It’s already been proven that the biggest gains in terms of efficiency and economy are on the larger motors (was noted a number of times by GM’s execs, which is why just about every big truck has hybrid options now), because they generally are the one’s with the most to gain. When you’ve got a V8 that’s towing around a lumbering mass everywhere that’s a constant burden on the loud pedal, your mileage is going to suffer more than a lightweight economy car that already has less weight to lug around and is already built to a higher efficiency level.

Compared to some of the older 80’s Civic’s, the Prius’ mileage doesn’t really resonate. Even some of the later normally aspirated, non-Hybrid Honda’s put up super low emissions comparable to what the Prius does. I mean, the Prius’ EPA #’s always sounded great until you compared them to some old 80’s and early 90’s Civic’s and Geo Metro’s and saw that there were other cars putting out 60 mpg without all of the gimmickry. Yet finding an SUV with a V8 that put out mid-20’s to 30 mpg with all of that mass, is more than a bit impressive IMHO. I’m not an SUV guy, but I definitely believe GM worked quite a bit of magic with their big SUV’s this go-round, and the EPA #’s are nothing short of miraculous IMHO compared to what they’d had on the market before.

When I keep hearing GM floundering back/forth on what to do with their big cars, I just shake my head. Toyota is already gunning to put a hybrid drivetrain option in everything they do. GM has already done this with the trucks. To me, if GM wasn’t already planning a hybrid drivetrain for Zeta… they missed the boat in the planning stages. I think the recent Denali concept highlights that there are Hybrid plans for Zeta, so why GM doesn’t just bite the bullet and commit is beyond me. E-Flex and the truck platforms shouldn’t be the only thing with a hybrid drivetrain option, every vehicle in every line should have one. The real key is engineering it so it provides gains and increases the cars overall efficiency, without just being an extra bit of weight that while giving a return, also shifts the dynamics towards heavy burdens (weight). Weight, in terms of CAFE #’s, is ultimately the enemy.

Now mind you… That isn’t to say that a performance-minded driver won’t flog the snot out of it a good percentage of the time and circumvent the efficiency gains… but driven practically, the car should be able to meet the new CAFE standards… not every car will be driven practically and efficiently, but that goes for those driving 4-cylinder cars like mine. Performance cars will always be there, will always be a major force, and whether the greenies like it or not… not everyone is going to want to mope around at pedestrian speeds watching a digital readout in the center stack of their car noting the best ways to get the greatest efficiency (ala Prius). I do think, however, that a Camaro, Mustang, Vette, Challenger, and any other performance car buyer wouldn’t be remotely against a car that when driven at more modest speeds on a trip, couldn’t get them great mileage so they save a little cash to burn when they get to their destination and want to do a little spirited driving.

I appreciate all cars (I tend to lean towards smaller and sportier, not necessarily a muscle car… but something that has a bit of oomph)… I just feel that the preaching of the death of the V8, while perhaps inevitable, should only be seen inevitable as much as the death of the internal combusion engine is. I do expect the higher displacement V8’s to go first, but that isn’t to say that I don’t believe there’s not a way that the gap between the last production V8 and the last production I4 can’t be within the same or similar decade. Whatever automaker spends the energy to figure out how to keep these on the market ’til the very end, is the one that’ll get the last laugh. Well, assuming they’re prepared for the next big thing (and for that, a performance EV or Fuel Cell vehicle = the next move).

“Amen, Brudder!”

Thanks for dictating to me what constitutes aural pleasures. Its not exhaust that determines sound. Exhaust can tune and amplify sound but not significantly alter it. To use your music analogy its like having Britney Spears sing Satisfaction and say “same thing” as the Rolling Stones. Cubic inches and intake produces alot of the sound character you hear. A pushrod sounds different than a DOHC. Big cubes produce that deep rumble, and you can’t replace that. Plus there’s the sounds V8 fans don’t like. Turbo whine for example, or the high pitched squeal a DOHC V6 makes. Rip the muffler off a DOHC V6 and its the same whiny empty sound, just a whole lot louder. Rip the muffler off a big V8 and its the same rumble, only louder.

