TriShield

Muscle Cars Poised To Get Four-Cylinder Engines



Published: 02/28/2013
by Rick Kranz, Correspondent

Just the Facts:

• The expected migration of four-cylinder engines to America's muscle cars is being pushed by higher gasoline prices and a government mandate for better fuel economy.
• Industry sources tell Edmunds that Chevrolet and Ford are preparing redesigned muscle cars, possibly with standard four-cylinder engines.
• The redesigned Mustang is expected to debut in 2014, the car's 50th anniversary, while the Camaro's update is penciled in later that year or early 2015.

DETROIT — The expected migration of four-cylinder engines to America's muscle cars — most notably the Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro — is being pushed by higher gasoline prices and a government mandate for better fuel economy.

Industry sources tell Edmunds that Chevrolet and Ford are preparing redesigned muscle cars, possibly with standard four-cylinder engines. The move isn't surprising, as four-cylinder engines become commonplace in full-sized sedans like the Ford Taurus and Chevrolet Impala.

The redesigned Mustang is expected to debut in 2014, the car's 50th anniversary, while the Camaro's update is penciled in later that year or early 2015. The cars will shed hundreds of pounds by adapting lighter-weight materials. The end result is a four-cylinder engine that will provide performance comparable to a V6 engine.

"Four cylinders are definitely going to be a way of life in larger vehicles and sporty vehicles," said Michael Robinet, a managing director at IHS Automotive, in an interview with Edmunds.

He added: "I think the next cycle of muscle cars are definitely going to have to offer a four-cylinder of some sort, if only for the export market. And they probably will be available for the domestic market as well."

The four-cylinder engines will offer plenty of horsepower and torque to spin tires and burn rubber or rapidly accelerate down the freeway. Plus there will be an added bonus to woo buyers.

"If you can get a four-cylinder engine with the power of a V6, but with much better fuel economy, it won't be a problem to gain consumer acceptance," said Michael Omotoso, senior manager of global powertrains at LMC Automotive Inc., in an interview with Edmunds.

Of course, both Chevrolet and Ford are mum about their redesigned cars. Neither will say whether a four-cylinder engine will be available. However, Ford has said the redesigned Mustang is being engineered for a global market, leading to speculation that a four-cylinder engine is mandatory for markets outside of North America.

Chrysler appears to be the lone holdout when it comes to putting a smaller engine under the hood of the Dodge Charger or Challenger. Dodge has no plans to offer a four-cylinder engine in Charger or Challenger.

In fact, Dodge's boss admits he can't comprehend the suggestion.

"I have a hard time getting my head around that," said Reid Bigland, Dodge CEO, in an interview with Edmunds earlier this month at the 2013 Chicago Auto Show. "The Challenger and Charger have the muscle-car aura to them. I think what we are seeing right now in the market is still a great deal of appeal for Hemi power."

Bigland said that for full-sized sedans that do not "have that muscle-car aura, the 300, the Impala, the Taurus, I think it is much more plausible for that to happen and happen in much greater frequency than we have ever seen."

However, Bigland said the automaker will have to look to hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles and diesel applications in other models within the Chrysler Group to balance the automaker's Corporate Average Fuel Economy so it can continue to offer the Hemi V8. He said the price to purchase a Hemi at some point likely will be somewhat higher.

While industry sources say Chevrolet and Ford are preparing redesigned muscle cars, it is unclear whether a Challenger redesign is in the works.

At Ford, the likely four-cylinder engine candidate for the redesigned Mustang is the turbocharged EcoBoost 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. The engine is rated at 240 horsepower, 48 hp less than the standard 3.5-liter V6.

This would not be the first time a four-cylinder engine is offered in a Mustang. When the car was redesigned and downsized for the 1974 model year, a four-cylinder engine was offered. However, the automotive press criticized the car's smaller size and the engine's disappointing performance.

GM has three four-cylinder engines that could end up in the Camaro. A non-turbo 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine is standard in the redesigned 2014 Chevrolet Impala. Chevrolet also offers a 259-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine in the Chevrolet Malibu. Finally, sitting in General Motors' arsenal is a 272-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter power plant. Today, however, it is exclusive to the Cadillac ATS.

