Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
SDPC
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-11-2008, 06:02 PM   #15
TheClassicCarKid

 
TheClassicCarKid's Avatar
 
Drives: V45
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by joepitt View Post
I think for lots of folks, including me, it boils down to IT'S A CAMARO and is inspired by the 1969 model. It isn't always a rational decision.
THANK YOU. Fuel efficiency is NOT the top priority of this car. If it were, it wouldn't have 304 horsepower. It's a sports car people.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1320junkie View Post
All of the stang guys in one thread..wow..lol
.
TheClassicCarKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2008, 10:19 PM   #16
SemperFi
U.S. Marine Corps
 
SemperFi's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 Ducati Streetfighter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheClassicCarKid View Post
THANK YOU. Fuel efficiency is NOT the top priority of this car. If it were, it wouldn't have 304 horsepower. It's a sports car people.
Top priority? No!

But good lord. When gas is the biggest cost on a car, and costing more than the food your eating, then its worth starting a thread over. If the Mustang didnt look so gay, and got 35 mpg, id buy it. It wont, and the Camaro still looks way better, so i dont have to worry. but you get the point. Its not a moot point. Just realize we love our muscle too, only with a side plate of practicality.
__________________

Texas Residents: Join the Texas social group!

Semper Fi!

Last edited by SemperFi; 11-12-2008 at 07:55 AM.
SemperFi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 08:52 AM   #17
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFi View Post
Its not a moot point. Just realize we love our muscle too, only with a side plate of practicality.
WTF are you talking about...there's no room for moderation or reason, this car is ONLY about raw pavement-destroying power, aggressive styling, and nothing else. Nobody buying the Camaro cares about practicality, cost, efficiency, reliability, comfort, or features...

/sarcasm

Seriously, if you are only in it for the looks and/or power, you're probably better served by a classic muscle car, not a brand new one. The whole point of having this new one is that we can have things like better fuel economy, practicality, and comfort.
__________________
Removing weight has surprisingly little effect on fuel economy
Engine break-in procedure | Gear ratios
2002 GMC Sierra 4x4 5.3 (190,000 miles and going strong)
1980 Buick Lesabre family heirloom with 36,000 miles
2008 Volkswagen Rabbit 2 door I5-2.5 5spd DD lease
Quote:
Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 View Post
she really underestimates the damage i would do to her reproductive organs
http://allOffTopic.com is the place for all the naughty stuff you can't get away with on this forum...
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 08:54 AM   #18
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 677
If I was in it for the power, I'd buy buying a used corvette not a new camaro :-)
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 10:50 AM   #19
Rodrunner
Senior Member
 
Rodrunner's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS/RS, '06 350Z
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: So. Maryland
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by theholycow View Post
WTF are you talking about...there's no room for moderation or reason, this car is ONLY about raw pavement-destroying power, aggressive styling, and nothing else. Nobody buying the Camaro cares about practicality, cost, efficiency, reliability, comfort, or features...

/sarcasm

Seriously, if you are only in it for the looks and/or power, you're probably better served by a classic muscle car, not a brand new one. The whole point of having this new one is that we can have things like better fuel economy, practicality, and comfort.

Funny, but I find myself more inclined to agree with your sarcastic statement than the serious one. That's what it's all about for me!!

And as far as weight (SS), GM says:
3860 - stick
3913 - auto

2SS/RS Black/Black w-Cyber Gray stripes/Auto ordered-10/18/08
Rodrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 10:54 AM   #20
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 677
So looks like it will weight the same as my 8.
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 11:38 AM   #21
Rodrunner
Senior Member
 
Rodrunner's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS/RS, '06 350Z
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: So. Maryland
Posts: 2,333
3800 sounds awfully heavy for the RX

2SS/RS Black/Black w-Cyber Gray stripes/Auto ordered-10/18/08
Rodrunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2008, 11:40 AM   #22
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 677
I agree it sounds high, but thats what the website says, 3,818 lbs
http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/disp...ehicleCode=RX8
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 10:44 AM   #23
Justcallme61
 
Drives: 2000 honda accord v6
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodrunner View Post
And as far as weight (SS), GM says:
3860 - stick
3913 - auto
V8.
Justcallme61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 11:32 AM   #24
TheClassicCarKid

 
TheClassicCarKid's Avatar
 
Drives: V45
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by SemperFi View Post
Top priority? No!

