A four-banger in a Camaro! Blasphemy you say? Could be, but what four-pot are we talking about? In this case, the General's car czar Bob Lutz suggests that the new 2010 Camaro due next February could offer the same 2.0 liter direct-injected engine used in the Saturn Sky Redline, Pontiac Solstice GXP and the SS versions of the Chevy HHR and Cobalt. Before dismissing the turbo-four immediately, consider the top-of-the-line engine options the Camaro offered after the last oil-embargo-driven doomsday. In '72, the big block 402 engine offered just 240 horsepower; in '73, the Z28 was equipped with a 245-horse 350 and by '75 the hottest option underhood made only 155 horses. Ouch. The 2.0 being considered for the Camaro punches out 260 horsepower, and based on our time with the engine, you feel each of them as you run up towards the redline. The next step-up will likely be a version of GM's 3.6, as offered in the CTS and G8, also making around 260 horsepower.
Other Camaro tidbits mentioned by Lutz: it will be priced higher than the Mustang, as GM sees the Camaro as a higher-end offering. Specifically, Lutz suggests that the Camaro will feature a much better interior than the 'Stang, along with its inherently better independent rear-suspension arrangement.
Perhaps a bigger question to ponder is how bad will the performance industry be impacted by new fuel efficiency standards along with the ever-tightening emissions regulations. Just so long as carmakers such as GM continue to offer engine options like their 2.0 liter DI four-banger, the performance drop-off won't be nearly as drastic as it was back in the mid-70s. Thank God for that!
[Source: Automotive News, sub. req'd]
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
IIHS releases official results on the smart fortwo
Tragedy at LeMons: Send love and a little bit more
Officially Official: New Ferrari California exposed!
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
Project Track Slut, Part One: Pick a weapon on the cheap
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
Johnny @ Mar 19th 2008 6:10PM
A four cylinder camaro? ARE YOU EFFING KIDDING ME?! Whats the Cobalt for?! Even the idea of a V-6 for this car is already painful enough!
vintage @ Mar 19th 2008 6:15PM
Go chase some minorities with your pickup and gunrack, hick. I'd love to have 250+hp, rwd, and GOOD fuel economy. Just because you're insecure about your manhood you need to get 10-12mpg doesn't mean the rest of us feel like wasting that much on funding oil company CEOs.
Yar @ Mar 19th 2008 6:18PM
Go hug a tree you pot smoking hippie, if you want a rwd 4 banger get a Solstice. 4 bangers don't belong in Camaro's.
geo.stewart @ Mar 19th 2008 6:25PM
all depends on power to weight ratio, and gearing.
referencing the low points doesnt help the case and using best case as a reference doesnt work if you dont reference power to weight.
But yeah, a Cobalt SS that beats out a stock Camaro edges on blasphemy.
vintage @ Mar 19th 2008 6:34PM
I'm not a hippie but I like performance WITHOUT getting 12mpg. And the solstice is NOT a car, it's a toy. It has 2 seats and no roof. A boosted 4 banger RWD camaro sounds like a VERY fun daily driver though! :D
Matt Keller @ Mar 19th 2008 6:39PM
Holy drama batman! An internet feud!
Johnny: 4 cylinders fist appeared in the Camaro in 1982. With something like 90 horsepower. This wouldn't be bad at all. It'd be cheaper than the V6 hopefully (Good Thing) get better mileage (Better Thing) and would be cheaper to repair compared to the complicated HFV6 (Best Thing).
Vintage:
Whoah buddy. Calm down. That made you look like such an ass, and was really uncalled for.
Yar:
*Facepunch*
Mr. Blake @ Mar 19th 2008 6:54PM
@ Matt Keller:
Thank you, mediator. We all care what everyone else thinks about our posts.
Pinhead @ Mar 19th 2008 7:13PM
Different times for call different stylings. 260 hp is not a bad thing no matter where it comes from. I agree a V8 is better but I mean if you want a muscle car go buy one. I've got a car with a 455 rocket V8 under the hood and it cost me $800. You'll save about that much in gas over the course of the year if you opt for the I4 Turbo over the V8. You won't be as loud doing it, but you'll still go about as fast.
DIRETTORE @ Mar 19th 2008 8:46PM
* Johny be good! You took the words right outta my mouth my friend! What the hell is Mr.Putz doing? And who says that dropping a 4 banger will make any benefit? The Vette gets better mileage than a Mitsu EVO!!! So whats the point?
I spoke with Irmscher the German tuner at Geneva about his LSx powered offering. And when I looked at the specs: 0-100=4.3, I said thats not any better than a stock Corvette. He said "I know, its because of the wind resistance. The aerodynamics are better on the Vette"!
Any dealer who gets a V8 Super Sport Cabrio will charge an arm+leg markup because there will be very few allocation if any at all :(
Russell @ Mar 19th 2008 10:35PM
They can use whatever engine they want in there as long as I can buy it used cheap and stick whatever I want in there.
bruno @ Mar 20th 2008 1:11AM
Keep in mind that the target customer for this car will soon not be able to afford the fuel for it with a V8. Those that can will have that engine option. But for the others, they want a powerful but efficient engine. But unless there is suddenly a major shift in who buys this car (young guys w/o a pot to whizz in) it's not guys with money to burn up the tailpipe. These are payment buyers. If they have to spend $75-$125 more on fuel each month they might just choose a different car.
Plus they have EPA standards to meet. what cha gonna do?
Student Driver @ Mar 20th 2008 1:30AM
Considering how much gas the old V6 and V8 would piss away and still not make the HP/torque of this 4 cylinder, I don't see much of a loss. The engine should be lighter and allow for more rearward weight bias, and it would probably be fun to autocross with reasonable mileage. I'd consider it if they could make it weigh less than 3200lbs that would be awesome.
idave101 @ Mar 19th 2008 6:10PM
Sounds prudent to me. If "entry level" = 260hp w/30mpg. Sign up a good portion of the pouplace. It will sell.
RP @ Mar 19th 2008 7:55PM
GM -- please give us 300 hp -- like the Subaru STI and Mitsubishi Evo. If they can do it, so can GM.
BTW, what is the curb weight of the Camaro?
vintage @ Mar 19th 2008 6:11PM
F*CK. YES. Now this is the musclecar I'd be excited about! RWD! V8 POWER! 4 banger MPG when you aren't on boost!
HALLELLUJAH GM! DO THIS! DO IT NOW AND YOU WILL SELL A TON OF THEM!!!!
Bryan @ Mar 20th 2008 1:20AM
Not if they are priced higher than a Mustang. I think it could be a cool thing, but I wouldn't want to pay more for less.
DC @ Mar 19th 2008 6:13PM
Funny, I just posted in the G8 Sport Truck thread that GM will need to spread the 2.0L turbo 4 DI throughout more models (I specifically mentioned a future G8) to create more cars that are both exciting and efficient.
Todd @ Mar 19th 2008 6:13PM
How much would it weigh though?
David(Postal) @ Mar 19th 2008 6:14PM
wow its the 70s all over again
vintage @ Mar 19th 2008 6:34PM
Except this time we have computers to make boosted 4 cylinders a reliable powerplant.