the Jew wrote:i doubt this will happen but my thoughts is why not make a ZR1 turbo instead of supercharged
I like the sound of that but even though I agree wit this, what difference does it make what engine they put in the C7 vette?? it's your choice to pick what engine u want , don't like it ,don't pick it lol!! but that option would be a change up for the vette to compete with Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini using European methods and as for heritage, every era has a trademark something, they didn't always stick to heritage, who kno's the vette might just be more sought after than the others because of half decent price and better quality, thats if GM is serious about a more euro vette.
Skr8 Goodz in tha hood
Cavalier Thompson wrote:but that option would be a change up for the vette to compete with Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini using European methods
they already compete and exceed in some classes....
JLAudioCavalier wrote:MRThompson (jrthompson) wrote:because vettes have always been big old v8s.
No... no they have not.
the only reason for that is the sbc had not been designed yet. if you're going to go and rain someones parade may as well be fully upfront. on that note it also had drum brakes...
going along those lines is like saying progress for the sake of progress is progress. sometimes it is sometimes it is not.
personally i like the idea of a turbo v8. i just think it should be on a ls7 to destroy other manufactures hopes dreams and (if gm gets rid of the unions) ability to compete
Alex Richards wrote:Its Americans who for whatever reason don't understand that by alienating and not embracing our rich heritage we will become enemies on both sides and be good for nothing.
Because our heritage is big burly V8s with poor gas mileage, that means we should keep treading down the same path? GM has gotten the strange idea that they should throw an LSX in everything and as such, have completely watered down the mystique of the LSX...and Chrysler has pretty much copied that model to a T, ruining the mystique of the Hemi. Ford is the only American company pushing forward with their engine designs and providing a different experience with each of their vehicles. You don't see them throwing the 5.0 in all of their cars. If we kept to our "heritage" (aka doing the same thing over and over as it seems everyone is defining this), then no American company would have had any chance at competing (or better yet, setting records) with their 4cylinder engines. It's when you get stuck in this Hillbilly mindset where no real progress can be made. With the emissions laws getting tighter and tighter it's very likely that they'll have to move to a smaller engine...or would you rather they repeat their mistakes in the 80's (GNX faster in the 1/4, Fiero faster in the corners).
What I love though, is the innate hypocrisy that you all hate the idea of a small high revving v8, but you all embrace a large displacement high revving v8. In what fantasy world do you live in that says
ANY high-revving production engine is a part of American heritage? Sure there are racing leagues with such engines, but not in a production vehicle.
I have no signiture
Whalesac wrote:
Because our heritage is big burly V8s with poor gas mileage, that means we should keep treading down the same path? GM has gotten the strange idea that they should throw an LSX in everything and as such, have completely watered down the mystique of the LSX...and Chrysler has pretty much copied that model to a T, ruining the mystique of the Hemi. Ford is the only American company pushing forward with their engine designs and providing a different experience with each of their vehicles. You don't see them throwing the 5.0 in all of their cars. If we kept to our "heritage" (aka doing the same thing over and over as it seems everyone is defining this), then no American company would have had any chance at competing (or better yet, setting records) with their 4cylinder engines.
with a vette? you bet!
by your logic, the vette should have a different motor, 4 doors and seat more than two.
That's a gross overstatement, Vince, and you know it. The Vette should have whatever best suites the car itself and not whatever the general public (who think they are engineers) think is best for it.
I have no signiture
oldskool wrote:Let's just hope if it comes to fruition, that they properly size the turbocharger for decent low end torque. This is all hypothetical, but I would imagien a 3.0L V8 that makes power to 8-10k rpm will not have much down low, espcially if you imagine it naturally aspirated and consdier the weight it has to move. Hell it's only 1.5L per bank, its like a honda V8 lol. It may be a moot point, but one of the things I love about LSx engines, and many gm engines in genearl, is that you can get around very capably staying under 2k rpm. I know that's not the point of a corvette, but i don't see chugging around at 2k rpm in a car of the vette's weight with a high revving 3.0 V8. But like i said, all speculation, who knows if they will make it, and who knows how high it will rev.
Hartley H1
Even naturally aspirated, small v8's have incredibly flat torque curves.
I have no signiture
Whalesac wrote:Alex Richards wrote:Its Americans who for whatever reason don't understand that by alienating and not embracing our rich heritage we will become enemies on both sides and be good for nothing.
Because our heritage is big burly V8s with poor gas mileage, that means we should keep treading down the same path? GM has gotten the strange idea that they should throw an LSX in everything and as such, have completely watered down the mystique of the LSX...and Chrysler has pretty much copied that model to a T, ruining the mystique of the Hemi. Ford is the only American company pushing forward with their engine designs and providing a different experience with each of their vehicles. You don't see them throwing the 5.0 in all of their cars. If we kept to our "heritage" (aka doing the same thing over and over as it seems everyone is defining this), then no American company would have had any chance at competing (or better yet, setting records) with their 4cylinder engines. It's when you get stuck in this Hillbilly mindset where no real progress can be made. With the emissions laws getting tighter and tighter it's very likely that they'll have to move to a smaller engine...or would you rather they repeat their mistakes in the 80's (GNX faster in the 1/4, Fiero faster in the corners).
What I love though, is the innate hypocrisy that you all hate the idea of a small high revving v8, but you all embrace a large displacement high revving v8. In what fantasy world do you live in that says ANY high-revving production engine is a part of American heritage? Sure there are racing leagues with such engines, but not in a production vehicle.
Ahem, them corvette gets over 30 mpg's on the highway. Even more with a tune. Put an lsx is any decently aerodynamic lightweight body and you'll get stellar gas mileage, its a very efficient engine, which is why its capable of making so much power.
