El Kabong

It may indeed be a beancounter thing as opposed to a government thing. Or maybe it's a preconceived-notion thing (then again, it's a Camaro). But for whatever reason, the V6 is there as opposed to the 5.3. Another thing to consider: if GM replaced the 3.6 with the 5.3 as it's mid-level engine... it would compete directly against the Mustang EcoBoost 2.3. ...ok, changed my mind. GM needs to get this thing done, like YESTERDAY

Possibly. Maybe even probably. But first, to clarify: my earlier statement regarding economics of scale applied to the V6. It's inclusion in, say, 40,000 Camaros per year drives down it's per-unit cost in a way that the smallblock probably doesn't need, seeing as how it goes into roughly half a million vehicles per year. It's the same thing as the Camaro's chassis: build enough to keep them attainable. But yes: whereas the Camaro's chassis is beyond reproach for both discerning drivers and aspiring donut-makers, the small four and V6 are a bit more controversial. Everybody wants the V8. And I can't blame them. It sounds great, it pulls great. With the right gearing, it's fairly economical. But government mandates cannot be denied (unless you're VW, and then only for a few years, it seems). You will need good AVERAGE FE numbers, and this is where the smaller motors will also have their place. I remember the 70s and 80s, so I take with a grain of salt those who predict the demise of the smallblock. But it will have to change.

Actually, you can probably mostly blame the "gotta have DOHC" crowd.... because somehow a DOHC V6 is moar better than a pushrod V8 There's an element of that, no doubt. But there's an exonomics of scale thing going on as well, particularly with the 3.6.

You stated the uncomfortable endgame of the argument that I laid out with the Smart car comment. And again, it boils down to the strange attitude we have with authority vs. responsibility in our cars. Realistically we do not need more than 100hp, for the most part. But we are free to have as much as 1200hp if we want.

Well, I mean... Seriously. How could you NOT get a downvote for such foolishness? You're over a half-century old, and you're not a tree. Time to grow up

It's far better than any pony car that existed when I was a kid, to be blunt. And probably just as inexpensive to tweak. The sole issue is the lack of a V8. And for that you can only point to government regulations. I'm pretty sure Mark Reuss would love to throw in a 5.3 truck engine for low thirty-grand range. But he can't.

So in other words you downvoted me twice because you are paranoid. You need help. I don't normally downvote people who need help. But for a comment as tinfoil-hat as that one I will. And laugh.

Sorry, didn't mean to get you caught up in that incorrectly. But it's an attitude I have read from others around the interwebs as of late. I find it baffling.

I don't think he's an engineer. After reading that I'm pretty sure he's an Aerosmith roadie.

But I don't. Why would I walk into a showroom and accept a good car, knowing that it could have been great but it was cynically dumbed down by beancounters who think it's full potential will never be reached on public roads anyways? That's what got GM in trouble in the first place. It's kinda like saying "why wipe your ass, you're just going to crap again tomorrow."

Very rarely am I astonished by the automotive world. But I am astonished at this.

So let's all do the logical thing and buy Smart cars. The reality is that most of us who buy these cars (and I count myself in that fortunate group) are buying potential, not the performance. Still, that does not excuse automakers from striving for anything less than excellence. If I buy a '16 Camaro, I will know that it's limits are superior to that of the competition. And knowing that my money has thus been well-spent, I can give myself a thumbs-up while doddering along at snore speed.

Possibly. Who knows? But to hear such inanities from folks who root for the brand that produced the Pinto and Explorer makes me want to vomit.

Todd 27 is wrong. An LT4-powered Camaro would lay waste to any Shelby, and have the power-to-weight to run with a Hellcat, all in one amazing package.

What it boils down to is that if you walk into a room and all you see are idiots, you're the idiot.

To be fair, minus eleventy-six has to indicate SOMETHING.

No no, I wasn't PLAYING the permaban card. I was laughing at how some guys react to it :D

Nah. The REAL fun comes when we discuss how many times someone's snuck back into a place they've been permabanned from 'cause they were too addicted to stay away

Possibly. But I could see mild hybridization/Voltec helping keep the dream alive. Small turbo smallblock with electric torque fill, anyone?

Eh, whatever. I'm more than comfortable with what I put up there. I don't mind being the frontman for calling you out.

Given that the weight savings over the Zetas seems to be over 200 pounds model by model a 3900 pound LT4-engined Camaro seems pretty feasible. Now, consider that the CTS-V weighs 4100-4200 pounds. C/D got it to 60 in 3.6 and through the quarter mile in 11.8. Wow

Wait to see if he stalks you and calls you a one-man PR wrecking crew. If he does, call me

Whatever one's opinions were on the issue, it is an appropriate time for closure. Given the precedent set by the fine levied against Toyota the punishment seems appropriate.

It's just unnecessary. The troll acts in an indefensible manner, and he doesn't care about the consequences.

I don't want to ignore anybody. I shouldn't have to ignore anybody. I don't attack anybody. Funny that you should mention that though. Last night I finally tried to PM wings to get this settled behind the scenes. He had me on his ignore list. Yet he sees fit to attack me and downvote my posts. What, he only ignores selectively? So, once again: the features the forum has to keep the trolls under control are instead being abused by them. He. Is. More. Trouble. Than. He. Is. Worth.