Four Cylinder Camaro

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

There have been 4-banger Camaros in the past, yet the Camaro is still around and you even own one. I don't see the problem. There is no indication there won't be a V6 and V8 available in the future as well. Buy the one you want, and hope enough other people do the same so they don't quit making them again.

I have been trying to warn you guys from every rooftop that the plan is not to "get rid of" the V8 Camaro and the V8 cars/trucks alltogether. There are uses for V8s that cannot be replaced such as in towing applications, etc.

The "plan" is to keep making them, but because the measurement of economy is AVERAGED across the manufacturer, the only way to meet the standard is to discourage people from buying the V8 models.

Ultimately, the V8 Camaro will be more like the ZL1 where production is limited and the price will be jacked up to levels that will prevent all but the wealthiest people from owning one.

The "masses" will get the 4-banger model and the upper middle class people will get the V-6 model which will be priced to keep the "masses" from buying too many of those, much like the SS is today.

[Scalded Dog]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

...The "plan" is to keep making them, but because the measurement of economy is AVERAGED across the manufacturer, the only way to meet the standard is to discourage people from buying the V8 models.

Ultimately, the V8 Camaro will be more like the ZL1 where production is limited and the price will be jacked up to levels that will prevent all but the wealthiest people from owning one.

The "masses" will get the 4-banger model and the upper middle class people will get the V-6 model which will be priced to keep the "masses" from buying too many of those, much like the SS is today.

That's exactly how it works: In order to get that high fleetwide AVERAGE MPG, the auto industry needs to sell, say, 10 POS/ 4 cyl/ less desirable cars for each single LOWER MPG/ 8 cyl/ more desirable car. This then gives a high AVERAGE MPG for the fleetwide sales of any manufacturer who wishes to sell in the U.S.

The only way to make this happen is to adjust the prices on all vehicles; in order to make 10 people choose the little econojunk while only ONE person chooses the desirable car... and the ONLY way to do that is to make artificially low prices on every economy car, and artificially HIGH prices for each non- economy car. Therefore, 4- bangers will be dirt cheap (often less than the cost of manufacturing), while, yes, all "nice" cars will be priced WAY out of the league of regular folks, and will be affordable by only the very wealthy. Note, too, that in this political era of fake "equality" for all, it puts the lower income people in inherently less- safe vehicles, while only the wealthy will be able to afford the larger (more- safe) vehicles.

But... that's liberal thinking: No more than five seconds into the future: "Hey let's force auto manufacturers to produce high mileage vehicles!" This brilliant plan has not considered the ramifications, including the inevitable result that lower income people with be adversely affected by being excluded from larger, safer vehicles.

Can't wait to see how this all unravels... Go, Big Brother!

[E.T.]

Originally Posted by nm1458

My srt-4 2.4l turbo, 2900 lbs is faster than my 2010 ss ls3. I think the turbo would be sweet.

It's not just about speed; it's also about sound and looks. There's nothing quite like a big 'ol V8....just puts a smile on my face

[Bonanza7]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

It would be sweeter on a V8.

If they find a way to make turbos reliable and reasonably priced to repair. We have them in some of the planes we fly at the charter co. They are a constant pain in the ass. And they are GOOD turbos. Far better than what you get in cars.

[TastyBake]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

You havce it backwards. Even Political Ads have become automotive.

We got one guy running ads now promising to "Double Fuel Economy" in his next term. How many people think this can be done in a short time and will not add significant cost and because the way the measurments are averaged will harm Muscle Car owners the most?



At least his side is giving some semblance of FACTS. I like exaggerated facts over exaggerated lies any day of the week.

Ok.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Scalded Dog

That's exactly how it works: In order to get that high fleetwide AVERAGE MPG, the auto industry needs to sell, say, 10 POS/ 4 cyl/ less desirable cars for each single LOWER MPG/ 8 cyl/ more desirable car. This then gives a high AVERAGE MPG for the fleetwide sales of any manufacturer who wishes to sell in the U.S.

The only way to make this happen is to adjust the prices on all vehicles; in order to make 10 people choose the little econojunk while only ONE person chooses the desirable car... and the ONLY way to do that is to make artificially low prices on every economy car, and artificially HIGH prices for each non- economy car. Therefore, 4- bangers will be dirt cheap (often less than the cost of manufacturing), while, yes, all "nice" cars will be priced WAY out of the league of regular folks, and will be affordable by only the very wealthy. Note, too, that in this political era of fake "equality" for all, it puts the lower income people in inherently less- safe vehicles, while only the wealthy will be able to afford the larger (more- safe) vehicles.

