loki

i was just implying them bringing back a engine size more "traditional" lol would that mean the altlas engine would be a good base engine? i know we've gone over that dozens of times, the atlas being in there has been a ridiculed idea so much.

it's 2.56 here now, but i'm sure that'll change in a few days.

you mean we have to wait another year more, not just a late 08 model? lol, more time to get it PERFECT!

is there any evidence of a 5.3L replacement? would it be closer to a 305, or more like an ls1 w/ VVT and AFM?

interesting, don't know about that blue/green looking combo... like the rs color combo though

my 99 monte, i'd have to guess the 3.9L would fit, right? would the 6speed manual fit too? lol just fix the body"imperfections" i may or maynot have caused..

impressive estimates... but i agree w/ Caddyxlr-V, well maybe it works for diesels, even if it's more like 10% increase. it said all brands... prolly not pontiac, but does that mean diesel buicks? if this is real i hope the public / press start looking/reviewing them w/ a clean slate

i totally understand the "go all out" idea that some of you agree on, but, sorry if i've missed the evidence, why are we believing the 3.6 "has to be at least optional, if not the base engine"? were the only OHC chevy's pre OHV, and the inline 6's that went in things between nova's and trucks? (other than the obvious more recent 4bangers) do we believe the 3.6L has more potential than the 3.9L? and would this potential outweigh the price difference if GM wanted to move lots of "well priced" v6 camaros? relating to my previous post, if a ~260-280hp(or more) V6 model having a 5.3L offering would, IMO, not be as necisary(spelling wow?). the v8 would have to put out a sound 420hp base though, w/ a z/28 or SS with more like 450hp.

i have seen a MC that color before, just not that... well... rediculous

i had kinda thought of that once, but more like just two engines ( I4's) side by side, could be connected to the trans like yours, but could have a "kick out feature", turn off one engine and disconnect from the trans to save gas when one engine was enough...

prolly a few have been made for motorcylces since there have been flat 6's like honda has made.. ?

no one likes this topic?

how about pulling the olds 4.0L out of storage, and updating it w/....~310 hp and have something closer to 5.0L making ~390hp

this going into the MC? could get a 21 30 rating....?

yeah, and it's in all the new 3.5Ls too that mileage was on a 3.5L (211hp iirc and yes vvt)

interesting. cool

checked chevy.com M.C. LTZ is ~220lbs lighter than the ltz impala Monte Carlo LTZ 3,501/1,588 20/28mpg Impala LTZ 3,729/1,691 19/27mpg so if the camaro is closer to th MC's weight it could rate a 21/30mpg w/ afm, add the +'s of a 6 speed, maybe closer to 23/ 32?

that 21/31 figure, where'd you get that? w/ afm on the impala "preliminary testing of the 2007 Chevy Impala equipped with the 3.9L V-6 with AFM indicates an estimated 20 mpg in the city and 29 mpg on the highway – improvements of approximately 5.5 percent and 7.5 percent, respectively."- from the "gm news-afm impala" not saying it couldn't be done, but a 6 speed may get it closer to 21/32, and have room for those higher HP/trq #s ?

then anyone know when the press release is?

maybe highway speeds are like 55- 70? more into the tourque curve there

that's hideous....rather have a caliber w/ 300hp hahah but prolly another 500lbs or so too. ehwell.

w/ current engines have to be the 3.9L 5.3L and the 6.0L since we know that's not the case... i'll speculate with keeping the 3.9L w/ afm and "tuning" to put out closer to 260hp while getting maybe 32mpg highway. 5.3L (~330hp) would be great for an RS model while also getting 30+ mpg. "ls3" (~420hp) and a "corvette ls3" w/ 450hp 3 engines is almost if the HP gap is bigger than the '02's gap from the v6 to the v8 which was.... 125hp if i remember correctly edit : grammar in last statement

oh, and more pics?

if it was shown where's the press release?

other than the cost to implement it, would there be any benefits to make an OHV&C engine? say... OHV for intake, 2 valves and vvt. OHC for exhaust, 1 valve and vvt. : or vice versa yes, i bet there would be packaging problems on the front of the engine and in the heads/valve covers... oh well anyone else thought of this or any other "crazy" engine designs? should this be in tech section? edit:changed an accidental smilie