toyotaz87 wrote:

Quote:

motor...im an idiot

yes, because it's an engine- the only cars that have motors turning the wheels are electric or gas/electric hybrid (nothing personal, someone jumped on me for that one once... I know what you mean)

the whole "turbo-vs.-supercharger" debate always boils down to your priorities, but IMO, turbo is usually better, just so long as the turbo matches your engine and what you want out of it. however, the supercharger on the LS9 is interesting, since it uses 4-lobe rotors, rather than three. according to Motor Trend "They [GM] started with turbochargers for efficiency's sake, but switched to supercharging when Eaton unveiled its latest four-lobe Roots-type blower. this new unit boasts thermal efficiency of nearly 76 percent (up form 60 in the best three-lobe blowers)- near turbo efficiency with no lag." I would be interested to see this engine converted to twin-turbo, though; it's essentially an LS3 built for boost.

Actually GM went S/C because their twin turbo test mule burned up.... Audi style!

And the car is pricer because of that engine that is going to be no less than $20K, Brembo brakes that are about $10K, Carbon fiber, magnetic shocks, and the aluminum Z06 frame. Not to mention the $10K a gallon for the CF clear coat.



>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

Quote:

Actually GM went S/C because their twin turbo test mule burned up.... Audi style!

Ouch. Well, I just quoted from MT...

I read about that clear-coat too. that seems really rediculous to me. The brakes, however, are worth every penny of $10k- they're carbon-ceramic 15.5" rotors in front and 15.0" rotors out back with Brembo calipers, 6-pots in front and 4-pots rear. I'd be surprised if this car takes 100 feet to stop from 60 mph.