Introducing, your 6th gen Camaro lineup*
#1
Introducing, your 6th gen Camaro lineup*
1) The Budget GT
Camaro Sport Coupe:
-Standard engine: normally aspirated 2.4L Ecotec. 210 hp.
-Optional engine: turbo 2.0L Ecotec. 285 hp.
-F41 performance package available.
Weight: 3350 -3400 pounds (coupe)
2) The Luxury GT
Camaro SS:
-Standard engine: turbo 2.0L Ecotec. 315 hp.
-Optional engine: Gen V 6.2L V8. 415 hp.
-Various high content options available.
Weight: 3450-3575 pounds. (coupe)
3) The Performance GT
Camaro Z/28
-Specific engine: Gen V 6.2L V8. 465 hp.
-Optional engine: None.
-Specific "Special Performance Package"
-Content and options limited.
Weight: 3395 pounds. (coupe only)
* Long way from any final specs or weights, but I'd call these possible - plus it's fun.
Discuss!
Camaro Sport Coupe:
-Standard engine: normally aspirated 2.4L Ecotec. 210 hp.
-Optional engine: turbo 2.0L Ecotec. 285 hp.
-F41 performance package available.
Weight: 3350 -3400 pounds (coupe)
2) The Luxury GT
Camaro SS:
-Standard engine: turbo 2.0L Ecotec. 315 hp.
-Optional engine: Gen V 6.2L V8. 415 hp.
-Various high content options available.
Weight: 3450-3575 pounds. (coupe)
3) The Performance GT
Camaro Z/28
-Specific engine: Gen V 6.2L V8. 465 hp.
-Optional engine: None.
-Specific "Special Performance Package"
-Content and options limited.
Weight: 3395 pounds. (coupe only)
* Long way from any final specs or weights, but I'd call these possible - plus it's fun.
Discuss!
Last edited by Z284ever; 05-19-2010 at 04:10 PM.
#5
Yup, the Z/28's theoretical 3395 pounds will take some 'sweating the details'.
#7
#9
Didn't I make a comment about a Camaro that jumped from turbo4 to v8?
To me, I cannot see the Turbo 4 replacing a N/A V6. The engine simply costs more to build and maintain while coming with a negative stigma to many consumers (and it would sound like a 4 banger as well). I see the merits of replacing a V6 with a turbo I4 - but not for Camaro.
It makes sense for the new Sonata or the Regal or even Malibu - when you engineer a V6 out of the picture so you only ever have a 4 cylinder lineup with motor mounts and transmissions in the same locations. Then you could hopefully offset the increased engine cost with reducing the overall platform costs and reduce variations along the way.
Now, to the realism of those numbers, the Genesis 2.0T 3294 / 3362 (MT/AT) and the 3.8L is 3389 / 3397 (MT/AT). Possible? Sure. I tend to think though Camaro's worst enemy is the styling department - they need to make the vehicle smaller on the outside and bigger on the inside - which means the long-hood-wide-body styling has to go.
To me, I cannot see the Turbo 4 replacing a N/A V6. The engine simply costs more to build and maintain while coming with a negative stigma to many consumers (and it would sound like a 4 banger as well). I see the merits of replacing a V6 with a turbo I4 - but not for Camaro.
It makes sense for the new Sonata or the Regal or even Malibu - when you engineer a V6 out of the picture so you only ever have a 4 cylinder lineup with motor mounts and transmissions in the same locations. Then you could hopefully offset the increased engine cost with reducing the overall platform costs and reduce variations along the way.
Now, to the realism of those numbers, the Genesis 2.0T 3294 / 3362 (MT/AT) and the 3.8L is 3389 / 3397 (MT/AT). Possible? Sure. I tend to think though Camaro's worst enemy is the styling department - they need to make the vehicle smaller on the outside and bigger on the inside - which means the long-hood-wide-body styling has to go.
#10
No 330HP V6?
415HP isn't much for a 6.2L V8 considering a 5.7L non DI was putting out 405HP in 2002 and a 5.0L Mustang V8 is 411HP in 2011. I could see getting that number out of a 5.3 or 5.5L though.
415HP isn't much for a 6.2L V8 considering a 5.7L non DI was putting out 405HP in 2002 and a 5.0L Mustang V8 is 411HP in 2011. I could see getting that number out of a 5.3 or 5.5L though.
#11
4 engine options? Too complicated. Just give 2. Whatever has a good balance of power, fuel economy, and cost on the low end, and the 5.5L V8 on the high.
GM should seriously enter the Camaro in Grand Am GT racing, (or an equivalent series) with a factory backed team. Then offer the suspension equipment as GM Performance aftermarket.
GM can still go ahead and build the car, but don't bother calling it a Camaro then.
GM should seriously enter the Camaro in Grand Am GT racing, (or an equivalent series) with a factory backed team. Then offer the suspension equipment as GM Performance aftermarket.
GM can still go ahead and build the car, but don't bother calling it a Camaro then.
#12
Didn't I make a comment about a Camaro that jumped from turbo4 to v8?
To me, I cannot see the Turbo 4 replacing a N/A V6. The engine simply costs more to build and maintain while coming with a negative stigma to many consumers (and it would sound like a 4 banger as well). I see the merits of replacing a V6 with a turbo I4 - but not for Camaro.
To me, I cannot see the Turbo 4 replacing a N/A V6. The engine simply costs more to build and maintain while coming with a negative stigma to many consumers (and it would sound like a 4 banger as well). I see the merits of replacing a V6 with a turbo I4 - but not for Camaro.
If it gets a V6 it'll probably be a 3.6. I've heard the 3.0 will be leaving the US market since it's theoretical mpg advantage never materialized. It'll go to other markets where displacement limits are an issue. Too bad, since it's a smoother, freer revving motor than the 3.6 - it would have made for a fun engine in a lighter Camaro.
#13
I think the hp wars are winding down. 415 hp is plenty for a base 6.2L V8 when you consider the the fuel economy and emissions targets it'll have to hit.
#15