Uh, 3 times the mileage? If that were the case, everyone would be using synthetic. I do use it in my car, but my point, if you would actually take a second to read and undersand what I am saying, is that if you the oil life monitor or do your oil changes at the right intervals, most modern engines that aren't high performance will run forever with any oil. Heck, my Mom just sold her 1998 LeSabre with the series II 3800 and it had 160,000 miles. Not a leak, never burned, and my stepdad and I used nothing but standard Valvoline 10w30 in it. I guarantee you the 3.6 VVT will run just as well if not better than that engine with standard old fashioned oil.

And no, you will not get 3 times the mileage out of any car with synthetic. Maybe 10-30 more miles out of a tank of fuel.

By that calculation, Corvettes should be getting 900 miles out of a tank of gas

 

There are two different versions of the 3.6L V6. One has direct injection (304hp), and one does not (~260hp). Both are available in the CTS. Lutz said they'd be using the same V6 that is used in the CTS, and he said around 260hp, so we can therefore conclude that the V6 Camaro will not have direct injection.

That's a fair point.

All of those things are generally only an issue when you're dealing with an aftermarket, upgraded turbo. If you upgrade your turbo, you should buy a turbo timer, which keeps the engine running automatically for a few minutes after you get out of the car. Problem solved.

On the off chance that GM ever builds such an aggressive turbo motor, I'm sure that they would integrate a turbo timer into the car's factory computer system.

You've obviously not driven any factory turbo cars manufactured in the last couple of years.

Superchargers whine. Turbos hiss. I don't care for supercharger whine myself, but I love the sound of a spooling turbo.

The last time? Probably in the last few minutes, since GM is still building Turbo Ecotecs, Subaru is still putting turbo motors in the WRX, and Mitsubishi is still putting turbo motors in the Evo. All of these engines have demonstrated good reliability. And that's not even bringing up turbodiesel motors.

I have yet to see a factory turbo vehicle with a blowoff valve. Usually there's just a wastegate.

Just in case, I think you should be prepared to join Jason's new cult.

 

I looked up the engine weights. The 3.6L engine weighs 370lbs, and the LS2 weighs 440lbs. I couldn't find a weight for the LS3, but I think it's safe to assume that it's not significantly different.

We don't know if the V6 will already have drivetrain and suspension components strong enough to handle the V8, or if the V6 and V8 will have different parts. I think it's safe to assume that the V8 will have larger brakes (although those brakes might be optional on the V6).

I think it's safe to assume that the V8's transmission options will be the T56 (or better yet, the TR6060) or the 6L80.

We can hope that the V6 gets the T56, but I don't think it will. I suspect it will get a smaller, lighter six-speed manual. I also suspect that its automatic trans will be the 6L50. A T56 weighs about 140 pounds, and a 6L80 weighs about 180 pounds (both dry, without clutch or converter). I wasn't able to find comparable weights for the CTS's 6-speed manual or for the 6L50. If anyone wants to spend more time finding those, we could compare.

 

Ill keep that in mind.

 

I think he was referring to miles in between oil changes...not MPG. just my .02.

 

Although if the article's other statement that Lutz confirmed to them that it was getting the DI motor from CTS is correct, than who knows.

I don't see why we can assume the V8 will get better brakes. The 98+s all had identical brakes across the line.

 

i would think the v6 would get a lighter 5 speed manual.

 

I think 5 speeds should be completley phased out. They are not necassary anymore.
If the v6 came out with a 6 speed the MPG would be even better. If it comes with a 5 speed I dont see it being that much better then the LS3 if driven without the pedal down 24/7.

 

There is a guy on the Dakota forums with a stock 3.9 engine that has never been removed and never had any mojor engine work done and it has 530,000+ Original Miles on it. He has used nothing but snythetic oil since new. He uses amsoil.

I use nothing but synthetic and have never had an engine failure in any car that I have ran syntech thru for the time that i have owned them. Except on car I bought that blew up almost as soon as I bought it but it had been abused.

 

I never had an engine failure in any engine I ran conventional oil in.

 

5 speeds ARE necessary if they cost less. And you can get the same mileage as a 6 speed if it has a tall overdrive (5th) gear.

 

6 speeds are overrated. who REALLY NEEDS two overdrives. If my T56 was a 5 speed, the car would drive exactly the same and get the same mileage. 6 speeds are just way overhyped.

with 5 speeds in the v6's, that would save $$ and lower the cost of the car.

 

How exactly would your car get the same mileage with one less overdrive gear? Besides, not all six speeds have two overdrive gears.

 

its really overhyped! what do you drive?

 

The number of gear ratios is entirely irrelevant.

As far as gear ratios are concerned, fuel economy is based on the ratio of your lowest gear. In the case of the T56 ratios, they took the ratios a normal five-speed with a single overdrive and added a sixth ratio, even lower than the existing 5th gear overdrive.

In the case of most other six-speeds, they make the ratios closer together, and sixth gear is just a regular overdrive, not a super-low overdrive like on the T56.