2018 Camaro 2.0T 6-speed
- Thread starter oilpsi2high
- Start date
- Status
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
My Malibu has the same engine. We really like it. It is certainly underrated. I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
I want to like GM but too many bad experiences. Friend of mine has a 2011 Regal he bought 3 years ago, thats maintained at the dealer (has semi annuals done and pays GM outageous amounts). Literally had the engine replaced by GM, transmission just went with only 78k miles and he drives like a grandma. Suspension problems, and the list goes on. Its been a real nightmare, even him being a GM guy is now considering another brand. They simply dont seem to hold up. Just my experience, I wouldnt expect that car to give me 10 years of low cost of ownership. Dont get wrong, I love the Impala and the Camaro but Id only lease one or plan to resell it within 5 years.
Last edited:
Never in a million years would I think GM would put a 2.0T in a Camaro.
AZjeff
$50 Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Never in a million years would I think GM would put a 2.0T in a Camaro.
Just drive it and don't look under the hood.
Never in a million years would I think GM would put a 2.0T in a Camaro.
Just drive it and don't look under the hood.
Originally Posted By: AZjeff
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Never in a million years would I think GM would put a 2.0T in a Camaro.
Just drive it and don't look under the hood.
How does it sound?
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Never in a million years would I think GM would put a 2.0T in a Camaro.
Just drive it and don't look under the hood.
How does it sound?
Does putting a tune on it negate the warranty then? Seems like a good amount of car for 20 thousand & a warranty to go with it for years.
Originally Posted By: mcrn
That is nice for that price....however you can get a 2017 GTI for the same price....that would be my choice.
Unfortunately those are drying up quickly, especially with a manual.
That is nice for that price....however you can get a 2017 GTI for the same price....that would be my choice.
Unfortunately those are drying up quickly, especially with a manual.
Originally Posted By: PimTac
Those air vents on the dash look like something from the 60’s-70’s.
This retro vent look seems to be the latest craze - take a look at some new Mercedes and Audi designs.
Those air vents on the dash look like something from the 60’s-70’s.
This retro vent look seems to be the latest craze - take a look at some new Mercedes and Audi designs.
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
My Malibu has the same engine. We really like it. It is certainly underrated. I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
There are some limited production models that beat the GM 2.0l DIT (like the non-US Subaru Levorg at 296 HP and 295 lb-ft), but 275 HP and 295 lb-ft for a mass market engine of that displacement that is available in a base model is very impressive. My 2.0l DIT is supposed to be 250 HP and 258 lb-ft, if you get a WRX the HP is upped to 268. The Japan model specs usually seem to show higher power and I've never quite understood why...
The WRX and WRX STI (which still uses a much older 2.5l PFI turbo) are due to be updated soon and I'm curious to see what the powerplants will be like and if they will also up the power in the Forester.
My Malibu has the same engine. We really like it. It is certainly underrated. I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
There are some limited production models that beat the GM 2.0l DIT (like the non-US Subaru Levorg at 296 HP and 295 lb-ft), but 275 HP and 295 lb-ft for a mass market engine of that displacement that is available in a base model is very impressive. My 2.0l DIT is supposed to be 250 HP and 258 lb-ft, if you get a WRX the HP is upped to 268. The Japan model specs usually seem to show higher power and I've never quite understood why...
The WRX and WRX STI (which still uses a much older 2.5l PFI turbo) are due to be updated soon and I'm curious to see what the powerplants will be like and if they will also up the power in the Forester.
Originally Posted By: MCompact
It's a LOT of car for the money. Not my cup of tea, but if it makes YOU smile, go for it!
I'd choose this Camaro over a Corolla, Civic, Focus or Mazda 3.
It's a LOT of car for the money. Not my cup of tea, but if it makes YOU smile, go for it!
I'd choose this Camaro over a Corolla, Civic, Focus or Mazda 3.
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Originally Posted By: MCompact
It's a LOT of car for the money. Not my cup of tea, but if it makes YOU smile, go for it!
I'd choose this Camaro over a Corolla, Civic, Focus or Mazda 3.
Note that I wasn't comparing it to FWD compacts. There IS one new Camaro I'd be happy to own- a ZL1 1LE.
Originally Posted By: MCompact
It's a LOT of car for the money. Not my cup of tea, but if it makes YOU smile, go for it!
I'd choose this Camaro over a Corolla, Civic, Focus or Mazda 3.
Note that I wasn't comparing it to FWD compacts. There IS one new Camaro I'd be happy to own- a ZL1 1LE.
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
My Malibu has the same engine. We really like it. It is certainly underrated. I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
In the ATS it seems to be a step or two behind BMW's 2.0T, but its still decent enough. I'd drive one for sure.
My Malibu has the same engine. We really like it. It is certainly underrated. I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
In the ATS it seems to be a step or two behind BMW's 2.0T, but its still decent enough. I'd drive one for sure.
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
I think it's worth venturing past the quoted peak HP/torque figures and looking at actual torque curves. For example, 2.0T in this Camaro doesn't reach its peak torque of 295 lb-ft until 3,000 rpm. By comparison, a GTI reaches its peak torque at only 1,500 rpm. Also, it looks like VW severely underrates this engine. Supposedly it delivers over 300 lb-ft, instead of the quoted 258.
With that said, I still agree this 2.0T Camaro appears to be a lot of car for the money, and it looks great.
I listen to the other folks here talk about other 2.0 turbos and they make nowhere the horsepower and torque of the GM 2.0.
I think it's worth venturing past the quoted peak HP/torque figures and looking at actual torque curves. For example, 2.0T in this Camaro doesn't reach its peak torque of 295 lb-ft until 3,000 rpm. By comparison, a GTI reaches its peak torque at only 1,500 rpm. Also, it looks like VW severely underrates this engine. Supposedly it delivers over 300 lb-ft, instead of the quoted 258.
With that said, I still agree this 2.0T Camaro appears to be a lot of car for the money, and it looks great.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
I think it's worth going past the quoted peak HP/torque figures and looking at actual torque curves. For example, 2.0T in this Camaro doesn't reach its peak torque of 295 lb-ft until 3,000 rpm. By comparison, a GTI reaches its peak torque at only 1,500 rpm. Also, it looks like VW severely underrates this engine. Supposedly it delivers over 300 lb-ft, instead of the quoted 258.
Ditto for the BMW B58; it makes peak torque of 258 from 1450-4800 rpm. It's underrated as well- most stock dyno tests show it making over 260 lb-ft at the wheels.
I think it's worth going past the quoted peak HP/torque figures and looking at actual torque curves. For example, 2.0T in this Camaro doesn't reach its peak torque of 295 lb-ft until 3,000 rpm. By comparison, a GTI reaches its peak torque at only 1,500 rpm. Also, it looks like VW severely underrates this engine. Supposedly it delivers over 300 lb-ft, instead of the quoted 258.
Ditto for the BMW B58; it makes peak torque of 258 from 1450-4800 rpm. It's underrated as well- most stock dyno tests show it making over 260 lb-ft at the wheels.
- Status