A Horsepower and Fuel Economy War??? Yes!!!

[SVT666]

GM planning Chevrolet Camaro V6 improvements for 2011?
03/23/2010, 4:19 PM
BY DREW JOHNSON

   
Ford really upped the pony car wars for the 2011 model year ? equipping the Mustang with two new powertrains ? but General Motors could be preparing to return fire. Ford trumped the Camaro with a new 305 horsepower, 31mpg V6 for the 2011 model year, but GM has indicated it might have a trick up its sleeve.

The Camaro V6 impressed when it first launched, offering a then class-leading 304 horsepower and 29mpg. However, Ford has since regrouped, equipping the 2011 Mustang V6 with an even more impressive 305 horsepower and 31mpg.

While the Camaro?s numbers are still nothing to snicker at, GM has no plans to sit idly by and let the Mustang hog all the positive pub. As such, a one-up could be on the way for the Camaro.

When asked if GM was readying an improved version of the Camaro V6 for a market launch in the next few year, Camaro and Corvette marketing boss John Fitzpatrick replied, ?You might see it sooner than that.?

While Fitzpatrick failed to elaborate any more, we have a sneaking suspicion that Chevrolet might be able to find a few more ponies and at least 2 more mpgs for the 2011 Camaro V6.






Report: Ford may increase 6.7-liter Power Stroke numbers to beat GM
03/23/2010, 7:54 PM
BY MARK KLEIS

   
Ford officially revealed the power numbers for its all-new, in-house designed 6.7-liter turbocharged diesel in late February. Ford announced that the new Power Stroke diesel would produce 390 horsepower and 735 lb-ft of torque, which at the time, was best-in-class. Now that GM has announced the numbers for its revised 6.6-liter Duramax ? coming in at 397 horsepower and 765 lb-ft of torque ? Ford may be back to the drawing for a quick fix to regain their number one spot.

For years Ford has prided itself as a leader in the truck segment for America, often carrying the segment leading payload and towing numbers, despite trailing in power figures for most of the last few decades.

According to sources that spoke with PickupTrucks.com, it seems Ford is no longer settling for just best-in-class capability, as it wants to boast the best-in-class power and torque, too. It?s common knowledge that diesel engines often respond well to custom tuning, as well as modifications to intake and exhaust systems for ?cheap? added power. Usually the re-tuning of the engine?s computer is left to aftermarket companies that sell either custom or ?canned? tunes that promise bumps in power and fuel economy, but this time around it might be Ford playing a different tune in an effort to take the top spot for power.

As PickupTrucks.com points out, GM?s diesel offering is based on an aging and potentially limited 6.6-liter Duramax design, compared to Ford?s fresh design with its 2011 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel. Because GM has already managed to wrench out a significant bump in power and torque from its Duramax, Ford may be able to make some minor tweaks that could result in a bump to over 400 horsepower and more than 775 lb-ft of torque without affecting the durability of its new diesel, and without worry that GM will follow suit.

Before Ford cranks up the power on its diesel it must first consider the corresponding changes to emissions and fuel economy for its super Duty trucks. EPA regulations have grown increasingly stringent, leaving very little room for changes that will result in increased emissions. Although Super Duty trucks do not have to report EPA mileage numbers, customers will certainly take note of the real-world fuel economy when reaching for their pocket books. Ford?s previous diesel offering, a 6.4-liter Power Stroke, was known for poor economy compared to the rest of the class.

Should Ford makes power changes, expect them to come in the form of a re-tuned computer which will not require any physical changes to the trucks, allowing the trucks which were already produced to be re-programmed at the dealers to reflect the potential bump in power.







Report: GM developing twin-turbo 3.0L V6 to combat Ford?s EcoBoost
03/23/2010, 9:15 PM
BY MARK KLEIS


According to engineers within General Motors, the automaker is currently far along in developing a new twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 that will help to combat Ford?s EcoBoost offerings which also feature twin-turbochargers. GM has been rumored to have a twin-turbocharged V6 in the works for years, but now it appears they actually may be close to introducing a TT V6 with production intent as this engine has been reportedly assigned a PRO code.

According to a GM Inside News exclusive, several sources within the engineering department at GM confirmed that a twin-turbo V6 is in the latter stages of development.

GMI?s engineering sources have clarified that GM has been developing a 3.0-liter twin-turbo engine, which has even been assigned a PRO code of ?LF3.? The assignment of a PRO code lends credibility to the suggestion that this engine will end up under the hood of future GM products. GM?s naturally aspirated, direct-injected 3.0-liter V6 goes by the PRO code of ?LF1.?

