The Camaro wasn't damaged in a "I'm never going to buy a Camaro again" sense. It was more of a "WTF was GM thinking?" Buyers didn't want a 4-cylinder Camaro. They bought the 6 and 8-cylinder versions in vast quantities instead.

I think that if GM offered another 4-cylinder Camaro, the same situation would happen. The 4-cylinder would not sell well at all. It wouldn't appeal to the "tuner" crowd, because even they know what a Camaro is, and a 4-banger isn't it. It wouldn't appeal to muscle car fans. It wouldn't appeal to mainstream buyers, because they don't normally associate 4-cylinder with "sporty car".

 

a modern turbo diesel might just fit what people want in a Camaro. Think of the V8 engines of the third gen years. The TBI and TPI models had lots of torque, low redlines, decent horsepower and got decent fuel economy. Sales suffered when the higher RPM LT1 and LS1 came out eventhough they were awesome performers.

 

Actually they bought 8-cylinder Camaros in vast quantities. V6s didn't outsell V8s until the 4th gens arrived, and even in its final production year V8s outsold V6s by a large margin. The high volume V6 was relatively a 4th gen phenomena. I'm not convinced V6s would outsell V8s in today's world.

 

Dunno. I was talking about the peak demand for coupes during the young years of the Baby Boom generation. Carmakers could just about do no wrong back then with any well-styled, well-performing coupe.
Whoa, be careful there! Saying the C*** word here will get us in trouble with the topic police
I'll be glad to answer your question, although I refrained so far since the answer is irrelevant. Irrelevant because, I'M NOT the target market for such a car. I will never want a stripped, buzzing 4cyl Camaro. My Camaro will need a substantial powerplant, with great torque, power and sound. Would I accept having a wheezer in the Camaro lineup, to enable a hot V8 sibling? Who knows? As I've already said, there are far too many uncertainties in the future for any of us to be able to predict not only the need for such an offering, but also - any of its real attributes.

 

Actually, the LT1 and LS1 got slightly better fuel economy than the TPI engines, with more power and just as much torque to boot. What each engine redlined at probably didn't matter much to consumers.

 

hey, at least that would help the case for a production Bumblebee Camaro

 

I understand that and I know that the change in the economy and the styling of the car had a lot more to do with it.

WHat do most people think of when Tuned Port Injection motors are mentioned? Low RPM torque. Same with diesels.

 

I understand it's hard to "predict" what will happen. It was just a simple, theoretical, yes or no question. No one says the 4 cylinder would be targeting you, just would YOU personally have a problem with one being available. Seems like you would.

By the way, I'm not looking at a 4 cylinder as being a completely wheezing, ridiculously mundane car to drive. A Camaro -- any Camaro -- needs to sustain a certain level of character. What I envision is a possible 4 cylinder Camaro being a car that is decidedly more "sporty" and prestigious than your typical Aveo or Cobalt.

 

I don't think most people want a return to the TPI days.

 

That's not how it was.

The '82 Camaro was smaller, more up to date and far more appealing than the one it replaced. Although, as far as I can remember there was no threat of CAFE, people were worried about the cost and availability of gas. Lots of people saw the availability of a I4 in the Camaro as a bold and progressive move. True, the I4 didn't sell in huge numbers, and as gas stabilized, fewer and fewer people bought them. After being available for four years, and I can't ever remember the Camaro's (or Firebird's) image diminishing for it. In fact, Pontiac released a whole bunch of Super Duty parts for the old Iron Duke and people used to hot rod them. And if you were a Pontiac purist, here was a Pontiac engine for your Firebird and Fiero.

As far as comparing the Iron Duke to the Ecotec, they are hardly comparable.
First off, you can get THREE TIMES the power today, in a production Ecotec compared to a production Iron Duke.

Second, the Ecotec has a thriving tuner/enthusiast presence.

The Ecotec is a modern international engine. GM probably makes millions of them. The Iron Duke was one half of a Pontiac V8. IOW the Ecotec has a HUGE future.

Most importantly though, and the thing it seems some you guys don't quite get is, Camaro will have to conform with federal law. And if we're going to have a 6th gen Camaro, there are going to have to be a bunch of them which get 35 mpg or over.

 

Both points are also essentially true about today's V8's. GM's modern V8's (heck also V6's) are far more powerful than their 1980's counterparts, and nearly as fuel-efficient as these new wunder-turbo-4's in real daily driving. So clue me in - why the I4 fawning?
The 6gen is not starting down the production line next week, next month, next year, heck maybe not even next DECADE. None of us can say with authority and certainty, what MPG it will need to have.

 

Respectfully disagree about todays V8s being nearly as fuel efficient.

