A 4.8 or 5.3 V8 would cost just as much to build as a 6.0 V8. The only difference in cost you'd see would be if the bigger one had DOD or VVT where the smaller one didn't. Likewise, the mileage difference would be minimal (one mpg at most).

For all the traditional V8 people in here who want a slow V8, there are probably more folks out there who'd rather have a V6 with equivalent power and better gas mileage.

So how many people would buy a 300hp 5.3 when they could get a 400hp 6.0 for the same price? Maybe GM could price the 6.0 with a $4000 add-on for additional profit like BMW does with the 325i/330i. That assumes the market would bear that.

 

He has said this himself? I don't recall this, but then again, I honestly don't remember. Besides, more to the point, most women I have talked to don't even know what horsepower is, so it doesn't matter what the engine is rated. With the typical woman, v8=fast, so I don't really buy this arguement at all.


Possibly, and not everyone in here wants some wussy low level v8 in the lineup anyway. With GM being having been behind most of their competitor's v6s in power levels for quite some time now, what better way to showcase a competitive high power v6 than as a low cost option in a Camaro?

 

I dont think anyone would. My fear though, is that the cost of going from the base price of the car, to a car with a V8 will be significantly more than the cost of doing it in a Mustang. I believe that is what some people on here fear. Not that anyone specifically wants a 300hp V8, just that they dont want to have to pay way more to jump to a V8 in a Camaro compared to a Mustang, whatever the HP levels.

 

About this torque thing and the 3.6. The 3.6 with it's VVT does a pretty damn good job of impersonating a V8's torque curve. It reaches it's torque peak at a very low 3,100 RPM. In comparison, the G35's VQ V6 reaches it's torque peak at a lofty 4,800 rpm. Both reach their power peaks at 6,200 RPM. Read those peak RPM's again.

I'd bet 99% of you have never driven a HF V6. This sucker is a real motor....not just some throw away, base car, prime mover.

BTW, let's say I'm in 6th gear, going 60 mph, and I want to speed up to get around some traffic. You know what I need to do? Just give it more gas and go.

Like I said in an earlier post, this motor - with even more power and more torque than the current one - in a Camaro, will attract buyers.

 

you know what, i'd be OK with mid level car haveing a 300+hp v6.. AS LONG AS, it's cheaper than a Mustang GT..

base V6 matches mustang V6.. 20,000...
mid range V6 a bit less than Mustang GT.. 24,000 ..
base V8, a bit more than Mustang GT 27,000
uber V8, matched to a Shelby GT500

 

Thats the goal...

 

oh, and those who say why would anyone spend 27,000 on a V8 Camaro when they can get a V8 Mustang for 25,000?

well for one, i doubt you can get a new Mustang GT for 25,000.. after all the options are piled on, you are probably around 27,000 or more.. second of all, you'll probably have about 100hp more than the GT, in the base V8.. third of all, you'll have IRS, and who knows, maybe even better standard options..

 

You cant get a GT for 25k right now....the base GT starts at $25,900, add any one single option and your over 26k. So in a few more year I don’t expect it to be under 26k base....look around, most V8 Stangs go for close or over 30k...

Chevy is banking that the customer with spend $500 to $1000 more on a Camaro from the performance and refinement it offers over the Mustang.

 

If you just consider the manufacturing cost, there is very little difference between a 300hp and a 400hp V8, given GM's current LS-engine designs. If anything, the LS4 in the Impala is a little more costly than the LS2 in the GTO, due to DOD (unless I'm missing something). Maybe a 4L65E costs a bit more than a 4L60E (which the GTO could use with the LS4) . . . .

 

It seems you are taking 2 different sides here. On one, you advocate a mid-level V8 without the performance suspension, etc. Essentially meaning a V8 in a base V6 car.

But on the other hand, you slam the base Camaro Z28 (which had the entire hgandling & performance package & cost a few grand over base) because it looks like the base car.


Because they want the Camaro?

Because they prefer the Camaro's looks?

Because the Camaro offers more features?

Because the Camaro offers more horsepower?

I can go on and on, but I think you get the idea.



Just to answer those who reach back to the 1980s to support the notion that a mid level Camaro MUST be a V8, I hope you guys realize you are reaching back 20 years! That's like using cars of the late 40s to justify marketing ideas in the late 60s. Sounds pretty silly doesn't it?

People today buy V8s in cars because of performance. Thinking that you can sell a low powered V8 in today's market when a affordable high powered one is avalible is unrealistic. Also, since the 1980s, V6 engines have been the standard bearer, and in most instances the top engine.

Mustang had the Mach 1 and Cobra engines over the regular GT, and Chrysler has SRT versions of their LX cars, but these are limited edition cars.

 

i'm sorry, i wasnt clear enough in my post.. that line shouldve read:

 

Im sure there is very little, if no difference in cost to produce either engine. But obviously they arent going to price a V8 car the same as a V6 car, its going to be more expensive, which then means that there is more of a price jump than if you dont have that hi-po V6 in there in the first place.

 

Wow, this has certainly been entertaining!

From the way I read it, I think the 2 V6 and 2 V8 option is the way to go. The big price point where the war will be heavily fought is the Mustang GT's price level it seems. But if we get a kickass V6 priced just below the Mustang GT and kickass V8 priced just above the Mustang GT, wheres the problem?

A low powered V8 priced under the Mustang GT in 2009 could be suicide. I can see the reviews now: "GM's Camaro lineup is fantastic but why they even bothered with a low 300hp V8 in the age of normal 400hp V8's is beyond us....."

Fact is, if you can get a V8 Camaro that will absolutely walk all over the Mustang GT in more than just power for just a few grand more, then there isnt a need for a V8 under the GT in my opinion.

 

People are getting it

 

I've been reading as this thread grows, and I'd have to say this is one of those instances in which the insular, performance oriented nature of the forum takes things to a place it absolutely doesn't need to be.

Sure, you could have a mid-level 300hp V6, but why. We'd be talking about throwing in an engine that could cost more than a V8. Chevy did the trims fine last time. Base V6, mid-level V8, and "top" V8 (wasn't even really the case). This is a ton cheaper, and will pay off more with the customer and with the press. As GM and Chrysler are finding out, the V8 is still a selling point to the American customer. And in a comparo, the mags are going to look at the V6, say it's a nice effort, but note that Ford offers a V8 for basically the same price that gets the same fuel economy numbers.

When I was speaking of a nice V6, I was talking more in terms of making it a nice car. Remember who buys most Camaros? Woman. Give the V6 style, luxury, and refinement. Those are all the things the last V6 Camaro lacked, and the main reason the car died. No one ever said that the 3800 wasn't powerful enough. That car is still more powerful than the V6 the Mustang offers four years later. The only difference is that Ford understands that a lot of people want the look of a Mustang and the feel of a Mustang without the price or insurance of a Mustang. There are many people in the market who would rather have leather seats, a nice stereo and bigger rims than a V8. Give them a healthy, smooth V6 with a long option list. If you want the performance, get the V8.