2016 Camaro V8 more efficient than V6

"MooseKnuckles" (andyschenk) 11/12/2015 at 12:24 • Filed to: None

1

26

GM Authority is reporting the 460hp V8 8spd auto is snagging better MPGs than the 330hp V6. Well done Chevy, well done.
I’m sure the V6 auto will break 30mpg, but sure as shit is good numbers for that 6.2L and a feather foot.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:27

1

Cylinder deactivation probably has a lot to do with it. I think that is an automatic-transmission only feature.

I’d love to see the software for when these actually deactivate because i feel like that is blatant software cheating for the EPA testing as a car on rollers can run on 4-cyl. a lot easier than a car rolling at 70 mph on rolling highway.

HammerheadFistpunch > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:27

2

Well 6.2/2 = 3.1 which is less than 3.6, which must mean that even with the additional pumping losses and inefficiencies of carting 4 dead pistons along for the ride its slightly better on fuel in cylinder deactivation mode. Interesting.

Future next gen S2000 owner > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:28

1

I wonder about the gearing differences playing into that.

spanfucker retire bitch > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:30

0

That’s the LT1, right? I’m guessing that’s becuase at highway speeds it can shut off 4 cylinders.

MooseKnuckles > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 12:30

0

I don’t really see much difference with cylinder deactivation, at least not in my Silverado. If I’m cruising in 4-cyl at 8L/100km and blip the throttle to fire up all cylinders it’ll jump to say 10L/100km then come back down to 8 while still being in 8cyl mode.
It obviously helps, I think the gains are pretty marginal though.

Ash78, voting early and often > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 12:33

0

Our Odyssey has 6/4/3 cylinder deactivations, but it’s really hard to keep them deactivated. Maybe in Florida or Louisiana at exactly 65mph, but in hilly or faster driving, it goes right back to 6 pretty quickly. I also feel this is pseudo-cheating, since we see 4-5mpg less than the EPA sticker under real world driving. I’ve met or exceeded the EPA sticker in all of my previous cars.

It’s clear a lot of carmakers can game the test pretty well now, even without deceptive software.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:34

0

Exactly my point. I assume that in EPA testing it could be worth a few points considering the silliness of the test as shown by the VW cheating, but as you’ve said, the real-world differences just aren’t as big.

kanadanmajava1 > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:37

0

How did they accomplish getting better mileage with the automatic compared to the manual version? Super long gearing with the automatic?

spanfucker retire bitch > kanadanmajava1 11/12/2015 at 12:42

1

Automatics have been more fuel efficient than manuals for close to a decade now. It’s now the norm.

The two extra overdrive gears in the 8-speed auto vs. the 6-speed manual probably don’t hurt either.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:42

0

Auto vs Manual. Not a totally fair comparison. Still really impressive though.

PatBateman > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:43

0

Bman76 (no it doesn't need a WS6 hood) M. Arch > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 12:48

0

I’d guess the V6 auto will beat it by 2-3 mpg.

BloodlessWeevil > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 13:16

2

It is only cheating the test if cylinder deactivation is enabled on the dyno and not in real world use. This is not the case. Cylinders are only deactivated when cruising at constant speed. While acceleration is fairly leisurely on the EPA test cycle, the Camaro is still using all eight cylinders (for the city cycles at least.)

Interesting note: Modern cars actually cut fuel entirely when decelerating and let the wheels back drive the engine to keep it spinning.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > BloodlessWeevil 11/12/2015 at 13:22

0

Right, it’s allowed to happen on EPA test cycles, and in fact, more likely to happen on EPA test cycles than in real life. We agree.

But we also know that in the real world that perfect scenario isn’t going to happen, so the reality is that it’s a way to boost EPA numbers without making a huge change to street performance because of an allowed loophole in testing protocol.

It’s essentially the VW system, just in plain sight and allowed because “under ideal conditions it will happen in the real world.”

needMORv8 now with more V8 > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 13:23

0

HMMPPHH this makes me feel bad about the ~25 i get out of my 2015 GT oh well at least gas is pretty cheap right now. Kudos to GM.

