STOCK1SC

I guess you want to argue for the sake of arguing so I'll step out. Laugh all you want about gas mileage, but I promise if you offer GM two engines with the same power and one gets 2mpg better, that's the one that the company is going to go with. CAFE changes will be here soon and auto companies are doing everything they can to save weight and get the same performance with better gas mileage. GM's AFM in my opinion and others who have it on their cars and trucks is that it has little to no impact on mpg, most people are never gonna drive 55mph on a perfectly level road for 100 miles. In my old SRT4 I could run with V8's when I put my foot down and when I wanted to drive for mileage I could get almost 30 driving in city traffic by staying out of boost(granted my Hwy was about the same as my 02 Z28 6 speed, about 28). Try driving an LS1 in city traffic and see if you can bust 16mpg. Turbo's and Direct Injection are the future, the days of big cubic inch GM's for the common working man are almost over.

Eric77TA

I've actually wondered what the LNF would be like in the Camaro - not as a hard core "performance" motor, but as a midlevel option. It doesn't make V8 torque, but it does have 260 lb. ft from 2500 to 5250 RPM. The Solstice GXP weighs 2988 or so. If the Camaro weighs somewhere between that and the 3500 pound weight of a CTS, it could be a good performer. That power and weight would probably be right in the neighborhood of a Grand Prix GTP.

STOCK1SC

I think it would get horrible mileage in the new heavy body Camaro, it's just too much weight for it to push without using a ton of gas. There is a sweet spot for weight I would imagine that would be the balance point between power and economy. Look at a Dodge Dakota the V8 actually got better than the V6 because the truck was so heavy the 6 had to wrok too hard to be effecient. I think it would take a turbo 6 to get the torque you need for a 3800lb+ vehicle.

jerminator96

Hey man I agree with you for the most part, sorry if you mis-interpreted the "". I know which one GM would pick, and I can't blame them for it. I am simply saying that as a performance enthusiast I would sacrifice a little weight savings (and really I think I am being very generous saying the V8 would be 100lbs heavier) to have a better performance platform.

If I had to pick a car and keep it showroom stock then sure, I'd be right there with you. Lucky for me though, that is not the case.

Not that any of my opinions matter, it will be many years before I buy another camaro, and I'll probably be buying it for my wife. They just don't have the "performance per dollar" value to justify buying one for myself.

Eric77TA

You're probably right, but I still think that it's interesting that a Grand Prix GTP Makes 260 horses at 5200 rpm and 280 lb ft. at 3600 and weighs in at 3700 pounds.

The LNF (in Solstice GXP) makes 260 horses at 5300 rpm and has 260 lb ft (starting at 2000) running up to 5300 RPM. Doesn't seem that if a Camaro weighed 3700 the mileage would be hugely different than a GTP. Torque starts way low.

5thGen

I seriously doubt they would use anything nearly as large as a T28. In addition, I don't think a 3-5 lb aluminum radiator and few aluminum tubes, probably mostly plastic ones actually, plus two small turbos will add 50 lbs when even added to your 30lbs of T-28s.

At the most I'd say 35 lbs would be added from the turbos and all equipment. Also, an aluminum block can handle power. Sure it probably can't handle 1000 hp, but do you think they are going to run huge amounts of boost through it? The engine has been designed and engineered to be aluminum. Taking it from 300 hp to 400 by adding a little more air pressure does not necesitate a switch to iron. Companies have been turbocharging aluminum engines for decades now. Some are even 6-7-800 hp monsters. I think GM has stepped up it's game enough by now that they can engineer an aluminum engine block that can comfortably handle a decent amount of power. Nissan RB20DETTs from 1989 could handle 30 lbs of boost and 700+ hp from the factory, that's 19 years ago. Am I thinking the 3.6 is as stout? Probably not. It also has the disadvantage of beeing a V instead of an inline 6. However that's not to say the 3.6 can't handle boost, even properly cooled boost at 8 lbs would yield over 400 hp with the DI. Most Hyperuetectic pistons can handle 8 lbs. Who's to say the 3.6 can't? What if they change the pistons? Do you know something about this motor that most people don't? You have repeated that they can't do it with THAT motor, so why can't they do it with THAT motor?

