# No DOD!!!



## lotaguts (Jan 17, 2006)

I am going to the Fort Lauderdale Intnl. Auto Show tomorrow night to get an up close look at the new camaro concept and will bring with me a bib to wipe all the drool. One thing came to mind is the camaro will have the DOD fuel managment with a highway mileage close to 30 mpg and I am thinking maybe this will either hurt or help our gto's value by not having it. I kind of wish our goats had this feature.


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

Please provide pics if you can.


----------



## lotaguts (Jan 17, 2006)

I sure will


----------



## PEARL JAM (Sep 6, 2005)

Pics. of that car would be an impressive thing, because there so few out there!:cool


----------



## GOATGIRL (Feb 6, 2006)

PICS, PICS, and more PICS....please!!!!!!!


----------



## Starrbuck (Dec 13, 2005)

lotaguts said:


> The camaro will have the DOD fuel managment with a highway mileage close to 30 mpg and I am thinking maybe this will either hurt or help our gto's value by not having it. I kind of wish our goats had this feature.


Many who are concerned about performance do not care for this feature, as there are a few milliseconds of time used when you want to have full power. Our GTO's don't have that issue. I'll admit the lag has to be very small but it is there...


----------



## Jeffs386 (Nov 1, 2005)

I would also be very hesitant about buying a model with this feature in the first year......I think it may take a few years to perfect the technology


----------



## HoldenGTO (Nov 22, 2005)

Actually, it's been out for a while. A year or two I think. I think it was first on the Cadillacs?


----------



## ftlfirefighter (Jun 6, 2005)

I went yesterday, the car's gorgeous but the "show" is whimpy Whimpy WIMPY! LOL


----------



## CrabhartLSX (Feb 12, 2006)

I wouldn't worry about it. People don't buy GTO's for mileage.


----------



## Clueless (Mar 2, 2006)

Starrbuck said:


> Many who are concerned about performance do not care for this feature, as there are a few milliseconds of time used when you want to have full power. Our GTO's don't have that issue. I'll admit the lag has to be very small but it is there...


I would have to wonder about this also. Ever since I've first heard how cylinder deactivation was becoming more common in modern 8's as a fuel-savings feature, I've had to wonder about the degree of lag (and also the nervousness that it is "yet one more thing that can break"). I've tried to read up on it some--most of what I've read is that the Dodge/Chrysler vehicles with this seem to suffer a bit of shudder when the engine is switching modes. However, I have a suspicion that there may not be as much feedback on this as there could be, since this feature isn't (to my knowledge) currently offered in a vehicle marketed as a performance vehicle.

If GM offers this vehicle and/or engine in a sporty/muscle car, I'm sure we'll hear a lot of feedback then.


----------



## Starrbuck (Dec 13, 2005)

CrabhartLSX said:


> I wouldn't worry about it. People don't buy GTO's for mileage.


Exactly! I always chuckle when I see people bitch about the trunk being so small. I didn't buy my GTO to haul anything but ME!!!


----------



## Starrbuck (Dec 13, 2005)

Clueless said:


> I would have to wonder about this also. Ever since I've first heard how cylinder deactivation was becoming more common in modern 8's as a fuel-savings feature, I've had to wonder about the degree of lag (and also the nervousness that it is "yet one more thing that can break").


Yep, it's a concern. Who wants a delay while the other cyls start up?


----------



## Thony216 (Sep 20, 2005)

It would be nice to have DOD if it could be turned off and on when desired. If our A4 GTO's had it, they might have avoided the gas guzzler tax - which may have helped sales.


----------



## GTO TOO (Sep 10, 2004)

I've just spent 24 hours ( 12 each way ) in the a new DOD vehicle. There is no LAG and in the GM application the cylinder off to on and off again is truely seemless. If you can tell 32.5 MSEC difference on 0-60 ( that's 32 and a half millisec as the DOD would only act once in a full throttle stomp. And in a 0-60 or quater mile run, it would actually not even activate at ALL !!!), your reaction times are much longer than 32.5 msec. Thats' .0325 sec. 

The only concern I would agree with is the added complexity. As anything that adds more parts must by deffinition add more posible failure modes.

And lastly, by the time the new GTO/Camero get DOD it will have been out for several years on close to a million vehicles.


----------



## johnebgoode (Oct 4, 2005)

Wait to see if it 's a prelude to electronic gremlins. Ours may be better off without it. DOD is not going to affect the actual cash value of our cars. I cant see how it would. 
Who buys a performance car while worrying bout gas mileage?


----------



## Clueless (Mar 2, 2006)

That's good to hear, GTO TOO, seeing how this feature is probably going to become more common over time. I've been concerned about the possibility of lag, but the only real-world reviews I've seen of DOD vehicles have been from non-enthusiasts who are less likely to notice any lag.

It is also nice to hear that you didn't experience any of the shudder that seems to occur on some of the Chryslers.


----------



## baron_iv (Nov 17, 2005)

All GenIV LS2s (which is ALL of them) are capable of DOD. I suspect that it's just a computer modification to activate it. I'm not 100% sure how it works, so I don't want to say that it's absolutely a computer issue. I do know that our LS2s most certainly are set up for DOD, but for some reason, it wasn't enabled.
Personally, I wouldn't mind if it was enabled, every extra mpg saves me $$, which allows me to add more mods. So, as far as I'm concerned, BRING ON THE DOD!! 
:cool


----------

