[ember1205]

Originally Posted by Silent_H_

I think you're right here. On the highway I get an indicated ~26 mpg in the V6. I'm pretty sure the V8s get very similar if not even better, but they do have the premium gas to deal with.

From my research, I don't think manual transmission V6s get the cylinder deactivation, so perhaps ones with that would do better than mine?

Correct that that M6 cars will have no actual AFM control of the engine... All of the hardware is there, it's turned off in the software.

In my car with the V8 (LT1 motor) and M6 transmission, the actual RPM of the engine is pretty low at 65-70MPH. So, while the Auto may well get slightly better MPG, it isn't really a massive difference.

[redcoats1976]

Originally Posted by ember1205

The actual drop in performance will be directly related to the actual drop in octane levels of the fuels. The computer will continuously monitor ignition and adjust timing within the allowable ranges based on the monitoring. But, that's the thing that needs to be accounted for: RANGES.

The computer does not simply keep backing the timing off until things are ok - it can only go so far. And the actual octane of the fuel combined with the overall quality of it can and do absolutely put the motors at a point where the engine will not fire correctly and damage can (and likely will) be done if one persists in running it this way. This isn't to say that you're going to blow your engine up if all you can get is 87 and you need a few gallons to get home (and you drive the car easy).

There is NO gain in performance on a motor designed to run on 87 when you run higher octane fuel in it for the exact same reasons as above. This is an absolute myth.

This is all directly purely at stock / untuned engines.

probably true.i have run my 6 cylinder on 87 since the price of gas increased but ran it on 93 for several months.while i didnt go time it at the dragstrip the butt dyno showed no increase in power on 93 octane.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by M0dnar

No, but if you're going to be driving around a Camaro, it should at least be more than insignificantly faster than a Mazda Miata. The minimum acceptable Camaro trim is the LT1. Save another year and save yourself the pain.

Is that official? Is there a link to a GM site supporting this? Got it.

I just dont get why people are so worried what other people drive and buy. But, so be it.

[Hrothgar]

Originally Posted by M0dnar

or a garbage sounding V6.

[gpskinzhut]

Originally Posted by M0dnar

No, but if you're going to be driving around a Camaro, it should at least be more than insignificantly faster than a Mazda Miata. The minimum acceptable Camaro trim is the LT1. Save another year and save yourself the pain.

Actually, it looks like GM says minimum is an LS with a 2.0T/Manual. I've included a pic from the build page on the Chevrolet website for reference.

Originally Posted by M0dnar

And Grand Tourer's are meant to be overpowered and smooth. Not a T4 whining at the limits or a garbage sounding V6. If anything, you want a LT1 with the NPP exhaust so you can set it to stealth mode. Lots of power throughout the powerband for lazy acceleration while remaining quiet and comfortable (somewhat true for a Camaro).

Actually this sounds like what YOU want. Also sounds a little harsh and unnecessarily bitter.

[Malbjey]

You would think that after 40-ish years of Camaros having a non-V8 option, people would finally accept that the Camaro can accomodate other engines and still be a good performance car.



How do people say 'the Camaro should only have a V8!!!!!' when it's always had a non-V8 option since the beginning. Alternative engines are just as much the car's heritage as the V8.



If you're gonna compare a Miata or V6 Camary to a Turbo 4 Camaro, and say the Turbo 4 is insignificantly faster, then you can also say the same about the V8 Camaro versus Dodge Charger Scat Pack. Why buy a cramped, impractical, V8 Camaro when it's marginally faster than a Charger Scat Pack?

[redcoats1976]

haters gonna hate.im happy with my 6 cylinder.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by Silent_H_

I think you're right here. On the highway I get an indicated ~26 mpg in the V6. I'm pretty sure the V8s get very similar if not even better, but they do have the premium gas to deal with.



From my research, I don't think manual transmission V6s get the cylinder deactivation, so perhaps ones with that would do better than mine?

My best tank on highway so far has been 25 MPG, so not far behind, but yes, I use 93+ AKI octane, so there is some price difference. How big that difference is, well that will depend on the area you live in. Apparently it is more expensive for some people to fuel their 2.0T than V6 due to the octane requirement, while for others it's not.