GMI?s sources were unable to provide expected power numbers, but did suggest that they were intending to produce power numbers in the same realm as Ford?s 3.5-liter EcoBoost engine. They also suggested that production could start in late 2011 to early 2012, seeing first duty in the upcoming Cadillac XTS.
Sources also indicated that the TT V6 may end up in the Cadillac ATS and possibly even a future Chevrolet Camaro.

[sportyaccordy]

This is actually pretty exciting....

[Jon?]

Competition is good.

[Nethead]

                                                 ~
OOOOHHHHH!!!!  Another Camaro Manana.  Like the Camaro Z28, the Camaro convertible, the Camaro Track Pack, the Camaro Yada Yada Yada, yada yada yada...

Yet more "Let's see what Ford does and then let's do it, too!!!"  These guys are such LOSERS

Ford has hardware, Chevy has proposals.  To me, there's a difference.  How 'bout you?

[WookieOnRitalin]

My only problem with both companies is that they seem to be missing the boat on snagging the entire diesel car market. There is no reason that they cannot produce Four or Six cylinder diesel engine for mainstream consumption. If they are engineering engines that can achieve those kind of fuel economy numbers for vehicles they produce that way close to a ton, then how would it not be in their interests to SLAM the competition with some class leading Diesels?

Regular: 2.75/gal
Diesel: 2.79/gal

Where are the diesel engines Ford and GM? You could do our country some good by getting us off of our dependency for foreign oil.


On another note. I have always preferred bigger engines. I've only driven sixes and eights. Would I be impressed with a smaller engine? I do not know. They make sixes now with 50% more power and 50% more fuel economy than I am used to. Even they can get even better numbers going forward, then I am pretty sure I will never buy a four cylinder. A six that gets 31 mpg is incredible. In 5 years, they'll likely get 35 mpg. Incredible.

[GoCougs]

My only problem with both companies is that they seem to be missing the boat on snagging the entire diesel car market. There is no reason that they cannot produce Four or Six cylinder diesel engine for mainstream consumption. If they are engineering engines that can achieve those kind of fuel economy numbers for vehicles they produce that way close to a ton, then how would it not be in their interests to SLAM the competition with some class leading Diesels?

Regular: 2.75/gal
Diesel: 2.79/gal

Where are the diesel engines Ford and GM? You could do our country some good by getting us off of our dependency for foreign oil.


On another note. I have always preferred bigger engines. I've only driven sixes and eights. Would I be impressed with a smaller engine? I do not know. They make sixes now with 50% more power and 50% more fuel economy than I am used to. Even they can get even better numbers going forward, then I am pretty sure I will never buy a four cylinder. A six that gets 31 mpg is incredible. In 5 years, they'll likely get 35 mpg. Incredible.

Diesel engines are expensive, noisy, smelly and rough as compared to the average V6. This is why Detroit (or virtually anyone else) doesn't build them for passenger car use in the US - virtually no one would buy them.

Detroit doesn't care (thankfully) about the "dependency" on foreign oil (diesel is still refined from "foreign" oil BTW).

[GoCougs]

As to the OP.

Ford designating the 3.7L V6 in the Mustang as 305 hp was plainly a marketing gimmick. I understand Ford is sensitive to getting owned for so many years when it comes to power train development, but c'mon. I don't believe Chevy is obsessing it at all. Certainly further refinement/replacement of the current 3.6L is underway, but not because of 1 hp.

The chances the new Ford Power Stroke is as durable and as reliable Duramax are very small. But I gon't blame Ford for being sensitive to 7 hp - they've been trailing so long in truck power train numbers I think they thought were all sorts of excited 390 hp would be unbeatable. Well, Chevy surprised them I guess.

I have a hard time believing the development GM's TTV6. Why bother? Ford's Ecoboost V6 is used in such boutique numbers it is irrelevant. GM (and Ford) should instead focus on building an I4 as good as the Japanese.

[Byteme]

Diesel engines are expensive, noisy, smelly and rough as compared to the average V6. This is why Detroit (or virtually anyone else) doesn't build them for passenger car use in the US - virtually no one would buy them.

Detroit doesn't care (thankfully) about the "dependency" on foreign oil (diesel is still refined from "foreign" oil BTW).

Plus the fact that the low sulphur diesel fuel required is more expensive than 87 octane regular and can't currently be produced in quantities sufficient to fuel a diesel fleet. 

So in summary why would I pay a premium for a car that's noisier, usually slower and more expensive to operate.  With the sole benefit being a couple of three MPG and that bebefit wiped out by the higher fuel cost.  No thanks.

[SVT666]

As to the OP.