I think GM has stepped up their game enough to where the 3.6L can handle it. With a change of pistons I think it can probably go up to 11-12 psi.

If you know something we don't please share it.

90rocz

Turbo 6's make V8 torque, with a larger flatter curve.
They would have to lower the compression ratio a little, which would cut down on detenation, and get more air into the cyls.

And I'd say it would take closer to 12psi to make good hp/torque numbers with the V6, based on my experience with GrandNationals.
(I wouldn't go over 13psi with Hyperuetectics tho.)
And they would have to ensure a minimal voltage drop at the fuel pump, b/c every 1v drop, drops pressure 10%...or used to.

A V8 wouldn't need to go over 8psi tho.

I mentioned a 4cyl turbo a few times b/c I couldn't dream they would ever build another V6 turbo legend..
(Well, maybe I could dream..)

jerminator96

I never said it wasn't feasible with that motor.

If you are referring to what I think you are referring to then you are taking it out of context and I urge you to reread what I wrote.

Maybe the 3.6 can handle some boost, I don't know a whole lot about that motor, are you sure that is the one they would use? All I said was I wouldn't be surprised to see an iron block, or at least an aluminum block designed for boost.

I think you may be taking my statements the wrong way, I have made very few absolute assertions. With good reason, I might add, as it is often unwise to assert anything about the future.

5thGen

This is what I was refering to. You are saying "You're not going to be able to do it reliably with that motor".

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but what you wrote is what I took it for. We've been sayin turbos on the 3.6L would be good, you are saying you don't think it can handle it. I don't see why it should not be able to handle medium levels of boost. Ford's 4.0L SOHC in the 05+ Mustang is not designed to take boost, but with minimal tuning there are examples running 9 lbs supercharged or turboed.

Some people like myself will be counting on the V6's ability to handle boost. If I can get a few things lined up right, I hope to get my hands on a manual trans V6 and put twin turbos on it myself to develop a kit.

jerminator96

That is the quote I was talking about, but you are taking it out of context. I was making a point to STOCK1SC about why I would not want a turbo V6, because that motor could not handle what I would do to it.

The statement had nothing to do with the stock motor, it was in reference to heavily modifying motors. I can see how you would make that mistake though, it's perfectly reasonable.

scaz

There is no replacement for displacement. I love a big cam on a larger V8. I wouldn't mind owning a turbo sky, but that would just be a totally different car and not what I would be going for. I wouldn't mind a turbo V6, but it would have to prove it's self to me over time before I would pick it over my V8.

It would be really cool if chevy made a retro version of the Corvette that looked like the early 60's late 50's and used the sky platform, but put a turbo V6 in it.

STOCK1SC

Turbo, the replacement of displacement.

5thGen

spoken by someone who has never encountered a 650+ hp single turbo 3.8L Regal.

I built one with a buddy, it outran and outright embarassed a 750 superbike with an experienced rider. Most people thought it was a big block by the rumbling exhaust.

It has been proven time and again that a smaller engine with forced induction can match power of bigger engines.

5thGen

also, big displacement means bad mileage, meet CAFE.

Until Chevy figures out how to squeeze 35mpg out of 6.0L of V8, you can forget about having big huge V*s in our future, except in very limited numbers with very high prices.

STOCK1SC

Yep, CAFE is gonna kill the big engines. Why lug around all those extra cylinders using up gas when you can get the same power and more torque from a boosted 6? I'm glad to see so many others that would like the option as well. One thing a lot of people forget is you really need to cam to make more power with a V8(nitrous excluded) and when you do people know it because of the lope but with a turbo they don't have a clue if you have 300hp or 600hp. I like that about turbo's, it ****s with people's heads! Kind of like people driving up next to SRT-4's, they don't know if they're running against 230hp or a 600hp Z06 killer.