Lutz: possible four-cylinder mill for new Camaro

 

chevy camaro concept motorauthority 001

Lutz: possible four-cylinder mill for new Camaro

Lutz: possible four-cylinder mill for new Camaro

Enlarge Photo
Speaking at the New York auto show today GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said the engine from the high-performance versions of the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky could make its way under the hood of the new Camaro. Likely a run at improving the marque's CAFE numbers, the turbocharged four-banger would sit alongside the already planned V6 and V8 models.

In Solstice and Sky trim the 2.0L turbo four-cylinder cranks out 260hp, which is just about exactly the power expected from the 3.6L V6 motor already used in the CTS - although at a more highly tuned 304hp - and pegged for the Camaro. Similar performance from less displacement probably means better fuel consumption, although that's not a certainty with forced induction setups. Lutz says the V6 will get around 17mpg in town and 25 on the highway, according to Automotive News.

Although those numbers are respectable for a performance-segment car, both the Nissan 350Z and the Ford Mustang GT get the same or slightly better efficiency while putting another 40hp on the table. Considering those two cars are probably the nearest competitors for the Camaro in the U.S., that leaves a lot of pressure on the appearance of the new car to support sales. The V8-powered models will obviously take the performance game back over the top of the standard Mustang GT and 350Z, but likely at a hefty price premium.

Lutz would not speak specifically on the topic of pricing, but said that the Camaro was "going to be above Mustang" pricing, although he couched the higher price on the basis of a "sophisticated suspension system, and, frankly, a much nicer interior." While the Mustang has been criticized on both fronts - perhaps unjustly - the Nissan 350Z has a very sophisticated suspension system, and the initially lackluster interior has received upgrades over its life.

Exactly what a four-cylinder Camaro might mean for the Camaro range - and whether anyone will buy it, given a high cost of entry and the availability of much more exciting and true-to-image V6s and V8s, will have to be seen when the Camaro finally makes its sales debut in early 2009.



 
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
Comments (18)
  1. Is it just me or is the US getting a little far behind on engine technology? About 1.0 liter more to produce the same HP as Europeans and Japanese, and even Hyundai now! BTW, I would very much like to buy this Camaro, but a V6 with a couple turbos perhaps. No more push-rods.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. I don't think a 4 cylinder would work for this car.
    Sure, you could pump it up to produce decent power, but this is a pretty big car.
    How about a V6 with cylinder deactivation and a couple of turbos.
    Then people could choose if they want high-pressure tech or big V8.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. I've been saying that for ages Americans are shit at making engines. 1.0ltr to 100bhp is the current push I'd be going for if I was an engineers. The new 65AMG engine could put out 720bhp+ but they tuned it down.

    That's a 6itre V12, abeit it is twi turbo'd, the 63AMG engine could put out over 600bhp too but they again tone it down, these cars even get decent MPGs consider. Whereas for 600bhp in an American car you're looking at a 7litre+ engine. Infact the 4.8 V8 in a 650ci gets better mpg than this 3.6 V6
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. @ cj

    Price is the deciding factor cj for an American made car..Do you know how much a S or E 63 AMG cost?? its in the 100k range and guess how many they sell?? ..The camaro is meant to be consumed by the masses and massed produced. My 21 yr old brother will purchase this car soley based on looks and price (The American Way). He will not care how many valves/cylinder or how the air is forced into that engine, forced or normally!!!!!!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. WORLd - and thats the reason why we are running out of petrol..

    Get in a greener car or a more fuel efficient car...

    There are still speed restrictions so whether it takes you 4seconds to go 0-100 kmh (0-60mph) or 8 seconds should make any difference....by the time you reach that speed you are already exceeding the speed limit.

    Im no tree hugger as i love my porsches and always will.....but there are alot more cars out there that are fun to drive and chuck around that look good but dont use 1950's technology !
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. "I’ve been saying that for ages Americans are shit at making engines."

    And people like you dont know shit about engines...

