Camaro MPG error

[tamatt27]

I was searching through the Camaro's stats on it's website and found this:
"-A 3.6L DI VVT V6 engine with a projected 300 hp and manual six-speed transmission is standard on LS and LT models. Choose the available six-speed automatic with TAPshift to achieve an estimated 26 mpg highway
-A 6.2L V8 with a projected 400 hp with six-speed automatic transmission with TAPshift includes Active Fuel Management technology to achieve 23 mpg highway"
I think the figures listed are city, not highway. Correct?

[jkennedy293]

Nope, both are hwy figures. The CTS mpg numbers should be abot the same as the V6 numbers, and I would love to see a 400hp V8 get 23mpg in the city.

[tamatt27]

23MPG HWY?? Wonder how much worse it would be with a 4-speed! That's ridiculous...

[Buick61]

23mpg isn't bad. It's the same as the 4-door, AWD, 5-speed Automatic, Dodge Charger Hemi....oh wait, I guess it is bad if a heavier, AWD sedan with an older, 5-speed automatic matches you on highway mpg.

[impala02]

Originally Posted by Buick61

23mpg isn't bad. It's the same as the 4-door, AWD, 5-speed Automatic, Dodge Charger Hemi....oh wait, I guess it is bad if a heavier, AWD sedan with an older, 5-speed automatic matches you on highway mpg.

Too bad you failed to mention that it's the 5.7 Hemi you are talking about, which gives up 60 hp compared to the 6.2 automatic Camaro. And to be technical, the AWD Charger Hemi it actually rated at 22mpg hwy. Step up to the 425 hp Hemi, available only in RWD, and the mileage drops to 18 hwy. I know that the 2009 Charger has increased the hp of the 5.7, but there is nothing about the 2009s on the Dodge website.

http://www.dodge.com/hostc/vsmc/vehi...Code=CUD200804

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by impala02

Too bad you failed to mention that it's the 5.7 Hemi you are talking about, which gives up 60 hp compared to the 6.2 automatic Camaro. And to be technical, the AWD Charger Hemi it actually rated at 22mpg hwy. Step up to the 425 hp Hemi, available only in RWD, and the mileage drops to 18 hwy. I know that the 2009 Charger has increased the hp of the 5.7, but there is nothing about the 2009s on the Dodge website.

http://www.dodge.com/hostc/vsmc/vehi...Code=CUD200804

"Too bad you failed to mention..." Nice way to sound like a jackass. Especially when you're the one that doesn't have his facts straight.


Fueleconomy.gov and media.chrysler.com Don't be shy about looking at more than one source.

The AWD Hemi Charger is rated at 23mpg highway. (RWD is 25!). We're talking about the '09 Charger. No sense comparing the '10 Camaro to the '08 Charger, is there?

And the Charger isn't down by 60hp, it's down by 32hp (if the Camaro is actually rated at 400, which we don't know yet). Not all that significant.

Oh, and the SRT8 is up by 1mpg for 2009 to 19mpg highway.

[BigAls87Z28]

Show me a 400hp V8 car that gets better then 23mpg.

[68haywagon]

Corvette? Anyway you know you are gonna hear from the people who have previous gen camaros with mods pushing over 400hp that get 32mpg hwy

Mike

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by BigAls87Z28

Show me a 400hp V8 car that gets better then 23mpg.

Corvette.

The Camaro has less power, yet still takes a 2 mpg hit in economy over the automatic Corvette.

Heck, the HYUNDAI Genesis makes 375hp and gets a Charger tying 25mpg highway. The 4,041lb, 372hp Challenger R/T with the automatic returns 25mpg. For all the talk about the Camaro's fuel-economy, it just doesn't seem all that remarkable.

