Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Phastek Performance
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons

Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-03-2008, 06:46 PM   #1
camaro5


 
camaro5's Avatar
 
Drives: Off Into The Sunset
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Cape Coral, Florida
Posts: 4,430
Exclamation New Camaro Could Get This Engine: Pontiac Solstice Coupe to pack 300 horses?

Whoa...Since Camaro is a candidate for the current 260hp 4cyl. turbo, it could wind up with this version of the same engine.

I still have to have my 400hp plus V8 with manual trans, but this could make Camaro even more appealing for more people, and help CAFE numbers so we can keep driving our V8's.



http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/03/s...ck-300-horses/
camaro5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 06:57 PM   #2
NOODLESgoneWILD
IS IT 2009 YET???
 
NOODLESgoneWILD's Avatar
 
Drives: '05 Z51 Black Vette & '06 H2
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Mill Creek, Washington
Posts: 409
Send a message via MSN to NOODLESgoneWILD
HHMMmmmmmmmmmmm...Very interesting! What kind of MPG would this engine produce in the new camaro??? 22 to 28??? (HYW)
__________________
Don't love me just for my FBod
NOODLESgoneWILD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 07:02 PM   #3
jhitson
 
jhitson's Avatar
 
Drives: 88 Camaro, 01 S-10, 06 G6 GTP
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 78
Thats cool I guess. I like the solstice because, in my opinion, it is what the corvette was originally intended to be. A small 2-seat roadster. Now the vette is "supercar". I understand the upping the power to compete, but that is what has taken the vette so far from its roots. Would be a nice option in the camaro.
jhitson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 07:11 PM   #4
camaro5


 
camaro5's Avatar
 
Drives: Off Into The Sunset
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Cape Coral, Florida
Posts: 4,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOODLESgoneWILD View Post
HHMMmmmmmmmmmmm...Very interesting! What kind of MPG would this engine produce in the new camaro??? 22 to 28??? (HYW)
Well, Bob Lutz said the 3.6L V6 gets 17mpg city, 25mpg hwy.

So this 2.0L 4cyl should do better if you stay off the boost.

Probably 28mpg hwy could happen, or maybe 30mpg which I saw quoted way back.

I just saw a Kia commercial with their little POS bragging about 32 mpg hwy. No performance, style, or comfort.

Everyone's going to need a Camaro - different versions for different people. Then it can live forever!
camaro5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 07:46 PM   #5
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 22,181
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
I love the power/mileage ratio that GM's cars produce. I don't want a 4 banger in my Camaro. Even if it had 400 hp, I'd still rather have the V8. I don't expect this 300 hp engine to deliver spectacular mileage though. Look at the Evo and the WRX STi. They make ~300 hp on a turbo I4 and get mid 20's for mileage and be a little bit lighter than the Camaro will be, not too much though.
__________________
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 08:55 PM   #6
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
Pontiac NEEDS to make a 4 door AWD sedan/hatch and put this new upgraded engine in it to go head to head to head with the STI and Evo. Now that would be a G5 to be proud of.
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 09:13 PM   #7
Camaro68


 
Camaro68's Avatar
 
Drives: 68 Camaro 327ci 2SS/RS 376ci LS3
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince William, VA
Posts: 3,080
Talking for all the rest that likes way better gas mpg

But I would still get the V8 V8 V8 LS3 gota have more power
Camaro68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2008, 11:36 PM   #8
LS9CamaroSS
 
