GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I found this noteworthy as it shows the media (CNN in this case) apparently bought off on the whole fuel economy focus rather than bashing GM for releasing a fuel-hungry sports car, which American's don't want.

When unveiling new performance models, car companies usually boast about horsepower, engine size and expected zero-to-60 times.

But when General Motors unveiled the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro Monday afternoon, it was the car's fuel economy numbers that were front and center.

It's the return of a once-popular model that has been out of production since the 2002 model year. V6 versions, which GM expects will be the biggest sellers, are expected to get 26 miles per gallon on the highway. That's about the same as a V6 Ford Mustang, while boasting the same horsepower output as a V8 Mustang.
More at link: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/autos/0807/gallery.2010_chevrolet_camaro/index.html
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,963 Posts
Awesome...GM has done well.
Take the focus off the V8's. The V8's will sell no matter what, its the V6 that will make or break this car. GM adding the RS package, which gives a lot of customers what they want (halo headlights, big wheels, better handling) was a great move.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
At one point there was talk of Camaro using the 2.0L GDI Ecotec Turbo (Solstice, Sky, Cobalt and HHR SS). I wonder if this will still happen at some point. I think it would make a nice entry level powertrain for Camaro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,170 Posts
26 highway is commendable for a 3700 lb car, but not enough. There should be a base engine geared to break 30 on the freeway.

I would like to see the DI 3.0L available as a base choice geared for 30+ freeway, and the 3.6L DI as a no cost upgrade. Think Cobalt XFE for Camaro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
958 Posts
26 highway is commendable for a 3700 lb car, but not enough. There should be a base engine geared to break 30 on the freeway.

I would like to see the DI 3.0L available as a base choice geared for 30+ freeway, and the 3.6L DI as a no cost upgrade. Think Cobalt XFE for Camaro.
I would think 30 mpg might be a little tough with that car - it doesn't look very aerodynamic which as I understand is no small thing contributing to the fuel mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
In comparison:

Civic Si = 29 MPG (premium fuel)
Accord coupe V6 = 28 MPG -- 25MPG/manual
Mustang = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual
Altima Coupe = auto/26MPG -- manual/27MPG (premium fuel)
Solara V6 = 27 MPG
G37 coupe = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Scion tC = 29MPG/auto -- 27MPG/manual
RX8 = 23MPG/auto -- 22MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Mazdaspeed3 = 26MPG (premium fuel)

The Camaro V6 is just as efficient as any comparable car with a shred of performance. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,419 Posts
26 highway is commendable for a 3700 lb car, but not enough. There should be a base engine geared to break 30 on the freeway.

I would like to see the DI 3.0L available as a base choice geared for 30+ freeway, and the 3.6L DI as a no cost upgrade. Think Cobalt XFE for Camaro.
I agree. I think it's pretty pathetic that the V8 gets 23 miles per gallon on the highway. With a 6 speed automatic OR manual! They can do a helluva lot better than that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,197 Posts
In comparison:

Civic Si = 29 MPG (premium fuel)
Accord coupe V6 = 28 MPG -- 25MPG/manual
Mustang = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual
Altima Coupe = auto/26MPG -- manual/27MPG (premium fuel)
Solara V6 = 27 MPG
G37 coupe = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Scion tC = 29MPG/auto -- 27MPG/manual
RX8 = 23MPG/auto -- 22MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Mazdaspeed3 = 26MPG (premium fuel)

The Camaro V6 is just as efficient as any comparable car with a shred of performance. :)
good point, now if it uses regular gas it would be in good shape. i am a bit suprised by some of the numbers. if you look at it, GM makes larger engines that get good gas mileage.

Alan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
At one point there was talk of Camaro using the 2.0L GDI Ecotec Turbo (Solstice, Sky, Cobalt and HHR SS). I wonder if this will still happen at some point. I think it would make a nice entry level powertrain for Camaro.
Would it really make a noteworthy difference? It has been my observation that the vehicle itself (weight and aerodynamics) affects the mileage alot more than the engine attached to it.

For example, look at the mileage of the 3.6/6speed malibu vs. the lamdas. Same powertrain, way different numbers. Now if you look back at the old camaro's, the LS1 only lost an 1-2 MPG over its 3800V6 counterpart.

