• Jan 4, 2011

Chevrolet Camaro RS – Click above for high-res image gallery

When the V6-powered 2011 Ford Mustang arrived with 305 horsepower – one more pony than the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro – the engineers at General Motors didn't take long to up their power quotient to 312 hp. Camaro5 reports that GM has no intention of resting on its seven pony victory, as the 2012 Camaro will received an updated 3.6-liter mill capable of 325-330 horsepower.

The rumored engine will reportedly carry the LFX designation, with the same direct injection, variable valve timing and dual overhead cams as the 2011 model, but that's not all. The rumored LFX also lists "E85 MAX" as a technology, giving the updated engine the ability to burn ethanol as its primary fuel. So how does E85 equal 330 horsepower? It doesn't, really, but the folks at Camaro5 estimate the new number based off the improvements made to the 270 horsepower 3.0L LF1 V6 (in the same engine family as the current 3.6-liter V6) that currently resides under the hood of several GM products. So if 3.0-liters equals 270 horsepower, then 3.6 liters can somehow net you somewhere between 325 and 330 ponies.

Okay, so A² plus B² divided by unicorn dust somehow equals 330 horsepower? That's not exactly the scientific method, but at least one forum poster claims that the LFX will also carry larger heads and exhaust valves, a new "tunable" ECM and a revised intake manifold. We have no idea how accurate any of this information is, but Camaro5 has a pretty good track record when it comes to Bowtie scoops, and we'll be more than happy to welcome a 330-hp V6 Camaro if this turns out to be true. Hat tip to Rick!



Photos copyright ©2011 Alex Núñez / AOL

[Source: Camaro5]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 74 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      The weight is why a turbo would really work. At 120 HP/L a 3.0 would make 360ish and get better mpg than the V8. I'd spend 30+ for that knowing that $5 Gould hurt but Not ruin me.
      josephdrummerj
      • 4 Years Ago
      All these cars are plastic, low power junk! They try and re-capture the glory days with the mustang, camaro, challenger, etc. give it up! Theres nothing like the origional, steel body cars and no matter what they do they will never be like he origionals. Is there really much diffrence between a camaro and a cobalt? I woulden't buy one of these pieces of crap for any price. The value of my 70 GTO keeps going up and the value of these is in the toilet the second you drive off the lot. You want a real muscle car? Buy an old one and restore it!!!!!
      • 4 Years Ago
      All these "who sold more" comments: McDonalds sells the most hamburgers. Do you really believe they are the best hamburgers?
      • 4 Years Ago
      All this will soon become meaningless as gas hits $4/gal....
      • 4 Years Ago
      Cant argue with more power.

      Out of curiosity... what is the weight difference between the camaro and mustng (V6's)?
        • 4 Years Ago
        About 300lbs depending on options in the Mustang. Despite that, both the Camaro and Mustang are virtually evenly matched in nearly every road test of both cars since they debuted.
        • 4 Years Ago
        The GT and SS are pretty evenly matched, but the V6 Mustang completely outclasses the V6 Camaro.
      • 4 Years Ago
      So if it is rated 330 hp on regular, it should be making about +/- 5% more on E85, right?

      So you could be pushing 350 HP (although mpg would likely take a hit..)
      • 4 Years Ago
      That would be a lovely update, but FIX THE INTERIOR (ergonomics)!
      • 4 Years Ago
      who cares how fast they go, the Camaro will definitely get you more @SS than a mustang, that's for sure. it just looks sooo much better.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I drove a 2011 Stang for a day. Despite 305 bhp, it didn't feel that powerful, possibly because of its weight. A CLK430 I used to have felt a fair bit more brutal in acceleration (it's lighter and, granted, it has a larger engine producing more low-end torque).

      So as HP ratings and weight go up, seat-of-the-pants feel still doesn't compare to their V8 versions. The interiors of these cars, while much improved over their older models, still trail the import sports cars by a bit. Ford Sync, of course, is a winner.

      In the end, we shouldn't be alarmed yet...they're still mostly the same base-model pony cars, just more competent than before.
        • 4 Years Ago
        I think that seat of the pants feel is due to the lower peak torque of bot the Ford and Chevy V6's compared to the V8's.

        But if you thought the Mustang felt heavy, go drive a Camaro, which weighs several hundred pounds more. The Mustang feels light compared to it.
      • 4 Years Ago
      More power is always welcome, but I want to see 'Track Pack' handling improvements. They need to beat the current 'stang in that department.
      • 4 Years Ago
      If GM can get the redline on the 3.6 DI up to 7500rpm, it'll make 330HP, actually probably a bit more.

      If you've driven one, you know it's a very free spinner, I can't imagine it takes much more than some slightly different cam profiles and springs to get this thing to hit 7500rpm.

      The 3.0DI is actually rated at a higher redline than the 3.6 although in reality they seem to have the same redline, 7000rpm.
        • 4 Years Ago
        The cylinder bore is a bit small, so 7500 is probably not going to happen.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I love all the smack-talk from Camaro and Mustang partisans. Let's face it, without the presence of both, neither would be as great or as inexpensive.
    • Load More Comments