New V6 Engine for 2012 Camaro?

[V8GMT360 Guy]

Doesn't E85 have crappy mileage though?

Yes, E85 does return lower fuel mileage than E10 or E15, which in my experience makes it impractical for daily driving. However, being 105 octane it's basically cheap race gas if you were to build and tune a performance engine specifically for use with E85 (high compression, etc.)

[BBDOS CV8]

if the 3.6 was tuned to run exclusively on e85 (~105 octane) and tied in with a turbo, it could make some serious power. look at what saab was doing with the 2.3t's in the 9-5's running e85.

It doesn't need exclusive E85 tuning. Tuning is recomputed several thousand times a second - you can run anything from ULP-PULP, and any ethanol mix from 0-85% and the ECU will optimise ignition, injection tune instant-instant.

Coupled with the fact SIDI is very resistant to detonation - that's where the gains come from.

The twin turbo bit - the answer's not no, just not now.

[Envoy4Life]

I remember just before it was introduced in 2001, GM had at least 1 off-road race truck with the Atlas six in it, probably just to promote it's "power of a V8" angle. I can't find anything about it online now though.

Y'know, that sounds vaguely familiar...

The Atlas family is for the most part out of the picture now anyway, or at least it will be when the GMT355s go away that are currently still using the I4 and I5.

I do remember that they played with the Atlas I6 in the beginning, including a factory built Twin-Turbocharged 4.2L in a TrailBlazer mule. Did 0-60 in 5.35 seconds, too.



Seems like a waste that this engine's development wasn't continued, I think it could have been very usable in further truck and SUV platforms (like as a replacement for the long-in-the-tooth 4.3L Vortec V6.

Yes, they did have a turbo variant. Completely forgot all about that. The 4200 was one of the smoothest engines I've ever seen. Absolutely no V6 can touch its I6 goodness. The only realistic advantages the 4.3 has over the 4.2 is cost and low end torque.

[chevypowa670]

Doesn't E85 have crappy mileage though?

Yes, and IMO it isn't as cheap as it needs to be...You get more power, but in the long run I don't think its worth it..

[miekp]

Anyone know if they fixed the timing chain issues on the DI motors? The non-DI 3.6 eats timing chains for breakfast, lunch and dinner! Its one major problem from being a great engine. Hopefully they got that issue fixed on the DI 3.6 and 3.0.

[poncho1982]

The Atlas family is for the most part out of the picture now anyway, or at least it will be when the GMT355s go away that are currently still using the I4 and I5.

I do remember that they played with the Atlas I6 in the beginning, including a factory built Twin-Turbocharged 4.2L in a TrailBlazer mule. Did 0-60 in 5.35 seconds, too.



Seems like a waste that this engine's development wasn't continued, I think it could have been very usable in further truck and SUV platforms (like as a replacement for the long-in-the-tooth 4.3L Vortec V6.

Indeed. I drive one daily. It is still a good engine, no doubt.

But I wish the Atlas i6 was in the Silverado as a base engine.

The 4.3 is more than enough for my Blazer though.

And at least its not a Ford 4.0l V6!!

[catbert]

The current 3.6 was developed for the CTS, and is expensive to produce. I'll bet this one is cheaper to make...otherwise, what's the point?

[63GrandSport001]

The current 3.6 was developed for the CTS, and is expensive to produce. I'll bet this one is cheaper to make...otherwise, what's the point?

It needs to make a bit more power in order to compete with the Ford Mustang 3.7L motor.

The Camaro Mustang battle will be mainly with the V-6 engines it seems, though a 340BHP 3.6L engine in the 2012 Camaro would be sweet. You can either get the best fuel economy or be the fastest but right now the V-6 Mustang is both.

[SAngelo]

Sport doesn't have to mean performance and speed. Sport can be semi offroad with a higher tow rating for camping and the like. Just something above LTZ to give it reputation and maybe edge them over the CR-V.

The 3.0 might make 260 + hp but it only has 223 ft lbs of Torque while the 3.6 DI in the Lacrosse (the tuned down CTS engine) has 259 ft lb's of Torque and 280 hp. I bet the MPG would be only slightly better with the 3.0 or the same because of the weight of the crossover. Also, you can keep the 3.0 as the first V6 and put the 3.6 in the Sport version. The 3.6 DI engine from the CTS or this new 3.6 should be the standard engine in the SRX but I will take it as an option to the 3.0 DI engine. What do you all think ??

[Impalibu]

The 3.0 might make 260 + hp but it only has 223 ft lbs of Torque while the 3.6 DI in the Lacrosse (the tuned down CTS engine) has 259 ft lb's of Torque and 280 hp. I bet the MPG would be only slightly better with the 3.0 or the same because of the weight of the crossover. Also, you can keep the 3.0 as the first V6 and put the 3.6 in the Sport version. The 3.6 DI engine from the CTS or this new 3.6 should be the standard engine in the SRX but I will take it as an option to the 3.0 DI engine. What do you all think ??

If the 3.6 with 280hp gets better mileage than the 3.0 and costs about the same then definitely use that. If not, might as well keep the 3.0. The 300+hp 3.6 should be for a special Sport model.

If the SRX is dropping the turbo engine then they need something to replace it. Ideally the turbo 3.0, if not this new 3.6 would do.

[Amphibian]

The 3.0 might make 260 + hp but it only has 223 ft lbs of Torque while the 3.6 DI in the Lacrosse (the tuned down CTS engine) has 259 ft lb's of Torque and 280 hp. I bet the MPG would be only slightly better with the 3.0 or the same because of the weight of the crossover. Also, you can keep the 3.0 as the first V6 and put the 3.6 in the Sport version. The 3.6 DI engine from the CTS or this new 3.6 should be the standard engine in the SRX but I will take it as an option to the 3.0 DI engine. What do you all think ??

The 3.6L, whether the existing engine or the upcoming revised one, should be standard. Lexus doesn't make you pay up for a sport version of the RX to get competitive power.

[thebuickguy]

Camaro needs ~330hp to match the power/weight ratio of the Mustang V6 or Genesis V6.

Or the pig needs to go on a diet, I'm just saying its a pony car not a muscle car wait muscle cars weigh less. Also if the car weighs less fuel economy improves, but GM in its infinite wisdom has decided that the zeta platform is God, and the Camaro would be built upon it even though its a full size car platform. Imagine an F body with that motor it would run low 13s all day if not barely run a high 12.

[Envoy4Life]

Indeed. I drive one daily. It is still a good engine, no doubt.

But I wish the Atlas i6 was in the Silverado as a base engine.

The 4.3 is more than enough for my Blazer though.

And at least its not a Ford 4.0l V6!!

The boat anchor?

Or the pig needs to go on a diet, I'm just saying its a pony car not a muscle car wait muscle cars weigh less. Also if the car weighs less fuel economy improves, but GM in its infinite wisdom has decided that the zeta platform is God, and the Camaro would be built upon it even though its a full size car platform. Imagine an F body with that motor it would run low 13s all day if not barely run a high 12.

Word of advice, don't call the Camaro a pig. Big argument on that over on another thread.

[Amphibian]

Word of advice, don't call the Camaro a pig. Big argument on that over on another thread.

YEAH! You can only say that if you're a Ferrari driver. Or something ...

[AMcA]

Heavens: they're going to put a turbocharged version into the new big Caddy. Pretty close to 400 hp, I bet.

Maybe I could get used to the idea of a V6 Caddy.