There's not a production V8 in the USA that can come close to 40mpg in average driving. Also, V8's typically get their best mileage on open roads under long sustained runs at cruising speed. Take them into the city for stop and go driving and they plummet. Not true so much for the 4-bangers of today. I ROUTINELY approach 40 mog with my 2.3L/5-spd with my average commute now being 8 miles each way through stop signs and rural intersections. Can't come close in anything with a V8.

Personally - in the two Mustangs I drive most often, the following are my averages over the last 2+ years...
Highway - V8 = 28mpg, I4 = 42mpg
City - V8 = 20mpg, I4 = 35mpg

Lastly - regarding the market for a 4-banger and there being no interest...
I was approached TODAY AT LUNCH by a guy driving a semi-truck who asked if the red Mustang coupe was mine. "Yes." I said. Glen worked for a logging company in Wilkesboro, NC (according to his uniform). His next question was if it is a 4 cyl or a 5.0 conversion (he saw no 5.0 badges on the fenders). I told him it's the original 2.3... that I bought the car specifically for commuting and grocery-getting, and love it. He wanted to buy it - wanted me to put a price on it right there. He wants it for his wife to drive to/from work. They love their 5.0 coupe - the size, view, feel, seats, etc - but she wants something more docile and cheaper to commute to work.
BINGO... Just today I have an unsolicited buyer after my 4-banger, and they specifically WANTED a Mustang because it's like their 5.0.

I have posted before on this board that I am AMAZED how many offers I am getting for my little 4-cyl coupe. I've probably had a dozen offers in the last 6 months and I'm NOT trying to sell it! These are all unsolicited folks "just asking" out of the blue in parking lots and gas stations. Heck, it's generating more "interest" when I drive it than my other V8 Mustangs do.

From my personal experiences and discussions with others like me, there is indeed a HUGE market for a nice sporty coupe with an economical driveline. And Z284ever is also right about the aftermarket for the Ecotec. Not only is it a better engine than the Duke from the get-go, but it has a much more enhanced aftermarket already in growth.

Like you, I am not going to go buy a new 4-cyl myself... I'll buy a used one for a beater (again) and buy my personal play toy with the goodies I want from the factory (V8, manual, etc). BUT, I am not about to deny all the wallets out there a chance to buy the 4-cylinder, hybrid, or diesel versions they prefer just because I don't want it in mine. If they can help justify my GT500 being available for me in 2012, I'm all for it.

 

If I am to take that literally, then no I do not agree at all that lack of marketing killed the car. Less appealing and Bad calls yes, Marketing no. I had a laundry list of what I felt sunk the car that I gave when GM was asking what we wanted in the next Camaro. All of the reasons I believe it was killed have been fixed.

My biggest issue was the windshield. at its angle it was a pain in the *** to clean. More over the 3800 V6 was not only under the windshield it was so fat it was right against the sheetmetal. Some have suggested jacking the car up and droping the engine and transmission to work on it. I never liked the look or practicality of the long front overhang the car gained in 82. It played havoc on my car trying to get it onto ramps or pulling into a steep parking lot.

Truth be told though I believe alot was resolved IMO just by bringing the firewall back to where it was supposed to be. Im glad it happend though because it offered an oppertunity to fix everything

 

Respectfully, I also completely disagree with the thrust above. I was referring to real daily driving. Can individuals do better? OF COURSE (and kudos to you, if you can tolerate your low-tq, low-power, nasty-rasping, I4 day after day). Of Course you will get good MPG. Hooray for you! (Wouldn't want to be you!). The gritty truth of the matter is - for those of us who demand high performance in our daily ride - it means mid-, maybe high teens in MPG in typical driving. Hence, a 2006 GTO M6 rated at 17 MPG city, with a grin-forcing 400 hp/tq... and a 2008 Subaru WRX STi with only 300 hp, less tq, and the SAME 17 MPG city rating. How is that? I'll tell you how. It's because there is NO free lunch in modern engines. It takes a lot of fuel to have fun. You're clearly doing without some of the fun... certainly your perogative... but let's be real here. The turbo I4 is no wunder-mill.
You strike me as someone who takes very good care of his cars... so I'm not surprised to see such an anecdote. Would people still approach you if your Mustang was not well-maintained? Bottom line... nothing about your experience is unique - simply a reaction by people to just about any rare, well-maintained car.
Perhaps some here are misconstruing my opinion. I don't care all that much if the 6gen can be had in an I4 variant. I do think it would weaken the Camaro brand... and might jeopardize it. But it would not stop me from buying a V6 or V8 6gen. All else equal though? I'd prefer that GM not waste one of their precious few engine options on such an abomination such as is found in a lowly four banger. I'd hope they do like is apparently going to happen with the 5gen... two V6 choices and one V8 (that is what I have been seeing posted on here). Muscle cars SHOULD NOT come with a four-banger

 

That contradicts everything you went on to say right after that.

Given the choice between an available 4 and no Camaro at all, it's a no-brainer to me. Completely take away the V8, and that's another story...