Here's a chance for you to make the case for a mid level V8 for the next Camaro. Before we start, let's rule out a few basic assumptions:

1. It won't lead to cheaper insurence. Insurence is based on claims, your driving record, and the area which you live. The painful fact is that the more youth that drive a particular model means more claims because of a lack of experience. Again, it won't lead to cheaper insurence, but likely higher insurence.

2. It won't make the car any cheaper. It costs roughly the same to make a 5.3 V8 and an LS6 V8 engine. The reason 5.3s are offered in trucks is marketing & the fact Trucks sell in enough volume to offset the costs of certification. The SSR's 5.3 is the result of cooling issues, and the upcoming 5.3 FWD mid-lux cars has to do with drivetrain durability.

3. It isn't going to lure anyone because of it's lack of horsepower. Noone bought a Mustang GT because it was less powerful than a Camaro Z28, yet people bought a Camaro Z28 because it was more powerful than a Mustang GT. The fact is that people in this market (small sporty cars) tend to either want the performance the car has to offer, or the "halo" of sportiness the car offers (the cool factor).

Some other things to consider is that in the 1980s, V8s were still something of a rage, and widely acceptible. Today, V8s are either viewed as inefficient dinosaurs or the ultimate in performance. The market that once covered base V8s are now covered by V6s.

And as far as using Mustang as an example, the 4.6 Mustang GT really isn't a mid grade or base V8 engine. The 2004 Crown Victoria makes 224 hp while the GT Mustang is at 260, the most powerful version of that engine. Mustangs other engines are more or less "Special Editions". The Mach 1 has Cobras old DOHC engine which started life as a Lincoln engine, and the Cobra is a supercharged, iron block version of that engine.

A similar situation for Camaro would be the SS having the LS6, the Z28 having a borderline race prepared Cadillac Northstar engine, and an even more exclusive Camaro having the Northstar engine supercharged & intercooled. Of course the base engine would still be the 3800 V6. As you see, no middle V8.

I'm taking the devil's advocate on this. I like the idea of a mid V8 personally, but it's nearly impossible to make a case for it that would convince GM to spring for it. I've put down some of the strong points that always shoots this down.

Now that I've installed some perspective, go ahead & make the case.

BTW: It was mentioned in another thread there will be 2 V8s offered in the next RWD "sports coupe" for reasons other than mentioned. Assuming AWD is going to be an option on this hypothetical chassis, it's safe to say that drivetrain liability issues (AWD grip + aftermarket stickier tires + dragstrip high RPM launches = drivetrain liability headaches) will mean a lighter powered V8 in those models... assuming such a vehicle program exists.

 

personally I think the 285hp 5.3 would be a great intermediate v8. But make it aluminum if it isnt already though.

 

I know you mean lighter as in terms of hp, but if its in terms of weight and hp, the aluminum 5.3 L in the SSR might fit the bill.

Quite frankly, I don't see a need for either an intermediate V8, nor AWD on the 5th gen Camaro.

 

guion,

1) You are in grave error if you believe people did not turn their nose and buy a Mustang GT because LS1s made "too much power." I witnessed these customers with my own 2 eyes. They would come in, drive a Formula, and say "gee, 310hp is nice, but I don't need it. I do want a V8 though." Then they did the math. For $4,000 over a comparably equipped Base Bird, a Formula brought 10mm wider RSAs or GSCs, an LS1, a T56, and firmer springs. Do you believe Eagle GAs, a 3800, a T-45 and softer springs cost $4,000 less? No way! But thats the way GM packaged it. They asked me why it is a base Bird can't have an 8...I had no answer. They then looked at the fact that the Mustang GT gave them the 8, for nearly the same $$ as a V6 Bird, and off they went. If I had had that $1,500 V8 option, I'd have been set. Give the people a nice V8 in a base car, and don't worry about the sticky tires, beefy sway bars and HD T56. Let it burn regular instead of premium. Using your logic, with the 5.3 going into Mid-lux FWD cars, economies of scale mean adding a third engine isn't that expensive at all. Sure, some of the intimidating qualitites of a 4th gen was due to lack of visibility, difficulty getting in and out, and that "too big" feel. But some of it was also the fact people felt like they DIDN'T NEED THAT MUCH POWER. But they wanted the 8...that alone is a case for a mid level model. Unless you have sold cars on a floor, and saw this phenomenon, you probably won't believe me...but hey, I am one of these people myself. Give me the $25k base car with a respectable suspension and "good enough" brakes, and I am happy.