1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by:
Kronos Performance
WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Whalesac wrote:That's a gross overstatement, Vince, and you know it. The Vette should have whatever best suites the car itself and not whatever the general public (who think they are engineers) think is best for it.
thats just it, a big LS based motor, is what fits it, its what has fit it, same thing that sets records for it. I will semi-disagree with the general public thinking what is best for it... they are the ones buying it, they are the ones modding it. They are the ones who realistically know what they want.
for example, the injector cups on the l61, dumbest piece ever created for our cars... id tell the engineer to shove it up their asses, but hey they developed it for some god known reason.
Just like our new fire truck, designed by some guy in a cubicle, not by us, so a lot of things are stupid to have on it and not how we wanted it. Id love it more if we designed it how we wanted it. same thing applies to a car...
and like he said 30+ mpg out of a LS powered vette is amazing... but thats just it, big motor, light body, equals out to great mileage.
Leafy wrote:Whalesac wrote:Alex Richards wrote:Its Americans who for whatever reason don't understand that by alienating and not embracing our rich heritage we will become enemies on both sides and be good for nothing.
Because our heritage is big burly V8s with poor gas mileage, that means we should keep treading down the same path? GM has gotten the strange idea that they should throw an LSX in everything and as such, have completely watered down the mystique of the LSX...and Chrysler has pretty much copied that model to a T, ruining the mystique of the Hemi. Ford is the only American company pushing forward with their engine designs and providing a different experience with each of their vehicles. You don't see them throwing the 5.0 in all of their cars. If we kept to our "heritage" (aka doing the same thing over and over as it seems everyone is defining this), then no American company would have had any chance at competing (or better yet, setting records) with their 4cylinder engines. It's when you get stuck in this Hillbilly mindset where no real progress can be made. With the emissions laws getting tighter and tighter it's very likely that they'll have to move to a smaller engine...or would you rather they repeat their mistakes in the 80's (GNX faster in the 1/4, Fiero faster in the corners).
What I love though, is the innate hypocrisy that you all hate the idea of a small high revving v8, but you all embrace a large displacement high revving v8. In what fantasy world do you live in that says ANY high-revving production engine is a part of American heritage? Sure there are racing leagues with such engines, but not in a production vehicle.
Ahem, them corvette gets over 30 mpg's on the highway. Even more with a tune. Put an lsx is any decently aerodynamic lightweight body and you'll get stellar gas mileage, its a very efficient engine, which is why its capable of making so much power.
That was one of my points earlier. We have already broken away from our excessive, care-free, gas-guzzling heritage a number of times over, so why should the number of liters in the engine be such a sore spot for so many people...
....and regarding heritage, we should be more offended that we refer to 350 as a 5.7L.
I have no signiture
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:Sounds like bloggers using sensational reporting to get clicks on their site and increase ad fee.
C7 is being rumored to be using a 5.5L like in C6-R in ALMS, which is why it is being tested there. So far they are not doing as well (competitively speaking) as when they had the 7.0L in the previous GT class. GM was testing with a 32V OHV, we'll find out if that makes it into production. Turbo... when the current "ZR1" was being developed, they were using Turbo, but all failed and burned on their track, needless to say it was changed to a supercharged set-up. That left a nasty taste on their mouth, but maybe minds have changed and they may reinstate the turbo vette program again. I'll ask our district GM rep and see what he says. But to me that blog is mostly hopes and dreams mixed with past rumors in hopes to get a; "made-ya-look."
Spoke to our district GM rep on this and said---NIET and lol ("no" in Russian) on this Vette. He also said there is nothing concrete yet on what will happen, and it is scheduled to come out in 2013 as a 2014 model.
Also there is no 30 mpg Vette (actually 26mpg HWY), at least that's what the EPA says. When I had my Z06 the most I could muster in a 500+ mile hwy trip was 28mpgs. Not bad if you ask me for 405HP brute.
Here is your link on MPGs
Carry on the hypothetical Corvette.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:
Also there is no 30 mpg Vette (actually 26mpg HWY), at least that's what the EPA says.
here is one place ill disagree with the EPA on til the day I die. I can give them a solid dozen vette's that were getting 30+ mpg in stock form. most were 30-32mpg. 6th gear was like 1100-1200rpm.
Whalesac wrote:oldskool wrote:Let's just hope if it comes to fruition, that they properly size the turbocharger for decent low end torque. This is all hypothetical, but I would imagien a 3.0L V8 that makes power to 8-10k rpm will not have much down low, espcially if you imagine it naturally aspirated and consdier the weight it has to move. Hell it's only 1.5L per bank, its like a honda V8 lol. It may be a moot point, but one of the things I love about LSx engines, and many gm engines in genearl, is that you can get around very capably staying under 2k rpm. I know that's not the point of a corvette, but i don't see chugging around at 2k rpm in a car of the vette's weight with a high revving 3.0 V8. But like i said, all speculation, who knows if they will make it, and who knows how high it will rev.
Hartley H1
Even naturally aspirated, small v8's have incredibly flat torque curves.
Is that torque curve supposed to be impressive? Less than 200 ft-lbs before 6000 rpm? Lmao! That doesn't refute my hypothetical, it confirms it!
It just shows that it maintains a wider torque curve than a comparable sized 4 or 6 cylinder. If you notice, that's a 2.6L and torque doesn't fluctuate more than 50 ft-lbs from 2000 RPM to 10,000 RPM. That's pretty good for an engine with traditional street cams.
I have no signiture
You are right - and the engine in question was to be turbocharged anyways. But of the dyno graphs you have shared, i don't think etiher would be very fun unless the vette went on a strict diet. But while we are on hypotheticals, out side of a coolness factor, why have a V8 that makes less torque than a s/c'ed 4-cyl, and less power than many 6-cylinders on the market today?