LS9CamaroSS's Avatar
 
Drives: Cavalier RS
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Jordan, NY
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhitson View Post
Thats cool I guess. I like the solstice because, in my opinion, it is what the corvette was originally intended to be. A small 2-seat roadster. Now the vette is "supercar". I understand the upping the power to compete, but that is what has taken the vette so far from its roots. Would be a nice option in the camaro.
how has the Vette strayed from its roots at all? still all fiberglass body. The first one to be non-fiberglass will be the ZR1 with fiberglass/CF on it. it hasn't changed size really. It still has 2 seats, and it still has only V8's in the engine bay. so where has the straying happened? Because back in the day the C1 was a world class contender in autosports...
LS9CamaroSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2008, 01:14 AM   #9
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 22,181
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS9CamaroSS View Post
how has the Vette strayed from its roots at all? still all fiberglass body. The first one to be non-fiberglass will be the ZR1 with fiberglass/CF on it. it hasn't changed size really. It still has 2 seats, and it still has only V8's in the engine bay. so where has the straying happened? Because back in the day the C1 was a world class contender in autosports...
when I think of C1's I think of a happy little roadster not a world beating sports car. After that it got an attitude adjustment and became an icon. Thats how I see it. If you were to debadge the cars and sit a C1, a C6, and Solstice. Then get someone who doesn't know anything about cars, and tell them one car is an old corvette, which is the new corvette? I'd bet most would say the pontiac and not the C6.
__________________
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2008, 08:08 AM   #10
BumbleBee
Yes, I am a girl
 
BumbleBee's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Pontiac Vibe
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 379
Talking Don't forget the Vibe

Quote:
Originally Posted by stovt001 View Post
Pontiac NEEDS to make a 4 door AWD sedan/hatch and put this new upgraded engine in it to go head to head to head with the STI and Evo. Now that would be a G5 to be proud of.
Pontiac already makes a hatchback, Vibe, but I do agree they need to put a more powerful engine in it. The 2.4 4 cyl is an upgrade from the 1.6 of prevous years, but they need a turbo.
__________________
You can check on the rep...

...second to none
BumbleBee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2008, 10:26 AM   #11
Bruno
 
Drives: 2010 CGM 2SS
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: OH now
Posts: 315
Excellent news! SC cars are easy to extract more power from too. Could we possibly see many turbo 4's with higher hp's than V6 versions with just a reflash or chip??
Bruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2008, 12:00 PM   #12
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno View Post
Excellent news! SC cars are easy to extract more power from too. Could we possibly see many turbo 4's with higher hp's than V6 versions with just a reflash or chip??


This is exactly the thinking I've had and why I would prefer FI this go around. It's hard to identify a pulley change whereas a big cam or big exhaust will wave a big flag where I live. Shoot, a boost controller on that turbo engine would easily allow it to make more power and most would not know the better. Of course, this could come at an expense to durability in the long-run...

I can't do as much cool or fun stuff to my car because of the tree huggers so even though I won't be looking at a turbo-4 or V6, I think it's these little engines that will allow our car to have engines that I, personally, hope will be available in a few years. Everything around here revolves around CARB numbers so the more stealthy my modifications, the better.

To sum up: anything GM can do to give us the most power for good fuel economy the better (DUH!) If this will allow GM to creap even more powerful engines into the line-up later, EVEN BETTER. If you ask me: WAY TO GO GM!!!
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2008, 12:26 AM   #13
JustinZS
 
Drives: waitin on 2010 !!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post


This is exactly the thinking I've had and why I would prefer FI this go around. It's hard to identify a pulley change whereas a big cam or big exhaust will wave a big flag where I live. Shoot, a boost controller on that turbo engine would easily allow it to make more power and most would not know the better. Of course, this could come at an expense to durability in the long-run...
A boost controller (ECU reflash or piggyback etc.) won't necessarily come at the expense of durability. I'm not sure what the top end and how good the internals on the ECOTEC engines are but if it's high, upping the boost a bit won't really hurt durability in the long run.

The idea of a boosted Camaro is definitely new to me and something I gotta get used to but it really does open up new sales demographic and big aftermarket tuning market.
JustinZS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2008, 02:16 AM   #14
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by radz282003 View Post


This is exactly the thinking I've had and why I would prefer FI this go around. It's hard to identify a pulley change whereas a big cam or big exhaust will wave a big flag where I live. Shoot, a boost controller on that turbo engine would easily allow it to make more power and most would not know the better. Of course, this could come at an expense to durability in the long-run...

I can't do as much cool or fun stuff to my car because of the tree huggers so even though I won't be looking at a turbo-4 or V6, I think it's these little engines that will allow our car to have engines that I, personally, hope will be available in a few years. Everything around here revolves around CARB numbers so the more stealthy my modifications, the better.

