Trim Levels, Pricing, Configurator For '16 Camaro Revealed!

[Drew Dowdell]

Quite true

[hyperv6]

Ok now that the performance numbers are out anyone want to still complain about the increase in price?

 

These numbers are looking pretty good. I will be interested if the braking number improve in the review testing. They are not bad but not as good as I expected.

[El Kabong]

It's a car that will almost certainly break into the threes in 0-60, it's going to corner at roughly 1g sustained, and it's going to ring in at 37 grand.

It's absolutely ridiculous that all this comes from the factory with a full warranty.

[ccap41]

I mean..I'll still complain about it.. I still don't like that you're forced into more equipment even if "most" order it with that stuff. I understand why they did what they did but I still don't like it as a consumer.

[ccap41]

This is one reason why..

2002 camaro z28 was 22,500 - adjusted to 29,800 for inflation.

[El Kabong]

But a 2016 Camaro four-banger starts at 27 grand and matches that old smallblock's numbers.

[cp-the-nerd]

That's my thought exactly. And if the boosted 4-cylinder sound/feel puts you off, give the V6 a try. The pre-production models had a shockingly good exhaust note and induction sound. It will be nearly as fast as the old Z28, be twice the driver's car, and get at least 5 more MPG. All for around $30k.

 

The new Camaro SS is simply NOT comparable to past SS models. It's just not. 455 hp and sports car reflexes? You couldn't buy cars as good as the upcoming $40k Camaro SS for ANY PRICE 15 years ago.

[ccap41]

I completely understand what you're saying but I bet they were saying the same exact thing in '02 with that camaro.

It's just hard to swallow north of 37k for a starting price on a v8. I know it's inevitable due to CAFE and the tech that's been put into the car but I still don't like it..

[El Kabong]

The '02 Camaro, however, WAS a different case. It's acceleration numbers were still not moved on from the classic pony car era (though they were pretty much at the tipping point). Thus, some old-timers likely groused in the same way you currently are. I can't say if the grousing was justified because I don't know what the buying power of a dollar was back in the day.

But this new SS is light-years beyond any of its predecessors. Like I said, I fully expect that some hoon/reviewer will sneak it into the threes to 60. That's the kind of number that would make people's heads explode back in the Sixties. And we won't even begin to discuss the handling or braking.

In the meantime, credit GM for at least setting up a fairly constant dollar/hp scale with the four-banger. The only thing you don't get from the old F-body is the exhaust rumble.

And the rear axle tramp/judder.

And the flexi-flyer chassis.

And the Fisher-Price plastics.

And the Caprice Classic steering wheel.

And the weird tumor in the passenger footwell where the catalytic converter used to live.

And...

Edited September 16, 2015 by El Kabong

[hyperv6]

You could buy a car that handles and ran as well back in 2002 but it generally had no interior, a cage and open exhaust. You could not drive it in the rain as there was no tread, it had no AC and the engine was to temperamental that it was a paint to drive.

You can add this to the list above. Don't also forget the window lifts that were well known to fail.

 

What also many forget is that even on the Turbo 4 you should be able to have it tuned for less than $1000 and add much more power with out even opening up the engine. I know the LNF was good to 400 HP before GM said to upgrade the rods and pistons. Most other parts will go over 500 HP with no issue.

 

As for bundles. Well GM could go back to the old way and build them by the option but that would only add to the price. Bundling is a way that they can make more money but also hold the cost down for the consumer. It sounds odd but if you make all the cars with a specific minimum of options the cost of many of these options get spread out over all the cars and not just a few. This in turn lets GM buy parts in volume cheaper and offer the parts at a lower cost to the customer. Most people want the better value.

Lets face the reality here few have any interest in a gutted or low option car anymore. If you are racing you buy a crashed one or a body in white.

Too many dealers have in the past gotten stuck with the orphan car with few options they have a hard time unloading even below cost. So they have no interest either.

Even if you did discontent a car out and sell it with few options  you would be surprised how little it would effect price.

 

I too wish cars were cheaper. The fact is this car offers much more for the money than the price went up. On the other hand you have cars like a Sonic RS that are near $25K loaded and just not worth the price. Even a stripped base model is too expensive for what you get.

 

There are no $9,999 Cavaliers or S10's offered anymore.

Thought there is a Snyder now offered that can be had for $6995 if you are ok with no air bag along with Chinese quality and only 3 wheels. Saw a red one last week and still can't get the image of Clarkson in a Robin Reliant out of my mind.

Edited September 16, 2015 by hyperv6

[ccap41]

But, like I said, people probably said the same exact thing in '02 when that came out. I mean it was a low 13 second car, was it not? Yeah it handled like "crap" to todays standards but how many people EVER are trying to take turns so agressive on the streets that a crummmy live rear axle won't take?

 

The "muscle car ear" was cars running 15's through the quarter mile not 13's.

 

Where 95% of owners will use these cars they've gained 1 second through the quarter.

 

Yes, the interior is light years better than those of back in the day. But 7k better?

 

I don't know.. I'm just saying I will still think it is over priced regarless of the sustained g's it can hold or how fast it's figure eight time is. I'm just more a fan of the way these cars once were with raw power and just go fast in a straight line for a reasonable price. Like I said the Z28 back in '02 started at $29,800 in today's money. And even back then it was probably picking on the bigger more expensive cars. For instance, the C32 AMG and S4 of the early 2000's were also low 13 second cars. All three pulling 0.85-0.9g on the skid pad as well.

[Guest wings4life]

So as I read the nonstop high praise for the turbo 4 cylinder Camaro, which costs about $1500 more than turbo Mustang btw, I can’t help but recall the nonstop bashing that the same people did on the turbo Mustang, literally for many months and many threads and many, many posts.  Yeah, it must just be us sensitive ‘Fordies.’

 

Anyway, so SS drops when, next spring. I’m sure the numbers will be good, but I will say it again, too bad GM is taking this extreme pricing route and excluding many who simply want a good V8 that performs excellent, to cater to those who want a bit more excellent.  Looks like consumer choice has taken a severely cramped back seat, to bragging rights for base performance cars. Dam shame.  What’s next, super car levels that nobody can afford.

 

No thanks. Well, there is always Mustang and Charger.   

