LS1LT1

While I agree with you on ALL of those awesome benefits, 2500 pounds is simply out of the question, unfortunately.
The car is expected (by both the buying public and the corporate decision makers alike) to have too much content and be too quiet along with all of the safety and emissions requirements for it to really go anywhere below 3000 (maybe 2900?) pounds.
It would require a major change in focus/direction (and likely a HUGE reduction in power output) for the nameplate to get the weight down that low.
Think of the transition from the heavier 300ZX twin turbos down to the lighter, less powerful 370Zs (after a few years hiatus of course).





Very cool cars, I've been somewhat of a fan of those since the late '70s. The Sprint models and the special 'Gold Leaf' editions, Minilite wheels etc.
When the Miata first came out I was like: "hmm, I wonder where some of that car's influence came from?" LOL.

Racer X

Power to weight is not the only factor to consider. Total power, and cd and frontal area are the primary determinants of top speed (see the 4000+ pound Veyron).

The 2005 Elise I had with the Sport pack theoretically could do 0-60 in 4.0 secs (with a 8000rpm clutch drop), but a 385hp, 3000 pound 2001 Z06 with a similar 0-60 kicked its bottom from there on up.

My brother had a 1967 Europa that weighed ~1500, that was spartan compared to the Elise, the Z06 was a luxury car by comparison to the Elise. The current Corvette is head and shoulders above the 2001 Z06. I don't get the complaints. Sports cars are supposed to be spartan.

LS1LT1

102" actually.

Racer X

The Northstar is dead and pales in comparison to the current LSx engines, in terms of size, weight and power. The Gen V engine will be even better than the LSx Gen IV small block.

B Stead

The Corvette needs better fuel mileage. They ARE talking about a turbo V6. But a 32-valve Northstar would have the balance of a V8. And we see from the Lincoln LS that a V8 has no problem as small as 3.9L.

A 5.0 32-valve Ford Mustang engine makes 420 horsepower. That's more horsepower-per-liter than the LS engines.

toxin440

My 2012 Kia Rio is 2403 pounds straight off the dealer lot. Base model, no crazy options. 1.6 Direct injection and I get 40mpg on the highway. Think about that.

And it's a tiny car (outward appearance at least) Inside - i'm almost 6'2 and 215lbs and have plenty of room.

It's a skinny short car though, once you start adding a 5-7L engine, 345mm tires/rims, all that jazz weight starts to skyrocket. It quite literally takes two tires put together to equal the width of the rears on my Z06. Kinda funny

If GM can really ramp up and get carbon fiber for cheap they could make a nice dent in the weight, but it's all about how much joe six pack is willing to pay.

B Stead

I said in my first post concerning the weight of the Corvette:

"And so the Corvette will pretty much be okay if it doesn't change its current construction type."

But see, they might change the construction type of the Corvette.

They have to keep the large frame for the horsepower but they could replace the fiberglass bodywork with hydroformed steel bodywork. If they do that the weight goes up 200 pounds. Could they do that ? Yeah, that's how the Solstice is built.

SCM_Crash

2500Lbs is simply unrealistic for a Corvette under $200K.

/story

Now I don't believe that the Corvette has to be super light weight to have a "new lease on life" and honestly, I'm not aware that it needs one.

LS1LT1

True, but at the roughly 31mpg that some people are getting out of their base C6s on the highway, it's not exactly delivering poor fuel economy at the moment either, especially for a 430+hp, 190mph car.
But yes, better fuel economy would be welcome and might even be mandatory if the car is going to survive well into the future.
I just know if going with DOHCs and 4 valves per cylinder is the only way to achieve it, as you seem to be implying.






The cars aren't actually fiberglass anymore, it's another form of plastic (SMC I believe?) now.
And they won't be adding 200 pounds (nor making the body out of steel) to the next Corvette. It might not lose too much (or any) weight for 2014 (though I still think it will), but it certainly won't be gaining any either.

CPhelps

So you want to use the Northstar that is at least 50 lbs heavier than an LS3 while having 130 fewer hp in your super light weight Corvette?

The new Coyote 5.0 is truly an impressive engine, but still does weigh more than an LS3, while making less power and torque.

In my humble opinion horsepower per liter is irrelevant for a street car that's primary market does not tax displacement. Direct Injection and the associated higher compression ratio, combined with reductions to internal friction and the rumored more advanced valvetrain, when coupled with some weight reduction will provide all the fuel consumption improvement necessary in a car that makes up such a comparatively low percentage of fleet volume.

