Chevy SS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Any one have a good guess for what the fuel economy of the SS will be? I saw one of the car sites estimated 14/20 or something like that. I am not buying this car for fuel efficiency, but that seems pretty bad.

I don't think it weighs much more than the Camaro SS and that gets 17/25, but I think it has cylinder deactivation. Also, the Dodge Charger weighs more and has more hp, but it gets 23 on the highway (maybe 1 or 2 more once they put the 8 speed in).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
379 Posts
My GTO got around 14 mpg around town with the manual 6, and that was pretty typical amongst owners. If I was really focused on it, I could average closer to 16 mpg. Highway was low 20's. The problem with the Goat was that literally at least once every time I took it out I got into the throttle. That and constantly killing Mustangs probably hurt my averages.:)y

The Goat wanted Premium fuel but would step down performance and run on Regular if necessary, although none of us ever would run Regular (or at least admit it),

The GTO avoided a gas guzzler tax by using a skip shift that, under certain conditions, locked out 2nd and diverted the shifter from 1st to 3rd. I know the SS gets hit with the tax, so I'm guessing it's worse than the GTO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
I'm willing to wager it will be around 1 or 2 mpgs better than an A6 G8 GXP.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
379 Posts
I'd expect 18 or 19 MPG combined. There is literally no way in **** the SS will have worse fuel economy than the Camaro.
Not too sure about that. The GTOs were 400 HP/6.0 liter and I'd imagine they were a bit lighter than the SS will be. Given that with 6,2 liters and an extra 15 HP the SS has a nearly identical projected 0-60 speed (GM says "Under 5 seconds for the SS. The GTO was 4.9 seconds).

Early indications are that the SS will have a combined MPG that be will be bad enough to get it hit with a gas guzzler tax, which the GTO narrowly avoided. I would brace yourself for crappy MPG.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
517 Posts
The most recent, and advanced versions of, direct injection, variable valve timing, and cylinder deactivation featured in the LT1 would have improved the SS Sedan's mileage.

I hope GM pulls their head out of their ass and replace the LS3 with the LT1 ASAP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
154 Posts
So I've done a little digging (thank you google). Tonawanda is the assembly plant for the new LT1, and production started sometime this quarter.

What I wonder is could GM have gotten the LT1 into production early enough for the introduction of the SS.

You can't just fly the things to OZ, they would have to be shipped via cargo ship, and that takes a minimum of 30 days from the Port of LA. Thats not including the time to ship from Tonawanda to the port. I don't even want to get into what it takes for Customs inspections. Then factor in the production time of the vehicles once the engines get to the plant in significant numbers for shipment to the US. I know a thing or two about shipping, and that kind of volume has to be booked way in advance. To bring cargo back from Austrailia to the US takes more than 30 days. Total transit time would take more 60 days with enough LT1's in the pipeline to sustain production of the SS as well as the other vehicles already scheduled to use the LT1.

I'm sorry but I can't see how logistically GM could pull off the introduction of the SS as a 2014 model with the LT1.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
379 Posts
Nice detective work! Doesn't the car need to be crash certified for each power plant it will carry in the marketplace? GM made a business decision that the LS3 was the right engine for the car. Time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
154 Posts
Nice detective work! Doesn't the car need to be crash certified for each power plant it will carry in the marketplace? GM made a business decision that the LS3 was the right engine for the car. Time will tell.
I didn't even take into account the crash testing required. I was guessing a lot of the choice to use the LS3 had to do with them already being in supply at the factory or already having an established supply schedule.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
the delay will be reworking all the connections to match up with the new engine, you can't just change the engine on a running assembly line, you also need to change the support system so everything will fit.

as for fuel economy the best improvment is from the drivers right foot, look at how much the G8 can vary, it's all down to the driver.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,766 Posts
Don't plan on an LT1 at any point 2014-2016.... it won't happen on a low volume car...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
The car has a much larger market than the us, the v8 is sold in aust, nz, uae, sth Africa & the usa, if gm stop building the ls3 they will need something.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
The car has a much larger market than the us, the v8 is sold in aust, nz, uae, sth Africa & the usa, if gm stop building the ls3 they will need something.
Therein lies the real question regarding the LS3 and LT1. The big question what are GM's plans with regard to LS3? Do they plan to continue production for an extended period or is there a production end date for LS3?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
Therein lies the real question regarding the LS3 and LT1. The big question what are GM's plans with regard to LS3? Do they plan to continue production for an extended period or is there a production end date for LS3?
Not likely, the Camaro is carrying the LS3 throughout the 2014 model year at least, and with the LS7 now being offered in the Z/28 model that was just announced...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,140 Posts
I can see them eventually phasing out the V8 on performance sedan's like the Chevy SS and going for a single or twin turbo V6 engine. Could possibly be the same twin turbo V6 from the new Cadillac CTS sedan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
Getting rid of the V8s would kind of change the heritage to cars like the Chevy SS but whatever is new and works better efficiently makes sense to change with time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
I don't have much experience with turbo power but this last summer I bought '12 F150 Ecoboost and I absolutely hate that engine. The turbo lag is just too much. Until the turbo's are spooled up it has zero power/torque.

Worst part is one of my co-workers has the 5.0 and gets the same, if not better, fuel mileage.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
517 Posts
r I bought '12 F150 Ecoboost and I absolutely hate that engine. The turbo lag is just too much. Until the turbo's are spooled up it has zero power/torque.
That's what you get for buying a F*rd.

my co-workers has the 5.0 and gets the same, if not better, fuel mileage.
You both should have your "car guy" cards pulled for buying F*rds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
I don't have much experience with turbo power but this last summer I bought '12 F150 Ecoboost and I absolutely hate that engine. The turbo lag is just too much. Until the turbo's are spooled up it has zero power/torque.

Worst part is one of my co-workers has the 5.0 and gets the same, if not better, fuel mileage.
What type of fuel are you using?
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top