[hyperv6]

So as I read the nonstop high praise for the turbo 4 cylinder Camaro, which costs about $1500 more than turbo Mustang btw, I can’t help but recall the nonstop bashing that the same people did on the turbo Mustang, literally for many months and many threads and many, many posts.  Yeah, it must just be us sensitive ‘Fordies.’

 

Anyway, so SS drops when, next spring. I’m sure the numbers will be good, but I will say it again, too bad GM is taking this extreme pricing route and excluding many who simply want a good V8 that performs excellent, to cater to those who want a bit more excellent.  Looks like consumer choice has taken a severely cramped back seat, to bragging rights for base performance cars. Dam shame.  What’s next, super car levels that nobody can afford.

 

No thanks. Well, there is always Mustang and Charger.   

I have no beef with the Mustang turbo. I wish GM had matched the HP.

But to condemn the Camaro for the things you listed before you have seen one let alone been in one is as short sighted as condemning a Mustang Turbo and praising a Camaro Turbo.

The back seat is not great in any of these cars if you are honest and to be even more honest it is not a priority. If it is the customer is buying a sedan anyways. Now if any of them were a sedan with a cramped back seat then you would have a legitimate issue.

Again if you are honest when you look at the cars sold by all three makers most are at least optioned to the same degree. Very few base models are built let alone sold. The fact is what most customers are getting are similar in price and equipment regardless of what the base model offers.

The fact is we sell parts to these guys that buy these cars and most add thousands of dollars the same week they buy the car just for aftermarket parts. I have already had heard calls for parts for the Camaro and it is not even on sale yet.

The price difference we are talking is what many are just dropping on a good set of wheels and tires.

If you can't afford the $3500 difference then you really should not be buying one of these cars anyways. Cutting it that close is not the way to own a car.

If they can't afford that odds are they are not going to buy the Mustang anyways and the Charger either.

Cross shopping here is not something you see often as most people remain loyal and will pay the small difference to remain loyal.

This is about value and what you get for the money. GM will market this and they have a car compelling enough to pull it off.

Also if there are any slow sales the special option package discount will be slipped in. I really don't think GM will a have any issue selling a Camaro in the next few years.

[ccap41]

 

I have no beef with the Mustang turbo. I wish GM had matched the HP.

But to condemn the Camaro for the things you listed before you have seen one let alone been in one is as short sighted as condemning a Mustang Turbo and praising a Camaro Turbo.

The back seat is not great in any of these cars if you are honest and to be even more honest it is not a priority. If it is the customer is buying a sedan anyways. Now if any of them were a sedan with a cramped back seat then you would have a legitimate issue.

Again if you are honest when you look at the cars sold by all three makers most are at least optioned to the same degree. Very few base models are built let alone sold. The fact is what most customers are getting are similar in price and equipment regardless of what the base model offers.

The fact is we sell parts to these guys that buy these cars and most add thousands of dollars the same week they buy the car just for aftermarket parts. I have already had heard calls for parts for the Camaro and it is not even on sale yet.

The price difference we are talking is what many are just dropping on a good set of wheels and tires.

If you can't afford the $3500 difference then you really should not be buying one of these cars anyways. Cutting it that close is not the way to own a car.

If they can't afford that odds are they are not going to buy the Mustang anyways and the Charger either.

Cross shopping here is not something you see often as most people remain loyal and will pay the small difference to remain loyal.

This is about value and what you get for the money. GM will market this and they have a car compelling enough to pull it off.

Also if there are any slow sales the special option package discount will be slipped in. I really don't think GM will a have any issue selling a Camaro in the next few years.

 

 

 

But as a consumer you will be drawing a line somewhere, correct? Lets say I can absolutely safely afford a 35k car. 2 cars are on that list and 1 isn't.  I can get some extra options on those other two as well. A smart consumer will find out what they can comfortably afford and draw a firm line there no matter what.

Edited September 16, 2015 by ccap41

[Guest wings4life]

 

So as I read the nonstop high praise for the turbo 4 cylinder Camaro, which costs about $1500 more than turbo Mustang btw, I can’t help but recall the nonstop bashing that the same people did on the turbo Mustang, literally for many months and many threads and many, many posts.  Yeah, it must just be us sensitive ‘Fordies.’

 

Anyway, so SS drops when, next spring. I’m sure the numbers will be good, but I will say it again, too bad GM is taking this extreme pricing route and excluding many who simply want a good V8 that performs excellent, to cater to those who want a bit more excellent.  Looks like consumer choice has taken a severely cramped back seat, to bragging rights for base performance cars. Dam shame.  What’s next, super car levels that nobody can afford.

 

No thanks. Well, there is always Mustang and Charger.   

I have no beef with the Mustang turbo. I wish GM had matched the HP.

But to condemn the Camaro for the things you listed before you have seen one let alone been in one is as short sighted as condemning a Mustang Turbo and praising a Camaro Turbo.

The back seat is not great in any of these cars if you are honest and to be even more honest it is not a priority. If it is the customer is buying a sedan anyways. Now if any of them were a sedan with a cramped back seat then you would have a legitimate issue.

Again if you are honest when you look at the cars sold by all three makers most are at least optioned to the same degree. Very few base models are built let alone sold. The fact is what most customers are getting are similar in price and equipment regardless of what the base model offers.

The fact is we sell parts to these guys that buy these cars and most add thousands of dollars the same week they buy the car just for aftermarket parts. I have already had heard calls for parts for the Camaro and it is not even on sale yet.

The price difference we are talking is what many are just dropping on a good set of wheels and tires.

If you can't afford the $3500 difference then you really should not be buying one of these cars anyways. Cutting it that close is not the way to own a car.

If they can't afford that odds are they are not going to buy the Mustang anyways and the Charger either.

Cross shopping here is not something you see often as most people remain loyal and will pay the small difference to remain loyal.

This is about value and what you get for the money. GM will market this and they have a car compelling enough to pull it off.

Also if there are any slow sales the special option package discount will be slipped in. I really don't think GM will a have any issue selling a Camaro in the next few years.

 

 

 

I never said a negative word toward the camaro, and the cramped back seat was a figure of speech. 

[David]

Most back seats in auto's like the Muttang and Camero have cramped back seats.

