6th gen Camaro, can it do 13.99 and get 34mpg?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

May 23, 2009 | 08:59 AM

#16

HAZ-Matt

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2001

Posts: 4,000

From: TX Med Ctr

I wonder how it would like a boost controller and some programming...

The only spec I don't like is the weight. It is about a 100lbs heavier than an LS series motor or the 3.6L V6.

May 23, 2009 | 09:08 AM

#17

Z284ever

Registered User

Joined: Nov 2000

Posts: 16,176

From: Chicagoland IL

Quote:

Originally Posted by HAZ-Matt

I wonder how it would like a boost controller and some programming...

The only spec I don't like is the weight. It is about a 100lbs heavier than an LS series motor or the 3.6L V6.

Hey, can't have everything, dude. Besides, for a diesel V6, it's weight isn't bad at all.

As with most turbo diesels, I'd imagine it's tunability would be phenominal.

Also, it could share drivetrain (trans, clutch, axles, diff, etc.), development costs with the smallblock powered Z/28,

May 23, 2009 | 10:48 AM

#18

Gold_Rush

Registered User

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 1,870

Diesel might be the best answer. The current BMW 335d will do 0-60 in 5.3sec, 0-100 in 13.4sec, and the 1/4 mile in 13.8sec. Best of all, it's rated at 36mpghwy. And this is in a car loaded with options with a test weight of 3,960lbs so far from a stripped light-weight.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/d..._compchart.pdf

So it's very possible.

May 23, 2009 | 12:21 PM

#19

Big Als Z

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 4,306

From: Jersey Shore

I dont see why not?
You have the current Camaro V6 gets an EPA 29mpg and hits the 1/4 in 14.2 @ 100mph! 100mph is a solid 13 sec car. My 87 runs 14.3 @ 96, so another 4mph faster is an easy 13 sec car.
Cut 300lbs off the car, add in more aerodymaic aids compared to the first gen brick nose, I dont see why not using existing technology.

May 23, 2009 | 07:53 PM

#20

teal98

Registered User

Joined: Jul 2001

Posts: 3,132

From: Santa Clara, CA

Diesels are kind of cheating

I say that, because in the future, I expect CO2 to be what's regulated, and not MPG. Either that, or they'll have "gasoline-equivalent" MPG. Diesels emit quite a bit more CO2 per gallon burned.

May 23, 2009 | 08:31 PM

#21

Z28x

Thread Starter

Registered User

Joined: Jan 2000

Posts: 10,285

From: Albany, NY

Quote:

Originally Posted by R377

You definitely get into the laws of diminishing returns past about 6 gears. Think about a CVT, which basically has an infinite number of ratios, and they don't really outperform a good 6-speed.

To pick up on your LNF example, the Solstice GXP weighs just shy of 3000 pounds, gets 28 mpg highway, and does the quarter in low-mid 14s. Figure on the F6 adding at least 400 pounds over a Kappa and you're already looking at high 14s (each 100 pounds adds about a tenth to your times). So you'd need the next-gen LNF to shave almost a second off its current capabilities, plus add 6 mpg in a heavier car. Seems like a tall order.

Most of the LNF cars get the same mileage as the same car with a 2.4L give or take 1mpg. Malibu 2.4L gets 33mpg and is 3300lbs,+, so a Malibu LNF should be in the 32-33mpg range. So in theory a coupe with the same weight and engine should get about the same mileage. It is too bad the solstice was never teamed with the 6 speed auto.

We also have 5-6 years or so for engine and transmission tech to improve. Just look at how much has improved since 2004 cars.

May 25, 2009 | 06:01 PM

#22

HAZ-Matt

Registered User

Joined: Mar 2001

Posts: 4,000

From: TX Med Ctr

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z284ever

Yeah I realize that. I think I would be one of the guys that would embrace a turbo diesel Camaro. It could get good fuel economy and make stupid torque with a little extra boost.