The new 2010 Camaro (rear wheel drive) can be had with either a 304 hp 6 cyl engine or the whopping 426 hp V8.

300 hp should push that coupe down the road at a fair pace. it won't win drag races (over a 1/4 mile) against a Corvette or another 426 hp Camaro, but it will have better fuel mileage. However, given a sticky set of tires, it might be a surprise about how good it can be off the line for the first 1/8 mile. Why? because 300 hp is enough power to light up the tires for a short distance. acceleration is limited by tire spin. Once the tires begin to spin, it doesn't matter how much power is on tap, the car will not accelerate any quicker. However, as the vehicle speed inceases and the tires hook up with the turf, 400 hp will beat out 300 hp every time.

But is all this necessary? Maybe for the ego trip or the drag strip. This sort of driving will net speeds above the speed limit on public roads in a short time. Also, if I were GM, I would secretly lay in a program in the engine controller to detect and record such abuse of the vehicle. If I were the manufacturer, I would want to know how long the engine was at 6000 rpm at full throttle for warranty purposes - could come in handy when someone wants to get a new engine under warranty after he's been drag racing with it. Missed a shift with the manual transmission and over-sped the engine. I'd want to know. Presuemably, this powerhouse will have a rev limiter, but that affects only ignition. It can not protect against engine over-speed from an accidental downshift when an upshift was intended.

In the not too distant future, US auto manufacturers will be facing a government mandate for increased fuel mileage. This may mean that GM won't be allowed to sell too many vehicles with poor mileage as it will pull down the corporate average. At this writing, I seriously doubt that the US car makers can meet the new standard, at least not with the present product size mix.

i have a caddy with the northstar and the kids have several grand prix's. ok cars but poor quality control. i guess that is GM's market though. i always thought a RWD GTO with a manual trans/3800 V6 would have been fun. never got into the FWD setup. i know the 3.6 is in the CTS but thats a little to plush for me. every brand has a 260-300hp V6 now. maybe offer a 2.5 DI V6 and have a little better mpg and still make 225 hp?

The V6 Camaro can do 0-60 in less than 60 seconds. That's darned impressive - faster than most V8s from the classic muscle-car era of the late 1960s. I just wish I could see out of the car - the windows are tiny and the beltline (bottom of windows) unnecessarily high.

in the car and driver comparo, the new v6 camaro, beat the new v6 genisis by 1 point, and at almost 2 grand cheaper. impresive.

My 06 Acura RSX does 0-60 in 6.4 seconds and gets 30 MPG . My 92 Honda Nighthawk does 0-60 in 4 seconds getting 45 MPG . Maybe backwards thinking technology that barely beats 60s tech is why GM is declaring bankruptcy ?

don't compare a rsx to a new camaro. totally different types of cars. I want a midsize car with RWD. I would love to have a new bmw 550 but thats too much money for me. does acura make a RWD car? why not? too crude? they could make one if they wanted too.

Nine7xbam:

The Honda Nighthawk is a motorcycle. Yes indeedy, it accelerates like mad; It has a power to weight ratio advantage over an automobile, but this is comparing apples to oranges. Lets compare the Nighthawk to a car for different kinds of weather. How does it compare with 8 inches of snow on the ground; 1 inch of ice; -10 F; pouring rain with 30 mph wind and 35 F temperature? In other words, it is a sport machine, not one useful for the daily commute of many workers in North America, and it has very little luggage space.

the new challenger, mustang, camaro are all similar designs. V6 or V8 options. RWD. 2dr body. they also all have OHC motors too. all cars from the 70's had crude engine management, suspensions, heck even the tires were junk. cars today are much more sophisticated but are they fun too drive?

The new ones are fun to drive, actually they are a lot more fun to drive than their predecessors, IMO.

The old ones are nice, but you really could not reliably climb into one and take off with a destination of just about anywhere like you can the new ones.

Hey Jem. I love the details of your nighthawk comparison to a car. There of course is no comparison, they are totally different machines. If the first one was allowed to stand, I might as well throw one out comparing a motorcycle to an airplane.

I love my 07 Mustang GT.

Joe , the power to weight ratio was the point I was trying to make . If you want a car with nostalgic appeal , ponderously heavy with a big V-8 at 3900 pounds the new Camaro with an old tech pushrod V-8 may be for you . Ditto the new Challenger at 4100 pounds . If I were looking for a sporty car at that pricepoint , I would seriously consider the new Nissan 370Z with 320 horsepower and handling at 3300 pounds that would leave the new Camaro in the dust on the twisty roads . Looks(tanklike visablity in the Camaro, sparse headroom for anyone over 6') or real world performance is what it comes down to . Myself, I like the pocket rockets , I'll probably get a VW GTI for my next car . Spacious cabin , 200 horsepower that can be chipped to 250 - all with 30 mpg avg , not too hard to live with as an everyday driver .

If the V6 car is cheaper, go with that. The GM V6 is a great engine with proven reliabilty since 1993. These V6 engines even do well in extended cab full sized chevy pickups. In that little camaro that V6 is more than enough power and has a life time that will match the V8 and gives you more room to maintanence the V6 under the hood.

the new 3.6 OHC V6 is a totally different animal than the old 3.8 based buick motor they offered before. the 4.3 is in lots of trucks but lacks a little in guts for towing. my girlfriend bought a brand new 79 camaro with the 3.8 V6. could hardly see the motor. totaled it after 6 months and bought another with a V8.

or maybe the camaro had the 229? that was 30yrs ago. my memory is a little foggy. besides, who wants a camaro with a V6? heck, the inline six camaros were bad enough.

i saw a set of 20" wheels/tires from a new camaro on craigslist today. $2300. wow! is the new owner putting on aftermarket wheels? gotta make their car look different from all the other new camaro's out there.

Hyundai claims the coupe's all-aluminum, 24-valve 3.8-liter V-6 makes 310 horsepower at 6000 rpm and 263 pound-feet of torque at 4700. More significant, Hyundai is certifying the Genesis coupe to run on regular.Curb weight is close as well-a claimed 3550 pounds.

I read a C&D comparo on the new Genesis coupe against the new Camaro that the Camaro won . Biggest gripe against the Hyundai was a jerky shifting transmission that snapped your head back no matter how you tried to shift smoothly - probable tranny problems down the road they surmised . In a three way C&D V8 comparo with the Camaro , Mustang , and Challenger , the Camaro finished second to the 2010 Mustang , despite having an over 100 horsepower advantage . The Mustang weighed in 300 pounds lighter than the Camaro . There's that power to weight ratio rearing it's ugly head again !