[hyperv6]

So as I read the nonstop high praise for the turbo 4 cylinder Camaro, which costs about $1500 more than turbo Mustang btw, I can’t help but recall the nonstop bashing that the same people did on the turbo Mustang, literally for many months and many threads and many, many posts.  Yeah, it must just be us sensitive ‘Fordies.’

 

Anyway, so SS drops when, next spring. I’m sure the numbers will be good, but I will say it again, too bad GM is taking this extreme pricing route and excluding many who simply want a good V8 that performs excellent, to cater to those who want a bit more excellent.  Looks like consumer choice has taken a severely cramped back seat, to bragging rights for base performance cars. Dam shame.  What’s next, super car levels that nobody can afford.

 

No thanks. Well, there is always Mustang and Charger.   

I have no beef with the Mustang turbo. I wish GM had matched the HP.

But to condemn the Camaro for the things you listed before you have seen one let alone been in one is as short sighted as condemning a Mustang Turbo and praising a Camaro Turbo.

The back seat is not great in any of these cars if you are honest and to be even more honest it is not a priority. If it is the customer is buying a sedan anyways. Now if any of them were a sedan with a cramped back seat then you would have a legitimate issue.

Again if you are honest when you look at the cars sold by all three makers most are at least optioned to the same degree. Very few base models are built let alone sold. The fact is what most customers are getting are similar in price and equipment regardless of what the base model offers.

The fact is we sell parts to these guys that buy these cars and most add thousands of dollars the same week they buy the car just for aftermarket parts. I have already had heard calls for parts for the Camaro and it is not even on sale yet.

The price difference we are talking is what many are just dropping on a good set of wheels and tires.

If you can't afford the $3500 difference then you really should not be buying one of these cars anyways. Cutting it that close is not the way to own a car.

If they can't afford that odds are they are not going to buy the Mustang anyways and the Charger either.

Cross shopping here is not something you see often as most people remain loyal and will pay the small difference to remain loyal.

This is about value and what you get for the money. GM will market this and they have a car compelling enough to pull it off.

Also if there are any slow sales the special option package discount will be slipped in. I really don't think GM will a have any issue selling a Camaro in the next few years.

 

 

I never said a negative word toward the camaro, and the cramped back seat was a figure of speech.

I had no issue with what you said. Just observations of owners that are in this class. You are good!

[hyperv6]

I have no beef with the Mustang turbo. I wish GM had matched the HP.

But to condemn the Camaro for the things you listed before you have seen one let alone been in one is as short sighted as condemning a Mustang Turbo and praising a Camaro Turbo.

The back seat is not great in any of these cars if you are honest and to be even more honest it is not a priority. If it is the customer is buying a sedan anyways. Now if any of them were a sedan with a cramped back seat then you would have a legitimate issue.

Again if you are honest when you look at the cars sold by all three makers most are at least optioned to the same degree. Very few base models are built let alone sold. The fact is what most customers are getting are similar in price and equipment regardless of what the base model offers.

The fact is we sell parts to these guys that buy these cars and most add thousands of dollars the same week they buy the car just for aftermarket parts. I have already had heard calls for parts for the Camaro and it is not even on sale yet.

The price difference we are talking is what many are just dropping on a good set of wheels and tires.

If you can't afford the $3500 difference then you really should not be buying one of these cars anyways. Cutting it that close is not the way to own a car.

If they can't afford that odds are they are not going to buy the Mustang anyways and the Charger either.

Cross shopping here is not something you see often as most people remain loyal and will pay the small difference to remain loyal.

This is about value and what you get for the money. GM will market this and they have a car compelling enough to pull it off.

Also if there are any slow sales the special option package discount will be slipped in. I really don't think GM will a have any issue selling a Camaro in the next few years.

 

 

But as a consumer you will be drawing a line somewhere, correct? Lets say I can absolutely safely afford a 35k car. 2 cars are on that list and 1 isn't.  I can get some extra options on those other two as well. A smart consumer will find out what they can comfortably afford and draw a firm line there no matter what.

$5K is not going to move me one way or the other. Most people in this class already spend more than the base price for the SS anyways as most are well optioned to start with. This is not an entry level class anymore not has it been for years.

Pontiac did the same thing with the TA as it was a Camaro with some restyling and some extra options include standard. GMC does it now with a slightly higher price but more standard features.

Now here is the real factor in this class. We are not comparing Accord, Malibu, Camry, Fusion. These cars are more inclined to be cross shopped.

But you get to a Mustang, Camaro and Challenger the customers are more like the truck market and band loyal. GM has generally been more expensive with the Camaro than the Mustang for years but have offered some extra things.

If there is any cross shopping with the Camaro, Mustang and Challenger it is mostly with engine inside the model. If you are so broke you can not afford a V8 you are going to go with the V6 in the same segment or just not buy at all. Few Mustang and Camaro owner will swap brands. As for the 4 cylinder most will be new owners to the brand as this engine represent a different demo than what the V6 and V8 already cover. Sure some may move down to play but most of the others are V8 till I die kind of customers.

If this was a general appliance like car then yes I buy your argument. But this segment is not that kind of segment and anyone willing to buy an SS is not going to let $4K stop them.

Look at what the addition of $4000 to a payment for one of these cars and few who are buying will not stop them. Most would have ordered the RS package anyways so they are already getting what they would have optioned anyways.

In the end do not expect to see discounts and rebated on the Camaro in the near future. Also I expect them to pick up the pace they had a year ago with the old car.

Also factor in too that no one with a stable mine pays sticker either. The prices will be below these numbers we see so the they be cheaper than posted.

Edited September 16, 2015 by hyperv6

[Guest wings4life]

Thanks hyper.

 

No prob at all, and as posters go actually, I enjoy yours a lot and you are one of the better posters here so no issues whatsoever. My remarks were mostly focused on the one, maybe two individuals, who spare no bandwidth when it comes to picking apart everything Ford does, yet hypocritically praises the same exact moves GM makes.  We all know who this is.

[ccap41]

"If this was a general appliance like car then yes I buy your argument. But this segment is not that kind of segment and anyone willing to buy an SS is not going to let $4K stop them."

 

I feel like this was a great way to word/sum it up. Very good point, sir

[hyperv6]

"If this was a general appliance like car then yes I buy your argument. But this segment is not that kind of segment and anyone willing to buy an SS is not going to let $4K stop them."

