So ive been readin this site for quite some time now with a few posts here and there. Somethin ive noticed (and im sure lot of others have as well) is that people are always talkin about how much HP a camaro should come with. Ive seen people clamor for hp ratings from 350 to a ridiculous 500. Am I the only one here that would be happy to see a 5th gen camaro, and dont care at all with how much power it comes with? (within reason of course) I would be perfectly happy for a 300 - 325 hp car.

Its obvious (read: mustang) that you dont need a butt load of power right out of the box to sell cars, and plus how many of you who really care about horsepower keep your car stock to begin with? That 450hp mark will be easily reachable.....thoughts?

-EriC

 

Its not an issue of how much HP anybody wants in a new Camaro, its an issue of what it is realistic for Chevy to actually put in a new Camaro given its:

1. Price vis a vis competitors and other Chevy and GM products
2. Market position vis a vis competitors and other Chevy Products
3. this one is more subjective..the "sweet spot" in the packaging that sells the most cars....and odds are it ain't a 450hp supercar that costs $40,000.

 

I've had a question / thought rolling around in my head for some time now and this seems to be a good thread to let it out.

IMO the LS7 will no way no how ever be put into even a special edition Camaro. The engine is just too expensive.

*PURE SPECULATION AHEAD*

What if.....

...the LS7 could be stripped of it's Ti parts and dry sump system? What if more standard parts could be used with a lowered redline (6500) and power rating (470).

Is this even feasible with the LS7?

If so, would it be economical enough for a $38,000- $40,000 limited production ZO6-like Z28?

Would they call it LS5?


Thoughts?

 

I can't see GM developing a 300hp V8 just for the Camaro if they already have the 6 liter making 400 hp and is available in just about every v8 performance application.

I am starting to think people are equating less power means less cost.

 

I just posted a similar thought to Chris's in the other thread. I guarantee a 300hp camaro with a nice riding and handling IRS and a nice interior would sell a **** ton better than a 400hp solid axle car with an interior reminiscent of 4th gens.

Seriously, didn't the 4th gen experience teach anybody anything. Being the fastest doesn't matter in the least. For all 4th genners like to rag on 'turdgens' they were the last f-car to outsell mustang in a given year despite being slower. They did it with a cutting edge exterior design with a pretty nice overall package compared to other stuff available in the era. The 4th gens evolved into engines in boxes, that went like hell, but noone but die hards would be caught dead in one.

 

Actually, less HP does cost less in the end. Not in the cost of the car, but the same costs that killed the first musclecar era. Fuel and insurance costs.

First the biggy, insurance. If chevy offers a 400hp car for $25K, A LOT of idiots and kids will get their hands on them and wrap them around trees quickly. Just like with earlier f-bodies, insurance would be worse on a camaro than an equivalently powered Vette / GTO, perhaps much worse since 400hp >>>>> 350hp of the last fbodies when it comes to how muxh easier it is to kill yourself. Thus, even though idiots and kids might be able the payment, insurance costs will kill them and they won't REALLY be able to afford it, and thus sales will lag.

OTOH, if they made a 300hp camaro insurance will be that much cheaper, both because of the lower #, as well as it being a little harder to accidentally t-bone a bus full of penguins @ 110 killing everyone, so the statistics should be that much better

And fuel economy is a pretty obvious one too. The 400hp LS2 gives up 4mpg on the highway to the 350hp GTO 6spd. Dod will make the LS2 match teh LS1 mileage, ok sure. But what happens if you put Dod on the smaller engine. Still beats the bigger one. Basically, DoD or not, for any given engine family, smaller and less power = better mileage (to a point anyway)

 

i'm not sure the ls2 gave up any fuel economy in comparison to the ls1?
but otherwise good points...
and the other way it costs more is for the supporting components to stand up to the engine

 

The 05 LS2 GTO 6 speed, with the same tranny, rear and tires as the 04 LS1 6spd is rated at 25mpg highway vs. 29mpg for the LS1.

 

hmm, sure it isn't a tranny gear change or rear end gear change or something?
sounds odd as i thought it was advertised as the same as the ls1