Welcome to the FirebirdV6.com/CamaroV6.com forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
-Eric<br />2002 Navy Blue Camaro...Striped and Stalled. 35th Anniversary SS wheels <br />Best ET: 15.384 @ 88.32 on street tires<br />Project Whitney: Goal, 14.0 1/4 by summer 2008.
Like what GM did to the new 2006 Impala SS FWD :rolleyes:
[ January 20, 2006, 10:42 PM: Message edited by: 96RS Alex ]
Black \'96 RS Camaro, 3.8 V6 Series II, M5, Stock 200 HP, 204K miles! Stock \'91 Firebird 3.1 V6 automatic w/ overdrive. 266,400 miles on it. \'83 Pontiac Trans Am,305 LG4, Cowl Induction,Borg Warner 5 Speed,T-Tops,Gale Banks Exhaust System:$800 obo
i think they'll stay around 240ish on the v6. its still enough to pound the v6 stang into the ground and has the makes for a good engine to mod if what thor says is true.
current car- 95 Trans am- bolt ons, parked and collecting dust. why? because **** it
I am more interested in the timeline for production at the moment. I think they realize if they are behind the challenger to market they are gonna miss out on alot of sales. If they can make sure it has a good cylinder deactivation that works well (supposedly the concept has cylinder deactivation). Then I think they can sell it. One other thing if this goes to production I think it's going to really kill what little sales the GTO has at the moment. I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing though, perhaps if the GTO dies we will get back our beloved firebird.
-Brad
98 Firebird - gone from mod mode to keep it running and useable mode.
2000 V-Star Custom 1100
If all else fails use a bigger hammer!
:rock:
Originally posted by JusFlyinBy: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 96RS Alex: I hope it's a rear wheel drive...
Like what GM did to the new 2006 Impala SS FWD :rolleyes:
Yea... Ridiculous right??? I mean, what stupid company would ever turn a family sedan into a fwd car???
end sarcasm
Originally posted by Mighty Thor: GM does have the 3.9 240 hp V6.
I read popular mechanics that GM is thinking of playing more with the timing and the cam. THis engine is actually capable of over 300 NA.
Can it do over 300, maintain reliability and still pull off decent gas mileage numbers... That's the question. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes. Give it variable valve timing or some kind and gas mileage can be had easily.
2005 Ford Focus ZX3 SE D20 M5 - Modified ;) <a href=\"http://www.knightenmotorsports.com\" target=\"_blank\">http://www.knightenmotorsports.com</a> <br />[ U R L = h t t p : / / w w w . g e o c i t i e s . c o m / h e a r t l a n d _ h e a t _ v 6 ] Heartland Heat V6 [ / U R L ]
^^^ Or they can give it the setting that lets it cruise on half its cylinders (as they're planning on doing with the V8 model)
-Eric<br />2002 Navy Blue Camaro...Striped and Stalled. 35th Anniversary SS wheels <br />Best ET: 15.384 @ 88.32 on street tires<br />Project Whitney: Goal, 14.0 1/4 by summer 2008.
Originally posted by speedracer95v6: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JusFlyinBy: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by 96RS Alex: I hope it's a rear wheel drive...
Like what GM did to the new 2006 Impala SS FWD :rolleyes:
Yea... Ridiculous right??? I mean, what stupid company would ever turn a family sedan into a fwd car???
end sarcasm
Originally posted by Mighty Thor: GM does have the 3.9 240 hp V6.
I read popular mechanics that GM is thinking of playing more with the timing and the cam. THis engine is actually capable of over 300 NA.
Can it do over 300, maintain reliability and still pull off decent gas mileage numbers... That's the question. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes. Give it variable valve timing or some kind and gas mileage can be had easily. </font>[/QUOTE]At a cost. There must be some reason they aren't doing it. Why haven't they done that to the STi so that gets good gas mileage?
I guess the point im trying to make is, I don't think GM's head guys sit around a table and go, "Ehh, our consumers don't need that much Hp, lets just give it so so hp and say F it. They'll deal."
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment