual goals each side can see value in acheiving through an ownership experience.

What do you and your wife really see eye to eye on regarding what life should be like and definately include?

Originally Posted by 95firehawk

What I've quoted in bold just doesn't quite seem like a valid argument to me. How is 365 hp going to differ from 425 hp if you have traction control and some form of common sense when it comes to driving? Safe bet would be that if you couldn't handle a car with traction control and 425 hp then you aren't going to be able to handle any V8 or a 300 hp V6 for that matter.

Now the rest I can understand to a point, but I still don't quite see the necessity for the L76. Why would you want a car that would barely be faster than the V6 yet get the gas mileage of the V8?

Originally Posted by toegead93

Agreed, I think only an un-informed consumer would see the L76 as a legitimate option. If the base V6 was equal to what Dodge and Ford offers then yes the L76 begins to make sense. But we don't have that problem, GM gave the Camaro a sophisticated stud V6. Compare the engine lineups to the Challenger and Mustang. The Camaro offers better performance and gas milage at equal or lower pricing. One main reason Dodge has the mid V8 R/T is because the gas mialge on the SRT8 sucks worse than my old 1987 L98 IROC.

I like the idea of having more flexibility in the options, but none of the competitors can offer the same as the Camaro for the price, even after all the goodies are added in.

Originally Posted by CLEAN

Right you are! Everyone has said that the usb jack was the ipod interface, and it is standard on the 2LT and 2SS, and optional on 1LT. So I guess that is addressed.

As to all the comments about the L76, in our case, the only reason I throw it out is because it is seemingly the only lesser V8 that would be feasable for the Camaro. As to why you would want it over a V6....torque and sound. If you don't agree w/ that, that's ok, but thats the reason. Who here would pick the DI V6 over an LS1 in the same car?

I'm done, defending an opinion based on personal preference is a no-win scenario.

Originally Posted by King Moose SS

I got an idea...... Replace the V-6 with the impala SS's LS4 V-8. It makes about the same hp and about the same gas mileage, just ones a V-8 with a active fuel management. and ones a V-6 with direct injection

Originally Posted by King Moose SS

I got an idea...... Replace the V-6 with the impala SS's LS4 V-8. It makes about the same hp and about the same gas mileage, just ones a V-8 with a active fuel management. and ones a V-6 with direct injection

Originally Posted by CLEAN

LS4 is set up as a FWD engine, been a while since I looked at it, but I think even the intake manifold and accessories are set up on what would be the "back" of the engine. It gets out of its own way though.