New Ram included:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01

 

The one that kinda bugs me is the V-6Camaro. I realize that EPA's rating system has changed last year or so. But in the last rendition of the 4th generation F-body's if you bought a 3.8 with 5 speed camaro you'd be getting right around 30 MPG. I also understand that this car is going to be a little heavier. but why does it seem mpg capabilities seem to keep going backwards?

the Challenger is the same. Why would you buy the 3.7 for any other reason but saving the 10K. If you're buying a muscle car in this century, isn't 100 HP more worth 10K considering all the trim and other upgrades? IE: ...why does the v-6 even exist for these cars now since they're splurge or emotional buys anyway?

 

Engineering and present day reality are always years apart. Pure gasoline powered vehicles are going to be in the minority in the next decade or so, until the industry and society can agree on two or three acceptable alternative fuels/power sources....

Dusty

 

Go find me a 300hp car for $21,500 brand new....

That's the reason why V6's exist....and honestly, that's a pretty impressive set of numbers if you consider that the top tier Mustang GT is only 300hp for around $25k.... then that's actually quite impressive. Are you going to beat a Mustang GT? Probably not, but having 300hp attached to a 6spd tranny is still going to be very nice.

I agree its always better to buy the V8, but some people are just going to want the look, and not care about the motor.

And I currently drive a supercharged V6 GM car, and I get about 28-30mpg on the highway, depending on how I drive. My car is on par with the new Camaro as far as weight, so it shouldnt be too much different.

 

So a GTP Grand Prix?

My mother just drove her GXP 5.3 across I-80 this Summer at about 75 and got 28mpg real world as well. Obviously around town it's not as efficient, but then there's the pleasure of the torque band. I think that's more my point. Alt Fuels is a ways off, but technology is current enough to do better than 26. I think it really does come down to saving 10K to get the look then....because there's a bunch of compact cars that can match performance (or beat it) and get closer to 30 right now.

 

In the case of the Challenger and Mustang I do agree with you... but with the Camaro...its a bigger difference. The SS will run you about 35-40k....and the RS V6 will run you about 22k...thats a huge difference especially considering the major difference is 100hp...

Now, how many BASE model American made or Import made cars do you know that start at $21-22k and have 300hp? The only thing that comes close to my knowledge was the SRT-4 Neon and perhaps the current Caliber SRT-4. The rest...not a chance..

More importantly, when did we start referring to 300hp as slow or lack of performance


Yes, I own a GTP Grand Prix Competition Group - stock 260hp/280ftlbs torque...3.8L V6

 

The reason why the MPG ratings are going down can be blamed on 2 things: First off, the EPA is using a different method based more on real world driving. So no posting mpg ratings based on what a car does in a lab and on rollers anymore. The other thing is, tightened emissions. Those 4th gen camaros didnt have multiple converters on them (till after '00 or so anyway) and as anyone knows, add on emissions garbage destroys power and mpg.

My '00 4.0 Wrangler will get left in the dust by a '95-ish model comparably equipped. I know because Ive driven several. And they got a few better MPG too, even though on paper my rig is superior in every way.

 

I dont believe that for a second. hybrids, etc have far too many drawbacks and anyone who knows thing #1 about cars knows that in the long run they'll cost you more. AND, even though the greenies like them because it makes a statement, they're actually setting up a huge environmental disaster in a few years when all those batteries need disposing of. Not only is the electrolytic solution highly toxic, its also the 30 or so percent of the batteries thats NOT recyclable when they claim that theyre 70% re-usable. AND, at a replacement cost of $3K-$7K its just one more reason to junk the car instead of keeping it going since its not cost effective to keep on the road. Consumerism gone WAY rampant. Thats a lot of dead cars that'll need disposing of. Maybe the hippies can use them as compost boxes?

And if our next Pres (Go McCain/Palin!) does what he says and taps all the oil recources including the oil shale and tar sands, then you'll see the cost of fuel go way down. We may never see it for 99 cents a gallon again, but there's no good reason on earth why it cant be under $2. There's plenty of petrol out there, all we have to do is go get it.

The only alternative fuel option Id get behind is biofuels and/or CNG or propane. When it comes to our cars and trucks, pure internal combustion is the very best there is. Its cheap, its reliable, vehicles that use it can be rebuilt and re-used. And existing cars and trucks can be upgraded to use biofuels or CNG which is the ultimate and most effective form of recycling. Additionally if youre an enthusiast, you have to give up not one thing. Personally, I dont care what you tell me about a hybrid, fuel cel, or whatever type of vehicle. Unless its a 2-door open top 4x4 with hardcore capability, or a rwd muscle coupe with 60's inspired styling you just wont sell me and many more like myself. A car should be just that--a car. Not a transportation device.

 

98-02 LS1 f-bodies have two cats dude...one for each bank. I'm pretty sure the LT1 96-97's do too...since they're OBD-II compliant.