Ford designating the 3.7L V6 in the Mustang as 305 hp was plainly a marketing gimmick. I understand Ford is sensitive to getting owned for so many years when it comes to power train development, but c'mon. I don't believe Chevy is obsessing it at all. Certainly further refinement/replacement of the current 3.6L is underway, but not because of 1 hp.

The chances the new Ford Power Stroke is as durable and as reliable Duramax are very small. But I gon't blame Ford for being sensitive to 7 hp - they've been trailing so long in truck power train numbers I think they thought were all sorts of excited 390 hp would be unbeatable. Well, Chevy surprised them I guess.

I have a hard time believing the development GM's TTV6. Why bother? Ford's Ecoboost V6 is used in such boutique numbers it is irrelevant. GM (and Ford) should instead focus on building an I4 as good as the Japanese.

[the Teuton]

BTW, the Ecotec 2.4 in the Cobalt is crap. I just thought that needed mentioning.

[Vinsanity]

                                                ~
OOOOHHHHH!!!!  Another Camaro Manana.  Like the Camaro Z28, the Camaro convertible, the Camaro Track Pack, the Camaro Yada Yada Yada, yada yada yada...

Yet more "Let's see what Ford does and then let's do it, too!!!"  These guys are such LOSERS

Ford has hardware, Chevy has proposals.  To me, there's a difference.  How 'bout you?

dude, the Mustang was the one that had to play catch-up to the Camaro's V6 and V8 powertrains. same story throughout the 80's and 90's, I might add.

[Raza]

                                                ~
OOOOHHHHH!!!!  Another Camaro Manana.  Like the Camaro Z28, the Camaro convertible, the Camaro Track Pack, the Camaro Yada Yada Yada, yada yada yada...

Yet more "Let's see what Ford does and then let's do it, too!!!"  These guys are such LOSERS

Ford has hardware, Chevy has proposals.  To me, there's a difference.  How 'bout you?

Come now, let's be fair.  The Mustang guys were saying the same thing all last year.  "Sure, the Camaro's faster now, but next year..."

[Catman]

This is actually pretty exciting....

[giant_mtb]

Plus the fact that the low sulphur diesel fuel required is more expensive than 87 octane regular and can't currently be produced in quantities sufficient to fuel a diesel fleet.  

So in summary why would I pay a premium for a car that's noisier, usually slower and more expensive to operate.  With the sole benefit being a couple of three MPG and that bebefit wiped out by the higher fuel cost.  No thanks.

Only a couple MPG?  Okay.

According to VW's website, a Jetta TDI is rated for 30/42 compared to the gasser at 23/30.  I'd say an advantage of 7 and 12 is nothing to laugh at.

[Nethead]

Come now, let's be fair.  The Mustang guys were saying the same thing all last year.  "Sure, the Camaro's faster now, but next year..."

There are promises, and there is hardware.
 
Hardware > promises.

As Forrest said, "That's all I have to say about that."

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

dude, the Mustang was the one that had to play catch-up to the Camaro's V6 and V8 powertrains. same story throughout the 80's and 90's, I might add.

Come now, let's be fair.  The Mustang guys were saying the same thing all last year.  "Sure, the Camaro's faster now, but next year..."

I was beat to the punch. 

[Nethead]

I was beat to the punch.  

gotta-qik-z28: They're roadtesting production 2011 Mustangs and Mustang GTs (395 RWHP@6600 RPM on chassis dynos) right now, and the order banks for all 2011 Mustangs opened earlier this month--11,000 orders were already taken some weeks ago, doubtless many more by now.  

Have you gotten to test drive a new Camaro convertible?  No you haven't.  

Get smarter and get that C6:  The C6 is hardware, the Camaro convertible is promises.  And the C6 is vastly better hardware anyway.  You know that, I know that.  If and when there ever is a production Camaro convertible, you'll wonder why you ever, ever considered it over the C6 you've been driving in the meantime...

[GoCougs]

The depth and breadth of this Camaro jealousy + Mustang apologism is one for the record books. We all get trolling but this is sociopathy.

[Raza]

There are promises, and there is hardware.
 
Hardware > promises.

As Forrest said, "That's all I have to say about that."

The Coyote was just a promise until very recently.  I don't care much if you prefer the Mustang to the Camaro--I like them both, but I'm not the type to get caught up in something as silly as a make/model rivalry--but preferring one car to another is very different than being dishonest about the situations surrounded them. 

[the Teuton]

So when is a Camaro XFE coming out on 16" rims?

[Nethead]

The Coyote was just a promise until very recently.  I don't care much if you prefer the Mustang to the Camaro--I like them both, but I'm not the type to get caught up in something as silly as a make/model rivalry--but preferring one car to another is very different than being dishonest about the situations surrounded them.  

Raza:  To be dishonest, something has to be untrue.  I've posted nothing untrue--at least knowingly untrue.  I don't need to.  