2) Again, the engine may not be cheaper to produce, but you can scale back some of the other go-fast goodies into a base car to keep the price down...

3) Sure V6s are all the rage now...but these are muscle cars. Muscle cars cry for an 8. Not a V6 or a supercharged 6. Leave those for base cars. Why force people like my father and I to a $29k plus car (in 2007 dollars) when all we want is a nice little motor that sounds, feels, and acts like an 8? We don't all need a pavement terror, but want the "real deal." And that means a V8...put a blown 3800 in an RS model, and it WILL NOT HAVE THE APPEAL a small V8 would...and I think we all know that. Even if the 8 made less power than the proposed 6...it ain't the same, damnit!

4) I have been told we will have two engines, and that reason alone is good enough for me!

5) A less expensive (because of CONTENT, not ENGINE COST), V8 car may have a 5.0 LX halo effect over the line. Granted, 5.0 LXs were GTs stripped of certain things, and had the top engine. But, they were cheap, they were V8s, and they were easy to mod. How is that any different than a 5.3 base car? Mods developed for 6.0 Z28s and SSs could be used on these cars, thereby even making mods potentially cheaper for all cars.

So who loses? Why deny the entry level buyer what they want? Isn't cheap V8 performance what a muscle car is all about? Again, I feel it should not cost GM more than a $1,500 MSRP to throw a 5.3 in a base car, so long as the base rear end and tranny can handle it. Borrow the T-45 specs straight from the Mustang GT, and there you have it...a $25k V8 performance car, in 2007 dollars.

 

One last thing...

History, if not learned from, will repeat itself. 39,000 of 70,000 '92 Camaros were 305 RSs. All throughout the third generation, the base V8 was THE engine of choice. Fourth gens never had that...and I firmly believe that is at least one reason for the poor showing.

Lets not repeat that again...

 

Quick question before I get started. Why can't there be a high powered V8 with AWD? After all, isn't there an AWD Monaro in the land down under with an LS1???

On your points:

1) I agree

2) I mostly agree

3) I disagree

Jason E covered #3 for me already.

Fact is, I don't think Camaro will do any better in 2007 than it did in 2002 if GM doesn't specifically target Mustang buyers and/or move Camaro out of the pony car segment.

 

An AWD system for the new platform is under development at Holden, however I'm sure it won't be offered on a Camaro.

I'm of the belief that, essentialy, there is nothing wrong with the Camaro formula. There were a number of problems with how the 4th gen was handled. Not enough styling updates was a bigee along with a number of other things you could probably rattle off.

In addition, an AWD system has certain disadvantages....weight, cost, more power lost in the drivetrain. Mustang itself proves that it is not necessary to be successful in the market.

There was a similar thread last summer....AWD was suggested then along with turbo and supercharged ecotec engines. Wish I could find it now.

 

As much as anything, I believe a case for the mid level V8 is a matter of market positioning as much as anything else. It allows it to match up with the Mustang quite well.

The real question is, is that the only competitor that should help dictate the Camaro lineup or should GM lead this time?

With high powered V6's available, it definately isn't about performance.....and I too wonder if the "sound" of a V8 is enough to justify the additional $$ and insurance costs for enough people...but JasonE makes some very good arguements.

I don't feel that a V8 is a fuel economy issue, except for perceptions.......a 6MN LT1 or LS1 gets better mileage than my wife's SC V6 GTP...or my daughter's 4 cyl. Alero for that matter!

Let's not loose sight of the concept that maybe, just maybe the third engine, 2nd V8 option just might be a high output, special edition model (of course this means I'm still fighting for the return of a real Z/28)....a feller can dream can't he?

