Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

What to expect from the next generation Chevy Camaro?




As long as Mustangs and Camaros are in production, Ford and Chevy will always be trying to one-up each other. Ford announced that it will be using a 4-cylinder EcoBoost that's larger than the one used in the Focus ST for the next generation Mustang. Instead of Chevrolet trying to one up Ford by offering a turbo 4-cylinder with more power, better fuel economy or both, they skipped the 4-cylinder option all together. Al Oppenheiser, Camaro chief engineer, recently said that the next gen Camaro will continue to have a V6 as the smallest engine offering. "As long as they'll pay me to be the chief engineer, I'm going to fight for every horsepower I can and every cylinder I can," he said.

The benefit, in my opinion, isn't power or performance. I would actually expect that the 4-cylinder turbo to have a slight edge in performance compared to the base V6 options in both the Mustang and the Camaro plus there will be a far better aftermarket potential. It's simply not what the car is about. The car is not meant to save fuel, it's meant to be a performance car. And I'm not saying that efficiency and performance can't go together. As a matter of fact, I would expect negligible real world difference in mileage between an EcoBoost Mustang and a V6 Camaro because, while the smaller engine will probably be more efficient and have higher EPA ratings, actual mileage of turbo engines drops quickly when you are pushing them.  It's the attitude of the car that they're maintaining with this move. Plus, at least for the next generation, you will not hear a 4-cylinder engine noise come from a Camaro.

GM pulled the same trick with their full size trucks when they continued to offer a V6 only as the base engine and kept all optional engines as V8's while Ford brought the EcoBoost V6 to the F150 lineup but they did work on improving efficiency. Although GM kept only V8's at the top, they added a multitude of technologies to save fuel and if you look at the midrange V8 in the Silverado that's meant to be an equivalent to the EcoBoost V6, it actually matched the EcoBoost's EPA city rating and beat the hwy rating by 1 mpg so don't count out the Camaro from the fuel economy race just yet.

And that's not all for Camaro fans. A few weeks ago, Chevrolet published a video showing the anticipated Camaro Z/28 lapping the famed Nurburgring in 7:37.47. That puts it just ahead of the 911 Carrera S, which did the deed in 7:37.9. There are a few things in the Porsche's favour though. The tested car had the PDK transmission which cuts 0.7 seconds off the 0-60 time and 1/4 mile time while adding over 3 mph to the 1/4 mile trap speed. This would probably translate to quite a few precious seconds on a 13-mile track. Moreover, the Camaro had to make do with a slightly wet track. Check out the video below for the full lap.





Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's vs Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's

I never thought I'd ever run Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2's on my 2012 Boss 302. The cost is astronomical and they are supposed to last the least of anything comparable. So how did I end up with (nearly) fresh Sport Cup 2's? A complete fluke. I came across a lightly used set with only a few hundred miles and no track time; 305/30/19 takeoffs from a GT Performance Pack Level 2 (GT PPL2). I knew my 71R's were getting very worn before the season started and likely wouldn't last the whole season, even this short one. The price was far better than a new set of RE-71R's, a little more than half, and local Time Attack rules (Canadian Automobile Sport Clubs) recently made 180 and 200 TW tires equivalent, meaning no PAX or PIP point penalty for going with 180 TW tire like the Pilot Sport Cup 2's. I have been very curious about how PSC2's compare to RE 71R's but I stayed away due to their being painfully expensive and, up to last year, their 180 TW rating would

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity. Grip is noticeably l