[Nethead]

So when is a Camaro XFE coming out on 16" rims?

~
Manana, of course...

[Raza]

All cars are not on sale until they go on sale, Nethead.  I don't see your point.

[GoCougs]

All cars are not on sale until they go on sale, Nethead.  I don't see your point.

He's preparing his delicate sensitivities for the ownage the 2011 Camaro Z28 will serve up on the GT500.

[Byteme]

Only a couple MPG?  Okay.

According to VW's website, a Jetta TDI is rated for 30/42 compared to the gasser at 23/30.  I'd say an advantage of 7 and 12 is nothing to laugh at.

I don't think the difference is usually that pronounced.  And besides if I wanted a gas powered automobile It would't be a VW. I was thinking more of would I trade my Mazda 3 (real world MPG of about 29/36) for something like a Jetta TDI.  The answer is no.

[FoMoJo]

The Coyote was just a promise until very recently.  I don't care much if you prefer the Mustang to the Camaro--I like them both, but I'm not the type to get caught up in something as silly as a make/model rivalry--but preferring one car to another is very different than being dishonest about the situations surrounded them. 

Ford vs. Chevy is a time-honoured tradition dating from the mid-fifties when Chevy finally got an engine that could compete in the horsepower game.  Unfortunately for Mopar fans like GoCougs, they always seemed to be on the sidelines and could never really get into the game so they ended up just being Ford haters.  No one really knows why but I expect it's because every time they thought they had the edge, Ford one-upped them; like in NASCAR before it became a spec series. 

Of course Mopar ruled the dragstrip with Keith Black hemis after Ford lost interest in drag racing and went after bigger fish to beat, like Ferrari in the World Sportscar Championship and, of course at Le Mans.  At the same time they were dominating the Indy 500 with a racing version of their Windsor small block, when it was real race, as well as Grand Prix racing with their Cosworth designed DFV.

Perhaps much of this seems irrelevant to the current times but as Mustang and Camaro are just modern iterations of those battle-scarred icons of the goldern era of motorsport where both fought bumper to bumper and wheel to wheel over the course of that most glorious of production car races, the Trans-Am series - aka the pony-car wars - there's a sense of continuation that is passed down over the generations and is virtually encoded into the genome of serious car guys.  Of course, then as now, Mopar is on the sidelines as they never could get their small-block competitive enough to beat even the AMC Javelins after Ford and Chevy abandoned the series due to lack of competition ; but I digress.  Bear in mind that both Ford and Chevy fans realize that competition is good for the brand.  It compells each of them to reach for a higher level of performance, and who would argue with that?

[Submariner]

                                                 ~
OOOOHHHHH!!!!  Another Camaro Manana.  Like the Camaro Z28, the Camaro convertible, the Camaro Track Pack, the Camaro Yada Yada Yada, yada yada yada...

Yet more "Let's see what Ford does and then let's do it, too!!!"  These guys are such LOSERS

Ford has hardware, Chevy has proposals.  To me, there's a difference.  How 'bout you?

"Rar Rar Rar!  Camaros r suxzors!  Mustangs r better than any car at everything! Rar Rar Rar!"

Give it a rest, dude.

[Vinsanity]

No one really knows why but I expect it's because every time they thought they had the edge, Ford one-upped them;

as far as I remember, the Camaro has never been short on hp compared to the Mustang. at least for as long as I've been around.

[GoCougs]

Nah FoMoJo, Mopar fans ain't by default Ford haters; additionally Mopar has always built a better engine than Ford since the dawn of the V8 era beginning in the '50s. The coming debut of this 5.0 V8 is the first time that's ever been a question.

Mopar sat on the sidelines in sales and other factors but not because of engines. Mopar has always owned Ford when it came to putting power to the street; most notably in the '55 - '70 heyday courtesy of the 331-392 Hemi, 340/383/440 Magnum, 340/440 Six Pack, and of course, the 426 Hemi.

[Nethead]

All cars are not on sale until they go on sale, Nethead.  I don't see your point.

Raza:  The point is simple, RazDude:  Hardware > promises.

Hardware is the 2011 Mustang GT, standard with a (apparently underrated) 412 HP 5.0L DOHC TiVCT V8, that you can order at a Ford dealer this afternoon.
Promises is "He's preparing his delicate sensitivities for the ownage the 2011 Camaro Z28 will serve up on the GT500."  Riiiiiiiight! 

Hardware > promises.  In fact, no one at Chevy has even promised a 2011 Camaro Z28 .  There's a mule that's been photographed a time or two, which ain't like they're arriving by the truckloads at Chevy showrooms all across North America later this afternoon, eh?