 

I see no need for a mid-level V8 whatsoever. I'd much rather see some stop-gap measure stuck in there, like a supercharged V6. Otherwise, you get the same problem you've got with the trucks right now, which is to say that there's one too many V8s in the lineup (IMO, of course).

Sure, if the best we could do was a 140 HP base V6, then I'd fully support a mid-level V8. Given what options GM has with its currently well-fleshed-out V6 lineup, I'm just not seeing the need.

And if someone decides to puss-out and neuter an AWD model because of a crappy reason like drivetrain strength, I will be very disappointed. Support the model with the hardware required to make things happen, or don't bother playing the game at all.

 

Being a proud 17 yo owner of a Z28, I can ASSURE you there is a market for these. You dont understand the ammount of persuasion it took me to get my parents to let me have a 300hp (its not stock) car. I ended up winning the arguement by refusing to spend my hard earned money (very hard earned at a KFC ) on anything other than exactly what I wanted... a Z28 / SS. HOWEVER, if there had been an entry level v8 in the 4th gens, I GUARANTEE you thats what I would be driving right now. I wouldve been willing to compensate with my parents on the issue of horsepower to a degree, however I WOULD NOT drop 2 cyclinders... that completely kills the muscle image the car has.

HISTORY ALONE PROVES THAT A VARIETY OF OPTIONS WORK . . . AN ENTRY LEVEL V8 IS EXACTLY WHAT YOUNG AND BROKE CAR ENTHUSIASTS NEED. I SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE.

edit: oh btw, having driven my dads '02 silverado, I can assure you that the 5.3 would have enough guts to satisfy my need for speed

 

Camaro needs a halo performance model, and staying true to form it needs, at the least, a slightly detuned version of the base Corvette engine, which will put it in the 380+ hp range. Without that option, IMO, don't even bother calling it a Camaro. And charge for it ...to keep it somewhat exclusive.

That established, a bread and butter V8 that runs on regular fuel needs to be available as the volume V8, I'd spec it as 300 HP 5.3 liter.

Throw in a base model V6 with 240 - 260 HP and you have a complete line up.

 

Weight and cost are not really factors. On the Audi the AWD system only adds 150 lbs. We've seen consumer cost is only $1000 to $2000 additional. This is easily made up in the money saved on tire replacement. There is some power lost in an AWD setup, but I can live with it considering the 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times it can provide. Stop light to stop light would be killer with a LSx with 350 HP and AWD.

 

1. hp DOES matter if you're under 25 for liability insurance. In Texas there is a LIST. It's a list of high performance cars that under 25 drivers cannot have without bending over. A 300hp Camaro would probably make the list.

2. It will make the car cheaper, because GM can put a LD 5spd instead of the expensive T-56, 7.5" solid axle rearend, smaller radiator, brakes and suspension. In other words Chevy can simply carry over the entire base V6 drivetrain, brakes and suspension.

3. A 300hp V8 RS will lure a lot of people looking for the best value in the low $20K range. If the RS sells for $22-23K, it can undercut the stang GT. Also there's a whole slew of potential *** sporty car customers(Altima V6, WRX, RSX etc) that would not even consider a V6 Camaro, but they'll come for a V8 at the same price that'll stomp the rice rocket competition.


Finally there's marketing segments. Every industry does it. By intentionally producing low end and middle class variants of a product, they can scale across the price range and earn maximal dollars.

A SC V6 could easily be the mid range Camaro, EXCEPT a SC V6 is considerably more expensive than a superior LSx V8. And costs are going to be the primary driver of pricing of the base V6 and mid-level Camaro.

If Chevy can do a V8 Camaro for $22-23K it'll probably become the volume profit maker in the Camaro lineup.

 

I pretty much agree with most of your post except the above.

Solid rear axles....and Camaro, are history.

 

While we are on the subject.....

Should this mid-level V8 be "wrapped" into some sort of model designation...RS, SS, LT, whatever....or should it be simply an option on the base car?