Continued: Lutz mentions engine options for Camaro -- 4 cylinder turbo a possibility

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by Kyle2k

Is it just me or are you trying to pick an argument with everything someone doesn't agree with you. The fact is we are both. I'm trying to be civil, but if you can't stand not "winning" atleast I hope you can get one thing out of this. That would be to use a dictionary-

DEMOCRACY
1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

REPUBLIC
1. a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
2. any body of persons viewed as a commonwealth.
3. a state in which the head of government is not a monarch or other hereditary head of state.
4. (initial capital letter) any of the five periods of republican government in France. Compare First Republic, Second Republic, Third Republic, Fourth Republic, Fifth Republic.
5. (initial capital letter, italics) a philosophical dialogue (4th century b.c.) by Plato dealing with the composition and structure of the ideal state.

I'm not trying to pick an argument, nor is this the proper forum to continue this discussion. Let's get back to Camaro engines and Lutz's comments.
Clyde

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by wildpaws

Let's get back to Camaro engines and Lutz's comments.

[D1]

I have gone through this thread and fondly reminded myself when Ford brought out the 1987 Thunderbird with the 4 cylinder 2.3 litre Turbocharged engine. Coupled to a five speed tranny this unit tore my head off for the frist two gears. As an added bonus it got 30 MPG let alone talking about 137 MPH top speed. Don't get me wrong about V8 power, I drove to High School a 1969 V8 Turbofire 255 HP 3 speed black with white interior Camaro that would peal the Dunlop bias plys while rowing through the gears.

What I want to quickly get to is that I am knocked out by the likeness of a 1968/69 Camaro that would come back as a retro blast from the past. I have owned fast cars and raced fast cars. Times are changing. It will never be like it was in 1977 ever again. Appreciate the retro body style, appreciate the provided HP's either from a 4-6 or 8 cylinder. Catch the dream within your means and live it all over again.

D1

[Kyle2k]

Wow, nice first post man, welcome...made some nice points

[JaysonAych]

Autoblog posted up something about the Solstice coupe's turbo-4 possibly getting upgrades to put out 300 horsepower by the time the coupe is released...could have some applications to the Camaro...

[JustinZS]

How would a 300hp turbo-4 AND a 300hp V6 work? How would that be marketed and priced. Odd situation.

[Scotsman]

Originally Posted by JustinZS

How would a 300hp turbo-4 AND a 300hp V6 work? How would that be marketed and priced. Odd situation.

Bump the V6 up in power through use of two small turbos. Sound familiar? I personally can't imagine the V6 Camaro having anything short of 300 hp, otherwise there's a questionable gap of over one hundred HP between the dumbed down 3.6-6 and a 6.0-8 with 400hp. Just doesn't make sense to me why they'd do that? And I'm not sure if you guys' have heard, but BMW's got a bi-turbo 4 in the works with an eleven-thousand rpm red-line with 260hp and crazy torque (the number escapes me right now).

[JustinZS]

Originally Posted by Scotsman

Bump the V6 up in power through use of two small turbos. Sound familiar? I personally can't imagine the V6 Camaro having anything short of 300 hp, otherwise there's a questionable gap of over one hundred HP between the dumbed down 3.6-6 and a 6.0-8 with 400hp. Just doesn't make sense to me why they'd do that? And I'm not sure if you guys' have heard, but BMW's got a bi-turbo 4 in the works with an eleven-thousand rpm red-line with 260hp and crazy torque (the number escapes me right now).

11,000 RPM!? Wow that will be some kinda fun engine to ring out. I've been in an S2000 at 9k rpm and the sound was frenetic I can't even imagine 11k rpm

[asrapid]

Originally Posted by Scotsman

Bump the V6 up in power through use of two small turbos. Sound familiar? I personally can't imagine the V6 Camaro having anything short of 300 hp, otherwise there's a questionable gap of over one hundred HP between the dumbed down 3.6-6 and a 6.0-8 with 400hp. Just doesn't make sense to me why they'd do that? And I'm not sure if you guys' have heard, but BMW's got a bi-turbo 4 in the works with an eleven-thousand rpm red-line with 260hp and crazy torque (the number escapes me right now).

