The BMW 3 won't get 40, unless you only go downhill. But there are three major differences between the BMW I-6 and the GM truck I-6.

1. The BMW is a slant 6. This slightly increases width, but reduces height, which is important for a passenger car.

2. The BMW has a smaller bore. This reduces the length of the engine, so that it will fit under a reasonable length hood.

3. The BMW has a shorter stroke. See number 1.

By the time you modify the 4.2 I6 (reducing displacement and power), you've spent a lot of money, and what does it buy you over the 3.6V6? Well, you have an I6, which is inherently smoother, and you may have less friction, because you have half the number of camshafts. But it has less displacement. Plus with 6 cylinders in a line, you need a stronger crank and a stronger block, to avoid twisting. So do the advantages minus the disadvantages justify GM offering yet another 6 cylinder engine?

 

The I-6 in my old TB (AWD) got over 17 mpg mixed driving all the time.

It was an EXT and it was quick. I'd say re-map it to be higher hp and lower torque and bingo 300 plus hp and 30 mpg as long as the new maro is not 4000 lbs. Add in the correct gearing and it's no big deal to get 30 mpg and 300 hp. This would be through cams and ecu changes, plus the inherent intake and oil pan changes, but I think it'd be a great idea. It'd be a great basis for my TT project.

 

The 3.9L V6 is going in the Camaro from what I have read. It's getting the higher output version from the G6 GTP making somewhere around 260-280hp.

 

I have hard this talk recently too. Hope its not true.

The 3.6L DOHC 255ish HP seems like a no brainer to me.

 

You'd rather have 255 than 260 to 280? The 3.9l is cheaper, and it would have more power and torque if the rumor is true. Why would you rather have the 3.6?

 

For one there is no guarntee the 3.9 will put out 280 hp. It makes 240 right now and IS NOT the top enigne in G6's. Its been surpassed by the 252hp 3.6L V6.

Heck the 3.9 is not even availible in the new Malibu or Aura.

WHat does that say? Tells me its days are numbered. So why then a costly move to add hp and switch it around for RWD configuration? The volume of a V6 Camaro is hardly justification.

Now lets look at the 3.6L. Hp is pegged at 258 for the 08 CTS.
Its the base engine for G8--which is based on Zeta--as is the Camaro.

Seems fairly obvious and logical why the 3.6L should be the base engine. And 258hp is more then rnough to full fill the misison of a V6 Camaro.

So after reading my arguemnents, why would GM go to the trouble of the 3.9 in the Camaro? And why would you rather have one?

 

Dont forget about the direct injected 3.6.

 

HP is not pegged at 258...they have a direct injected version making 300.
The 3.6 makes 275hp in the Lambda's with dual exhaust, said to make 280+ in the Buick...so there is more power to be had.

I hope that the 3.6 makes more power then 250+ with the Mustang V6 probably gunna be over 270 with teh Duratech 3.5.

 

hey just passing on what I read. Base engine for CTS is the non DI 3.6

 

If it has 280hp, I'd rather have it, because it'd be cheaper and more powerful than the 3.6. This is all just rumor anyway, so we're just guessing on costs and all that. But between a rumored 280hp 3.9 and a non-DI 3.6 -- probably with 252 like the G8, though that's just speculation again, I'd rather have the 3.9.

 

but your not making much of a case for that being likely to happen

3.9 is doubtful to be cheaper at all. How can they get 40 more hp from the 3.9 and maintain gas milegae and emmsions?? Everyting is a trade off and there is no free lunch.

Even if they could do it--it will likley increase the price so much that, in conjuntion with the 3.6L being cheaper all the time (notice how production and avaiblbility have gone sharply up?) and price differential would be nominal.

Besides the 3.6L soumds kick ***! I drove a Malibu SS and it sounded like a broken dishwasher under WOT. 7K redline too

but each to there own....

 

I don't think I understand what your context is here -- not making much of a case for what?


These are two assumptions on your part. I don't know whether they are, in fact, true. I've read things about V6 cost elsewhere that indicate maybe your cost assumption isn't valid. 280hp from a 3.9V6 sounds about as difficult as 372 from a 5.2V8, which doesn't really sound difficult, given LS2s down under making 413 (yes I know it's a 6.0).

 

All I was trying to say is that while 280 can be had form 3.9L why would they do it? Remeber the no free lunch bit. Have to swtich to RWD,mod it quite alot, make it run claen and get good gas mileage. Tall order to just use in the Camaro.

GM rarely has 1 engine for just one car. They share engines alot.

I know you'd like the 3.9L but I was asking you to justify a case for it. Like I was--and I made one for the 3.6L. I am admiditedly making a simple case---unit volume on the 3.6L goes up, costs go down.

Just trying to good debate going and not the what you'd like to see--stuff.

 

Okay. Well, I don't have any data on costs, so I can't really generate a case. My original point is that I'd rather have a 280hp 3.9 than the 3.6 (making 252hp as in the G8), given that the 3.9 should be cheaper to build (based on OHV engines being a few hundred $$ cheaper than the DOHC engines).

You give up some refinement, but I'm fine with that for a Camaro.

If the 3.9 is more expensive to build than the HF 3.6, then the case for it is much weaker.

I'll probably end up buying a V8 version in any case, so it's a moot point for me....

 

Hehe--me too