open letter to GM.

[BBGEN5]

I understand that this web site is monitored by GM employees. I have a request for you. I presently own four Camaros. My dream vehicle is a 6th generation Camaro 1LE with a twin turbo 3.6L v-6. Do not change a thing about the suspension,brakes,etc.:just drop in the twin-turbo motor. Call it The Hugger, a nod to the 1969 Z-28. Of course offer it in Hugger Orange! I would buy the first one that you make.
BBGen5

[FenwickHockey65]

So what would an LF3 or LF4 Camaro 1LE do that an SS 1LE can't?

[Dmpsix]

Or just add a twin turbo to the already present V6 1LE

[The camaro show]

YEAH lets go v6 guys!!!!!!

[BBGEN5]

The original Z28 is the answer to the first question-less weight and more power. The non-turbo v6 is not the same internally as the turbo motor.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by BBGEN5

The original Z28 is the answer to the first question-less weight and more power. The non-turbo v6 is not the same internally as the turbo motor.

Its hard to find apples to apples figures for engine weights on these. But I'm pretty sure the LT1 weighs a little less than the LF3/LF4. Not much, maybe 20 lbs at most. And it makes 35 more hp than the LF3 (but 10 less than the LF4). However, the midrange torque advantage of the LT1 will give it more power coming out of corners roughly negating the peak power advantage of the LF4.

But beyond that, the LT1 is a superior engine for a track oriented car. Natural aspiration provides better throttle response as well because the only way to truly eliminate turbo lag is to eliminate the turbo. And heat soak is a non-issue when you don't have to deal with forced induction. And even if weighs about the same, its CG will be lower. The 4 cams and intercooler brick sitting on top of the engine put a lot of mass exactly where you don't want it.

And those TTV6s are probably a fair bit more expensive than the LT1 is. I've heard that the LGX and LT1 engines have about the same production cost, so it makes sense that a twin turbo V6 would cost more. And thats before adding in all the extra costs of emissions & fuel economy certification. Without a ton of sales to count on, those costs will get spread pretty thick on your TTV6 1LE. In the end you could be looking at more than 50 grand, for an otherwise no option 1SS 1LE with an LF4.




I'm not trying to tear down your idea. Just giving you some info that you might not have been considering or aware of. There is a reason why so many reviewers of the ATS-V say they wish it had an LT1, and its not just because of the sound.

[BBGEN5]

You raise many interesting points. Would fuel economy and emissions certs be that expensive, since this is a production engine? I just like the idea of a 6 that run with the 8's.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by BBGEN5

You raise many interesting points. Would fuel economy and emissions certs be that expensive, since this is a production engine? I just like the idea of a 6 that run with the 8's.

It would be. GM can't just drop an LF3/4 into a 6th gen and call it a day, there's a lot of engineering and validation that needs to happen to make sure it'll work as intended without causing the customer headaches down the road.

[BBGEN5]

I just don't see why. They put the twin turbo into a Cadillac-a very similar car. Why not drop that engine into the Camaro?

[Silver14]

Because they wouldn't sell many. You want a unique product that not many others are interested in.

[FenwickHockey65]

Originally Posted by BBGEN5

I just don't see why. They put the twin turbo into a Cadillac-a very similar car. Why not drop that engine into the Camaro?

Well, just because a car rides on the same platform and has similar dimensions doesn't mean it's just a drop-in. Remember, GM isn't Bob's Performance Shop down the road. There are a lot of regulations they have to comply with, both from the government and internal corporate guidelines.