Biturbo 4 with 11 000 rpm red line and only 260 hp. What is displacement of that thing? 1.0l or less?...i mean GM make 4 cylinder 2.0 l turbocharged engine with 260 hp and redline of that engine is 6300 rpm..It could probably go over 300 hp with little tuning.
And imagine if GM decide to turbocharge 3.6 l V6. It could go over 400 hp.

[Mr. Wyndham]

I really doubt the 4 we end up getting will be at 300 hp. That would completely miss the point of having a 4-cylinder in the first place.

[Muscle Master]

even thought I'm not a chevy fan, I'm not wit the 4 cylinder idea, this is american muscle baby v8-v10's all the way, screw the gov.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Scotsman

Bump the V6 up in power through use of two small turbos. Sound familiar? I personally can't imagine the V6 Camaro having anything short of 300 hp, otherwise there's a questionable gap of over one hundred HP between the dumbed down 3.6-6 and a 6.0-8 with 400hp. Just doesn't make sense to me why they'd do that? And I'm not sure if you guys' have heard, but BMW's got a bi-turbo 4 in the works with an eleven-thousand rpm red-line with 260hp and crazy torque (the number escapes me right now).

Unless that engine has an extreme torque peak, I can't imagine it making much more than 140-150 ft-lbs.

[Scotsman]

Here's the original story...and before you guys go blowing this off remember just what kind of company BMW is and be sure to consider their latest powertrain developments.

Rumor..or not? BMW to build a 4 Cylinder twin-turbo engine

09 Apr

Posted by JakeC as Rumors

Update: We have spoken with our sources and there is DEFINITELY going to be a twin-turbo 4 Cylinder. They are of course trying to push for 11k Rev, but more testing needs to be done.

We have been hearing from two independent sources that BMW is going to build a 4-Cylinder High Rev (11,000 rev limiter) engine, hoping for about 220-260 horsepower. The 4-Cylinder will be offered in 2 stages with and without twin-turbos.

We hear that the new engine will be exclusive for the 1 Series to start, but may go to a 3 coupe, but not the sedan. Release date of 2010 is what we hear they are shooting for. Parts and pieces (suppliers) are being scouted now.

Continuing down the rumors path, same sources indicate that a quad-turbo 4-Cylinder might be in works as well.

Will the recently announced 1 Series and 3 Series tii, feature these new engines sometimes down the road? Well, time will tell.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2008/04/09/ru...-turbo-engine/

[theholycow]

Originally Posted by JustinZS

How would a 300hp turbo-4 AND a 300hp V6 work? How would that be marketed and priced. Odd situation.

I bought a 1997 Grand Am v6 that made barely any more power than the 4-banger. It was a quieter, smoother ride. The difference would be even more pronounced between a turbo 4 and a big v6. Some of us don't enjoy winding it out to 11,000 rpm and want to make reasonable amounts of power without commotion.

Originally Posted by Muscle Master

even thought I'm not a chevy fan, I'm not wit the 4 cylinder idea, this is american muscle baby v8-v10's all the way, screw the gov.

I've never understood this attitude. I understand not wanting a 4, but why do you have a problem with them being produced? You won't have to buy one, and in the meantime the car can sell enough of them to carry it's own weight for CAFE and such; and then in a few years you'll be able to buy a really cheap used 4 cylinder Camaro for that engine you've been building in your garage. It's a win all around.

Edit: Oh, and one more thing -- the 4 cylinder Camaro will probably bring down the insurance cost on ALL Camaros.

Originally Posted by Scotsman

Here's the original story...and before you guys go blowing this off remember just what kind of company BMW is and be sure to consider their latest powertrain developments.

Why are they talking about piling on four turbos but zero superchargers? There must be some diminishing returns on the amount of exhaust energy that can be harvested to force induction, and in the meantime an supercharger would help to cover for turbo lag. They could even use an electric blower that only runs when the turbo hasn't yet spooled up. I suspect that they wouldn't be identical turbos running in parallel, but rather would be optimized for different RPM ranges...but I doubt any will work from idle!