LmborginiZ, I just checked my hunch on cars.com and I was right. V8 in your 540 generates 282 HP and 324 lbs of torque. 2007 turbo 6 generates 300 HP and 300 lbs of torque. On highway V8 will go 23 miles per gallon I6 will do 26. I drove 335 coupe and after 250 miles measured over 30 mpg. Granted that 3L turbo was not available in 2001 but with about the same technical characteristics 6 cylinder does save fuel.
Comment by autonut

Because the 5-series and 3-series are the same size…. 2008 G8 is competitive with that Turbo I6’s mileage and it doesn’t demand premium. The G8 is also a significantly heavier car. Corvette’s 425hp V8 exceeds the mileage of the I6 turbo 3-series. Then there’s the fact that off the line the I6 produced horrible power. I’ve driven a Supra, a faster car than the M3 and even it felt weak until the boost kicked in. Turbo engines do not replace the driving character of a V8. They don’t replace the sound, the immediate surge of power, none of it. If you don’t get that that’s fine, but those of us who do would like to keep our choice.

It is try that more and more people in the US and around the world are not as enamored with manual shift, and they don’t need to be. All this attention is given to the engine but you could see very obvious improvements in F/econ and performance by paying some attention to the tranny.

Not just making it smoother, but making the auto smarter and more flexible.

Their is a lot of short-sighted panicking going around DETROIT with these new standards. It is foolish for these companies to seek to hedge back on everything because suddenly they are being required to go further on a gallon of gas.

There have been great advancements made to maintain power while using less fuel. These are important. It is not enough, however, the engines are only the start. But that is what this article focuses on and, it seems, the readers.

While I am a advocate for Hybrids, hydrogen, and fuel-cells, I also know that this technology is still only just becoming marketable and/or even ready to leave the lab.

For now I recommend a complete re-evaluation of the automobile. We know even the best internal combustion engine is at best 40% efficient. The transmission must make better use of the power put in. I wouldn’t be put off by a 12, 14, or 16-speed Tranny using a 6, 7, or 8, speed tranny and using a kind of “High-Low” gear to double your available ratios and extend the range of the trans mission, not unlike a 12-speed bicycle. This, only if there is a real improvement in F/econ. Not the usual 1-2 miles per gallon that usually comes of it.

More intelligent Trannies, and more efficient engines – not necessarily having fewer cylinders but using them more intelligently, lighter more intelligently built cars will save the V8 and maybe resurrect the V12 is American automobiles (FORD and GM used to make them back in the 1920s to 1930s). The core mechanics haven’t changed in over a century, only the technology and that just needs to be implemented more expediently and cost effectively. Stop saving the best stuff for the hyper-priced luxury and sports exotics.

A smartly built Mustang (as an example) with a V12 (Not some over-priced F1 derived block made of unobtainium) with the latest technology and the smartest engine and transmission management system for the money, that gets over 40 mpg, can reach 180mph could easily be possible by 2020. But DETROIT has to stop panicking and start really putting their engineers to work.

As long as the price is right and the vehicle does what we want and need it to do, within a certain realm of reality, we will buy it.

Except of the new KITT of course. He he…

Besides you can’t outrun their helicopters

While I agree with you that’s not entirely true. I’m a young person (just graduated college a few years ago) of the fast and furious generation and I love muscle and hate turbo. I grew up riding in big GM V8 Station Wagons. I drive a big GM V8 Wagon and a Chevy truck. I want to get a used C5 Z06, Charger SRT8 or a Challenger R/T as a “fun car” to drive around. I have no interest in any AWD or FWD cars, no interest in little cars (Vette excluded), no interest in anything that ain’t an American pushrod V8 driving the rear wheels.