 

I feel like this was a great way to word/sum it up. Very good point, sir

Thanks hyper.

 

No prob at all, and as posters go actually, I enjoy yours a lot and you are one of the better posters here so no issues whatsoever. My remarks were mostly focused on the one, maybe two individuals, who spare no bandwidth when it comes to picking apart everything Ford does, yet hypocritically praises the same exact moves GM makes.  We all know who this is.

Thank you and thank you!

This segment is all about how fast do you want to go? How much are you willing to spend?

The last real value performance car was the Fox body Mustang. They were cheap to buy and cheap to make fast. The new car is not like that anymore as are the others in class. Most guys buy as much factory speed as they can and then it is still not cheap to make it faster.

I hope the two turbo cars make it easy to go faster as you can add 50+ HP and 80 FT LBS with just a flash and two 3 bar maps if it only has two. I did it and my torque was limited to 65 FT LBS because of the tranny. The Solstice with the same kit gains 80 FT LBS to 340 FT LBS out of a LNF.

Note too this set up was is under the full GM warranty too so it is not near the edge.

Here is a book everyone needs to read. It is getting older but still applies to the new engines that can do even more. It list out how far you can take an Eco engine and it will amaze you. Might look around as some folks have put it on line.

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/nal-88958728

This little engine rivals the ZR1 in performance per cylinder.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

I understand that the bottom end of the EcoTech is capable of up to 800 hp.

Not sure what the 2.3L is capable of, but one thing for sure, these turbo engines are capable of far more.

[El Kabong]

October 16 is the date MT's first drive report will break (of course Jalopnik will break it, because Jalopnik. Still). On that day, I'm guessing that we will see why the SS will be worth every penny of that 37 grand. We will probably get a feel for the differences between the four and the V6, and we will probably get hard numbers shortly after that, since production at Lansing is just starting to come online. Given that the competition is heavier and rarely purchased bare-bones, I expect price to be a complete non-issue.

Speaking as a former Camaro owner, I suspect that I will be a future Camaro owner.

[hyperv6]

I understand that the bottom end of the EcoTech is capable of up to 800 hp.

Not sure what the 2.3L is capable of, but one thing for sure, these turbo engines are capable of far more.

I was lucky to be around John Lingenfelter back when he was racing the Eco. He was using the stock block and head up to 1500 HP before the head cracked. It was the Saab version that the LNF was patterned after.

I expect the Ford also will be able to take a fair amount of power because today the MFG are not short cutting these engines and are building them to take much more abuse than ever.

I see daily 23 PSI of boost and back in the old SVO and GN days 12 PSI was a lot. Things like Sodium valves, the pistons are oil cooled the DI cools the cylinder, standard compressions have risen. The crazy part is how stiff the Ford and GM blocks are now and they are lighter.

The Ford is a good engine but the GM is as good or better but they did such a bad job of marketing it most people have no clue.

Anyways I can see the after market taking these engines on and doing much with them. The only question I have is how will the insurance companies deal with them. Will they swack them for younger drivers or will they give them a break from the V8. If they give them a break the younger buyers may take interest. These cars can be the American Skyliner. It is not easy to drift a FWD Civic.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

I understand that the bottom end of the EcoTech is capable of up to 800 hp.

Not sure what the 2.3L is capable of, but one thing for sure, these turbo engines are capable of far more.

I was lucky to be around John Lingenfelter back when he was racing the Eco. He was using the stock block and head up to 1500 HP before the head cracked. It was the Saab version that the LNF was patterned after.

I expect the Ford also will be able to take a fair amount of power because today the MFG are not short cutting these engines and are building them to take much more abuse than ever.

I see daily 23 PSI of boost and back in the old SVO and GN days 12 PSI was a lot. Things like Sodium valves, the pistons are oil cooled the DI cools the cylinder, standard compressions have risen. The crazy part is how stiff the Ford and GM blocks are now and they are lighter.

The Ford is a good engine but the GM is as good or better but they did such a bad job of marketing it most people have no clue.

Anyways I can see the after market taking these engines on and doing much with them. The only question I have is how will the insurance companies deal with them. Will they swack them for younger drivers or will they give them a break from the V8. If they give them a break the younger buyers may take interest. These cars can be the American Skyliner. It is not easy to drift a FWD Civic.

 

 

 

Block and heads can take a lot. I assure you that he did not have stock bottom end though, iow, he had stronger rods and pistons, bearings and probably crank.  Block structures are easy to over design, given modern CAE tools, and with minimal impact to weight. So we do just that, which often assists in NVH.  

[El Kabong]

Hyper: GM pricing the four-banger at 27 grand was absolutely the right thing to do. They may not have hyped the tunability of this engine as much as you woulda liked, but at least they never lost their minds marketed/priced it as the mid-level engine.

The kids can afford it.

There will be hoonage.

Edited September 17, 2015 by El Kabong

[hyperv6]

I understand that the bottom end of the EcoTech is capable of up to 800 hp.

Not sure what the 2.3L is capable of, but one thing for sure, these turbo engines are capable of far more.

I was lucky to be around John Lingenfelter back when he was racing the Eco. He was using the stock block and head up to 1500 HP before the head cracked. It was the Saab version that the LNF was patterned after.

I expect the Ford also will be able to take a fair amount of power because today the MFG are not short cutting these engines and are building them to take much more abuse than ever.

I see daily 23 PSI of boost and back in the old SVO and GN days 12 PSI was a lot. Things like Sodium valves, the pistons are oil cooled the DI cools the cylinder, standard compressions have risen. The crazy part is how stiff the Ford and GM blocks are now and they are lighter.

The Ford is a good engine but the GM is as good or better but they did such a bad job of marketing it most people have no clue.

Anyways I can see the after market taking these engines on and doing much with them. The only question I have is how will the insurance companies deal with them. Will they swack them for younger drivers or will they give them a break from the V8. If they give them a break the younger buyers may take interest. These cars can be the American Skyliner. It is not easy to drift a FWD Civic.

 

 

Block and heads can take a lot. I assure you that he did not have stock bottom end though, iow, he had stronger rods and pistons, bearings and probably crank.  Block structures are easy to over design, given modern CAE tools, and with minimal impact to weight. So we do just that, which often assists in NVH.

Oh for sure he had full race parts like crank, rods, pistons etc.

