2010 Camaro v-6 first drive

[regfootball]

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_li...st_drive_review

[regfootball]

wow, the interior looks so much better than any previous pictures......now i am even lathered up over this car.

[regfootball]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...rticleId=131090

edmunds too

[gm4life]

I really want one.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

So the C&D article is referencing the Bullitt and SRT-8 Challenger for the V6 Camaro?!?!

NEWS FLASH: There is a V8 coming guys. I know you hate to follow the Detroit companies and are probably a little foggy on the details, but just so you know.

Like the mullet that is often associated with it, it looks like the V-6 Camaro will walk a fine line between classiness and savagery.

And this is why the Camaro is my car... Because it communicates my personality.

[regfootball]

sounds like the camaro v8 is set up to walk all over the mustang and chrysler products.

[BatmanGTO]

sounds like the camaro v8 is set up to walk all over the mustang and chrysler products.

especially if the 6 is only losing to the Bullit and SRT-8 by about a second in the quarter........

[HarleyEarl]

Great interior, actually has some style compared to the sea of blandness out there.

I'm glad the V6 has hot looks and not just a pale version of the V8.

Luv this view of this sexy car:

[longtooth]

300 Horsepower V6. The '93 tuned down LT-1 made 275 horses. I love technology sometimes. Like when it can find oil somewhere that we don't need to send soldiers to baby-sit the commodity.

[quantum110]

300 Horsepower V6. The '93 tuned down LT-1 made 275 horses. I love technology sometimes. Like when it can find oil somewhere that we don't need to send soldiers to baby-sit the commodity.

But you're comparing the high revving HP of a DOHC V6 to a torquey V8. How bout 273ft-lbs @ 5k vs 325ft-lbs at 2.4k. The LT-1 excelled at being unruly, capable of completely destroying a set of tires through an intersection and having the inexperienced facing the wrong way after making a quick U-turn. With 15 year in suspension, tire, transmission, and engine design the 3.6 Camaro is a teddy bear in comparison even though it may be able to closely match an early factory LT-1 in speed.

Edit: I hope the 3.6 being in the Camaro brings out more Supercharger and Turbocharger kit makers. Kinda sad to see this engine family widely ignored by GM performance fans while the Ecotec and LSx get all the good stuff.

Edited September 5, 2008 by quantum110

[longtooth]

But you're comparing the high revving HP of a DOHC V6 to a torquey V8. How bout 273ft-lbs @ 5k vs 325ft-lbs at 2.4k. The LT-1 excelled at being unruly, capable of completely destroying a set of tires through an intersection and having the inexperienced facing the wrong way after making a quick U-turn. With 15 year in suspension, tire, transmission, and engine design the 3.6 Camaro is a teddy bear in comparison even though it may be able to closely match an early factory LT-1 in speed.

Edit: I hope the 3.6 being in the Camaro brings out more Supercharger and Turbocharger kit makers. Kinda sad to see this engine family widely ignored by GM performance fans while the Ecotec and LSx get all the good stuff.

Roger that. Currently restoring a relatively low mileage '93 Z28. Some pep left in her and a bit rough around the edges but otherwise a decent looking example of that vintage. Also drive a 2007 G6 GTP. The whoosh factor of the Z over the G6 is appreciable. I'm somewhat amazed at what they can wring out of the 3.6. I can appreciate both for their own virtues, but I'd rather scoot around town in the Z and go farther afield in the G6. I also have an '06 Yukon (6.0 liter) for serious people-moving and towing.

Like you, I can anticipate an aftermarket blower for the upcoming V6 Camaro. Why they've not chosen to christen a Z28 model leaves me puzzled somewhat but I can't wait to eventually get my hands on a new SS Camaro. We'll see.

[Drew Dowdell]

But you're comparing the high revving HP of a DOHC V6 to a torquey V8. How bout 273ft-lbs @ 5k vs 325ft-lbs at 2.4k. The LT-1 excelled at being unruly, capable of completely destroying a set of tires through an intersection and having the inexperienced facing the wrong way after making a quick U-turn. With 15 year in suspension, tire, transmission, and engine design the 3.6 Camaro is a teddy bear in comparison even though it may be able to closely match an early factory LT-1 in speed.

Edit: I hope the 3.6 being in the Camaro brings out more Supercharger and Turbocharger kit makers. Kinda sad to see this engine family widely ignored by GM performance fans while the Ecotec and LSx get all the good stuff.

As a first gen CTS owner, I can attest that even the lower powered 3.6 can still destroy tires and have you facing the wrong way...... if the Stabilitrack is switched off.

[The O.C.]

As a first gen CTS owner, I can attest that even the lower powered 3.6 can still destroy tires and have you facing the wrong way...... if the Stabilitrack is switched off.

Who needs to even turn off the StabiliTrack?

Just take one '07 CTS, with 37,000 miles on the original Bridgestone Potenzas.....and a greasy, slippery, Las Vegas street (post-monsoon-rain event)......it's a power-sliding adventure! (At least until the axle-hop kicks in....)