Camaro - fuel economy

[veeman]

I don't understand the point of the turbo 4 motor.  The whole point should be about gas mileage for CAFE etc but according to fueleconomy.gov the V6 actually saves you money because the turbo 4 requires premium gas whereas the V6 does not.  You get a few extra miles per gallon with the turbo 4 but you actually lose money with current U.S. gas prices.

I believe to "upgrade" from the turbo 4 which is their base model to the V6 costs about $1500 more.  My assumption is the turbo 4 is more costly to maintain over the long haul because of the turbo.  So other than the initial $1500 cost benefit, why should anyone in the U.S. choose the turbo 4?  Why even offer it here other than tit for tat with the Mustang?

[MrH]

Well, the huge gap between premium and regular, combined with cheap gas prices, is what makes this a no brainer.  If gas was $4/gallon, and premium was $.10-$.20 more per gallon, it might make sense.  I'd still get the V6, but oil economics moves a whole lot faster than GM's product planning.

Besides, what are you doing looking at these wimpy engines?  V8 or bust

[BimmerM3]

I don't understand the point of the turbo 4 motor.  The whole point should be about gas mileage for CAFE etc but according to fueleconomy.gov the V6 actually saves you money because the turbo 4 requires premium gas whereas the V6 does not.  You get a few extra miles per gallon with the turbo 4 but you actually lose money with current U.S. gas prices.

I believe to "upgrade" from the turbo 4 which is their base model to the V6 costs about $1500 more.  My assumption is the turbo 4 is more costly to maintain over the long haul because of the turbo.  So other than the initial $1500 cost benefit, why should anyone in the U.S. choose the turbo 4?  Why even offer it here other than tit for tat with the Mustang?

I think you're greatly overestimating the amount of research the average car buyer puts into their purchase, particularly the kind of buyer that would get a 4 cylinder Camaro.

[MX793]

Mustang's in the same boat, except Ford charges more for the turbo.  To make the advertised power, which is only 10 more than the V6, you have to run premium while the V6 makes its rated power on regular.  The fuel economy difference isn't enough to offset the added cost of premium.  The turbo Mustang will run on regular, which bring total fuel cost slightly below the V6, but the engine cuts power down to about 280, which is 20 less than the V6.

[veeman]

 Rental car fleets, especially base model sporty coupes, would never see premium gas.  And someone who buys a turbo 4 to save money would never put in premium gas.  So the Camaro turbo 4 is pure stupidity in the U.S.?

[Byteme]

I don't understand the point of the turbo 4 motor.  The whole point should be about gas mileage for CAFE etc but according to fueleconomy.gov the V6 actually saves you money because the turbo 4 requires premium gas whereas the V6 does not.  You get a few extra miles per gallon with the turbo 4 but you actually lose money with current U.S. gas prices.

The CAFE standards don't really care about the cost of the fuel, they worry about how far that fuel will carry you.  That leads to engines calibrated to maximize mileage and maintain HP while burning the more expensive premium gasoline. 

I've got one car that requires premium, the 2003 CLK 320.  I'd willing give up 20 or so HP in exchange for the ability to use regular.     

[MX793]

The turbo Mustang has proven popular with the import tuner crowd.  It's possible to get quite a bit more power out of it for not a lot of money.  The turbo Camaro may have similar appeal.  An ECU flash and a couple of relatively inexpensive bolt on may get it up over the V6 for about the same money.

[veeman]

Well, the huge gap between premium and regular, combined with cheap gas prices, is what makes this a no brainer.  If gas was $4/gallon, and premium was $.10-$.20 more per gallon, it might make sense.  I'd still get the V6, but oil economics moves a whole lot faster than GM's product planning.

Besides, what are you doing looking at these wimpy engines?  V8 or bust

Maybe the V8 is overkill for someone who never tracks their car?  The V8 costs about $9,000 more upfront.  Factor in about $500 to $1000 more a year on gas (V8 requires premium and a few less miles/gallon) plus probably higher insurance cost, plus quicker tire replacement due to inadvertent "burn outs", it's basically a different price bracket.  I don't know?

[veeman]

The turbo Mustang has proven popular with the import tuner crowd.  It's possible to get quite a bit more power out of it for not a lot of money.  The turbo Camaro may have similar appeal.  An ECU flash and a couple of relatively inexpensive bolt on may get it up over the V6 for about the same money.

Would that void the warranty?  Wouldn't the turbo for sure fail prematurely doing that?

[veeman]

When I get to eventually have VW buy back my TDI beetle, I'm thinking V6 manual Camaro.  Just thinking about it.  The gunslit sight lines don't bother me.  I was initially thinking turbo 4 because I really like my current TDI great fuel economy and the cheaper price, but it don't make no sense.  At all.

[MX793]

Would that void the warranty?  Wouldn't the turbo for sure fail prematurely doing that?

Yes, it voids the warranty.  Most don't care.  They understand that is the price of their hobby.  I expect it shortens the life of the engine before failure as well.  Tuners don't generally care.  I suspect that most move on to a different car before it becomes a problem.

[12,000 RPM]

#ucanchipitbro #backwardscap

Ford has its fingers on the pulse of its market.