    How do you get the engine weight, size, fuel effciency, price, maintnence costs, final cost, etc, etc...from a HP/Displacement figure??

    Fast and Furious kids just love their worthless HP/Displacement figures...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. S85 5.0 v10 of the M5 and 6 de 2007: HP: 500/7750 Tq: 383lbf-ft/6100 Weight: 529 pounds

    SRT-10 8.3 v10 of the Viper 2007: HP: 510/5600 Tq: 535lbf-gt/4200 Peso: 550 libras (the 2008 has 600hp and is slightly lighter but there are no numbers yet)

    Fuel consumption of R8 vs Viper (both are sport super-cars have the same weight, data from Canadian Goverment):

    Viper SRT-10 2008 - City: 16.8/ Highway: 9.2/CO2: 6432 kg/year

    Audi R8 2008 - City: 16.1/ Highway: 10.6/CO2: 6528 kg/year

    You people just say those stupid cliches because its american.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  8. ok woah woah woah... first of all, Fritz: who the HELL makes a 1L engine that makes 260 hp?

    theyre talking about a 2L engine making 130bhp/L thats good no matter what country you're in. so piss the hell off.

    is this engine right for this car? hell no. GM had better figure out how to pump that up to 300 hp at least. or turbo the 2.4L. they dont want this car competing with the mustang in the lower trim. but i think a big 4cyl with a good turbo could easily kick this thing to 300-350 which would be more than enough for a base trim camaro.

    gus; times are a changin. its sad to think of a camaro with a 4 cylinder but, if its got the power, why not. it would be nice if gm made a 2.5L V8, then turbo that thing, and have cylinder deactivation, but that wont happen. not JUST so that they can have a glory engine that is fuel efficient. not yet anyways. I do see the day, not too far in the future, where a 2.5L V8 WILL be the largest displacement engine around.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  9. It would look pretty dang funny though when you open the hood and see this tiny little mill in there with enough room on either side to stand up... :)
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  10. To quote myself, maybe reading it again will help. Doubtful...But whatever I'll piss the hell off if it cures illiteracy. Again, doubtful...

    "About 1.0 liter more to produce the same HP as Europeans and Japanese, and even Hyundai now!"

    6.2 Amg=600+ Hp
    7.0 GM= 500 HP
    Both top of the line.
    Get it? Push rods are as lame as your comment, Cochise.

    Moreover, the Camaro has already had a 4-cylinder engine. Imagination is hard, just try history, it suits your intellect better.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  11. Oh yeah, the z06 is only a few thousand cheaper than the E63 so, whoops.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  12. meant 500+, not 600 sorry.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  13. Weight of Z06 engine: 458 lb
    Weight of 6.2 amg: 439 lb

    And check the fuel consumption of a z06 with any merc using the 6.2

    Pushrod equal anything in the world and HP/Displacement figures are worthless
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  14. So, it's lighter and more powerful. Excellent.
    Oh, but fuel consumption comparisons of a 4000lb car vs a 3100lb car is valid? But OK, 15-24 for the Vette, and 12-19 for the Benz. Not bad, especially considering one has a 7-speed auto and the other a 6-speed manual. You add 2-3 MPG for the stick, put them real close I should think. With the weight difference, even or tipped towards the Benz. In the new C63 it gets 20 HWY at 3800lbs, albeit slightly detuned. And unfortunately that car is to be had for less than the z06 with enough to spare for a splurge at renntech.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  15. What are you guys smoking?
    Stop comparing engines that cost 5x as much to something in this car.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  16. Dear "Gus",
    Why don't you stop insulting people? For Christ's sake, who cares if they are wrong?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  17. I have driven the car and it absolutely an AMERICAN REVOLUTION being produced by the some of the best car builders in the world CANADIANS!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  18. I just want this car!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Research New Cars

Go!

 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.
 

Use the form below to send us a tip, give us feedback, or just say hello.

(max 750 characters)