I have the GM numbers on what part will take what. Here are some examples on the LNF.

I have covered Rods and Pistons to 400 HP.

Valves 400 HP

Cylinder liners 400 HP

Head gasket 500 HP

Crank 500 HP

Wrist pins 600 HP

Exhaust rockers 700 HP

Head casting 900 HP

Block 1000 HP

GM has build several cars including the pro drift Solstice with the 500 HP version of this engine. It was very street able and very durable with no teardowns during the whole season in drifting.

Back when John was racing this engine they had not yet gone Turbo from the factory and also he was the first to race it in drag racing. There was little aftermarket parts so he used stock and parts his company made to make it stronger and faster.

My Point is the engine that is now 250 HP in the Malibu can handle up to 400 HP with no modifications other than those to add boost. What is holding GM back from 300 HP is the Regular Fuel recommended and not required. The extra boost moves the fuel up. GM has to look at the fact that people in non performance applications are reluctant to buy premium fuel even if it only cost them a couple buck a fill. They like the option and that is where we are today. I had a talk with a GM brand manager about this one day when he invited me to Michigan for a visit.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

 

EDIt for Duplicity

Edited September 17, 2015 by Wings4Life

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

 

I understand that the bottom end of the EcoTech is capable of up to 800 hp.

Not sure what the 2.3L is capable of, but one thing for sure, these turbo engines are capable of far more.

I was lucky to be around John Lingenfelter back when he was racing the Eco. He was using the stock block and head up to 1500 HP before the head cracked. It was the Saab version that the LNF was patterned after.

I expect the Ford also will be able to take a fair amount of power because today the MFG are not short cutting these engines and are building them to take much more abuse than ever.

I see daily 23 PSI of boost and back in the old SVO and GN days 12 PSI was a lot. Things like Sodium valves, the pistons are oil cooled the DI cools the cylinder, standard compressions have risen. The crazy part is how stiff the Ford and GM blocks are now and they are lighter.

The Ford is a good engine but the GM is as good or better but they did such a bad job of marketing it most people have no clue.

Anyways I can see the after market taking these engines on and doing much with them. The only question I have is how will the insurance companies deal with them. Will they swack them for younger drivers or will they give them a break from the V8. If they give them a break the younger buyers may take interest. These cars can be the American Skyliner. It is not easy to drift a FWD Civic.

 

 

 

Block and heads can take a lot. I assure you that he did not have stock bottom end though, iow, he had stronger rods and pistons, bearings and probably crank.  Block structures are easy to over design, given modern CAE tools, and with minimal impact to weight. So we do just that, which often assists in NVH.

 

Oh for sure he had full race parts like crank, rods, pistons etc.

I have the GM numbers on what part will take what. Here are some examples on the LNF.

I have covered Rods and Pistons to 400 HP.

Valves 400 HP

Cylinder liners 400 HP

Head gasket 500 HP

Crank 500 HP

Wrist pins 600 HP

Exhaust rockers 700 HP

Head casting 900 HP

Block 1000 HP

GM has build several cars including the pro drift Solstice with the 500 HP version of this engine. It was very street able and very durable with no teardowns during the whole season in drifting.

Back when John was racing this engine they had not yet gone Turbo from the factory and also he was the first to race it in drag racing. There was little aftermarket parts so he used stock and parts his company made to make it stronger and faster.

My Point is the engine that is now 250 HP in the Malibu can handle up to 400 HP with no modifications other than those to add boost. What is holding GM back from 300 HP is the Regular Fuel recommended and not required. The extra boost moves the fuel up. GM has to look at the fact that people in non performance applications are reluctant to buy premium fuel even if it only cost them a couple buck a fill. They like the option and that is where we are today. I had a talk with a GM brand manager about this one day when he invited me to Michigan for a visit.

 

 

Thanks for the useful information.  Seems about right too, and good to know where the block/head cracked at 1500.  Goes to show you how close a typical CAE structural safety factor is, which is probably around 1.5 FS (factor of safety).  So that 1000hp limit that broke at 1,500 is spot on.....lol.

 

And regarding power, I am sure that GM took the same path that Ford did when they targeted a fuel efficient turbo engine option, in that they designed it to BE fuel efficient, and thus compromised performance to some degree.  In the case of the 2.3L, it is launching in the spring in the RS with 350hp, and obviously fuel economy is not a priority. But CAFE has spoken, and fuel economy is critical.  Just less so in some cars.

[oldshurst442]

Hyper: GM pricing the four-banger at 27 grand was absolutely the right thing to do. They may not have hyped the tunability of this engine as much as you woulda liked, but at least they never lost their minds marketed/priced it as the mid-level engine.

The kids can afford it.

There will be hoonage.

I up voted you because I find its FREAKIN' ridiculous for someone to have down voted THAT!!!

I think I know who it is...

 

Why downvote???!!!

 

At least tell us why!!!

 

I have a feeling its because El K talked about the 4 banger being the ENTRY level engine choice rather than how Ford has made it a mid pack engine...

 

THAT does NOT deserve a downvote...it may deserve a DISCUSSION though!!!

 

So....DISCUSS!!!

 

The rest of El K's post is just another opinion....he IS allowed to say that there might be hoonage over an Ecotec 4 cylinder Camaro...

The Cobalt SS had a decent following from the tuner crowd...why not the Camaro?

 

An turbo 4 cylinder is also what Ford is counting on to entice a certain demographic that likes a certain type of car... *cough* Subaru BRZ *cough*

 

So...why on earth would that somebody down vote that post?

 

At least be a man about it and give us a bloody DISCUSSION!!!

 

THAT is what I hate about the voting system...the whole thing is childish...

 

 

There have been other posts too...yours and mine...and others...that have been downvoted with WTF remarks from me...without the explanations to go along with the down votes...

 

Its just that... I now...decided to go ape shyte on that observation...

Edited September 17, 2015 by oldshurst442

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

I downvoted bong for taking yet another shot at Ford for no freaking reason, and I would do it again and I will do it every single time he zings Ford when it's uncalled for.

 

If someone disagrees with that, have at it.

[El Kabong]

I didn't even know I got the downvote for that. A certain someone is probably soiling his diaper again.

I downvoted bong for taking yet another shot at Ford for no freaking reason, and I would do it again and I will do it every single time he zings Ford when it's uncalled for.

