View Poll Results: Would you buy a 230 horse S/C Ecotec for about $20K?
Yes. It would be cool, cheap and hotroddable.
16
19.75%
No. I don't care how cool, cheap and hotroddable it is...no 4 bangers.
65
80.25%
Voters: 81. You may not vote on this poll
Would you buy a supercharged Ecotec Camaro for $20K?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by Darth Xed
I have a problem with several of your points:
1) Noone is saying every Camaro should be a V8, so don't put it forth like that. What we (or at least I) am saying is that a V6 is more appropriate for this application.
2) I do not believe that the "tuner crowd" are "the ones that buy alot of cars and really help this hobby to keep going" ... They buy mostly USED cars... sure, some buy new, but no where near the majority.
3) You use Mustang as a successful example... well, where is Mustang's 4-banger?!?!?!?
I have a problem with several of your points:
1) Noone is saying every Camaro should be a V8, so don't put it forth like that. What we (or at least I) am saying is that a V6 is more appropriate for this application.
2) I do not believe that the "tuner crowd" are "the ones that buy alot of cars and really help this hobby to keep going" ... They buy mostly USED cars... sure, some buy new, but no where near the majority.
3) You use Mustang as a successful example... well, where is Mustang's 4-banger?!?!?!?
1) I am not saying the Camaro should have a 4-cyl as a base motor either. GM is really pushing the eco-tec and if it does end up in the Camaro it's not a bad thing. The eco-tec can be tuned to perform like any V8, and I think that scares everyone.
2)Where I live most of the kids I see have new Civics. They are cheap you can pick one up for $12k, and if they buy used they have RX-7's, 300ZX's, ect. But usually when I see a "tuned" car it is a "ricer". I don't see as many F-bodies moded or Mustang's for that matter. That's why I said that.
3) The Mustang is successful because it has a model that caters to everyone's needs. I am sure if Ford had a 4-banger that could make over 200hp it would be in the mustang. Remember the 79-93 Mustang with the 2.3. I am sure they sold more 4-cyl's than V8/V6 combined.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by ProudPony
Remember, I'm not saying the turbo4 should REPLACE the V6 - I think that would be all wrong too. I have said many times that I am for the V6 as the STANDARD for the base unit.
My position - in this thread anyways - is to endorse Charlie's idea about OFFERING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The turbo4 could be marketed in the Camaro lineup just as the SVO or turbo GTs were in the Fox lineup, right with the big V8s and the other base units. It could bring additional - and sorely needed - attention to the cars from folks who would otherwise pass it up. It is up to GM to decide if it is cost-effective and capable of being done though, not us.
FWIW, given the attention and money that tuners are putting into 4-bangers these days, I'd kinda like to see Ford put out another "SVO" or turbo GT - I think they'd sell like $.25-hotdogs. They are doing it with the Focus, but I'd like to see them offer something to the "rice" crowd in a Mustang too - heck they are ricing them anyways, why not cater to them? Anybody notice the Mustang that got squished in 2F2F? He!!, I was just happy to see a Mustang get screentime in that flick (regardless of how bad it looked.
). THAT alone will sell some Mustangs, I feel sure, and the more they sell the better IMO.
Remember, I'm not saying the turbo4 should REPLACE the V6 - I think that would be all wrong too. I have said many times that I am for the V6 as the STANDARD for the base unit.
My position - in this thread anyways - is to endorse Charlie's idea about OFFERING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The turbo4 could be marketed in the Camaro lineup just as the SVO or turbo GTs were in the Fox lineup, right with the big V8s and the other base units. It could bring additional - and sorely needed - attention to the cars from folks who would otherwise pass it up. It is up to GM to decide if it is cost-effective and capable of being done though, not us.
FWIW, given the attention and money that tuners are putting into 4-bangers these days, I'd kinda like to see Ford put out another "SVO" or turbo GT - I think they'd sell like $.25-hotdogs. They are doing it with the Focus, but I'd like to see them offer something to the "rice" crowd in a Mustang too - heck they are ricing them anyways, why not cater to them? Anybody notice the Mustang that got squished in 2F2F? He!!, I was just happy to see a Mustang get screentime in that flick (regardless of how bad it looked.
