99SilverSS

Well to me if the V6 and the base V8 Camaro (LS3-L76) match the Mustang weight then what's the problem? And one would think the top performance Camaro Z28/SS whatever may not be supercharged. And the engine should weight about what an LS3 weighs so there is some extra weight the Mustang has to carry for an iron block, Supercharger and full set up that a Camaro wouldn't.

Make no mistake I don't want a Camaro that has a curb weight close to my Explorer either.

dream '94 Z28

Who exactly are these "people like us" you speak vaguely about?

99SilverSS

Traditionally a car company would start work on the replacement very soon after the original model is ready for production. Now that’s contingent on the car company having the funds to juggle this schedule and not have to take turns like Ford for instance. GM doesn’t have this problem. So in theory GM would put the 5th Gen into production and then trim the staff down to the bare essential members to monitor basic engineering needs and updates. But behind the scenes stylists and designers would begin to conjure up the 6th Gen and the process would begin again.

There won’t be another hiatus for the Camaro if it’s dropped again that’s it. I imagine you think there would be a hiatus or something because of the Zeta and CAFÉ issues. I don’t buy it, GM can afford to do this car even if it’s the only Zeta offered, ever. If it sells and if it’s a great image for Chevy and helps bring in foot traffic to the dealer while maintaining its media darling status GM will easily do what it takes to keep the car. Just because GM loves to build many models off one platform doesn’t mean they have to and don’t be fooled the Camaro can make money and be profitable if GM never builds another Zeta again. How nearsighted would the NA Strategy Board be if they didn’t have a plan to move forward with one Zeta and not the others? The Camaro would have never been approved.
Oshawa is a multi line plant and GM can stuff another model in there to quiet the CAW if need be or negotiate.
CAFÉ is a long ways off and while the average fuel economy rates must rise within the next several years why would anyone think GM didn’t have an idea this could happen? The board didn’t just happen to turn on CNN one day and notice the CAFÉ rules had been changed. They had a plan B, C, and D if need be. The Camaro is going to be built, its part of GM’s future plans and even with what we think are issues from the outside may not be so on the inside.

90rocz

Agreed, both on size and powertrain.
I could accept an Ecotec ONLY with a TURBO, but would love to see a V6 turbo even more, and that should make plenty of room for an LS? engine.

skorpion317

Cadillacs aren't pony cars. A 4-cylinder in a Camaro just isn't right, even a turbo Ecotec. The 2.0L LNF isn't exactly a fuel-sipper. And an N/A Ecotec just doesn't have the ***** to be in a pony car.

A fuel-efficient V6 would be a much better choice. It could get similar fuel economy and similar power to a turbo Ecotec, and it wouldn't have the image problem that a four-banger would.

A turbodiesel is an interesting choice. The Germans (mainly VW/Audi) have shown that diesels can have sporting intentions. A diesel's torque output would certainly be in line with the Camaro's image. The fuel economy would be great. But I'm not sure a diesel is right for Camaro, either. Again, the image factor comes into play. It just doesn't seem right for Camaro.

As for a V8, GM would be stupid to not include one for the 6th gen. If Alpha can't support a V8, then find a different platform, or re-engineer Alpha to be V8-capable. V8s are integral to the Camaro's heritage and credibility. It doesn't have to be a huge V8 - a smaller-displacement, high-revving N/A motor with direct injection would be awesome in a smaller 6th gen.

skorpion317

Not necessarily. We may not know all the specifics - engines, suspension setup, etc., but we have a good idea about the curb weight range, and it's effects on the car's performance.

I don't think anyone expects the car to be perfect. In this class of car, there's always some tradeoffs. Just look at the 4th gens. They're somewhat hard to get out of, they have long doors that don't offer much room in parking lots, the B-pillars are huge blind spots, the back seats are for decoration, there's not much cargo room, they're not that great in the snow, etc. But stomp on the gas and row through the gears just once, and you forget all about that.

The 5th gen doesn't need to be gigantic to offer great features. Weight does not have to be a tradeoff.

Plenty of people think the 5th gen is going to be heavy. The VE (Zeta) Holden Commodore is between 3700-4000 lbs., depending on the model. Even with weight-saving materials, the Camaro is still going to be in that range. That extra weight carries a penalty on acceleration, handling, and braking. If the Camaro is going to be the best car in it's class, it needs to be the best at all of those. Throwing parts at it can help (more powerful engines, bigger brakes, better suspension), but the underlying problem of weight must be resolved.

The 6th gen must be CAFE positive because if it isn't, the Camaro will be going away again. If GM is looking to meet that 35 MPG requirement, what do you think will be the first cars they look at? Anything sporty will be on the chopping block. If the Camaro is going to survive, it has to be able to adapt. It can do that without losing it's character, but it can't be a 500+ HP supercharged monster anymore(at least not from the factory).

Z284ever

I have no issue with a base 4 cylinder or turbo 4 in a Camaro, as long as it is appropriate for the total package. It may even open up a whole new segment for Camaro and aid in it's future survival.

Z28Wilson

They'll probably be quite similar -- at least until Ford unveils the new, smaller Mustang just a year after Camaro hits the streets.