But good lord. When gas is the biggest cost on a car, and costing more than the food your eating, then its worth starting a thread over. If the Mustang didnt look so gay, and got 35 mpg, id buy it. It wont, and the Camaro still looks way better, so i dont have to worry. but you get the point. Its not a moot point. Just realize we love our muscle too, only with a side plate of practicality.

I guess gas is more of a problem where you are.
I think that 26 mpg is GREAT for what the car is. It's going to cut what I spend on gas in half.
Maybe they'll make a 4-cylinder that gets 30+ someday

I understand what you mean, if we could have high horsepower and great fuel efficiency it would be great, but compromises have to be made with cars like the Camaro/mustang/challenger
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1320junkie View Post
All of the stang guys in one thread..wow..lol
.
TheClassicCarKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 11:38 AM   #25
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 677
The turbo 4 cylinder GM makes gets 270 HP. . .
Granted Camaro people would find a turbo 4 as offensive as the RX-8 people but until we're burning hydrogen, turbo 4's might be the way to go
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2008, 02:50 PM   #26
surfevo
 
Drives: 2005 Rx8
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: CALI
Posts: 15
I008com you are reading the weight on the RX8 wrong. It weighs only 3064 with the 6 speed. The 3800 is the MAX or Gross weight. Meaning the maximum load for the car is about 800lbs of people/stuff. The RX8 has a better power to weight ratio then the V6 Camaro. 3064lb/238hp vs 3700lb/304hp, also the RX8 has a better balance. You will notice the 700lb weight difference between the two cars. I just wanted to let you know.
surfevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2008, 02:55 PM   #27
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 677
I see. But doesn't the camaro still have a better power to weight ratio based on your numbers?

0.07767 HP per pound RX8
vs
0.08216 HP per pound Camaro

?
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2008, 04:29 PM   #28
Geno
 
Drives: 2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe GT
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post
I read, i think on chevy.com, that the V6 is going to get 27MPG, with the automatic. Thats pretty damn good. Thats about the best HP to MPG ratio I've seen. Is the stick going to get less? How much less? My RX-8 gets shitty milage, I was thinking about getting a loaded Mazda 6 with the small motor. This camaro costs the same, gets 2 MPG less and has 300 HP instead of 170. Tough choice eh? :-D

I do wonder how this car will handle compared to my RX-8. The weight is about the same, but the RX-8 is probably a little better balanced. I'll miss my back doors but not as much as i'd miss rear wheel drive if I got some other car! Hell i'd probably still buy this thing even if it came with the turbo charged 4cyl out of a Solstice :-) But hey I drive a 1.3L vehicle so wahcagoonado
My expearience. GM cars can get better mileage than the EPA or window sticker.
My '06 Monte Carlo w/3.9 V6 is rated at 27 highway. I can get over 30 anyday on the highway. My best is 32 for US 30 and I 75 not using the AC and 30.5 with AC. This is running 65-70+ using cruise. Heavy traffic will cut into this big time.
Geno 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
Why the Camaro is Doomed!! TFord 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 140 01-16-2010 09:07 PM
Help Me Pick An Economy Car Marosolid Off-topic Discussions 75 07-11-2009 07:41 AM
Ready or not: 36 MPG by 2015 mandate from Feds Scotsman 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 76 03-07-2009 04:19 PM
What's your deal breaker? LSxcellent 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 103 06-24-2008 12:26 AM
35 MPG Standard Will Kill the Muscle Car? Uh-Huh. Sure. Mr. Wyndham General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 6 01-09-2008 03:29 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.