MooseKnuckles > BloodlessWeevil 11/12/2015 at 13:39

0

My 2006 3.6 CTS did that. Could get 35mpg on highway trips. My 2012 Silverado however does not have a DFCO, direct fuel cut off I believe is what GM calls their system

Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 13:40

0

I think you’re stretching more that a bit comparing cylinder deactivation, an increasingly common feature, to a secret internal line of code literally hidden in the software which they were specifically told not to use.

Do you see active aerodynamics as the same as the VW cheating system? I mean, they only work under “ideal” conditions too.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast 11/12/2015 at 13:48

0

Active aero is different as it has little effect on the EPA test cycle. Cylinder deactivation is guaranteed to happen on the EPA test cycle.

If anything active aero is the exact opposite of my argument.

Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 14:07

1

But it still has an effect, no? Aerodynics have a huge impact. The logic is the same, hardly opposite.

Seems like you are just deciding it doesn’t effect it enough based on your own opinion.

Let’s take hybrids then. A gas engine gets the car going, but in the EPA test cycle at the ideal conditions, a computer jumps in, switching things around and helps the car “cheat” the test by assisting with electric motors. Do you call that cheating?

The issue with VW really has little to do with the actual internal system that changes things around based on driving/testing conditions. It’s the fact that the system they used, changed things enough to fall into very illegal territory. Cylinder deactivation does nothing illegal.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > HammerheadFistpunch 11/12/2015 at 14:20

2

“Well 6.2/2 = 3.1”

Which means Half-Life 3 is confirmed!

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > Ash78, voting early and often 11/12/2015 at 14:24

0

Probably would be easier if you drop the speed to 55mph or follow a big truck.

Speed > MooseKnuckles 11/12/2015 at 14:38

0

The 4th gen V8 and V6 Fbodies had comparable gas mileage too, especially when the LS1 came out. 6spd Fbodies and Corvettes have hit 30mpg on many occasions. My 3.8 and 5.0 Mustang weren’t far off one another either. I think the one big thing to remember is how effortlessly the bigger engines can move a car along at cruising speed.

BloodlessWeevil > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/12/2015 at 14:43

0

That is quite literally the opposite of what I said, and the enable window for cylinder deactivation is very far from any “perfect scenario.” It is pretty much any constant speed (AKA the majority of driving) that does not require more power than can be produced with only 4 cylinders. This is the case for roughly one third of an EPA test cycle, but the vast majority of real world driving.

I’m sorry, but I’m having trouble seeing your reasoning as anything other than “designing an engine that reduces emissions is cheating the test.”

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Danimalk - Drives a Slow Car Fast 11/12/2015 at 14:46

0

The difference is the allowed cheats that are “new tech” versus the ones that aren’t allowed and are called cheating.

Everyone in the industry knows that Hybrid EPA tests are essentially lies. There have been myriad discussions about how it will be addressed and what is needed to get those numbers to more accurately reflect real world results.

So my argument is just that it’s still software that under predetermined conditions, trigger a response from the engine to operate in a certain way that improves EPA test-cycle numbers.

And yes Aero has a huge impact, the second biggest impact after weight comes into play for most speeds that we drive. The difference is that Aero is actually more effective in the real world than it is on the EPA test cycle, so like i said that’s the opposite of what we see for the MDS that engines are starting to use. The aero activates at certain speeds, the MDS may not depending on how it is driven.

As the system is designed to be more frugal on fuel and help CAFE and Fleet numbers, it is great for the manufacturer even though it has very little real world application.

So in short, I see it as an enabled cheat for the tests that the EPA allows because it’s been a marketed system. VW’s is not because theirs was kept quiet. But without MDS, the Camaro would still pass air quality tests, it just would get a more realistic 24 mph highway.

WhoisTylerDurden > PotbellyJoe and 42 others 11/18/2015 at 05:40

0

The fuel savings from cylinder deactivation is a little overblown in my opinion. On long flat stretches of interstate, sure you’ll gave 1-2 mpg. But in areas with even slight variations in elevation, that savings is nullified. I drive a 2014 Silverado 5.3 and permanently disabled the feature and had only a minute impact on my long distance average fuel economy. The system is more of an annoyance if anything.

My Dodge-owning friends have had similar experiences. Most have had tuners disable the system.

OPPOsaurus WRX > MooseKnuckles 01/12/2016 at 16:06

0

i think the Ford Sport Trac was the same wasy