I don't think anyone is thinking that anymore. Look at the direction the Gen IV V8 is going. LS7 will be phased out soon. The new CTS-V is supercharged, ZR1 is supercharged, and so on. We already know the LS8 and LSA are supercharged engines. The top Camaro (if it is to go after the GT500) will be blown, for better or worse.

The thought is that coupes based on 2 ton sedans (Zeta) won't make any sense when CAFE hits full-force. Granted that isn't for quite some time, but GM would be foolish, as you said, to let Zeta Camaro lumber on when its competitors are pushing to get smaller and lighter.

I agree in principle. But, given the choice between making a tiny profit off of one Zeta vehicle and making a much larger profit off of sharing Zeta with many other vehicles, I think you can see what a corporation would rather do. Let's at least recognize that Camaro as the lone Zeta isn't the strongest of business cases.

Remember when it first came out last year that "Zeta was dead" and GM was killing its RWD programs in North America? Camaro and G8 were the only spared vehicles, and that apparently was only because they had already been announced and they were too far along to cancel.

As far as 4-cylinders and their "appropriateness" in a pony car, you have to think back to the root of the pony car formula.....cheap RWD performance for the masses. If, in a new CAFE world, a turbo 4 accomplishes that job, you have to look at it if you want to keep the nameplate living and thriving. Of course I do not advocate anything less than a V8 being the top offering, but I have no objections to a turbo 4 in a smaller package if need be.....

Fenster

I couldn't agree more. I have no issues with a turbo 4 as an option. Personally I think it would be a great addition to the line up. Add a peppy but fuel efficient v6, and a nice v8 and you have a well rounded model to sell to the masses.

skorpion317

Key words right there. I don't see how a 4-cylinder would be appropriate for the Camaro. It would certainly be appropriate for the car slotted underneath the Camaro (Cobalt, or its successor). But for a larger sports coupe? Both GM and Ford tried the 4-cylinder pony car approach back in the '80s. It didn't work out. People buying these kinds of cars aren't purchasing them for fuel economy. They want cars that look sporty and have the performance to back it up. The only reason fuel economy is entering into the equation now is to ensure the Camaro's survival against internal corporate resistance.

An N/A 4-cylinder does not fit in with the Camaro's image in any way, shape, or form. A turbo 4-cylinder is effectively the same as a V6, so it doesn't make much sense to change from the latter to the former.

The thing that should change is the base-model V8. A performance-oriented V6 could take the place of a V8, with better fuel economy. Look at the new CTS's DI 3.6L V6. 304 HP, 273 lb.-ft. of torque, with 18 MPG city and 26 MPG highway, all in a 3900 lb. vehicle. A Mustang GT's 4.6L V8, on the other hand, puts out 300 HP and 320 lb.-ft. of torque. It gets 15 MPG city and 22 MPG highway, in a 3300 lb. vehicle. The CTS is only slightly slower in the 1/4 mile than the Mustang, mainly due to it weighing 600 lbs. more.

A 6th gen Camaro lineup could include a base fuel-efficient V6, a performance direct-injection V6 taking the place of the base-model V8, and a top-dog V8 to satisfy the hardcore power junkies. The Camaro could retain its sporty image AND remain in line with CAFE regulations, all without using a 4-cylinder engine.

Z284ever

Ah. Right there we've got a problem. Figure every car will start getting one size smaller.

Camaro + next decade + "larger sports coupe" = fail.

jg95z28

I don't see V8s ever leaving the Camaro line-up if the car is to continue. Instead of offering a larger V6 (turbo or otherwise) to me the answer is offering a smaller (turbo) V8 with AFM. What if a 4.0L to 4.8L turbo V8 can be used instead of a 6.2L N/A V8? With AFM and flex-fuel capabilities, such an engine would surely get higher mpg, while still providing the performance (hp) needed for the Camaros and Corvettes of the next decade (post CAFE 2010). I don't forsee Camaro ever becoming a featherweight without seriously changing the dynamics (proportions) of the car, making it essentially a RWD Cobalt. A larger turbo V6 to replace a N/A V8 isn't the answer imho. First of all, the engineering behind deactivating half the cylinders on a V8 seem more balanced than trying the same on a V6. Secondly I don't see the turbo V6 making significantly better mpg over a smaller turbo V8. However I do see where a turbo 4 could potentially replace a N/A V6 as the base engine.

Ideally there needs to be a balance between weight reduction and engine displacement, however I don't forsee safety taking a back seat to fuel economy no matter how high the average numbers go for CAFE. Therefore, I don't see Camaro all of a sudden becoming svelt in future generations unless it changes from a ponycar to a RWD subcompact. Personally, I'd rather see Camaro get killed off before that ever happens.

BigDarknFast

100% Agreed.

90rocz

+1 here too...

skorpion317

When I say "larger sports coupe", I say it relative to the compact car slotted below it in the lineup. The Camaro will still be larger than that compact, even if both are one size smaller than they are currently.

The Camaro may not become a featherweight, but it can certainly be smaller that the 5th gen.

Also, I wouldn't put a turbo V6 in the Camaro. An N/A V8 would be a better fit.