If someone disagrees with that, have at it.

Yup yup yup. He's melting down again.

I didn't even mention Ford. What a baby.

Edited September 17, 2015 by El Kabong

[oldshurst442]

I downvoted bong for taking yet another shot at Ford for no freaking reason, and I would do it again and I will do it every single time he zings Ford when it's uncalled for.

 

If someone disagrees with that, have at it.

I down voted you Wings...

 

Its an opinion...HE IS ALLOWED TO HAVE ONE....

And you know what?

 

I MIRROR HIS THOUGHTS on where the ecoboost 4 cylinder is with the Mustang versus the V6 and how GM decided to go on about it...

Its a different marketing strategy...that I believe SUCKS because...although I LOVE my 1.6 ecoboost Fusion...I too...think its STUPID for Ford to keep PUSHING ecoboost the way they do...with no effin' logic!!!

 

Why not an ecoboost V6 Mustang?

Why not drop money on a direct injected V8 and put ecoboost on it and drop it in the Ford GT?

 

it still has the ECOBOOST nomenclature that Ford wants to throw down our  freakin' throats...

 

Hell...Ford is thinking about dropping a 2.7 liter ecoboosted V6 in a Fusion and call it an ST....so it aint ALL ABOUT the ECO after all!!!

 

Wings...we ARE allowed to criticize Ford without YOU having a hissy fit!!!

And our CRITICISMS are NOT BASHING Ford...its us saying...WTF is WRONG with Ford???!!!

Edited September 17, 2015 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

And at the end of the day...

 

Its a Camaro thread...inevitably...Ford WILL be mentioned one way or other by somebody...be it a Chevy fanboy...or a Ford fanboy...hell...even a Mopar fanboy will inevitably mention Mopar AND Ford in a Chevy Camaro thread...

Edited September 17, 2015 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

I downvoted bong for taking yet another shot at Ford for no freaking reason, and I would do it again and I will do it every single time he zings Ford when it's uncalled for.

 

If someone disagrees with that, have at it.

And of course you down vote my post where EL K   up voted...

 

Anthrope to Theou...For Christ's Sake...GROW UP!!!

 

What...you are gonna go on a down voting rampage???!!!

 

Let me remind YOU....'twas YOU that cried to Drew about your EFFIN' Rep in the FIRST EFFIN' PLACE abut the EFFIN DOWN VOTES...

Edited September 17, 2015 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

NOW....I wanna know who is the other chicken shyte who down voted that other post...

 

Now...I get it...you dont wanna this out in the air like that...but as long as you mofos HIDE under a down voting system...I WILL ALWAYS CALL YOU OUT!!!

 

Be a EFFIN MAN and REVEAL yourself and STATE why YOU down voted!!!

 

So I could actually EXPLAIN myself to you and others...

And YOU could do the same to me!!!

 

 

WTF is this???!!!

Down voting because I EXPRESSED MY OPINIONS ON SOMETHING THAT BOTHERS ME!!!

 

AT LEAST I MADE IT PUBLIC ON TO WHY IT BOTHERS ME!!!

 

WHY DONT YOU DO THE SAME???!!!

GROW UP....ALL OF YOU!!!

 

DOWN VOTE BUT REVEAL YOURSELVES AND EXPLAIN AS TO WHY!!!

CHICKEN SHYTES!!!

[El Kabong]

They're just children. They take their lead from the guy who openly admits to using the voting system to try and bully other poster, and who thinks I am a one-person campaign against Ford.

Pathetic.

[hyperv6]

I have seen more harsh comments made. Both sides need a little thicker skin here.

This rivalry is what has kept both cars alive and popular for as long as they have. No rivalry then you get sales like the Scion/Toyota/ Subaru coupe where few care and sales struggle.

Guys make your comments, post your points but keep it fun. You need both sides here to survive.

I just lost a good Mustang friend. We beat on each other hard but in the end of the day we both realize both are decent cars and kept it fun. He had a Shelby and it was an amazing car. Note this was one of the real Shelby's converted in the 90's at Shelby not a production line car. It even has the performance upgrades but no spoiler. Rare car. He just passed away and I will miss my Mustang arguments with him over the new Camaro. That and he was a Michigan fan and I an Ohio State. I used to decorate his cubical with Buckeyes every year.

We have gotten to an age we need to appreciate each and every performance car we have left. You may still argue about who is better but we need to keep close to one another as we may need the support for our favorite to survive.

[oldshurst442]

I have seen more harsh comments made. Both sides need a little thicker skin here.

This rivalry is what has kept both cars alive and popular for as long as they have. No rivalry then you get sales like the Scion/Toyota/ Subaru coupe where few care and sales struggle.

Guys make your comments, post your points but keep it fun. You need both sides here to survive.

I just lost a good Mustang friend. We beat on each other hard but in the end of the day we both realize both are decent cars and kept it fun. He had a Shelby and it was an amazing car. Note this was one of the real Shelby's converted in the 90's at Shelby not a production line car. It even has the performance upgrades but no spoiler. Rare car. He just passed away and I will miss my Mustang arguments with him over the new Camaro. That and he was a Michigan fan and I an Ohio State. I used to decorate his cubical with Buckeyes every year.

We have gotten to an age we need to appreciate each and every performance car we have left. You may still argue about who is better but we need to keep close to one another as we may need the support for our favorite to survive.

Yup.

 

Yup.

 

and more Yup.

 

Especially the part where one car needs the other to keep going well into the 21st century.

 

Like the Coyote and RoadRunner.

Like Smokey and the Bandit.

Like Superman and Lex Luther.

Like Batman and The Joker. 

Like the Boston Bruins and the Montreal Canadiens.

 

Sure....other cars come to join in on the fun...but its the original rivalry that keeps the fire alive...and if that fire dies out...

 

And it did...in 2002...I dont know about you folk...I dont want to go back to 2002...

 

The Camaro amd Mustang are even pushing cars ABOVE their class to perform better...th BMW CEO fainted because of it...

 

The thought of a Mustang GT350, Camaro SS and an upcoming Z/28 beating up on his M4 scared him...the reality of an Alfa Romeo Guilia based Challenger/'Cuda down right took his breath away...