To sum up: anything GM can do to give us the most power for good fuel economy the better (DUH!) If this will allow GM to creap even more powerful engines into the line-up later, EVEN BETTER. If you ask me: WAY TO GO GM!!!
I know what you're saying. My future brother in law lives in Elk Grove and apparently gets nailed all the time for supposedly illegal mods on his car all the time. Apparently a big problem up there is that the police really enforce the "each mod by itself passes CARB, but together they don't" regulations. His friend who works as a tuner says all of their cars pass the sniffer test, but get nailed on visual inspections. One more reason I'm looking to get out of California. Kinda , but does anyone know how the car emissions laws are in Florida? In the company I work for, everyone seems to do some time out there, so that's probably where I'll end up.
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2008, 02:35 AM   #15
camaro5


 
camaro5's Avatar
 
Drives: Off Into The Sunset
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Cape Coral, Florida
Posts: 4,430
Emissions? What's that?

No inspections at all.

I think it's wild what you guys go through in Cali.

Come on down to Florida - the air's fine and CARB is just something I used to have on my car engine made by Holley.
camaro5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2008, 11:13 AM   #16
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro5 View Post
Emissions? What's that?

No inspections at all.

I think it's wild what you guys go through in Cali.

Come on down to Florida - the air's fine and CARB is just something I used to have on my car engine made by Holley.
Eat crap j/k California sucks...

Yeah; if we get pulled over, and don't have CARB numbers showing, on the parts themselves, they'll write us up a ticket and we get to pay a big fine and even go to the smog referee sometimes. I've been there and done that. That's why I'm pushing a forced-induction engine option since it will be easier to sneak by a visual inspection. I don't think a pulley or boost controller really comes into play under conditions smog tests are conducted so it just seems like it will be easier to get more power without running the risk of fines.

I think 300 horses to start is great though.
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 06:02 AM   #17
leifhain
 
Drives: lancia delta integrale
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: belgium
Posts: 6
My experience (Lancia Thema V6 and 2.0 Turbo) makes me believe that the 4 cyl 2.0 Turbo will only have a better fuel economy than the V6 if you stay off the throttle. Most people can't. I definitely would go for the V6 if it comes to fuel economy.
leifhain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 07:50 AM   #18
carsismeZ06
Corvette and Camaro lover
 
carsismeZ06's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro...some day...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 965
honestly, i don't see why they cant throw in an LS3. It gets pretty good mpg. And if you have to put a V6 in it, look what the Nissan GT-R can do. It's got a 3. something liter enging, twin turbo that has 480 hp! So really, when it comes to enginges, I think the Camaro is all good.
carsismeZ06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 11:06 AM   #19
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by leifhain View Post
My experience (Lancia Thema V6 and 2.0 Turbo) makes me believe that the 4 cyl 2.0 Turbo will only have a better fuel economy than the V6 if you stay off the throttle. Most people can't. I definitely would go for the V6 if it comes to fuel economy.
Here in the States a 300hp turbo 4 should get slightly better mileage than a naturally aspirated 300hp V6 no matter how you drive them. They used build them to run over-rich on boost for extra cooling. Our Environmental Protection Agency has put a stop to that, so both engines should run the same ratio at WOT. But the turbo 4 still gets the reduced friction (4 cyl vs 6) and reduced pumping losses (from the turbo) so it should take a little less gas to get 300hp to the flywheel.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 11:17 AM   #20
The_Blur
Jayhawk USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 6.2L of AWESOME! 2011 L99 2SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NAS Whiting Field
Posts: 14,274
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
That doesn't make me want an EcoTec Camaro. It makes me want to get a Solstice if I can't get a Camaro V8. That makes the Pontiac my back up car.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:22 PM   #21
3whiterag
GM Powertrain Retired
 
3whiterag's Avatar
 
Drives: 67SS350, 87 IROC L98, 96SS ver
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro5 View Post
Whoa...Since Camaro is a candidate for the current 260hp 4cyl. turbo, it could wind up with this version of the same engine.