[BigAls87Z28]

Originally Posted by 68haywagon

Corvette? Anyway you know you are gonna hear from the people who have previous gen camaros with mods pushing over 400hp that get 32mpg hwy

Mike

Yes, well this is the EPA, lets remember that. This is only an EPA rating, and if you convert the 4th gen LS1 cars, they also drop to 23mpg or less.
So, lets remember that real world numbers vs EPA numbers tend to be far off.
Camaro's EPA numbers are not yet official, but probably pretty close.

[impala02]

Originally Posted by Buick61

"Too bad you failed to mention..." Nice way to sound like a jackass. Especially when you're the one that doesn't have his facts straight.


Fueleconomy.gov and media.chrysler.com Don't be shy about looking at more than one source.

The AWD Hemi Charger is rated at 23mpg highway. (RWD is 25!). We're talking about the '09 Charger. No sense comparing the '10 Camaro to the '08 Charger, is there?

And the Charger isn't down by 60hp, it's down by 32hp (if the Camaro is actually rated at 400, which we don't know yet). Not all that significant.

Oh, and the SRT8 is up by 1mpg for 2009 to 19mpg highway.

You are right. I am a jackass for going to the site that actually sells the car and looking at the specifications for the car listed on the site. In your original post, you didn't mention 2009. Shame on Dodge.com for not having the info available. 32 hp difference isn't "that" significant? Interesting. When does it reach significance? 100 hp difference? Or are you going by percent difference?

[E. Haskell]

Originally Posted by Buick61

Corvette.

The Camaro has less power, yet still takes a 2 mpg hit in economy over the automatic Corvette.

Heck, the HYUNDAI Genesis makes 375hp and gets a Charger tying 25mpg highway. The 4,041lb, 372hp Challenger R/T with the automatic returns 25mpg. For all the talk about the Camaro's fuel-economy, it just doesn't seem all that remarkable.

Why not compare cars with similar acceleration? This will allow us take into consideration something like gearing.

The Challenger SRT8 does 0-60 in 4.9 seconds.
The Camaro SS does 0-60 in 4.6 seconds

The Challenger gets 19 mpg
The Camaro gets 23 mpg

GM wins.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by impala02

You are right. I am a jackass for going to the site that actually sells the car and looking at the specifications for the car listed on the site. In your original post, you didn't mention 2009. Shame on Dodge.com for not having the info available. 32 hp difference isn't "that" significant? Interesting. When does it reach significance? 100 hp difference? Or are you going by percent difference?

Well, sir, it is the 2009 Model Year, so I don't know why we'd be talking about last year's models. So, whether or not Dodge.com is up to speed, the fact remains that Dodge has been making the 2009 Charger for two months now.

A Delta of 32 horsepower is less significant than the Delta of 60hp that you were using, is it not?

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Why not compare cars with similar acceleration? This will allow us take into consideration something like gearing.

The Challenger SRT8 does 0-60 in 4.9 seconds.
The Camaro SS does 0-60 in 4.6 seconds

The Challenger gets 19 mpg
The Camaro gets 23 mpg

GM wins.

Oh, I wasn't aware that a production 2010 Camaro had been tested by a third party. Please link us all to that information, thank you.

[E. Haskell]

Originally Posted by Buick61

Oh, I wasn't aware that a production 2010 Camaro had been tested by a third party source. Please link us all to that information, thank you.

Both times are factory claims.

Considering the Camaro is ~250lbs lighter and has an extra gear, I don't see why you would doubt that it'll be as fast or faster than the SRT8.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by E. Haskell

Both times are factory claims.

Considering the Camaro is ~250lbs lighter and has an extra gear, I don't see why you would doubt that it'll be as fast or faster than the SRT8.

The only thing I'm doubting is that those numbers are from an actual production Camaro SS, which, of course, they're not.

The Camaro has 7 speeds? The SRT8 has a 6-speed manual now, so if the Camaro has an extra gear, I'll be very impressed. And you're using mpg figures for the automatic Camaro, which will have cylinder deactivation--the manual won't.

I say, let's wait until GM actually, you know, makes the Camaro before we all go crazy with bench rancing.