[Guest wings4life]

Olds,

I responded to your individual posts, but they did not appear.  They may still, but let me summarize what I said in this one post, and will not say another remark on this topic here.

 

So yes olds, we should all allow negative remarks regarding Ford or any brand, of course. And I welcome it and love to debate it if I disagree.  But simple criticism is one thing, and repeated non-stop criticism that we have all heard literally hundreds of times from the same individual  --is another completely.  He is by definition, then, trolling, plain and simple.  At what point do I believe he is trolling?  I think in my mind, I draw the line at anything over 2 or 3 posts in the same thread.  In the Ford GT thread about power, he managed many, many negative remarks, even going on about an exact quoted price, when there was no exact quoted price.  I downvoted that crap, because there is no need for it.  It was a simple thread about a rumored power rating, so no need for nearly a dozen negative posts.  And although you don’t know him as long as I do, I can easily say that in that decade, he has never said a positive word toward Ford and certainly not me, without a back-handed compliment.  It’s what he is programmed to do.  The GT thread is one mild example of a decade of far more and far worst.  So I’m fine with all that, but since negative votes are for trolls, I will down vote the troll if I think he has already made his point, usually, far too often.

 

So that’s all I have to say about that, but he is clearly going on a campaign discussing it and cross posting threads in several other threads.  I could freaking care less.  Zero respect is what I give him.

 

Let’s get back to the topic that I was happily discussing, before you two made this a thing.

[El Kabong]

I don't mind the rivalry.

I do mind the childishness.

The reality is that the Camaro is shaping up to be something really special. And I celebrate that.

I cannot help it if the competition cannot/will not/ain't interested in bettering the car.

What I DO notice is the lack of hysterical whining from the Mopar brigade. Clearly they're part of the rivalry too, right?

Nope. Wings is the problem. And he has been, wherever he has gone, for years. It's too bad.

Now, let us discuss the Camaro. 27 grand for an easily-tuned example that will hit 60 in the mid-fives stock?

Yabba dabba do!

[cp-the-nerd]

But, like I said, people probably said the same exact thing in '02 when that came out. I mean it was a low 13 second car, was it not? Yeah it handled like "crap" to todays standards but how many people EVER are trying to take turns so agressive on the streets that a crummmy live rear axle won't take?

 

The "muscle car ear" was cars running 15's through the quarter mile not 13's.

 

Where 95% of owners will use these cars they've gained 1 second through the quarter.

 

Yes, the interior is light years better than those of back in the day. But 7k better?

 

I don't know.. I'm just saying I will still think it is over priced regarless of the sustained g's it can hold or how fast it's figure eight time is. I'm just more a fan of the way these cars once were with raw power and just go fast in a straight line for a reasonable price. Like I said the Z28 back in '02 started at $29,800 in today's money. And even back then it was probably picking on the bigger more expensive cars. For instance, the C32 AMG and S4 of the early 2000's were also low 13 second cars. All three pulling 0.85-0.9g on the skid pad as well.

 

I have to heartily disagree here.

 

The 2002 Camaro had no bragging rights besides the straight line. Japanese cars for the same money handled better, felt better, braked better, and didn't have a penalty box interior. Asking if the new interior is worth $7000 more, I'd be inclined to say yes, absolutely, because I'm reminded how much I can't go back to an old GM interior every time I ride in my fiance's Cobalt, but that's a misleading question because it ignores everything else that's state of the art about the new car. Or the fact that the $30k V6 will nearly run LS1 numbers.

 

Former Camaro engineers openly admitted that GM gave them just enough money to fully develop the drivetrain and virtually nothing else. This Camaro is the first one in decades with zero development compromises.

 

The Alpha chasses, now THAT alone is worth $7000 over the old LRA sled. The rest of the 2016 Camaro package is icing on the cake.

[ccap41]

1LE..?

 

"Just saw this new video posted within the past hour. You can clearly tell that it is not the ZL1 we saw videos and pictures of over the last few days. But it does have a bigger front splitter, rear spoiler, wider track tires, and louder exhaust note than the standard SS. What do you guys think?"

 

http://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=423664

[David]

At 2:29 you hear a hard crunch on the transmission, so I think it is a manual. Wonder if this could be a twin turbo V8 they are testing in the camero body. New motor for Cadillac?

[hyperv6]

At 2:29 you hear a hard crunch on the transmission, so I think it is a manual. Wonder if this could be a twin turbo V8 they are testing in the camero body. New motor for Cadillac?

No it is a supercharged Camaro.

What I like is how smooth and fast is appears in the video.

Edited September 17, 2015 by hyperv6

[hyperv6]

But, like I said, people probably said the same exact thing in '02 when that came out. I mean it was a low 13 second car, was it not? Yeah it handled like "crap" to todays standards but how many people EVER are trying to take turns so agressive on the streets that a crummmy live rear axle won't take?

 

The "muscle car ear" was cars running 15's through the quarter mile not 13's.

 

Where 95% of owners will use these cars they've gained 1 second through the quarter.

 

Yes, the interior is light years better than those of back in the day. But 7k better?

 

I don't know.. I'm just saying I will still think it is over priced regarless of the sustained g's it can hold or how fast it's figure eight time is. I'm just more a fan of the way these cars once were with raw power and just go fast in a straight line for a reasonable price. Like I said the Z28 back in '02 started at $29,800 in today's money. And even back then it was probably picking on the bigger more expensive cars. For instance, the C32 AMG and S4 of the early 2000's were also low 13 second cars. All three pulling 0.85-0.9g on the skid pad as well.

 

I have to heartily disagree here.

 

The 2002 Camaro had no bragging rights besides the straight line. Japanese cars for the same money handled better, felt better, braked better, and didn't have a penalty box interior. Asking if the new interior is worth $7000 more, I'd be inclined to say yes, absolutely, because I'm reminded how much I can't go back to an old GM interior every time I ride in my fiance's Cobalt, but that's a misleading question because it ignores everything else that's state of the art about the new car. Or the fact that the $30k V6 will nearly run LS1 numbers.

 

Former Camaro engineers openly admitted that GM gave them just enough money to fully develop the drivetrain and virtually nothing else. This Camaro is the first one in decades with zero development compromises.

 

The Alpha chasses, now THAT alone is worth $7000 over the old LRA sled. The rest of the 2016 Camaro package is icing on the cake.