I still have to have my 400hp plus V8 with manual trans, but this could make Camaro even more appealing for more people, and help CAFE numbers so we can keep driving our V8's.



http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/03/s...ck-300-horses/

I just talked to a gentleman who registered for our Show & Shine and he has an 02 Camaro SS that he says gets 38 mpg. (Imperial Gallons) I assume he has a six speed and 345 hp. stock.
3whiterag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 03:59 PM   #22
swazworth
the nerd king
 
swazworth's Avatar
 
Drives: 2005 scion xb...
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: phoenix, az
Posts: 428
ok so.....
1 Imperial gallon = 1.20095042 US gallons (say google)

what is the size of the fuel tank for the uk camaro?
well if it is the same fuel tank (16.8 us gallons) that means that it would be a 14 imperial gallon tank. getting him 532 miles to a tank.
14 gallons x 38 mpg = 532 miles

now math was not my best subject in school. i might be wrong (tell me if i am) but that would be about 31.6 mpg here in the states right?
532 miles / 16.8 gallons = 31.6 mpg

that doesn't seem that unreasonable. just to be on the safe side say 30 mpg which gives you just over 500 miles to a tank.

16.8 gallons x $3.20 a gallon = $53.76 a tank, that would cost about right around $.11 a mile to drive.

my scion xa has a 11.9 gallon tank gets about 320 miles to a tank and at $3.20 a gallon.....

11.9 gallons x $3.20 = $38.08 a tank, that cost about $.12 a mile. wow i could save myself $.01 a mile if i drove a 02 ss camaro... i need to trade in my car.

i have no clue why i just figured all that out. i just hope i did it right.
swazworth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 05:24 PM   #23
Slave One
 
Drives: 1996 Camaro V6
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by swazworth View Post
ok so.....
1 Imperial gallon = 1.20095042 US gallons (say google)

what is the size of the fuel tank for the uk camaro?
well if it is the same fuel tank (16.8 us gallons) that means that it would be a 14 imperial gallon tank. getting him 532 miles to a tank.
14 gallons x 38 mpg = 532 miles

now math was not my best subject in school. i might be wrong (tell me if i am) but that would be about 31.6 mpg here in the states right?
532 miles / 16.8 gallons = 31.6 mpg

that doesn't seem that unreasonable. just to be on the safe side say 30 mpg which gives you just over 500 miles to a tank.

16.8 gallons x $3.20 a gallon = $53.76 a tank, that would cost about right around $.11 a mile to drive.

my scion xa has a 11.9 gallon tank gets about 320 miles to a tank and at $3.20 a gallon.....

11.9 gallons x $3.20 = $38.08 a tank, that cost about $.12 a mile. wow i could save myself $.01 a mile if i drove a 02 ss camaro... i need to trade in my car.

i have no clue why i just figured all that out. i just hope i did it right.


My head hurts...
Slave One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2008, 12:28 AM   #24
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 22,181
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3whiterag View Post
I just talked to a gentleman who registered for our Show & Shine and he has an 02 Camaro SS that he says gets 38 mpg. (Imperial Gallons) I assume he has a six speed and 345 hp. stock.
If he averaged that, he must have been cruising downhill with a tail wind. not saying it isn't possible, just that it is pretty favourable circumstances. Also, talking about gas milage in imperial gallons in Canada is kinda silly to me, since it requires 1 conversion already (litres to gallons), why not just translate it to US gallons? I never use imperial gallons myself, I associate 1 gallon to 3.8L, not 4.5L. oops
__________________
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2008, 01:49 AM   #25
JustinZS
 
Drives: waitin on 2010 !!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blur View Post
That doesn't make me want an EcoTec Camaro. It makes me want to get a Solstice if I can't get a Camaro V8. That makes the Pontiac my back up car.
Thats the point of having a turbo 4, 6cyl and 8cyl versions though. Something for everyone! And Camaros for everyone!
JustinZS 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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Camaro Product Manager - interview Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 11 04-04-2012 07:10 PM
GM memo to dealers Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 41 02-04-2010 08:33 PM
Official Camaro Convertible CONCEPT Press Release Tran Camaro Convertible Forum 12 11-18-2009 08:05 PM
Camaro (concept) Press Release!! Pencil.Fight 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 4 07-21-2008 04:33 PM
Holden Monaro coupe could be produced Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 4 03-11-2008 10:27 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:00 PM.


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