I would like to see the C7 be as light as possible too, but think fewer than 3000lbs is probably unrealistic, and even that is not going to be easy.

The above is all just my opinion and could very well be off base. We'll all find out in January

BlueOx

The SOLSTICE?? What the.....???

Racer X

As someone sated the Northstar is heavier than the LSx. It is also bigger is external size, and gets worse fuel mileage. Not to mention as someone else did lower horsepower.

Power per liter is of little consequence.

Jinx

No, it's 3400 pounds, for the base car. Nearly 3500 pounds for the enthusiast turbo-4 version, and over 3500 pounds for the 320hp V6 automatic.

It's still impressively light for a luxury sedan, but it's yet more evidence of how wholly unrealistic calls for a 2500lb Corvette are.

I'd love to see cars get lighter, but it's going to take serious rationalization of safety standards and new manufacturing technology to make significant reductions, especially in cars like Corvette.

And yes, pounds-per-horsepower is an important metric. The US Elise never saw the right side of the 10lb/hp line; the Corvette crossed it fifteen years ago. Nuff said.

As for the Northstar fanboy, your favorite engine is dead for very good reasons.

.Jinx

LS1LT1

True.
Of course the car that it's installed in also weighs 400+ pounds more than a Corvette as well.

shank0668

I thought I saw 32xx somewhere, but anyway the base is 3315.

I think 30xx-3150 would be possible within the price, but I don't know if it will happen.

Jinx

I'll be damned, you're right -- GM released six days ago: base 3315, 3461 with the V6. And 22/32 mpg for both the fours.

I wonder how much those numbers will climb with typical options.

.Jinx

Endeka

I think one useful area to attack with carbon fiber products is the unsprung weight of the car. Featherlight wheels, that make OEM wheels, CCWs and OZ racing wheels look like lead bricks by comparison, have always been available, but cost something like $10,000 for four. I would imagine that an order for tens of thousands of those wheels could reduce the cost substantially, and although the weight savings over current stock wheels might only be 30lbs, 30lbs off of unsprung weight is a substantial savings.

Bill Dearborn

The problem with using the power per liter measure is you get an underpowered car that way. The LS engines are getting more power per pound and physical dimensions than the other manufacturers. That is why people are replacing BMW, Miata, 944, 911 and older Nissan Z engines with LS engines. They get more power, for the same or less weight in a smaller overall size package. The Northstar is dead because it weighs too much, is too big and is too complicated. You don't see people putting them or Ford OHC engines in other cars with smaller displacement OHC engines since they don't fit. Late last year one of the other instructors at a WGI driving school took me for a ride in his LS1 powered 944. I asked him why he made the switch and his answer was reliability, less maintenance while at the track, more power, less weight and better performance. The car was awesome on the track, it cornered like it was on rails and ran as fast or faster than most of the top dog cars that were there that day and when he finished the session he pulled into the garage and walked away until the next session.

You start going with a smaller displacement OHC V6 with a Supercharger on it and you get a heavier engine with larger outside dimensions. All that crap necessary to place the cams on the top of the engine adds weight higher in the car and requires more room for the engine.

Bill

Rapid Fred

A 2500 LB Vette sounds like my dream daily driver. I have owned, driven daily, and loved, a 2000 lb Scirocco, 2100 lb FIAT X-1/9 and a 2800 lb Porsche 944. They had more than enough creature comforts for me, driver-friendly seating and communicative handling! Of course, they were terribly slow by today's standards (or, for that matter, Y2K standards).

I think it is conceiveable that you could create a safe, legal, reasonably comfortable and dependable, mass-produced, 300 HP/300 lb-ft torque, 2500 lb sports car for $50K -- but it would be a somewhat spartan vehicle. The market would be very small given today's consumer preferences. Think a stripper Miata with a 4 liter DI alloy V8. All systems -- wheels, tires, brakes, shocks, springs, AC, power assists, etc. would be "right-sized" for this somewhat smaller platform. If Miata can give you all that with 170 HP for $25K, then another $20K or so should put it over the top.

Now something like this would be really great if it somehow had the tractability and dependability of the Vette, which I am sure it does not: http://www.ronsusser.com/inventory.htm?id=884 But then, I'm older now and it would need to fit a couple golf bags plus my wife. No way...

SanDiegoBert

Back in the mid-80's there was a company called "Monster Miatas", which converted new-build Miatas to be equipped with Ford 5.0L V-8's. I came close to getting one, especially after driving one, but decided on a new Firebird Trans Am, instead. This is the best I can do about recollecting that vehicle. It was a pocket rocket!