). THAT alone will sell some Mustangs, I feel sure, and the more they sell the better IMO.
Thank you.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Originally posted by steves
1) I am not saying the Camaro should have a 4-cyl as a base motor either. GM is really pushing the eco-tec and if it does end up in the Camaro it's not a bad thing. The eco-tec can be tuned to perform like any V8, and I think that scares everyone.
1) I am not saying the Camaro should have a 4-cyl as a base motor either. GM is really pushing the eco-tec and if it does end up in the Camaro it's not a bad thing. The eco-tec can be tuned to perform like any V8, and I think that scares everyone.
Is a 230 hp S/C'd 4-banger even going ot be exciting to many people anyway? I mean, family cars are putting out this much hp right now.
And what if the tuner-crowd rejects this whole thing because they don't like the "Camaro-image" (The reverse angle of all this)? Then this is all money down the drain.
2)Where I live most of the kids I see have new Civics. They are cheap you can pick one up for $12k, and if they buy used they have RX-7's, 300ZX's, ect. But usually when I see a "tuned" car it is a "ricer". I don't see as many F-bodies moded or Mustang's for that matter. That's why I said that.
3) The Mustang is successful because it has a model that caters to everyone's needs. I am sure if Ford had a 4-banger that could make over 200hp it would be in the mustang. Remember the 79-93 Mustang with the 2.3. I am sure they sold more 4-cyl's than V8/V6 combined.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,368
From: OR
Well, I don't want the Camaro/Firebirds to become the "Jack of all trades/master of none" The next F5 should be designed to be a sleek 2+2 sport coupe/convert with a V8 in priority..
I don't want any stubby sport compact influence.... I can't even imagine how you can combine the two together...
They should attract people by being a sleek RWD 2+2 sports coupe/convert with relatively big smooth powerful engines..
Something different? How about the options to get: displacement on demand, active suspension, a real hi perf paddle shift trans..
Let another car thats better suited carry the I4 forced induction route.
I don't want any stubby sport compact influence.... I can't even imagine how you can combine the two together...
They should attract people by being a sleek RWD 2+2 sports coupe/convert with relatively big smooth powerful engines..
Something different? How about the options to get: displacement on demand, active suspension, a real hi perf paddle shift trans..
Let another car thats better suited carry the I4 forced induction route.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by Darth Xed
I am not against a mid-level motor, but if you have a Base V6, then an intermediate S/C'd I4, then a top of the line V8, well, that really adds to the confusion, IMO. Plus, I doubt we are going to actually see an I4, a V6 AND a V8 all in any Gen 5 Camaro...
Is a 230 hp S/C'd 4-banger even going ot be exciting to many people anyway? I mean, family cars are putting out this much hp right now.
And what if the tuner-crowd rejects this whole thing because they don't like the "Camaro-image" (The reverse angle of all this)? Then this is all money down the drain.
I doubt any new base Camaro is going to come in at $12k... so we are going to offer something here that would already be priced out of it's market? Heck, I think a $16k base Camaro would be a great starting point... and I doubt even that can happen!
But.... they are doing it without the I4 right now .
I am not against a mid-level motor, but if you have a Base V6, then an intermediate S/C'd I4, then a top of the line V8, well, that really adds to the confusion, IMO. Plus, I doubt we are going to actually see an I4, a V6 AND a V8 all in any Gen 5 Camaro...
Is a 230 hp S/C'd 4-banger even going ot be exciting to many people anyway? I mean, family cars are putting out this much hp right now.
And what if the tuner-crowd rejects this whole thing because they don't like the "Camaro-image" (The reverse angle of all this)? Then this is all money down the drain.
I doubt any new base Camaro is going to come in at $12k... so we are going to offer something here that would already be priced out of it's market? Heck, I think a $16k base Camaro would be a great starting point... and I doubt even that can happen!
But.... they are doing it without the I4 right now .
I agree with you. But the whole idea is to try and get different people to look at Camaro. If more are sold GM will spend money to advertise, ect. If a model is not selling or reaching it's sales goal GM will get rid of it. If a 4cyl will appeal more to different costumers then they should do it, only if they can get it right.
