L99 and LS3
#22
then if being a speed demon and getting the most out of your car is what youre after, chances are within the first year of ownership youre going to do some mods that are going to require the engine to be retuned anyway. so when its being tuned for the mods you paid to have why not just get them to diable the dod while theyre tuning it?!
i still dont see why DOD is the horrible problem you make it out to be.
i still dont see why DOD is the horrible problem you make it out to be.
#24
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond, Va
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys keep in mind that GM didnt put DOD in these cars to **** off people who mod cars ...they need to be able to sell these cars to the average consumer, otherwise we probably wouldn't see another camaro. With gas prices at ~$4.30+ for premium your average consumer isn't going to buy what is perceived as a gas guzzling v8 (granted we all know ls1's and whatnot actually get decent gas mileage) but your average consumer would probably think a v8 is going to get horrible gas mileage compared to a 4 cylinder honda/toyota/etc. With DOD they are able to get even better MPG while still using the v8 we all love. My point is, this isn't the '90s when gas was cheap and a v8 didn't seem so impracticle. Just be happy that GM is bringing the camaro back. If you buy an auto car you'll have to have the computer tuned to delete DOD...but so what? This car has to appeal to more than just camaro enthusiasts, and besides who cant say they'd like to save a few $ in gas while cruising down the interstate?
#25
Guys keep in mind that GM didnt put DOD in these cars to **** off people who mod cars ...they need to be able to sell these cars to the average consumer, otherwise we probably wouldn't see another camaro. With gas prices at ~$4.30+ for premium your average consumer isn't going to buy what is perceived as a gas guzzling v8 (granted we all know ls1's and whatnot actually get decent gas mileage) but your average consumer would probably think a v8 is going to get horrible gas mileage compared to a 4 cylinder honda/toyota/etc. With DOD they are able to get even better MPG while still using the v8 we all love. My point is, this isn't the '90s when gas was cheap and a v8 didn't seem so impracticle. Just be happy that GM is bringing the camaro back. If you buy an auto car you'll have to have the computer tuned to delete DOD...but so what? This car has to appeal to more than just camaro enthusiasts, and besides who cant say they'd like to save a few $ in gas while cruising down the interstate?
now dont get me wrong. i have a 2000Z28, 1968GTO and a 2005RegCab ram so i know a thing or two about impractical yet awesomely exciting vehicles.
but! when i go to rebuild the engine and tranny in my GTO when i restomod it should i build something with great power and the worst possible fuel economy and reliability? or would i build something with great power, overdrive gears and the reliability of a new modern car? do you not want the best of both worlds?! awesome power and added economy?
saying "i dont want DOD on a stock auto car" is as ignorant as saying "im gonna spill a few gallons of gasoline on my shoes every time i fill up the tank" because it doesnt matter to me or anyone else at all
#27
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
From everything I've read about DoD, that is exactly how it works. For those that are bitching about it, they obviously have never driven a vehicle that has it. It is not like turbo lag, where the damn thing has to spool back up to 8 cylinders. You are cruising, you use 4 - as soon as you jump on it, you get every cylinder firing off instantly - no lag. Try it. Impalas have it, I believe.
#29
10 Second Club
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kansas City, KS
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have yet to see a valid non-AFM arguement.
it may lose about 10 buyers, I would predict it will attract thousands.
#30
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (19)
And for all of you saying that there is no difference in power from a DOD engine to a non-DOD engine, then why are the power ratings different? Keep in mind these are horsepower numbers AT THE CRANK so obviously power is effected at WOT, when in-theory, DOD should be disabled.
#31
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, it's not extreme but I do notice the V8 "asleep" running on four cylinders on the freeway when I put my foot in it from cruise on my L76.
And it's not like it's really saving me anything. It doesn't cut cylinders while I sit in traffic every day and I almost never get any opportunities to drive at a constant high speed here in Phoenix.
On my commute my LS2 is returning 17-19mpg. My L76 so far is returning 16-17mpg. Why even bother with it in the first place?
#32
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (4)
They bother with it because even though minor, it still saves fuel. Some save more than others (not everyone drives the exact same as you) And with the new CAFE standards car companies need to save it where they can if we still want V8's that perform the way we want them. Even if it's just a psycological thing that gets the average consumer to buy the car, that means more sales and makes the car profitable.
#33
TECH Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ Hometown: Aberdeen, SD
Posts: 4,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If people want economy they can buy the V6 models. That's what they're for.
#34
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (4)
I agree, I wish they would buy V6's and leave the V8's to us, but the reality of it is there are way more people out there that want stock V8's that get the best possible MPG than there are hp addicted people like us that aren't worried about MPG. I also wish the G8 had a DOD less 6.0L so an M6 could be offered. But most people that want an M6 also want the most power, hence the LS3 GTX version this fall.
#36
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,266
Likes: 0
Received 1,698 Likes
on
1,217 Posts
As for your question, no; I'm not rich nor a boy. However, I'm in the market for another car and would have bought an LS3/A6 Camaro had GM provided one. Since they opted not to, they've lost a sale. Simple as that.
#37
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,266
Likes: 0
Received 1,698 Likes
on
1,217 Posts
#38
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,266
Likes: 0
Received 1,698 Likes
on
1,217 Posts
In the end, my real issue is with the fact that GM isn't using the same engine in both the A6 and M6 cars. If the M6s also received an L99 engine I wouldn't be exactly happy either, but not nearly as pissed. The fact that us auto guys are getting screwed out of the good motor is what really burns.
#39
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,266
Likes: 0
Received 1,698 Likes
on
1,217 Posts
Hate to break it to you but thats the way computer controlled cars are. Go buy your C6 A6 but your still going to have deal with torque management. If you buy a M6 you have to deal with skip shift and TM. GM knows your going to beat on it so they built in some protection.
Skip shift, TM, etc. All are merely in the PCM. L99 vs LS3 are not the exact same engine internally (unlike an M6 LS1 vs an A4 LS1), nor do they come with the same power stock.