I will back you up on the 4 gen. I was sitting with Scott Settlmire the head of the F body program when he told us that the car got all the money for engine and suspension but not much else for the details and quality inside. He said "This is why your power window fail".

I think once people get to really see the new car here and drive them they will find the first most completed Camaro every built. Like the C7 while not perfect it is the best Corvette ever made and lacks many of the things it used to fall short on every year. As for not perfect it is close but when the price is considered nothing else is close for what you get.

[oldshurst442]

 

 

But, like I said, people probably said the same exact thing in '02 when that came out. I mean it was a low 13 second car, was it not? Yeah it handled like "crap" to todays standards but how many people EVER are trying to take turns so agressive on the streets that a crummmy live rear axle won't take?

 

The "muscle car ear" was cars running 15's through the quarter mile not 13's.

 

Where 95% of owners will use these cars they've gained 1 second through the quarter.

 

Yes, the interior is light years better than those of back in the day. But 7k better?

 

I don't know.. I'm just saying I will still think it is over priced regarless of the sustained g's it can hold or how fast it's figure eight time is. I'm just more a fan of the way these cars once were with raw power and just go fast in a straight line for a reasonable price. Like I said the Z28 back in '02 started at $29,800 in today's money. And even back then it was probably picking on the bigger more expensive cars. For instance, the C32 AMG and S4 of the early 2000's were also low 13 second cars. All three pulling 0.85-0.9g on the skid pad as well.

 

I have to heartily disagree here.

 

The 2002 Camaro had no bragging rights besides the straight line. Japanese cars for the same money handled better, felt better, braked better, and didn't have a penalty box interior. Asking if the new interior is worth $7000 more, I'd be inclined to say yes, absolutely, because I'm reminded how much I can't go back to an old GM interior every time I ride in my fiance's Cobalt, but that's a misleading question because it ignores everything else that's state of the art about the new car. Or the fact that the $30k V6 will nearly run LS1 numbers.

 

Former Camaro engineers openly admitted that GM gave them just enough money to fully develop the drivetrain and virtually nothing else. This Camaro is the first one in decades with zero development compromises.

 

The Alpha chasses, now THAT alone is worth $7000 over the old LRA sled. The rest of the 2016 Camaro package is icing on the cake.

 

I will back you up on the 4 gen. I was sitting with Scott Settlmire the head of the F body program when he told us that the car got all the money for engine and suspension but not much else for the details and quality inside. He said "This is why your power window fail".

I think once people get to really see the new car here and drive them they will find the first most completed Camaro every built. Like the C7 while not perfect it is the best Corvette ever made and lacks many of the things it used to fall short on every year. As for not perfect it is close but when the price is considered nothing else is close for what you get.

 

In regards to the sentence that you made that I underlined in bold:

 

 

And Im assuming...why BMW M3 coupes also got so popular in the mid 1990s...because...although a loaded up Trans Am WS6 was still less expensive than a BMW M3...its was still a stone's throw away from it...and many figured that the M3 is a much more complete car...with not only better handling...but a much much nicer interior.  A more complete car...

 

And like El K and yourself have pointed out...never mind the Cadillac ATS...the Camaro is the sporty 2 door coupe that crosses all of its Tees and dots all of its  eyes in being the complete package. Its the Camaro and its higher end trims that will probably put the BMW M4 on its heels.

Edited September 18, 2015 by oldshurst442

[hyperv6]

BZMW is not going to lose a lot of sleep here on the Camaro.

While the Camaro and Mustang performance wise will be as good or better the cars hold a different appeal.

Many sales of BMW are not as much for performance as image. People buy because they want to look affluent and sophisticated. The Camaro and Mustang while moving closer is still seen as a working mans performance car. While models like the ZR1 and Z/28 have help to start to change that they still have to work on rebuilding the Joe Dirt image some have placed on them.

Doing sales globally may help change this as people overseas have a mixed view but many like the loud and brash performance of the American coupe. If there are more of these in Europe it could help morph the image here.

The Cadillac line will take care of the customer who see's him or her self as more sophisticated. They want the more quiet exhaust, they want the smoother ride, They want the more high end interior. The fact is there is a place for both cars and with the ATS offered in a Sedan it will see more sales here anyways.

The truth is the Camaro and Mustang are the only 2 two door coupes that hold much volume today at a lower price. Also look for the ATS to change much with the move to the CT4 name. They will not just changed badges as they will make some major changes to the car and fix any area that was not addressed properly like the interior in the new car.

[oldshurst442]

As far as brand snobs go...sure, the BMW M2 and the BMW M4 and their less potent "civilian" versions will remain the soupe du  jour cars with this crowd.

What I am talking about is those guys and gals that seem to enjoy performance, will realize that the Camaro is actually the real deal...

 

I talk to many teenagers, and the Challenger Hellcat is known to them...they hoon over that car as much as they do the JDM video game cars...

They falsely assume it does not handle, they think it handles like a muscle car of yore...however, they understand that modern day American Muscle Cars do handle the twisties...and the Zeta Camaro is the reason for that...

 

Some still hoon over the BMW "M" cars too...but not for performance reasons...for image...

As far as German cars go...these  kids hoon over a VW GTi...for performance reasons...

 

These same teenagers...also like a BRZ...they recognize its handling...but they too...wished it had the engine from the WRX STi under the hood...

Cadillac is not even in their radar...

 

Going forward....I think the Alpha Camaro will start a new following...especially with the turbo 4 cylinder crowd...

That 4 cylinder is best of both world's to get the hooning started...

 

The Camaro has the Muscle Car legend name.

It has the V8 to shame other cars...that kids will dream about...and...

Its probably the 4 cylinder that will get the sales and the aftermarket improvements...that kids will aspire to...to get close to and beat those V8 performance numbers...

 

1. because they are used to and actually are comfortable with 4 cylinders.

2. because they grew up hatin' on V8 engines anyway...so it will be their pleasure to improve the stock turbo 4 cylinder in the Camaro...just to beat up on a V8...

3. it already comes with a Turbo from the factory...

4. its the Camaro they will most probably afford...either new or used...

[frogger]

So many teens mag race (though I suspect fewer in the digital age of smartphones and social media becoming the all consuming hobby), but so few of them ever end up buying sports cars even when they eventually have the money.