When I say that I mean: cheap, look good (this is very important), and good quality. If GM does that I think they will sell like hotcakes.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,368
From: OR
Originally posted by steves
I agree with you. But the whole idea is to try and get different people to look at Camaro. If more are sold GM will spend money to advertise, ect. If a model is not selling or reaching it's sales goal GM will get rid of it. If a 4cyl will appeal more to different costumers then they should do it, only if they can get it right.
When I say that I mean: cheap, look good (this is very important), and good quality. If GM does that I think they will sell like hotcakes.
I agree with you. But the whole idea is to try and get different people to look at Camaro. If more are sold GM will spend money to advertise, ect. If a model is not selling or reaching it's sales goal GM will get rid of it. If a 4cyl will appeal more to different costumers then they should do it, only if they can get it right.
When I say that I mean: cheap, look good (this is very important), and good quality. If GM does that I think they will sell like hotcakes.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Originally posted by steves
When I say that I mean: cheap, look good (this is very important), and good quality. If GM does that I think they will sell like hotcakes.
When I say that I mean: cheap, look good (this is very important), and good quality. If GM does that I think they will sell like hotcakes.
) I am a firm believer that the "Camaro formula" is still very valid and can be successful...
If you look at the F4, it had:
1) Very limited marketing after it's initial launch.
2) Very little money put in it for updates. A car like this needs to have small changes more often. After all, this is an enthusiasts car.
3) The F-platform was ancient and outdated compared to even economy car offerings from other manufacturers...
4) Quality, while better than the past, just wasn't on par with everything else out there.
5) Dealer support was dismal. The barely stocked any F-cars, and when they did they were all very similar.
A good looking, modern, quality built Camaro would be very successful, IMO using the traditional Camaro formula.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by Ken S
To do it right, wouldn't you want ot he I4 to be in a smaller car that doesn't need the extra room to accomidate the V8? It just sounds like putting an I4 in would be a kludge comprimise.. Rath have the money spent to concentrate on making inexpensive, looks, and quality..
To do it right, wouldn't you want ot he I4 to be in a smaller car that doesn't need the extra room to accomidate the V8? It just sounds like putting an I4 in would be a kludge comprimise.. Rath have the money spent to concentrate on making inexpensive, looks, and quality..
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by Darth Xed
This is a winning statement! (Though I'd replace "cheap" with "reasonably priced" )
I am a firm believer that the "Camaro formula" is still very valid and can be successful...
If you look at the F4, it had:
1) Very limited marketing after it's initial launch.
2) Very little money put in it for updates. A car like this needs to have small changes more often. After all, this is an enthusiasts car.
3) The F-platform was ancient and outdated compared to even economy car offerings from other manufacturers...
4) Quality, while better than the past, just wasn't on par with everything else out there.
5) Dealer support was dismal. The barely stocked any F-cars, and when they did they were all very similar.
A good looking, modern, quality built Camaro would be very successful, IMO using the traditional Camaro formula.
This is a winning statement! (Though I'd replace "cheap" with "reasonably priced"
) I am a firm believer that the "Camaro formula" is still very valid and can be successful...
If you look at the F4, it had:
1) Very limited marketing after it's initial launch.
2) Very little money put in it for updates. A car like this needs to have small changes more often. After all, this is an enthusiasts car.
3) The F-platform was ancient and outdated compared to even economy car offerings from other manufacturers...
4) Quality, while better than the past, just wasn't on par with everything else out there.
5) Dealer support was dismal. The barely stocked any F-cars, and when they did they were all very similar.
A good looking, modern, quality built Camaro would be very successful, IMO using the traditional Camaro formula.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,072
From: Lilburn, GA, USA
I don't know about you guys, but i still like the Turbo I-5 motor idea in a totally new model (a name not from the past). It's forced induction, which is always cool. It is an inline motor, overhead cams, and it is a five cylinder so it is something new and fresh to a Camaro(not counting the old strait 6). I bet it could be modded easily too. The only problem is, I don't know how much this would cost or if it would overlap a smaller V8 model in horsepower and price.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 452
From: chicagoland area
Originally posted by SNEAKY NEIL
I don't know about you guys, but i still like the Turbo I-5 motor idea in a totally new model (a name not from the past). It's forced induction, which is always cool. It is an inline motor, overhead cams, and it is a five cylinder so it is something new and fresh to a Camaro(not counting the old strait 6). I bet it could be modded easily too. The only problem is, I don't know how much this would cost or if it would overlap a smaller V8 model in horsepower and price.