Manual Camaro's don't have AFM, aka cylinder deactivation. My old C7 did, however. With the M7 trans, you have to be in Eco mode for AFM to kick in.

Non-V8 will also be cheaper to maintain. Less oil, lighter car = more tire and brake life, etc. Especially for people who track their cars, this could be a consideration, and depending on the track, the non-V8 could still be fun to toss around if there are a lot of curves. I am curious if that will offset the lower residual value when you sell them.

Originally Posted by Malbjey

You would think that after 40-ish years of Camaros having a non-V8 option, people would finally accept that the Camaro can accomodate other engines and still be a good performance car.

How do people say 'the Camaro should only have a V8!!!!!' when it's always had a non-V8 option since the beginning. Alternative engines are just as much the car's heritage as the V8.

If you're gonna compare a Miata or V6 Camary to a Turbo 4 Camaro, and say the Turbo 4 is insignificantly faster, then you can also say the same about the V8 Camaro versus Dodge Charger Scat Pack. Why buy a cramped, impractical, V8 Camaro when it's marginally faster than a Charger Scat Pack?

You have to realize, the non-V8 Camaro's of the old are quite slow, especially when you consider Malaise Era where V8's barely had 200 BHP, let alone V6 engines. And traditionally, pony/muscle cars are about going fast in a straight line and less about cornering so it's not like a Miata where handling is the selling point so a 90-BHP engine didn't matter as much. I think this is a big part of where the hate comes from.

Being that Camaro is evolving beyond a pony car into a sports car, and even the base engines now have about 300 BHP, however, I think these notions could be left behind. But old habits die hard.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by Malbjey

You would think that after 40-ish years of Camaros having a non-V8 option, people would finally accept that the Camaro can accomodate other engines and still be a good performance car.

How do people say 'the Camaro should only have a V8!!!!!' when it's always had a non-V8 option since the beginning. Alternative engines are just as much the car's heritage as the V8.



If you're gonna compare a Miata or V6 Camary to a Turbo 4 Camaro, and say the Turbo 4 is insignificantly faster, then you can also say the same about the V8 Camaro versus Dodge Charger Scat Pack. Why buy a cramped, impractical, V8 Camaro when it's marginally faster than a Charger Scat Pack?

Hey man, leave me out of this


I am fine with 4t and v6 cars.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

You have to realize, the non-V8 Camaro's of the old are quite slow, especially when you consider Malaise Era where V8's barely had 200 BHP, let alone V6 engines. And traditionally, pony/muscle cars are about going fast in a straight line and less about cornering so it's not like a Miata where handling is the selling point so a 90-BHP engine didn't matter as much. I think this is a big part of where the hate comes from.

Being that Camaro is evolving beyond a pony car into a sports car, and even the base engines now have about 300 BHP, however, I think these notions could be left behind. But old habits die hard.

While your statements here are right on point, one piece I feel you overlooked is the relativeness of it all. A Gen1 with a V6 versus a V8 - what was the performance difference between those two? How about Gen2? 3? And so on.

Comparisons between generations get more interesting when you compare only the generation and not differences in the engines as well. In other words, look at the V6 Camaro of today and compare it to a Gen1 or Gen2 with a V6. Similar for the V8's of each generation.

If you really want fun comparisons, put a T4 or V6 in a Gen6 up against a Gen1 V8.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Malbjey

You would think that after 40-ish years of Camaros having a non-V8 option, people would finally accept that the Camaro can accomodate other engines and still be a good performance car.

How do people say 'the Camaro should only have a V8!!!!!' when it's always had a non-V8 option since the beginning. Alternative engines are just as much the car's heritage as the V8.

If you're gonna compare a Miata or V6 Camary to a Turbo 4 Camaro, and say the Turbo 4 is insignificantly faster, then you can also say the same about the V8 Camaro versus Dodge Charger Scat Pack. Why buy a cramped, impractical, V8 Camaro when it's marginally faster than a Charger Scat Pack?

