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

[Sawyer]

Great job GM!

['11CamaroLS]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

It would definitely need to be reworked. And GM would need to give it a lot of boost. A big reason for why OEMs go with those turbo 6's is fuel economy. Cranking up the boost hurts fuel economy in gas engines. So while building a 430 hp TTV6 is possible, it isn't going to save you much gas over an LS3. Or weight. Or money (well, it definitely won't save you money).

And keep in mind that if a gen IV port injected 6.2L LS3 makes 426-436 hp ... imagine what a gen V direct injected 6.2L V8 would make (I'm thinking of a number, and it starts with 5 ... ). Little chance a turbocharged V6 could make that power and get the same efficiency. One or the other, just not both.

what about the camaro built for jay leno? it was twin turbo with 425 hp and better mpg than the SS for sure. now i know a turbo'd camaro would cost alot in reality if it ever happened. but say the LS or LT have a base sticker price including delivery of 24-26k. wouldnt it be awesome to have a stripped down model, like manual windows and seats, no foglights or spoilers, and basic 18 in wheel, super plain to save cost. would maybe have a base sticker of like 22,500 maybe? but then turbo it, it might have a sticker of 28-29k? i really dont know about numbers or costs. but i would image it to have a sticker price less then the ss for sure. i know if i was offered a 2lt with more ammenites but 312 hp or 425 hp ss with alot less mpg and more money Or a 425 twin turbo with only slightly less mpg than the v6 but alot less ammenites and stuff...id get the twin turbo for sure.much rather have more hp then that other stuff.

[KSCamaro]

Originally Posted by 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"

http://www.engineeringtv.com/video/O...posed-Cylinder

[mike25]

Originally Posted by nak3dsnake

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.

no, but i did see a post saying they were switching the v6 models to the ss trannies, both auto and manual. per jeff at gm customer service.

[b4z]

The 2LS gets a new taller 2.92 rear gear for 2012. That is why it is rated at 30mpg hwy. If you are looking for the quickest accelerating V6 don't get a 2LS. If you are looking for mileage, it is the one to get.

ALSO: the LFX in the SRX will be rated at 308hp and 265 tq. at only 2400 rpms. That is half again the rpms the Camaro's tq. rating is, 278tq at 4800rpms. The SRX should feel fairly srtong off the line.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by b4z

The 2LS gets a new taller 2.92 rear gear for 2012. That is why it is rated at 30mpg hwy. If you are looking for the quickest accelerating V6 don't get a 2LS. If you are looking for mileage, it is the one to get.

ALSO: the LFX in the SRX will be rated at 308hp and 265 tq. at only 2400 rpms. That is half again the rpms the Camaro's tq. rating is, 278tq at 4800rpms. The SRX should feel fairly srtong off the line.

The LLT in the Camaro makes roughly 265 ft-lbs at 2400 rpm also. It just makes a bit more higher up. I would expect the LFX to be much the same.

You have to be careful when looking at the peak rpms for torque. Every now and then they can cause one to think an engine is stronger down low, when in reality its just weaker up top. The torque band is at least as important (if not more so) as when it hits its peak.

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by mike25

no, but i did see a post saying they were switching the v6 models to the ss trannies, both auto and manual. per jeff at gm customer service.

He's looking at the same info we are, the tranny's not changing any time soon. Besides the RPO is for the wrong transmission, it's the t6060's in the SS not the t56.

[riderguy999]

the big question is will it bolt onto a 2010 block

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by riderguy999

the big question is will it bolt onto a 2010 block

I'd imagine you be able to mount parts on a 2010, they should be the same block. I'm interested in the composite intake, hopefully the intake mounts on the heads are the same. Maybe the new higher pressure fuel injectors too.

[thePill]

Design looks interesting but not sure getting rid of the manifold was a good idea, if they wanted efficiency they should have designed some factory shorties. Oh well, I think GM is trying to bring the Camaro to a broader base in which none of those people know what manifolds are.

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by thePill

Design looks interesting but not sure getting rid of the manifold was a good idea, if they wanted efficiency they should have designed some factory shorties. Oh well, I think GM is trying to bring the Camaro to a broader base in which none of those people know what manifolds are.

Yeah, this whole spiel about saving fuel is nonsense. In my opinion, this was done so that they could save money.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by nak3dsnake

Yeah, this whole spiel about saving fuel is nonsense. In my opinion, this was done so that they could save money.

If it saves money then it's not such a bad idea then. If they increased horsepower and achieved the same fuel economy of the departing LLT for less cost then they really had no choice. The people that never intend on upgrading are the big winners here and there are still exhaust options beyond the one tube manifold. It saves the consumer the money they would invest into long tubes and who knows, maybe they will show nice gains being the straightest exhaust setup.

Anyway, here is the best post of this thread by Maryland Speed a page back.

Few things.

Headers scavenge. What that means is because of their length, and their design, they accelerate the exhaust gases. It is not a matter of "flowing better"...the actually make the gas move faster because of the vacum pulses in the exhaust. This is why LT's make more power than shorties. On a V8 car, LT's make 25HP untuned.

Not only are LT headers not possible with this design, but it is also terrible because it creates a hard limit on how well your exhaust can flow. Your engine is an air pump. To make more power, you have to put more air in, and allow more air out. With this, you are now limited to whatever exhaust can flow through the integrated manifold, and that 2" or whatever oval port. To do anything better at minimum is gonna require reworked heads.

The only reason they did this was to save money. I like the BS about the reduced mass of the parts adds to fuel economy. Bottom line is that it is cheaper to cast the manifold in the head than make it a seperate part.

I hope this never makes it to the V8.

[nak3dsnake]

Originally Posted by thePill

If it saves money then it's not such a bad idea then. If they increased horsepower and achieved the same fuel economy of the departing LLT for less cost then they really had no choice. The people that never intend on upgrading are the big winners here and there are still exhaust options beyond the one tube manifold. It saves the consumer the money they would invest into long tubes and who knows, maybe they will show nice gains being the straightest exhaust setup.

Anyway, here is the best post of this thread by Maryland Speed a page back.

I just discovered that Chrysler Pentastar V6 uses the single exhaust port design as well.

[FC_GIBB]

Originally Posted by nak3dsnake

I just discovered that Chrysler Pentastar V6 uses the single exhaust port design as well.

Good find... i test drove one of the 2011 V6's they look sharp, when i stepped on it I was like "wow..." the sales man was like "i know, impressive right" i said "no not really, I had a Camaro V6 and it was way faster." he said "oh...."
dunno why they didnt go direct injection w/ the pentastar especially coming in late in the game after chevy's 3.6 and ford's 3.7 you would think they would want to try and squeeze past chevy's V6.

But either way i see aftermarket turbo companies all over these integrated manifolds.