2012 Camaro V6 Engine's New Cylinder Head Design Adds Power, Saves Fuel

[b4z]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Minor detail but ... 278 ft-lbs, it went up (along with the hp) when they actually rated it for 2011 MY.

I'm not really sure why you think the V6 needs more toque for its weight. I can only really go off the 2010's and 2011's with all this but ...

To my knowledge, this car has the highest torque to weight ratio of any 6 cylinder Camaro. GM did extremely well with the breadth of the torque band. It has 90% of it available from around 2100 rpm up through what looks like 6300. It also does pretty well in terms of specific torque (torque/L). Getting more than 80 ft-lbs/L is very difficult on a naturally aspirated engine. Most, if not all, naturally aspirated cars that you can buy today are in the 60-80 ft-lb/L range, and the vast majority being between 65 and 75. Its just the way the laws of physics work. All in all, this is the best V6 GM has ever put in a Camaro. Sure, it would be great to have more. But when wouldn't it be great to have more? You say it would be a blast to drive a 360 hp V6 Camaro on a twisty road, I'm sure it would. But a 370 hp V6 would be even better. And you know what would be even better than that? a 380 hp V6.

If you look at the MB and BMW 6s their max tq is in the 3500 range. That's where GM needs to get it rather than 4800rpms and up.
I agree it's a good engine from a specific hp view.
I like it more than the Nissan 3.7L. Roooough.

Maybe we need to bore it out a little AND stoke it. It will probably lose some of it's smoothness and willingness to rev.

[b4z]

I do wonder with this new exhaust in head design if it is not as strong. Will it take boost?
I've got the 3.0L in my CTS and it is a very smooth, willing to rev motor. But with only 223 tq in a 3800lb car it is not what you would call quick off the line. Gm says that the tq curve is flat, and I've seen the graph, but .................
EPA ratings for the CTS are identical whether it is a 3.0L or 3.6L. gear ratios are the same.
I can get 37mpg instant at 60mph.

[Norrin Radd]

Originally Posted by b4z

I do wonder with this new exhaust in head design if it is not as strong. Will it take boost?
I've got the 3.0L in my CTS and it is a very smooth, willing to rev motor. But with only 223 tq in a 3800lb car it is not what you would call quick off the line. Gm says that the tq curve is flat, and I've seen the graph, but .................
EPA ratings for the CTS are identical whether it is a 3.0L or 3.6L. gear ratios are the same.
I can get 37mpg instant at 60mph.

I would be more inclined that this head design will take boost quite reasonably with very minimal lag. The valves/airflow obviously will, the exhaust design is begging for a turbo...The only downside I can think of(forced induction wise) is not having the benefits of longer runners, but the upside is compact-ability and minimal lag, having the turbochargers mounted almost directly to the head is a huge space saver. If done right, you could adapt most of the stock exhaust system while utilizing a electric cutout. Really most of the fabbing would be the intercooler,piping system and air filters. OR, if you want to run a single turbo, do you know how easy it would be to make a twinscroll design header for a twinscroll turbo with these integrated exhaust heads? Two large exhaust pipes into a twinscroll flange and your done..Of course this is all theoretical since we do not have an engine/car at our doorstep..

[djsnoflake]

Sounds good to me!

CAFE doesn't care about how mod-able a motor is, they just want numbers. GM is getting those numbers.

And I think the vast majority of V6 owners aren't worried about headers

[GretchenGotGrowl]

Originally Posted by Thorlius

V6 EcoBoost = twin-turbos.

Twin-turbos on the Camaro V6 - if it could handle it without needing a reworking - should be able to put out better numbers than the LS3. But it would cost considerably more to produce, too.

Definitely!

Not sure I agree about the expense part, though. Chevy has produced turbo cars at reasonable expense (e.g. new Cruze, old Cobalt). Adding two small turbos and an intercooler won't be that expensive. They probably won't do it on all models, but it could be a new trim (3LT?? Z24??) some day in the future.

[b4z]

Of course it would cost more. You gotta figure that the LLT/LFX is probably similiar in cost(if not more) as an LS3/L99 because of the DOHC heads. Remember there are 4 cams in that engine.
Then you add the cost of 2 turbos, plumbing, intercooler, larger radiator, development costs, emissions testing, certification etc.
The 3.5L Ecoboost V6 in the F150 has a retail cost of $1,000 more than the 5.0L DOHC Coyote motor.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by htron50

Aluminum warps too fast vs cast iron...won't the focused extra heat remaining in the HEAD longer mean quicker fatique?? AS i stated at first. You have to admit the heat is in the head longer and the cooling channels will be challenged!

I'm fairly certain the powertrain engineers have addressed this...but where aluminum conducts heat better, it will also dissipate it better than steel. if they've got coolant running through there, it should all do just fine...imo. Though I'm no engineer...

[CAMAR0]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I'm fairly certain the powertrain engineers have addressed this...but where aluminum conducts heat better, it will also dissipate it better than steel. if they've got coolant running through there, it should all do just fine...imo. Though I'm no engineer...

Their software models the thermal expansion/contraction. If your interested in how industry and race teams study these things check out Race Tech Magazine for more info. There magazine is free online at the link below. It costs about $10 a month at your local Barnes and Noble. By far my favorite magazine ever... but then again I am an Engineer!

http://www.racetechmag.com/emag/

PS the new head is itching for a Turbo!

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by CAMAR0

Their software models the thermal expansion/contraction. If your interested in how industry and race teams study these things check out Race Tech Magazine for more info. There magazine is free online at the link below. It costs about $10 a month at your local Barnes and Noble. By far my favorite magazine ever... but then again I am an Engineer!

http://www.racetechmag.com/emag/

PS the new head is itching for a Turbo!

They kinda made it easy, didn't they?

And thanks, I'll check that out when I get a chance!

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by spyderbuddy

I dont know about anyone else, but I'm interested in the composit intake manifold and new fuel rails.

Me too.

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by PYROLYSIS

Has the TREMEC trans for the v-6 rumor been confirmed or denied yet? I think that would be a great package and could make the v-6 even more desirable. As long as price doesn't jump too much, adding a higher quality manual trans would be a great change.

Its just a rumor, GM already stated they have no plans to upgrade. The online ordering guide is wrong too because they have the tremecs listed on the 2010 and 2011 models, and we all know that aint true.

[2001ragtop]

Okay now they will do it to the V8.....

[vtboyarc]

the LS is supposed to get 30mpg....shouldn't the LT get the same?

[derklug]

The new argument is going to morph into a Hp/Tq/MPG realm, and the # of cylinders will become irrelevent. Give me a fast revving 1 cyl producing 550 horse, 475Tq, and 40MPG, and my response will be "V WHAT"