So I guess the question is, will a 4 cylinder turbo made in europe be cheaper to ship over and use; or is it better to stick with a simpler 6 cylinder.

Im sure they'd see SOME mileage increase, but I dont think it would be worthwhile, nor break the 30 MPG barrier unless it was given a really high final drive ratio, thus killing low-end acceleration.

But I'm no engineer.. so who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
"So I guess the question is, will a 4 cylinder turbo made in europe be cheaper to ship over and use; or is it better to stick with a simpler 6 cylinder"

Well maybe you are right... how about the 3.5L V6 as a base. I get fantastic mileage with it in my 2007 Impala, and it only has the 4 speed automatic, no 6 speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
I found this noteworthy as it shows the media (CNN in this case) apparently bought off on the whole fuel economy focus rather than bashing GM for releasing a fuel-hungry sports car, which American's don't want.



More at link: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/autos/0807/gallery.2010_chevrolet_camaro/index.html

Not a bad idea, unless it backfires, remember the 2010 Mustang will be out about the same time as Camaro, and its supposed to be getting the 3.5L V6, which is rated at 28 on the Taurus (granted only 263 Horsepower, but I don't think thats going to matter greatly to the V6 buyer so much as fuel economy). I expect the Mustang to get at least the same as Taurus, despite being less aero, it is a smaller lighter car so I expect a wash on that.

Unfortunately, I don't think its going to matter much as I suspect most consumers are going to want 30 MPG+.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
In comparison:

Civic Si = 29 MPG (premium fuel)
Accord coupe V6 = 28 MPG -- 25MPG/manual
Mustang = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual
Altima Coupe = auto/26MPG -- manual/27MPG (premium fuel)
Solara V6 = 27 MPG
G37 coupe = 24MPG/auto -- 26MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Scion tC = 29MPG/auto -- 27MPG/manual
RX8 = 23MPG/auto -- 22MPG/manual (premium fuel)
Mazdaspeed3 = 26MPG (premium fuel)

The Camaro V6 is just as efficient as any comparable car with a shred of performance. :)
I sure wish GM would advertise it JUST like that, along with a picture of each to show the bland styling most of those offer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
I agree. I think it's pretty pathetic that the V8 gets 23 miles per gallon on the highway. With a 6 speed automatic OR manual! They can do a helluva lot better than that.
Or can they? Look at the 350hp+ cars on the market and the gas mileage they get.

Challenger SRT8 = 18MPG
GT500 = 20MPG
RX8 (238hp) = 23MPG
EVO X (291hp) = 22MPG
GTR = 21MPG
M3 = 20MPG
WRX STI (305hp) = 23MPG

Considering those numbers, I think 23 MPG for the SS is pretty impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,501 Posts
I imagine if they put in a 2.56 or 2.73 final drive ratio for a base V-6 model and 6 speed automatic it would break 30 mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
Or can they? Look at the 350hp+ cars on the market and the gas mileage they get.

Challenger SRT8 = 18MPG
GT500 = 20MPG
RX8 (238hp) = 23MPG
EVO X (291hp) = 22MPG
GTR = 21MPG
M3 = 20MPG
WRX STI (305hp) = 23MPG

Considering those numbers, I think 23 MPG for the SS is pretty impressive.
Again, GM needs to advertise it JUST like that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,640 Posts
Great article and very respectable estimated MPG.
I bet it is an under estimated a bit and with people slowing down it shopuld hit atleased 29~30 HWY. ^speed all around is awsome too!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,569 Posts
They say the V6 can do 0-60 in 6.1 seconds. I don't think there would be any shame in having a model tuned for better mileage that does 0-60 in ~6.8 seconds. That wouldn't be extremely slow considering the current Mustang V6 runs about the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,640 Posts
I agree. I think it's pretty pathetic that the V8 gets 23 miles per gallon on the highway. With a 6 speed automatic OR manual! They can do a helluva lot better than that.
Once again I think that is an under estimated number. Also try to keep in mind you are looking at 400+HP in a 370Lb vehicle. Most trucks midsize are getting the same if not less with considerably LESS HP!!!;)
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
Top