AdioSS

the Genesis Coupe should have kept the Tiburon name.

falchulk

Both are stupid names.....

Z28x

I have not seen that at all in the upstate NY area, maybe it is different where you live. Most hybrid owners I've met buy the car because they don't like paying for gas. Most do a lot of driving. I'm not sure what kind of coffee they drink but they seem to be your average middle class person. They also don't seem to be car people. I don't think a Camaro hybrid would be something they would want because it isn't practice. Also, $30k+ hybrid don't seem to sell.

You are forgetting one very important thing. Camaro hybrid = expensive, Camaro 4cyl. = cheap. No one is going to buy a slow and heavy $35k Camaro. They will buy a light, quick, 35mpg, $22k Camaro though.

There are lots of sporty 4cyl. cars on the market. Everything from Mini Cooper, Scion tC, WRX, to Kia Forte and Civic coupes. Those are the cars that will be cross shopped with the 4cyl. Camaro.

I think most enthusiasts would rather have turbo car that can easily be modded than the V6. Higher mpg would just be a bonus.

Changing the name of a product is a great way to confuse consumers and kill sales. Hyundai should have learned this from watching GM.

Z28Wilson

That's exactly my point. The types of people who buy hybrids aren't car guys/gals, aren't Camaro-intending buyers. Camaro is no more a good fit for a hybrid model than Corvette.

Z284ever

Every last mpg will count.
Keep in mind that those same Aveos also have to offset larger Chevy/Cadillac/Buick sedans, crossovers and trucks.

HAZ-Matt

Agree with the sound, disagree with the last statement. More to engine design then number of cylinders. Besides, you can't just slap turbos on a production NA V8 and hope that it holds together like a factory boosted motor such as a VR38DETT, RB26DETT, 2JZGTE, etc. Besides, there is a huge difference between messing around with a boost controller and adding FI or switching the internals. Start talking about mods like that and the sky is the limit for any engine.

Because I have sense enough to know that there is a practical limit to the displacement of a four cylinder engine, as well as head flow and max RPM. Torque is basically proportional to displacement at given manifold pressure. If you want more power you can push the limits of RPM and you will get something like the F20C which made 240HP at 8300 RPM, with redline at 9000 RPM. However, it was right at the limit of piston speed for a production street car and also noted for feeling somewhat gutless in the S2000 with only 153lbft of torque at 7500 RPM. A car which is likely to be lighter than a 6th Gen Camaro. You just won't have enough torque available in low enough revs to feel any semblance of sportiness. Sure you could gear the car very aggressively, but you will eventually run out of gears and the fuel economy will suffer.

Next, consider the LNF in Kappa guise. Same displacement, but under 20 psi of boost so power was 260HP @ 5300 RPM, while torque was 260lbft from 2500–5250 rpm. Throw on the GMPP kit and it makes 290HP @ 5200 RPM and 340lbft @ 3600RPM. Ignoring the GMPP kit, 260lbft over most of the rev range will motivate a 3500lb Camaro much better than any naturally aspirated motor could hope to.


I won't argue with this. But there is much more to selling a car than the engine note. Especially on a car that should be a volume car like a base Camaro.

I don't pretend to be able to predict what any individual values in a car. However, teh data is quite clear that the "V8 sound" is likely not very high on the priority list of the vast majority of car buyers, even buyers of sporty coupes.



I don't know what the vast majority of the market comment means. formula79 brought up 4 cylinder image cars, then talked about the Lancer Evo and the WRX. I talked about both of them above. I agree the Lotus is definitely a more ridiculous example and would have nothing to do with a base Camaro.

Out of those four, yes. But as I stated earlier the base Camaro should even appeal to people who buy Accord and Altima coupes. Accord is the most cross shopped vehicle for Mustang after the Camaro. Making the base Camaro desirable to those shoppers, while leaving enough Camaro-ness in the car to keep core buyers might be tricky, but it is doable. Hell, if this message board is any indication, just calling a car Camaro would be enough to get half of the enthusiasts to buy it, unlike the old grumpy GTO guys that wanted a carbon copy of a '66.

Exactly. Glad to see there are other people that get it.

Valid concern.

As far as the issues with the V6 go, part of that can be blamed on GM and their lukewarm stance on aftermarket mods. Would be nice if they would help the tuners out a little bit with the 3.6L... they are also sitting on a pretty powerful turbo kit in the form of the Leno Camaro.

AdioSS

If there were a Monte Carlo out now, would that be a more appropriate hybrid vehicle?

Z28Wilson

Good question. Honestly, I don't see a hybrid with anything less than 4 doors being a big success. I think there's an expectation of practicality that goes along with it.

Didn't Honda kill the Accord coupe hybrid many years ago?

Z284ever

Yup. Plus, I think that the 3.6 lacks alot of the smoothness, eagerness and refinement which would make an enthusiast excited about having one. It's a prime mover, not one of those glorious motors which you "must" have.

It does have a pretty tough bottom end though, if someone were to offer a turbo kit.

jg95z28

Assuming a smaller 6th gen Camaro, the one negative I can see with a turbo 4, is if premium fuel is required. Optional would be one thing, but if it requires 91 octane, then they'd be better off with a smaller N/A V6 that is tuned to run on 89 as the base engine.

Z284ever

Good point. I'd bet you'll be able to run it on 87 octane if you wanted to.

Anyone know what the Regal's 220 hp turbo's fuel requirements are?

teal98

Not off hand, but the new Sonata DI turbo I4 uses 87 and gets 22/34 EPA and has 274hp, which totally destroys any V6 in the HP*fuel economy factor.

jg95z28

I meant 87 not 89 btw.

FWIW, My mother recently purchased an Acura RDX. One of the negatives that she hemmed and hawed over was the fact that she needed to run 91 octane with the turbo 4 cylinder. She decided the other pluses outweighed the negatives, but her car is considered a luxury vehicle.

With Camaro, the turbo 4 would be the base model, and needs to be marketed as such.

SSCamaro99_3

The premium fuel vs cost argument drives me nuts. If "you" drive 250 miles per week, and get 19 mpg (I get that in mixed driving in my 1998 Regal GS) the dlta between the two is not outrageous.

250/19 = 13.16 gal* $2.50 per gal (for example) = $32.90 per week or $1710.80 per year

250/19 = 13.16 gal* $2.80 per gal (premium) = $36.85 per week or $1916.10 per year.

It's less than $4 per week. The base price of gas and mpg are the drivers.

jg95z28

That would be true provided the car gets the same mpg with premium over regular, however I've never seen that to be the case. Higher octane means more power, which means lower fuel mileage.