Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion

General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion Come chat about other cars.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-01-2013, 10:38 AM   #101
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
Please go back and re-read my post that you quoted.

I said with a tune. If a crew cab f150 can do mid 13s or better, and if a Flex that weighs 5,000 lbs with a tuned ecoboost can do 12s (which has been done more than once) then this truck is capable of low 13s or high 12s.

In stock form I'd expect low to mid 14s.
This almost, though if I not mistaken they were running a few other slight things then just a tune to run those times. Tune only i would give the Tremor a possible mid 13, totally agree on low/mid 14s at best stock.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 11:59 AM   #102
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post



Yes sir! I tow a race car and trailer that weighs 4450lbs total. The 6.2 is a bit of overkill. Tows it like it's not there.

The max tow package is the best bargain going. $1600 gets you the 6.2, a bigger diff. A hitch and integrated brake controller.

all with a 5 year /100,000 mile powertrain warranty not a 5 year / 60,000
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 11:12 PM   #103
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
I don't care what the numbers on paper are. I've driven them, and they don't feel any stronger driving around town and merging onto the interstate than the NA 3.5s. Maybe they start to put out if you put your foot all the way to the floor, but having to whip it to get anything out of it doesn't exactly give a sense of a strong engine. If the way they tune these EcoBoosts is such that their power delivery is like an on/off switch, they can keep them.
I own one, mine is tuned, you would be surprised.. btw, what other 3.5 are you talking about? Ford doesn't make a 3.5 NA
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2013, 11:14 PM   #104
Truck Norris
Thread Mover
 
Truck Norris's Avatar
 
Drives: a Monte Carlo
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sierra Nevada
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
I own one, mine is tuned, you would be surprised.. btw, what other 3.5 are you talking about? Ford doesn't make a 3.5 NA
They did in the 2010, 2011 and 2012 Fusion Sport with 263hp.
__________________
In the market for something fast
Truck Norris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 01:23 AM   #105
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 21,979
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
I'd put my money on my brothers 5.3L Colorado before the Tremor. He hasn't done anything with it.

Which reminds me ... as much as I generally dislike sport trucks and 'small displacement turbo engines' I think the time might be right for a brand new GMC Cyclone. Stick the LD3 into a Canyon & you've got yourself a modern Cyclone.
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 06:36 AM   #106
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3 View Post
I'd put my money on my brothers 5.3L Colorado before the Tremor. He hasn't done anything with it.

Which reminds me ... as much as I generally dislike sport trucks and 'small displacement turbo engines' I think the time might be right for a brand new GMC Cyclone. Stick the LD3 into a Canyon & you've got yourself a modern Cyclone.

Wrong - GMC made the Syclone to embarrass the industry into showing it that a pickup could even out accelerate even a Ferrari I believe at the time. Put the LD3 into a Canyon and you have just another sport truck. Two different ideas. The Syclone proved its point and ever since we have seen nothing but vast improvement in engine technology. Until the Syclone the industry had been bogged down for over a decade in unreliable and experimental junk.
I like your idea though but that was not what the Syclone was about.

Last edited by 05stram; 07-02-2013 at 01:22 PM.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 09:28 AM   #107
skoal bandit
 
skoal bandit's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 ZL1 1991 Syclone 2011 Silverad
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TN
Posts: 59
As an owner of one I have to say it's spelled Syclone.
__________________
2012 ZL1
skoal bandit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 09:39 AM   #108
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by 05stram View Post
Wrong - GMC made the Cyclone to embarrass the industry into showing it that a pickup could even out accelerate even a Ferrari I believe at the time. Put the LD3 into a Canyon and you have just another sport truck. Two different ideas. The Cyclone proved its point and ever since we have seen nothing but vast improvement in engine technology. Until the Cyclone the industry had been bogged down for over a decade in unreliable and experimental junk.
I like your idea though but that was not what the Cyclone was about.
I would not say the Syclone/Tphoon did anything for making any car more reliable haha. I also would not say the Syclone did much to push the industry ahead either. We already had high po turbo/AWD cars in the form of the DSM tripletts that were also aread running DOHC tech and a DOHC Corvette ZR1 that probably did more than the Syclone did. We had already had the turbo GN, GNX, and TA, which had a much more sturdy engine than the Syclone had. the AWD was the most innovative thing it had, but even that was just an adaptation of what the Olds Bravada already had. The Cyclone was also ridiculously expensive for the time, running over 30k at a time when Camaro Z28s and Mustang GTs were running as much as half that. It was an amazing performer, and a game changer only in the fact it was a pickup truck. It is also one of my favorite vehicles EVER built and also gave me one of the wildest rides I ever had. Had a blast taking one of those and a Typhoon on back to back drives a few years ago. Would love to have one, but finding a decent one these days is a tough task.
Stew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 01:07 PM   #109
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truck Norris View Post
They did in the 2010, 2011 and 2012 Fusion Sport with 263hp.
they also put them in the Flex's too, but we are talking about trucks here
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 01:24 PM   #110
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoal bandit View Post
As an owner of one I have to say it's spelled Syclone.