While I agree with you, clearly the V6 and I4 options in the past were pretty blah. We get it. My girlfriend had a Berlinetta and it was, well, slower than molasses uphill kind of thing. But, its 2021 now. Times have changed and the "V8 or bust" thing is losing its validity. Why do V6 Camry's even get into this discussion? Freegin 4 door family sedan. Zero credibility. 4 door cars = NOPE.

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

You have to realize, the non-V8 Camaro's of the old are quite slow, especially when you consider Malaise Era where V8's barely had 200 BHP, let alone V6 engines. And traditionally, pony/muscle cars are about going fast in a straight line and less about cornering so it's not like a Miata where handling is the selling point so a 90-BHP engine didn't matter as much. I think this is a big part of where the hate comes from.

Being that Camaro is evolving beyond a pony car into a sports car, and even the base engines now have about 300 BHP, however, I think these notions could be left behind. But old habits die hard.

Bolded for emphasis. The Camaro is growing up. Its evolving. Its no longer just a V8 thumper for knuckle-draggers with a lot of back hair. . It rides on a sophisticated, high-quality chassis that would be wasted on the old way of thinking which was straight line only considerations. So, to make the car more accessible to more people - and thats not just a money thing either; is a smart move by GM, IMO. The cre has wider range of uses now. GOOD!

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

While I agree with you, clearly the V6 and I4 options in the past were pretty blah. We get it. My girlfriend had a Berlinetta and it was, well, slower than molasses uphill kind of thing. But, its 2021 now. Times have changed and the "V8 or bust" thing is losing its validity. Why do V6 Camry's even get into this discussion? Freegin 4 door family sedan. Zero credibility. 4 door cars = NOPE.



Bolded for emphasis. The Camaro is growing up. Its evolving. Its no longer just a V8 thumper for knuckle-draggers with a lot of back hair. . It rides on a sophisticated, high-quality chassis that would be wasted on the old way of thinking which was straight line only considerations. So, to make the car more accessible to more people - and thats not just a money thing either; is a smart move by GM, IMO. The cre has wider range of uses now. GOOD!

Like the trunk, back seat, console, cup holders...if you ask me they made it more of a 1 trick pony, and less of a reason to sell "lesser" levels

[redcoats1976]

my one trick pony has hauled a 6 foot mailbox post with cross bracing,2x4s,a barbeque grill (not assembled),bags of cement,and gotten 30 mpg on the highway on the way to the beach...its a good trick.

[Malbjey]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

You have to realize, the non-V8 Camaro's of the old are quite slow, especially when you consider Malaise Era where V8's barely had 200 BHP, let alone V6 engines. And traditionally, pony/muscle cars are about going fast in a straight line and less about cornering so it's not like a Miata where handling is the selling point so a 90-BHP engine didn't matter as much. I think this is a big part of where the hate comes from.

Being that Camaro is evolving beyond a pony car into a sports car, and even the base engines now have about 300 BHP, however, I think these notions could be left behind. But old habits die hard.

Originally Posted by s2mikey

While I agree with you, clearly the V6 and I4 options in the past were pretty blah. We get it. My girlfriend had a Berlinetta and it was, well, slower than molasses uphill kind of thing. But, its 2021 now. Times have changed and the "V8 or bust" thing is losing its validity. Why do V6 Camry's even get into this discussion? Freegin 4 door family sedan. Zero credibility. 4 door cars = NOPE.

Yep, I get it about the old V6 Camaros.



However wasn't everything a dog back then? I feel like the V6 was always being compared to the V8, and not other performance cars in its own price range. Is that a fair assessment? I dunno, and I'm not bothered to research it.



However that's the argument I'm bringing up regarding modern Camaros (and Mustangs). The turbo 4 and V6 cars are great performance cars for their price range.



What about in the 1980s and 1970s? Were the V6 cars still better performing than the average econobox of the time?


I bet 20 years from now people are going to call the modern turbo 4 and V6 Camaro a dog, even though it is a great performance bargain. They won't look at what was available at the price range. They'll just say 'lol no V8.'