[AutobahnSHO]

Would that void the warranty?  Wouldn't the turbo for sure fail prematurely doing that?

They probably try to reflash/restore to stock to limp it back to the dealer and say "I don't know what happened, I was just on the interstate and... "

[AutobahnSHO]

And aren't the fuel economy rules about mpg not at all about regular vs. premium????

It's a game=  EPA playing field, OEMs vs. each other and the Fed

[2o6]

The Character of the turbo 4 is different, and it may edge out in the real world over the V6 as far as fuel economy. GM engines generally are underrated in my experience.

[GoCougs]

My bet is the turbo-4 has more to do with marketing, CAFE, and brand management (market segmentation). By the numbers turbo motors are not tit-for-tat replacement for their N/A counterparts.

[280Z Turbo]

GM has been installing turbochargers on passenger car engines for over 50 years. It's not super complicated or heavy.

They make sense when you don't have room or want to save weight over a V6. In the Camaro, space is not an issue, so it seems a little odd.

If only somebody would give us a baby V8 that sipped fuel. cost less and still made V8 noises. The V6 versions of the pony cars are making more power than their V8 predecessors, but the sound is missing. And isn't that half the point?

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

I agree the Turbo 4 is a waste of time and money! 

[MX793]

GM has been installing turbochargers on passenger car engines for over 50 years. It's not super complicated or heavy.

They make sense when you don't have room or want to save weight over a V6. In the Camaro, space is not an issue, so it seems a little odd.

If only somebody would give us a baby V8 that sipped fuel. cost less and still made V8 noises. The V6 versions of the pony cars are making more power than their V8 predecessors, but the sound is missing. And isn't that half the point?

I like the sound of a good V6.  The latest V6 Camaro and the Cyclone-powered Mustangs both sound pretty good in their own right.  That said, it would be cool to see smaller V8s in lieu of V6s (or turbo 4s) as the mid-level engine.  A Mustang with a ~340-350 hp 4.0L short-stroke Coyote or a Camaro with a 350 hp 5.3L would be cool.

[280Z Turbo]

The only problem with a V6 Camaro or Mustang is the reputation and exhaust note. Long gone are the days of using coarse and anemic truck engines.

[MX793]

The only problem with a V6 Camaro or Mustang is the reputation and exhaust note. Long gone are the days of using coarse and anemic truck engines.

There's nothing wrong with the exhaust note from either other than people expect something deeper from a Camaro or Mustang.  Play a recording of either to a motorhead, or even a casual enthusiast, without telling them what car it was from and most would say they think they sound good.

[CALL_911]

New V6 Camaro sounds really, really good

[GoCougs]

The Camaro V6 sounds excellent. It is not embarrassed by the V8 in any way. Check YouTube vids.

The barrier with a smaller version of the same basic engine is it's little different in cost to build, unless there is a significant tech change (which you're not going to get in a Camaro or Mustang) which doesn't pencil out for cheaper cars like a Camaro.

[Xer0]

I priced out a V6 Camaro recently for shits and giggles and that thing gets pretty damn expensive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MrH]

A fully loaded V8 is pushing $45k-$50k.  But I guess loaded Corvettes are in the $70k range now, so I think they're reaching unobtainable level for a lot of people.

The performance levels are going way up, but I would have a hard time justifying $50k on a Camaro.

[GoCougs]

Much of that extra cost is non-performance. The 1SS with MRC and dual mode exhaust is $40k. If you look at what you have to spend to meet that performance level, $40k is a bargain, and if you look at what you have to spend to beat it, $44k is the deal of the decade.

[Char]

Much of that extra cost is non-performance. The 1SS with MRC and dual mode exhaust is $40k. If you look at what you have to spend to meet that performance level, $40k is a bargain, and if you look at what you have to spend to beat it, $44k is the deal of the decade.

But Raza said the GTI Type R Golf..!

[veeman]

But Raza said the GTI Type R Golf..!

I'm not a gearhead.  I wish I had that knowledge and experience but I don't.  But I do know that pony cars and hot hatches drive very very differently.  Even if certain specs are comparable, the sheer increased size/girth and weight make all the difference in seat of the pants feel.  I completely get why someone would pick a GTI type R Golf over a Camaro SS. 

Off topic but comparing my very non sporty Sonata which I've driven for years with my Beetle (which isn't considered a sporty car in TDI form), I much prefer driving the Beetle.  It feels much tighter.  The thing is I feel much more vulnerable in the TDI than I do in my Sonata.  This time around I want a bigger car which still feels tight. 

[AutobahnSHO]

This time around I want a bigger car which still feels tight. 

batmobile.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

A fully loaded V8 is pushing $45k-$50k.  But I guess loaded Corvettes are in the $70k range now, so I think they're reaching unobtainable level for a lot of people.

The performance levels are going way up, but I would have a hard time justifying $50k on a Camaro.

Much of that extra cost is non-performance. The 1SS with MRC and dual mode exhaust is $40k. If you look at what you have to spend to meet that performance level, $40k is a bargain, and if you look at what you have to spend to beat it, $44k is the deal of the decade.

This is true also but I can bring myself to pay 40 Large for a new Pony Car that has no toys (Sun Roof, Navi, heated/cooled seats)