Edmunds says: Some may wonder if we'll still be able to call them muscle cars. But as long as the power is comparable to a V6, four-cylinder engines may win the hearts and wallets of U.S. buyers.

Tainted

iTrader: (9)

Ahhh good ol government telling us what we have to have.

jimmy169

Honestly, is it a big deal what the "standard" models will have for engines. Personally, I was hoping for the option for a twin turbo v6 Camaro alongside the v8. If the mustang pictured above had a reliable turbo package (wouldn't want 4 cylinder though, v6 at the least) and didn't use the BOSS badge since that would get panties in a bunch, I'd go straight to the dealer with a down payment. It looks great, I just don't find anything unique anymore about the engine choices, especially since the GT is so close in power anyway.

Plus it looks like the decision may also have to do with the requirements beyond our borders:

"Of course, both Chevrolet and Ford are mum about their redesigned cars. Neither will say whether a four-cylinder engine will be available. However, Ford has said the redesigned Mustang is being engineered for a global market, leading to speculation that a four-cylinder engine is mandatory for markets outside of North America."

Cool28

iTrader: (2)

I doubt that sales would tank. Quite funny there is a lot of options that you could put on a v8 and have it get good mpg. If car company's would pool there forces we could have good mpg v8s. One option I can think of is get rid of a cam all together and use electronic Valving. That alone you could give you a lot to work with on getting mpg up and still having a v8. Also could do 4-6-8 cylinder shutoff depending how much throttle your using. The current 4 cylinder shutoff thing is a joke cause and little throttle input and 8 cylinders kick in right away. American company's need to wakeup cause next time the government won't bail them out

1CAMWNDR

iTrader: (21)

Turbo diesel? Yes please.

I agree with the above statement that it really doesnt bother me what the base models are available with. A 4 cylinder turbo, a 6, a 6 cylinder turbo, an 8, an 8 cylinder supercharged/turbo. What ever makes the economy ratings good is fine with me.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

A turbo-4 base model is fine by me. As long as the SS/GT/RT models (and up) still get the V8s, I don't care what they do to the base models. I think it would be an interesting case study to offer a base model with the option of a turbo-4 and a V6, both costing exactly the same amount, and see which one sells more. I can't imagine anyone buying a muscle car hoping for good/great gas mileage.

Yes they will. Government fears the political backlash of letting a company of that size go bankrupt.

ThisBlood147

I agree. As long as the V8 still reigns supreme in the "performance" trims of these new musclecars, who gives two ***** if a 4 cylinder entry model is available? I might be upset if I were looking to get into a sixxer model to putt around town in and found out that only a 4 was available, but other than that I can't think of who would be highly disturbed by the existence of a 4 banger Mustang or Camaro. If memory serves, it wouldn't be the first time we've seen that (ie: the 70's and 80's). Hell, the ole SVO's are now considered collectable now by many.

When the V8's disappear, I'll get upset. Until then, not concerned. The sky is not falling...yet.

proxemics

That is ok I already have my muscle car

99FRC

iTrader: (5)

https://ls1tech.com/forums/automotiv...r-deliver.html

That is all.

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Yea, high MSRP cost is killing V8 performance faster than govt fuel economy. Heated seats, Navigation, blue tooth, 4G hot spots? When we,the consumers, started demanding our daily drivers have all the conveniences of our homes is when I started growing concerned with the performance car market.

1CAMWNDR

iTrader: (21)

Truth.
Ford did sell a **** ton of 4 cylinder base model fox body Mustangs. It's gonna be alright.

black06g85

iTrader: (6)

eh at least with the cobalt ecotech's we've been making over 500hp on stock motors so power can still be made.

Cajun ELESS-ONE

kelobro

Great as long as you don't wreck it and it doesn't wear out.

