Modern Camaro Forums banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My only upset as of now is the 23 est. hwy mileage (auto). I am more than sure i will be getting an m6 but how big of a difference can there be?

Also the DI V6 has higher compression but requires only regular. I guess i dont understand. I know it says premium "recomended" for the V8's but it is lower compression
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,135 Posts
I too am somewhat let down by the lower fuel economies. I was expecting near 30mpg (about 25-27mpg) for the V8 with AFM and about 25mpg for the LS3. Thats probably due to the stiff rear end, 3.45, in the SS. They should have gone with 3.08 standard and 3.27 as the highest. We all are pretty sure that there will be better models next year and the people will stiffen up the rear end, so why not have decent gears that allow for decent accel and great fuel economy. Leave the kick ass performance up to us gear heads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
dont worry about the FE guys. GM did the best they could with the size of the engine and the weight of the car. Be fair and compare it with some of the luxury V6 sedans out there that are 3.5L V6s and are only rated 25ish mpg on the highway. With a moderate right foot on the M6/LS3 combo you can probably coax 24-25 out of it on a moderate steady cruise. Plus dont forget the new EPA fuel economy test methods are tougher than they used to be. And the big 20 in. wheels and tires probably contribute to a "not so friendly for fuel economy" road load. The aero seems like it would be pretty decent other than the blunt front end. But dang it is worth it cuz they hit a homerun by keeping the whole front end nearly identical to the concept! :roxor:

The V6 only needs reg. fuel b/c it is DI. DI has a HUGE cooling effect on the intake charge.
The V8 recommends premium for max performance. Even though the CR is lower, it is port injection which doesnt work the wonders that DI does. It will run on reg, but you wont be getting the best ignition timing possible. On a somewhat similar note, knock is also harder to control on a bigger bore. The longer path the flame front has to travel opens the window more for knock. This turned into an technical engine post (not drivetrain). Oh well, just figured I would answer the question. ;) If you want more detail i can elaborate more in the appropriate section of the forum.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,867 Posts
If it makes you feel any better, fill up when your car is half empty (or half-full, for those optimists out there). Then it doesn't seem like you are spending as much. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,135 Posts
If it makes you feel any better, fill up when your car is half empty (or half-full, for those optimists out there). Then it doesn't seem like you are spending as much. :D
I'm already doing that and still spending $50 at the pump:mad: But its worth it to me so I really can't complain:D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,867 Posts
I filled up the other day, from empty (and I mean, sputtering kind of empty), and it cost me $72. I peed my pants, right there. I don't even want to take my F-150 with dual tanks to the gas station. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,135 Posts
I filled up the other day, from empty (and I mean, sputtering kind of empty), and it cost me $72. I peed my pants, right there. I don't even want to take my F-150 with dual tanks to the gas station. :D
At work we have a F-250 with dual tanks and when we fill it up, it costs about $130 to do so.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,153 Posts
I'm a little surprised there isn't more difference in gas mileage from the 6 to the 8 cyl. Unless there is a HUGE difference in price, I'm going to go for an RS/SS model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,055 Posts
It's the new way they're having to do mileage. Here's a snippet of John's response to this very question:

lyndalu:
I thought we would get better gas millage than 26mpg since my 4th gen gets 30mpg on the highway. Hows that

JohnFitzpatrick:
Remember, gas mileage is based on a federal government approved method. Actual gas mileage will depend on driving condition and use. If you get 30 with your 4th gen, you'll probably do even better with the 2010.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,873 Posts
I'm a little surprised there isn't more difference in gas mileage from the 6 to the 8 cyl. Unless there is a HUGE difference in price, I'm going to go for an RS/SS model.
Especially considering how great DI is supposed to be...I was expecting to see the 6 a little more efficient...Oh well, it does have the same HP as the Mustang GT:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao: Can't have everything.:D

BUT...supposedly the EPA has changed the way the estimate fuel economy on new cars...it's supposed to me more conservative now...rather than in the past, where you'd be real lucky to get what you car was rated at.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
there's been alot of information given out here, some of it spot on and some off the mark.

the biggest problem with camaro is the weight of the vehicle: it's simply too heavy for decent fuel economy AND good acceleration. it would need to lose atleast 300 lbs, better still would be 400 lbs. take a look at the pics of the bare frame and look at the a and c pillars, this car is built like a tank. that's a good thing for safety and for a decent ride but you pay for hauling around that weight.

as far as fuel economy goes, i have an 06 sts with the port injected version of the 3.6. my car weighs just over 3900 lbs and the transmission is the 5 speed auto. my rear end ratio is 3.42 and i consistently get just over 19 mpg
with NO hiway driving, all local stuff with stop lights and stop signs. the few times i have taken it for longer drives, i have seen over 27 mpg. the epa numbers for this car are 17/27. the camaro with the di 3.6, with either tranny and the 3.27 ratio and 200 lbs less weight should get 30 mpg on the hiway, with a judicious use of the go pedal...you play you pay...this iswherethe extra weight comes into the equation.

the di engine runs on regular fuel because it was engineered to run on reg gas...the di heads do cool the combustion mixture and that does allow a higher compression ratio, but there are trade offs with the di...there have been a number of posters on the caddy board i hang out at regarding the surging problems with the exact same engine that's going into the camaro...this happens at certain speeds only.

the v8's are designed to run on pemium, just like the northstar in the sts calls for premium, the n/s in the previous generation of sts did not...it was engineered to run on 87 octane. the v8's could easily have been designed to run on regular.

the afm that is on the l99 is something that will only help your fuel economy on long trips at steady throttle position, then the afm goes to work and shuts down 4 cylinders. in the epa fuel economy test, the loop isn't long enough for the afm to do it's thing and therefore the afm doesn't change the epa numbers.

if only gm had a crystal ball...


jackg
06 sts6
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top