Its more of a personality thing than anything else. A V8 muscle car is a cruiser, its laid-back and its power delivery is raw and beastly. A turbo car makes for a terrible cruiser, delivers power in a gradual explosive fashion and features advanced technology. An appropriate analogy is that a turbo car is like picking the lock to get in to a house to steal stuff, while a muscle car is like smashing the window and door open with a sledge hammer. Same result, different method. The muscle car is violent, using brute force to accomplish its goal. The turbo car is sleek, using high tech innards and savvy to accomplish its goal.

The feeling of raw power appeals to me, but others like the techy turbos. But at the end of the day its what you like.

And power for power = go with the 6 right? That is certainly intuitive, but not always true. Compare the SIDI 3.6L with the LS4. both are 300hp, go with the SIDI V6 right? Not exactly, the LS4 is much torquier and a heavier FWD Buick with the motor and a 4 speed will smoke the CTS in a drag race while returning better fuel economy. That Buick will eat a G36 sedan too. If I wanted power and economy the LS4 makes more sense than the SIDI V6.

All in all GM’s V8s are very efficient and compete with V6 motors on economy. I imagine the SIDI 4.9L V8 with AFM will be superior to the 3.6L V6 in economy. Ford, BMW, Lexus, Merc, etc V8s all suck gas down with reckless abandon, but that doesn’t mean GM’s V8s have to also.

@Z06ified,
Thank you for putting it straight. You just can’t replace the V8 that easily. I’ve driven what’s pretty much the ultimate turbo car. I was fortunate enough to get to drive a 96 Supra Turbo (college = rich friends, and me as somebody who doesn’t drink always gets to DD, and because I didn’t have a car of my own I’d drive other’s cars and this car was one of them). Supra felt SLOW off the line before the boost kicked in. Then it was crazy fast, but I still would prefer the feel of a V8. There was nothing smooth about Supra’s power delivery.

Nothing sounds meaner than an Olds 455 with a good exhaust. If you’ve ever heard a 1970 Cutlass 442 with that motor fired up, you’ve just heard automotive nirvana.

How do you like your Z06 btw? I’ve been considering buying a C5 Z06 as I really do love the LS6 engine.

Comment by Fletch, posted on February15 at 5:50 am ”

There’s no such thing as a mean sounding 4 cylinder. A V-8 will always sound meaner than the meanest 4 banger. No contest.

Not a lot of lag? How about NO lag with a V-8.

The V-8 will not become extinct – it will just be sold in fewer numbers and will be installed in fewer applications. Large pickups, SUV’s, performance luxury cars and sports cars will always have V-8s, as long as there are fossil fuels to burn in an internal combustion engine.

The media is kidding themselves if they think forced induction smaller displacement 4-cylinders and 6-cylinders are the answer to better fuel economy versus a V-8. Just look at the fuel economy numbers of the Evo, STi, and RX-8 – they’re all much worse than the fuel economy of the 6.2L V-8 in the Corvette while making less horsepower. Another example is the Acura TSX – its naturally aspirated 4-cylinder gets far worse fuel economy than most V-6 powered sedans.

That’s because cheap corporate America buys them as work vans. However the drivers of these things will take a V8 Ford or Chevy in a heartbeat than the absurdly slow Sprinter.

And what’s with all this “V6 Turbo is as good as a V8″. Yeah and a man with corrective surgery and hormone treatment is just as good as a woman. Believe it or not its not all about the performance. I love the sound of a V8. I hate whiny or empty sounds. Nissan’ VQ sounds like crap. I hate the sound of forced induction, high pitched and unpleasant. Plus there’s the driving character. A Turbo 6 may put up similar numbers, but it won’t feel the same. No turbo 6 is going to produce the off the line torquey feeling of a V8. No Turbo 6 is going to rumble down the street.

If V8s disappear from cars again, I guess I’ll always be driving trucks.

Why not offer those kinds of cars again ??

Chrysler is doing it.