You're right I corrected it thanks I actually forgot that.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 08:17 PM   #111
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger View Post
Please go back and re-read my post that you quoted.

I said with a tune. If a crew cab f150 can do mid 13s or better, and if a Flex that weighs 5,000 lbs with a tuned ecoboost can do 12s (which has been done more than once) then this truck is capable of low 13s or high 12s.

In stock form I'd expect low to mid 14s.
The argument that it will be great if only it were modified, to me, is an admission that it is not that good as is. (The car would be great if only it were different).

At the very least, it sets the bar pretty low. If the mark of a good car is how great it could be once modified, then I give you one of the best cars ever made based on that definition:

__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 08:26 PM   #112
fielderLS3


 
fielderLS3's Avatar
 
Drives: 02 Alero, 2011 Mustang 5.0
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Portage, Wisconsin
Posts: 4,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
I own one, mine is tuned, you would be surprised.. btw, what other 3.5 are you talking about? Ford doesn't make a 3.5 NA
When the cyclone engine family first came out in 2007, it was only a 3.5L. It was and still is used on many vehicles in N/A form (Edge, Explorer, Flex, Taurus, and for 3 years in the Fusion). And the 3.7Ls are basically the 3.5L with a small displacement bump.

I've driven versions of the above vehicles with the 3.5 N/A and 3.5 Ecoboost, and under normal driving on public roads and highways, I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference except for the subtle whistle of the turbos.
__________________
"Proven V-8 power with better efficiency than a turbo V-6"

"The car is the closest thing we will ever create to something that is alive."eds.
fielderLS3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 08:54 PM   #113
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
The argument that it will be great if only it were modified, to me, is an admission that it is not that good as is. (The car would be great if only it were different).

At the very least, it sets the bar pretty low. If the mark of a good car is how great it could be once modified, then I give you one of the best cars ever made based on that definition:


A little paint and some drivetrain work (replacement) and it was spot on

Vegas I absolutely loved the car and sure wished it would not of had its shortcomings
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2013, 09:51 PM   #114
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by fielderLS3 View Post
The argument that it will be great if only it were modified, to me, is an admission that it is not that good as is. (The car would be great if only it were different).

At the very least, it sets the bar pretty low. If the mark of a good car is how great it could be once modified, then I give you one of the best cars ever made based on that definition:

OEM engineers have a lot more to consider other than just balls out performance. They are always working with one hand tied behind their back for many reasons. Most vehicles that are actually affordable fall into the category of being "good" but can be made "great" through the aftermarket. I would argue that the 5th Gen Camaro and S-197 Mustang are two perfect examples of this.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 05:00 AM   #115
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
OEM engineers have a lot more to consider other than just balls out performance. They are always working with one hand tied behind their back for many reasons. Most vehicles that are actually affordable fall into the category of being "good" but can be made "great" through the aftermarket. I would argue that the 5th Gen Camaro and S-197 Mustang are two perfect examples of this.

So you are saying that without the aftermarket these cars are not great?

Most people who buy cars are not looking to get their seat material pinched between their ass cheeks when they step on the throttle or care about when they turn the corner the curb pulls free. The enthusiast community is somewhat larger than it was years ago but still I contend your statement is not accurate as the Camaro as it comes off the lot seems to be suiting millions of people as is.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 07:19 AM   #116
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by 05stram View Post
So you are saying that without the aftermarket these cars are not great?