I don't know about you guys, but i still like the Turbo I-5 motor idea in a totally new model (a name not from the past). It's forced induction, which is always cool. It is an inline motor, overhead cams, and it is a five cylinder so it is something new and fresh to a Camaro(not counting the old strait 6). I bet it could be modded easily too. The only problem is, I don't know how much this would cost or if it would overlap a smaller V8 model in horsepower and price.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,313
A few questions regarding this S/c'ed ecotec....
1) Isnt it a transversely mounted engine/tranny combo suited for FWD platforms? Would getting it into a RWD platform (Camaro) be cheap or worth the effort when 6's are readily available? I know the 3.8 was available for FWD and RWD platforms, but is it the same case with the ecotec since i've only seen them in FWD applications. EDIT: The Solistic (sp?) is RWD right and will be powered by an ecotec?
2) Weight and size issue of the car (this case camaro). The camaro is no compact, and the 4th gen was a fairly large/heavy car. Even the base model weighed more than a A4 Mustang GT coupe. Assuming the dimension and weight don't change much, would a 4 banger be better suited than a v6 for such car? The SVO mustang was a small light car (2800-2900lbs).
3) Would this Sohc/Dohc Supercharged I4 be necessarily any more fuel efficient or lighter than an all-aluminum N/A pushrod v6 or even a Sohc v6? Would it be cheaper?
1) Isnt it a transversely mounted engine/tranny combo suited for FWD platforms? Would getting it into a RWD platform (Camaro) be cheap or worth the effort when 6's are readily available? I know the 3.8 was available for FWD and RWD platforms, but is it the same case with the ecotec since i've only seen them in FWD applications. EDIT: The Solistic (sp?) is RWD right and will be powered by an ecotec?
2) Weight and size issue of the car (this case camaro). The camaro is no compact, and the 4th gen was a fairly large/heavy car. Even the base model weighed more than a A4 Mustang GT coupe. Assuming the dimension and weight don't change much, would a 4 banger be better suited than a v6 for such car? The SVO mustang was a small light car (2800-2900lbs).
3) Would this Sohc/Dohc Supercharged I4 be necessarily any more fuel efficient or lighter than an all-aluminum N/A pushrod v6 or even a Sohc v6? Would it be cheaper?
Last edited by RiceEating5.0; Jul 25, 2003 at 03:24 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,769
From: cinci
id say go with displacement on demand...if you want something "fresh" in the camaro
make it like a 4-6 type deal, im sure people wouldnt mind that
or you could even do 4-8
i havent seen the lineup of engines for gm in a while so im not sure which ones they offer
make it like a 4-6 type deal, im sure people wouldnt mind that
or you could even do 4-8
i havent seen the lineup of engines for gm in a while so im not sure which ones they offer
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Originally posted by RiceEating5.0
A few questions regarding this S/c'ed ecotec....
1) EDIT: The Solistic (sp?) is RWD right and will be powered by an ecotec?
A few questions regarding this S/c'ed ecotec....
1) EDIT: The Solistic (sp?) is RWD right and will be powered by an ecotec?
2) Weight and size issue of the car (this case camaro). The camaro is no compact, and the 4th gen was a fairly large/heavy car. Even the base model weighed more than a A4 Mustang GT coupe. Assuming the dimension and weight don't change much, would a 4 banger be better suited than a v6 for such car? The SVO mustang was a small light car (2800-2900lbs).
3) Would this Sohc/Dohc Supercharged I4 be necessarily any more fuel efficient or lighter than an all-aluminum N/A pushrod v6 or even a Sohc v6? Would it be cheaper?
Last edited by Z284ever; Jul 25, 2003 at 11:41 PM.