Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Emblempros
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 01-12-2009, 01:32 PM   #35
TheClassicCarKid

 
TheClassicCarKid's Avatar
 
Drives: V45
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfevo View Post
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.
Yes it has better power to weight
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1320junkie View Post
All of the stang guys in one thread..wow..lol
.
TheClassicCarKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 01:40 PM   #36
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 26,387
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
It doesn't have a better power to weight, though. Don't know how I missed this before.

Camaro V6: .08 hp/lb
RX8: .07 hp/lb

The Camaro is a little better. Also, doesn't the RX8 use a rotary engine? Two TOTALLY different animals.
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.

Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 01:59 PM   #37
TheClassicCarKid

 
TheClassicCarKid's Avatar
 
Drives: V45
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
It doesn't have a better power to weight, though. Don't know how I missed this before.

Camaro V6: .08 hp/lb
RX8: .07 hp/lb

The Camaro is a little better. Also, doesn't the RX8 use a rotary engine? Two TOTALLY different animals.
Yeah it has a 1.3 Wankel.
Getting 238 horsepower from a 1.3 is freakin' insane
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1320junkie View Post
All of the stang guys in one thread..wow..lol
.
TheClassicCarKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 02:11 PM   #38
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
It is a very different kind of engine. It has no low end torque whatsoever, all the power is in the high RPMs. But it's super solid at the high RPMs, it doesn't feel like a motor that youre about to blow up, you can hit 9000 rpms in the thing and it just GOES
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 04:58 PM   #39
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,566
I have a feeling that if you keep your foot out of the V6 and just cruize, lean burn mode will carry you a lot higher than the EPA ratings.

I'm somewhat worried that the EPA will drive the car too fast when they test it for lean burn mode to kick in.
- Xanthos

P.S. - and downforce is basically deliberate drag - thats why the Z06 is as high as it is.

P.P.S. - Every time I see the title of this thread I think "oh great, another person complaining about the mpg numbers."
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 06:43 PM   #40
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6
I'm somewhat worried that the EPA will drive the car too fast when they test it for lean burn mode to kick in.
Whether or not driving conditions/style are appropriate for lean burn depends on how the car is programmed -- if they've designed and programmed it for the EPA test schedule, you can bet it will be in lean burn a lot. If they've ignored the test and concentrated on real-world results, it could get underrated.

It's kinda like students taking tests...you can have a student whose teachers teach to the test so he learns how to take the test, who gets great scores and is worthless in the workplace, and you can have a failing student who learned how to actually get stuff done and produces real results.

Pasted from http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml (and edited for formatting / display appropriate to this forum, as well as adding emphasis).
Quote:
Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 10-15 percent of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.

In the laboratory, the vehicle's drive wheels are placed on a machine called a dynamometer that simulates the driving environment—much like an exercise bike simulates cycling. The energy required to move the rollers can be adjusted to account for wind resistance and the vehicle's weight.

On the dynamometer, a professional driver runs the vehicle through a standardized driving routine, or schedule, which simulates “typical” trips in the city or on the highway.
Video: http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/FE_test_p...on_dyno_hi.WMV

Each schedule specifies the speed the vehicle must travel during each second in the test. The driver watches a computerized display that shows his driving statistics compared to the specified schedule.
Video: http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/FE_test_p...chedule_hi.WMV

A hose is connected to the tailpipe to collect the engine exhaust. The carbon in the exhaust is measured to calculate the amount of fuel burned during the test. This is more accurate than using a fuel gauge.
__________________
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 01-12-2009, 07:52 PM   #41
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by theholycow View Post
Whether or not driving conditions/style are appropriate for lean burn depends on how the car is programmed -- if they've designed and programmed it for the EPA test schedule, you can bet it will be in lean burn a lot. If they've ignored the test and concentrated on real-world results, it could get underrated.

It's kinda like students taking tests...you can have a student whose teachers teach to the test so he learns how to take the test, who gets great scores and is worthless in the workplace, and you can have a failing student who learned how to actually get stuff done and produces real results.

Pasted from http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml (and edited for formatting / display appropriate to this forum, as well as adding emphasis).
I would hope they would concentrate on real world results, but they might lose sales if the numbers are too low. Like I said - I just hope everything goes right when the EPA tests it.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 08:18 PM   #42
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
I just hope everything goes right when the EPA tests it.
...if the EPA tests it at all. The EPA might just accept GM's tests, which still have to be done at specified speeds anyway.
__________________
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 01-12-2009, 08:21 PM   #43
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
omg DIE THREAD DIE!!!
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 08:26 PM   #44
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post
omg DIE THREAD DIE!!!
?
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 08:32 PM   #45
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
This thread was dead, then recently it came back to life but people just keep repeating the same stuff that was already said when the thread was new.... is all....
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 08:33 PM   #46
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post
This thread was dead, then recently it came back to life but people just keep repeating the same stuff that was already said when the thread was new.... is all....
So? That's half the fun!
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 08:38 PM   #47
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
Meh
I'm in the "enough talk, enough research, lemme drive already!" mode...
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 09:02 PM   #48
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,808
I think some people are offended by fuel economy discussions.
__________________
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 01-12-2009, 09:06 PM   #49
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
This was my thread remember? I'm not offended by the topic, I'm offended by threads that get stuck in repeat loops
__________________
l008com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 09:15 PM   #50
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,808
That comment was caused by but not directed at you, l008com. I was thinking of people on automotive forums who actually seem offended when someone mentions fuel economy, as if you had insulted their mother.
__________________
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 01-12-2009, 09:22 PM   #51
l008com
 
l008com's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LT Crystal Red/Beige Manual
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stoneham, MA
Posts: 619
Yeah thats pretty much what I got on the RX-8 forum too. Back when gas as $4.50 and i was trying to decide what to get. I mentioned how bad the RX-8 is on gas, and basically the response was sports cars are supposed to be bad on gas, if you want better fuel economy get a compact car.
__________________
l008com 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 05:13 PM.


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