[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Wasn't this pretty much a given?

No it wasn't...not in my opinion.

Ford originally did not have plans to use the 3.7 V6 in the Mustang, but it was given the go ahead after the turbo 4 and the V8 because it would still enable them to offer a low entry price.

I also believe it wasn't a given because offering a V6 in a lineup that includes a performance oriented turbo 4 cylinder is a hard sell. In my mind, even though I want the V6 to be offered, even I had a hard time coming up with a good reason why you'd offer a V6 when the turbo 4 could be faster, and have better highway FE. No 60 degree V6 will match the torque of a turbo 4 cylinder when its pumped up to around 300 HP, as typically you see more TQ than HP in these applications.

But if GM goes a different route and offers a lower power, better FE base turbo 4 as the base, and a high output n/a V6 as the middle ground, then I think that makes sense.

OR

Maybe Fen is right, and they will offer a powerful turbo 4, and a powerful V6 at roughly the same, if not exact same price.

Anyways, this is the first real "confirmed" bit of news we've had engine wise on the 6th gen, so I think its pretty cool news. I think the LT1 is a given, but we have yet to hear of it going into the 6th gen, or any model that use Alpha chassis yet for that matter

[mr02Z/28]

I'm not sure why so many are against a Hi Output Turbo 4 for the 6th Gen Camaro as long as they still make the V-8 available ... if you don't want the Turbo 4 just don't buy it .... as for me, I like the idea of a H.O. 4cyl turbo as long as it is in the 320-330hp range with good torque range ....

[Jason@JacFab]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

I'm not sure why so many are against a Hi Output Turbo 4 for the 6th Gen Camaro as long as they still make the V-8 available ... if you don't want the Turbo 4 just don't buy it .... as for me, I like the idea of a H.O. 4cyl turbo as long as it is in the 320-330hp range with good torque range ....

+1

[mr02Z/28]

I like variety and I honestly think a 4cyl Turbo would add more interest to the Camaro name plate .... Options can never be a bad thing ....

[SSmokinSS]

My 2.0L turbo Solstice was a beast. It was 260hp.
Given the weight difference, a Camaro with a 300-330hp turbo 4 banger would interest me as long as the fuel mileage was above 30.
I'd still have the V8 for making children cry.

[Cymaro]

Originally Posted by SSmokinSS

My 2.0L turbo Solstice was a beast. It was 260hp.
Given the weight difference, a Camaro with a 300-330hp turbo 4 banger would interest me as long as the fuel mileage was above 30.
I'd still have the V8 for making children cry.

Add on the GM stage kit while keeping your warranty and make 290 hp and 340tq!

[G-Mann]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

I'm not sure why so many are against a Hi Output Turbo 4 for the 6th Gen Camaro as long as they still make the V-8 available ... if you don't want the Turbo 4 just don't buy it .... as for me, I like the idea of a H.O. 4cyl turbo as long as it is in the 320-330hp range with good torque range ....

I prefer the idea of a high performance 4 cyl turbo model over one focused on fuel efficiency. In a lightweight package I think this would turn into a popular choice.

It will be interesting to see what direction GM takes but this could be the beginning of the end for the V6.

Instead of following ford GM should bust out with the first plug in hybrid offering with near current V6 performance and 45 mpg's vs a watered down 4 banger.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by mr02Z/28

I'm not sure why so many are against a Hi Output Turbo 4 for the 6th Gen Camaro as long as they still make the V-8 available ... if you don't want the Turbo 4 just don't buy it .... as for me, I like the idea of a H.O. 4cyl turbo as long as it is in the 320-330hp range with good torque range ....

Because a HO turbo 4 will have almost exactly the same stats as a V6, but be more expensive and less reliable than a N/A V6. I don't understand why people are so happy of that. Is it "because race car" or something?

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

Because a HO turbo 4 will have almost exactly the same stats as a V6, but be more expensive and less reliable than a N/A V6. I don't understand why people are so happy of that. Is it "because race car" or something?

I didn't really intend for this thread to turn into another "for or against a 4 cylinder" topic, but I guess that's inevitable when discussing the V6.

That said, if this source is correct there will FOR SURE be a V6 in the next gen, and that alone, I think is exciting news for some people, and the potential and configurations of the V6 is what I'd like to dive into and get more opinions on.

In my mind, the only advantages of a turbo 4 over a V6 is low to mid range torque will can be much higher and also highway FE could be a tad bit better, but not much when you start talking about a 300+ HP 4 cylinder turbo engine. You could also say that it likely weighs less than a V6. Those are the reasons people are happy about a possible turbo 4. (also the tuning potential is very high, but this discussion is about stock only)

The V6 on the other hand should have a peak HP advantage, as you almost never see stock turbo 4 cylinders making 330 - 340 + HP. Usually the TQ is higher than the HP in the turbo engines.

If the V6 ends up having cylinder deactivation, then I think that washes away the highway FE advantage the turbo might have.

[ssrs396]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I didn't really intend for this thread to turn into another "for or against a 4 cylinder" topic, but I guess that's inevitable when discussing the V6.

That said, if this source is correct there will FOR SURE be a V6 in the next gen, and that alone, I think is exciting news for some people, and the potential and configurations of the V6 is what I'd like to dive into and get more opinions on.

In my mind, the only advantages of a turbo 4 over a V6 is low to mid range torque will can be much higher and also highway FE could be a tad bit better, but not much when you start talking about a 300+ HP 4 cylinder turbo engine. You could also say that it likely weighs less than a V6. Those are the reasons people are happy about a possible turbo 4. (also the tuning potential is very high, but this discussion is about stock only)

The V6 on the other hand should have a peak HP advantage, as you almost never see stock turbo 4 cylinders making 330 - 340 + HP. Usually the TQ is higher than the HP in the turbo engines.

If the V6 ends up having cylinder deactivation, then I think that washes away the highway FE advantage the turbo might have.

I mentioned this another time but my only fear is that I would rather have the V6 but if it is not the base model the price will increase. I love the fact that the LS is a great car at a great price point. If the 4cyl is the base car then I would have to consider it due to price point and tuning potential.

[mr02Z/28]

Unless you get a Turbo V-6 in the 6th Gen, I think the Turbo 4 would be a better bet due to the fact the Buick version of the Turbo 4 already makes 295lb/ft where as the 3.6L only makes 276lb/ft ......


adding more "boost" may make the Torque jump considerably ... just my opinion .....

[GretchenGotGrowl]

I know I'm resurrecting a year old thread, but I thought it would be interesting given what we've learned since Saturday.

[KMPrenger]

Not to brag....or at least not too much (ha!) but my original thoughts in the first post weren't too far from the real thing!

[KMPrenger]

By the way...does anyone know what type of ECU they are using for the LGX? I'm assuming its Delphi....but would be nice to know for sure.