But... that's liberal thinking: No more than five seconds into the future: "Hey let's force auto manufacturers to produce high mileage vehicles!" This brilliant plan has not considered the ramifications, including the inevitable result that lower income people with be adversely affected by being excluded from larger, safer vehicles.

Can't wait to see how this all unravels... Go, Big Brother!

The funny part is how many people refuse to see this is happening and actually defend this kind of meddling in our lives as if it is a good thing and will actually solve problems (real or imaginary).

I wonder how many posts before someone starts calling you "paranoid" or accuse you of listening to the wrong information sources? You are somehow the silly one for doing your own research and applying common sense and ignoring all of the dropout washed up actors and B-list comedians who will tell you the "truth".

LOL.

[GretchenGotGrowl]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I have been trying to warn you guys from every rooftop that the plan is not to "get rid of" the V8 Camaro and the V8 cars/trucks alltogether. There are uses for V8s that cannot be replaced such as in towing applications, etc.

The "plan" is to keep making them, but because the measurement of economy is AVERAGED across the manufacturer, the only way to meet the standard is to discourage people from buying the V8 models.

Ultimately, the V8 Camaro will be more like the ZL1 where production is limited and the price will be jacked up to levels that will prevent all but the wealthiest people from owning one.

The "masses" will get the 4-banger model and the upper middle class people will get the V-6 model which will be priced to keep the "masses" from buying too many of those, much like the SS is today.

My ecoboost f150 tows just fine.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Bonanza7

If they find a way to make turbos reliable and reasonably priced to repair. We have them in some of the planes we fly at the charter co. They are a constant pain in the ass. And they are GOOD turbos. Far better than what you get in cars.

I was just pointing out the hypocrites who promote that 4-cylinders in some exotics and racing cars are way more powerful than our "antiquated" V8 engines amd we are a bunch of luddites for refusing to embrace the new technology.

My point to them is that any fancy crap they can throw on a 4-cyl engine to make it as powerful as a V8 can just as easily be put on an 8-cylinder engine and make it just as much better than the best 4-cylinder made.

Why people think that we can only improve a 4-cylinder is mind boggling.

[TastyBake]

What about chevy making a performance 4 cyl turbo rear wheel car in general? Maybe not the camaro.

Remember car companies goal is to sell cars. Would a car like that sell?

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl

My ecoboost f150 tows just fine.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

Does it tow the same amout as the F-450 Super Duty?

If not, why not?

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by TastyBake

What about chevy making a performance 4 cyl turbo rear wheel car in general? Maybe not the camaro.

Remember car companies goal is to sell cars. Would a car like that sell?

I would not mind if they made a reworked Solstice or Sky with all the tech they can cram into it and sell it as such, instead of having all these people clamoring for GM to transform the Camaro into that.

[jd10013]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

I need to correct you on this point. These rules are made by regulators, not legislators. We vote for legislators and can influence their rules because they represent the people.

Regulators, on the other hand are not elected, and therefore do not answer to the people. They do whatever they want, and as they are wont to do, they often impose their own personal views and biases into the rules they make.

.

not quite. the regulators have to be authorized by law to regulate. for example, the legislature could remove EPA's ability to set CAFE any time it wanted. it would simply take a majority vote and presidential signature. I think the politicians like having the regulators around to take all the heat for what they do or don't do. "don't blame me, it was the regulators"

as for the whole I-4 thing, I'd be surprised to see it happen. yea, you could probably make a TT 4 that performed pretty well, but I don't see how they keep the cost down to where people would buy it. the camaro is a low production, limited market vehicle. even if GM could design one that got 100mpg they just don't sell enough of them to have anything but a negligible impact on their fleet average. where the gains are going to have to be made are in the truck and SUV segments. they not only get some of the worst MPG, they probably make up over half of GM's vehicle sales.

[TastyBake]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Does it tow the same amout as the F-450 Super Duty?

If not, why not?

You go to a diesel V8.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by jd10013

not quite. the regulators have to be authorized by law to regulate. for example, the legislature could remove EPA's ability to set CAFE any time it wanted. it would simply take a majority vote and presidential signature.

This is where it gets bad.

These agencies have the ability to spew out ANYTHING they want without any approval process, and our way of stopping them has to go through a lengthy and difficult political process and all of the problems that entails.

We have seen countless times they they publish a regulation, we fight for months or years to stop it, and the day we end it they publish a different regulation that does the exact same thing with a different name, and we go back to square 1.

It is like we have to play by a rule book that they don't have to use.