L99 discussion

[pinkcamaro10]

yeah, but who knows if that is really true or not. we will see tomorrow for sure.

[jmliptak]

Originally Posted by 4thGen

Personally, if I wanted an auto, I would want the same V8 that comes with the manual to be an option. There's talk that the autos will come with the L99 and the manuals will come with the LS3. I wouldn't be too fond of this if the LS3 wasn't also an option for the auto. I can understand an auto only model that comes with the L99, but I would still want the LS3 as an option for the auto because I want the same power. Does anyone else feel the same?

It APPEARS the L99 is the L3 with AFM, etc, its a 6.2, but it has been rumored for quite some time that there would be a hp difference between the auto and the stick..I hear what you are saying, we should know a great deal more tommorrow

[4thGen]

Originally Posted by jmliptak

It APPEARS the L99 is the L3 with AFM, etc, its a 6.2, but it has been rumored for quite some time that there would be a hp difference between the auto and the stick..I hear what you are saying, we should know a great deal more tommorrow

Well generally autos produce less power(rwhp) than manuals outright, so if I'm wanting an auto, I don't want to be restricted to buying an already less powerful engine. Hopefully I'll find out tomorrow.

[fastball]

Originally Posted by 4thGen

Personally, if I wanted an auto, I would want the same V8 that comes with the manual to be an option. There's talk that the autos will come with the L99 and the manuals will come with the LS3. I wouldn't be too fond of this if the LS3 wasn't also an option for the auto. I can understand an auto only model that comes with the L99, but I would still want the LS3 as an option for the auto because I want the same power. Does anyone else feel the same?

Honda follows this same principle. The Accord sedan and coupe with 5 speed automatics have the 3.5 V6 with AFM. On the Accord coupe, you can get a 6 speed manual, but you do not get AFM on the engine.

You cannot buy an automatic V6 without AFM. I will presume the same will be true for the Camaro L99 and LS3. I think the main reason for that is computer programing - they would need TWO ECMs for the automatic SSs, one for AFM and one without. That would increase production costs and decrease CAFE averages.

[Jak]

That's what has me puzzled. If the story is to be believed it said that the V-8 auto would be the L99 w/395 hp w/AFM and that the standard would be getting the LS3 w/420 horses a 25 horse difference, now if it is the same engine why the huge gap in horses? Now the challenger R/T for example has 370hp for the auto w/MSD and 375hp w/o MSD for the standard just a five horse difference.
Now me personally it don't matter the L99'd still kick the R/T's butt anyways and barring some huge screwup like priceing the Camaro through the Roof I'm getting this car.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Jak

That's what has me puzzled. If the story is to be believed it said that the V-8 auto would be the L99 w/395 hp w/AFM and that the standard would be getting the LS3 w/420 horses a 25 horse difference, now if it is the same engine why the huge gap in horses? Now the challenger R/T for example has 370hp for the auto w/MSD and 375hp w/o MSD for the standard just a five horse difference.
Now me personally it don't matter the L99'd still kick the R/T's butt anyways and barring some huge screwup like priceing the Camaro through the Roof I'm getting this car.

I don't understand the huge gap between the manual and auto either if the numbers are correct.. Anyone care to explain??

[willisit]

On the fuel front, my 2005 Monaro with an LS2 requires "premium" (that's 97RON here but I know the format is different to yours in the US) due to the compression ratio - making it cleaner but less easily supercharged/turbocharged.

The LS3 is no different (think it's 11:1) so I would fully expect the Camaro to need higher-octane fuel.

[shank0668]

just learn to drive stick. you can learn in a week. but in that week there will be a LOT of tire marks

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Jak

now if it is the same engine why the huge gap in horses?

Originally Posted by Supermans

I don't understand the huge gap between the manual and auto either if the numbers are correct.. Anyone care to explain??

No explanation...yet. There will be a hp discrepancy; one has AFM, and one doesn't - so it's inevitable. But keep in mind that most of the numbers released aren't...accurate. This was a British car site that 'leaked' everything, and the disciples are making it clear that the text is wrong. So wait until this afternoon, and you'll get more complete answers.

[fastball]

I would have to guess the reason for the large discrepency in HP between AFM and non-AFM is for fuel economy. They are probably really congnisant of fuel numbers, and their logic is those who buy the automatic aren't as "purist" or "enthusiast" as those who buy stick, so, a significant decrease in HP numbers won't bother those who opt for the slush box.

If you want power and the ability to modify, and don't care about fuel economy, buy stick

[shank0668]

Originally Posted by fastball

I would have to guess the reason for the large discrepency in HP between AFM and non-AFM is for fuel economy. They are probably really congnisant of fuel numbers, and their logic is those who buy the automatic aren't as "purist" or "enthusiast" as those who buy stick, so, a significant decrease in HP numbers won't bother those who opt for the slush box.

If you want power and the ability to modify, and don't care about fuel economy, buy stick

but sticks get better gas mileage thans autos

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by shank0668

but sticks get better gas mileage thans autos

not true. At least...not anymore.

But still, wait for 4PM, those numbers are WRONG.

[Jak]

Unfortunately I've got to work this afternoon , so I'll see it tonight. Now, I've been thinking about this, could GM be taking gas prices in mind with the L99? Remember awhile back Scott said to forget everything we knew about engines for the Camaro. Could the L99 be geared for regular unleaded and be set up for FlexFuel (Would that explaine the difference in HP?) where the LS3 would run on super unleaded. Yeah, I know, we'll have to wait for this afternoon for the real answers, but what do you think about this theory? Possible?

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

No explanation...yet. There will be a hp discrepancy; one has AFM, and one doesn't - so it's inevitable. But keep in mind that most of the numbers released aren't...accurate. This was a British car site that 'leaked' everything, and the disciples are making it clear that the text is wrong. So wait until this afternoon, and you'll get more complete answers.

[shank0668]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

not true. At least...not anymore.

But still, wait for 4PM, those numbers are WRONG.

hmmmmmmm my brothers 5 speed g5 gets better mpg than the auto