I've owned:

• 62 VW Baja Bug
• 65 Malibu SS
• 71 Malibu
• 72 CJ5 Jeep
• 70 Firebird
• 78 firebird
• 78 Monte Carlo
• 79 F150 truck
• 82 Lincoln Towncar
• 86 (or 84) Caprice Wagon
• 91 Caprice
• 91 Z71 4x4
• 91 Buick Regal
• 98 Grand Prix
• 2001 Grand Am
• 2004 Impala

I don't own any of them anymore. After a while you want a newer car and it sucks if all the new cars suck.

justin455

2 year old thread, dude

kelobro

With 4 cyl. 2014 Impalas, I4T Buicks and smaller Camaros coming out, it fits. You say that like 2 years is a long time...

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Well since this old thread is back....

Every weekend during the summer I attend events with hundreds of different "old" muscle/performance cars, from the '60s to the '00s. For those of us who don't demand fancy cutting edge gadgets, flashy-blinky tech and soft touch materials from floor to roof, there is NO shortage of cool/fun/appealing cars on the used market. With the continued value of and interest in old muscle, the restoration industry is quite strong and packed with available items to restore most common/popular models to whatever level of stock or modified finished product is desired. New cars are great for their weather resistance and daily driver friendliness, but they are certainly not the only option for those of us who own second (or third/fourth/etc.) cars as hobbies and toys. When you wear one out or grow tired of it, there is always something else different from that 40-50 year period to try.

I agree that it's nice to be able to run out an buy a brand new XXX and find it perfect for both daily and hobby use, but I don't really see it as the end of the world if the newest offerings don't grab my attention. I'm always finding old stuff that I'd rather have instead, and I hate the thought of spending $30-50k on a brand new car to drive in horrific Chicago winters, so I'm fine with a basic, 4-cylinder foul weather daily driver on days where you couldn't enjoy the muscular nature of a 400+hp performance car anyway.

I know that a multi-car lifestyle isn't possible for everyone, but considering the MSRP of a new, genuine performance car, it's probably more affordable to have a beater and an older, nice toy than to buy something brand new with a V8 and performance pedigree.

It'llrun

That also lends some reasoning for buying new and hanging on to it. Of course, that's great for those who not only can afford it, but are either young or have someone young they intend to leave it to, but you need to know which version to get because obviously not all will hold high value.

Either way, it's hard to go wrong if you can afford whichever and want it for awhile or a long while.

I was listening to a "dial and deal" type of thing yesterday and one of the callers was selling his 1973 Grand Am. Most of us wouldn't want it, but it is actually quite rare and he was asking 15k and said it was in mint condition. I had no idea it was rare and still don't want it, but the point is, value can happen anywhere in the automotive world for those w/ a good eye and knowing how many are going to be or were built.. Any V8 73 Grand Am is worth 15k plus in mint condition and the price goes way, way up.

Accrdwgnguy

Not a 18k new econobox has afforded me alot of used junk, which is fine because I like tinkering anyways.

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

The problem here is that modern vehicles are much more complex and loaded with solid state electronics, as compared to their decades older counterparts. It's one thing to keep a car from the '60s or '70s on the road indefinitely; this is much easier with older vehicles that are more machine than computers and sensors and touch screens. Then there are the packaging concerns; just accessing various components on a modern car is often much more labor intensive, and the knowledge, training and tools required to do the repairs are often leaps and bounds beyond what's required for a typical "old" muscle car.

Beyond all that, there is also the concern of parts availability as any car ages, so if you pick the wrong "new" model, and this model isn't supported well by the aftermarket parts and restoration industry as the years pass, then you find yourself in a perpetual parts hunt when you need to repair it 30+ years down the road (something that the buyer of a '73 Grand Am would be familiar with in terms of cosmetics at least, though the drivetrain is common enough.) That complexity factor also makes more difficult the process of fabricating things to take the place of original items that are no longer available but required for proper operation.

While it's true that newer cars last much longer than stuff from the '60s did in a daily usage role in terms of rust/cosmetic deterioration and average mileage possible on an assembly-line original drivetrain, personally I would be very wary of buying a brand new 2015 "XXX" with the expectation to keep it road worthy for myself or a relative 50 years from now. I think doing so would be a much taller order than what has been the case for cars that are 50 years old today and still on the road.