Most people who buy cars are not looking to get their seat material pinched between their ass cheeks when they step on the throttle or care about when they turn the corner the curb pulls free. The enthusiast community is somewhat larger than it was years ago but still I contend your statement is not accurate as the Camaro as it comes off the lot seems to be suiting millions of people as is.
I completely agree. And the Tremor will suit plenty of people with zero modification as well. But it will be a lot more fun with some upgrades. I am saying that they have a lot more potential than what the OEM engineers were allowed to develop. Same is true with most cars. Doesn't mean that they are crap, like was asserted a few posts ago.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 12:33 PM   #117
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,385
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
I completely agree. And the Tremor will suit plenty of people with zero modification as well. But it will be a lot more fun with some upgrades. I am saying that they have a lot more potential than what the OEM engineers were allowed to develop. Same is true with most cars. Doesn't mean that they are crap, like was asserted a few posts ago.
this same character you're responding to will say an L99 requires a tune to be fun..
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 01:59 PM   #118
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russo View Post
this same character you're responding to will say an L99 requires a tune to be fun..

Why would I say that? You do not know me so why the cheap shot?
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 02:02 PM   #119
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
I completely agree. And the Tremor will suit plenty of people with zero modification as well. But it will be a lot more fun with some upgrades. I am saying that they have a lot more potential than what the OEM engineers were allowed to develop. Same is true with most cars. Doesn't mean that they are crap, like was asserted a few posts ago.
I got what you are saying now. Without the aftermarket I agree lots of nice rides could not be had. I love some of the body modifications and some of the engine work but for me I am a stock sort of person.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 02:09 PM   #120
KMK454
 
KMK454's Avatar
 
Drives: 91 B4C Camaro
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: KY
Posts: 254
The solution to this is already in GM's inventory... all they need to do is allow a more "piecemeal" approach to how we can option out their trucks. Right now, consumers are held hostage by options "packages." If I want leather seats, I have to get at least the LT Z71 and then get a value pack; I don't want all the other options of the packages, I just want an LT with leather seats and mechanical adjustments. If I want the 6.2, I have to get the LTZ Z71 with even more stuff I don't want.
KMK454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 02:11 PM   #121
05stram

 
Drives: 2013 RS - 2013 2SS/RS - 1971 RS
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK454 View Post
The solution to this is already in GM's inventory... all they need to do is allow a more "piecemeal" approach to how we can option out their trucks. Right now, consumers are held hostage by options "packages." If I want leather seats, I have to get at least the LT Z71 and then get a value pack; I don't want all the other options of the packages, I just want an LT with leather seats and mechanical adjustments. If I want the 6.2, I have to get the LTZ Z71 with even more stuff I don't want.
05stram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 04:04 PM   #122
shaffe

 
Drives: 2012 Focus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Burr Ridge
Posts: 1,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK454 View Post
The solution to this is already in GM's inventory... all they need to do is allow a more "piecemeal" approach to how we can option out their trucks. Right now, consumers are held hostage by options "packages." If I want leather seats, I have to get at least the LT Z71 and then get a value pack; I don't want all the other options of the packages, I just want an LT with leather seats and mechanical adjustments. If I want the 6.2, I have to get the LTZ Z71 with even more stuff I don't want.

Seriously whats up with that?

All the manufacturers do it, but why? I can understand some high end options only being available on the "top" trims but if why can't I get leather seats without getting a higher trim and an option package
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 04:05 PM   #123
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK454 View Post
The solution to this is already in GM's inventory... all they need to do is allow a more "piecemeal" approach to how we can option out their trucks. Right now, consumers are held hostage by options "packages." If I want leather seats, I have to get at least the LT Z71 and then get a value pack; I don't want all the other options of the packages, I just want an LT with leather seats and mechanical adjustments. If I want the 6.2, I have to get the LTZ Z71 with even more stuff I don't want.
This. The parts are on the shelf. All they have to do is let you put them together.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 04:09 PM   #124
Apex Motorsports

 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 23,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
Seriously whats up with that?

All the manufacturers do it, but why? I can understand some high end options only being available on the "top" trims but if why can't I get leather seats without getting a higher trim and an option package
Because accountants believe it increases the bottom line. Reduces the number of possible combinations in manufacturing and they believe it increases the average purchase price. If you want a certain feature they get to sell you two or three others just to get it.
__________________
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2013, 04:19 PM   #125
1LEMayhem
Wheel Man
 
1LEMayhem's Avatar
 
Drives: GXH 2SS 1LE
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Parrish, Florida
Posts: 906
I agree. GM needs to break up their options more. Ford is better at this with their trucks. I got everything I wanted on a base F150 RCSB and nothing I didn't.
__________________
1LEMayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.