Yes, it's makes sense. I thought you might be trying to imply that upping Hp on an LS6 wasn't cheaper than on an LT5, but in fact is is. (with exceptions like LPE notwithstanding)

The LT5, however, is clearly superior to the LS6 motor. Fewer cubes, more horse, better idle. Almost like an exotic car motor...

 

I just saw (well, I heard it well before I saw it) a 422ci off the C5-R block that was running "10.90s on motor" and that **** was LOUD! Civilized? Certainly not! I don't think that's the point.

I think the LS6 is both easier and cheaper to mod, while the LT5 is more refined and has the "googaw" factor. Also much rarer. No ZR-1s at the Car show last night.

 

Lotus often is classified as an exotic...

NOTHING revs like dohc.

 

To a certain point they will cost almost the same. But $/hp the LS6 is cheaper to mod, no doubt. The 400RWHP mark can be had for roughly 3k on the LT5, but your hands will have to get dirty. Which is right where I am at. The next motor mod would be porting the heads. Which would get another 25+ rwhp on stock displacement. But the cost to have the heads done is more than the price of every mod I have done to date.

 

I know, that's why the big grin was at the end. Designed by Lotus and GM, with MerCruiser building it.

 

The LS6 is the same size as a LT5 and makes the same HP and MORE torque with 3 less camshafts, it is also readily available and not almost 10 years old, and installed in a much better platform.

Now the base Corvette engine makes 400 HP (LS2), you gotta love evolution.
Hello! 2005 calling.

 

Had the LT5 been further developed and used we would have seen 500+ hp levels in the C5. 475hp OBD2 ready LT5s were scheduled and a few produced for the 1995 Corvette. But GM couln't get over the fact of Americas favorite sports car having a motor that was designed over seas.

As is, we've had to wait a least over a decade to see those levels again from the "in house" GM stuff.

 

I don't think that had anything to do with dropping the LT5. The Z06 has essentially the same performance numbers as the LT5. How much was a ZR1 vs a base Corvette back in 90-91 and how much is a Z06 now compared to a base C5? If you want to know how corporations make decisions, just follow the money trail. The LT5 was dropped because of cost, not because of where it was designed.

There's more to the cost than just the motor price. Because the LT5 is much wider and somewhat heavier than an LS6, that would have meant a different design for the Z06, and it would need more Hp for the same performance numbers (to make up for the greater weight) AND the LT5, from everything I've read, doesn't have BSFC numbers as good as the LS1/6 -- IOW, not as fuel efficient.

 

Im with him. The main reason that the LT5 was droped and the ZR-1 seemingly forgotten by GM is that the most of it wasn't built here.

As for the LS6 making more torque, what are the numbers on a LS6 385/405 hp and ?? torque? Im not sure. I checked the GM site and couldn't find anything. Also what is the fuel milage on the LS6? Not what the EPA says, but what owners have seen on the road.

 

Last time I looked, 405hp is the same as 405 hp. Or did my teachers lie to me in school Who cares how many camshafts is has. Nobody claims Ferrari and their 4 cam design is inferior? Just becuase it's ten years old, means it's worthless? The Z06 has 7 more to go then. I should hope it's installed in a better platform, otherwise that would mean GM isn't advancing their technology.


How many cubes is taking for gm to get 400 hp out of their base model.

Hello, 1986 calling, GM/Lotus was getting that power. Thank you for waking up GM and finally getting around to it 15 years later


[Modified by Jeffvette, 1:18 PM 6/13/2004]

 

Haven't done any long trips in the z06, but my trips in the zr1:

65mph for appx 1hr, 32 mpg
80-85mph long haul - san jose to anaheim, 27mpg

not bad for a 14 year old car.

 

Wow, somebody who is trying to sound intelligent. If GM decided to use the LT5 in the C5 and wanted to use it in all the models, let's just say 30,000 first year and use 30,000 across the board until 2004. Wouldn't you think it would cost less to manufacture 270,000 plus the warranty motors, than compared to say 6,939 plus warranty motors.

Also, let me go pop the hood on my Silverado. Has an ugly looking engine as well.


[Modified by Jeffvette, 1:30 PM 6/13/2004]

 

I have heard it said that Merc gave GM a price of $2000 per LT5 if they ordered 30,000 engines a year - so the price of the ZR-1 could have been bought down a lot.

 

Most of it wasn't *designed* here, although GM Powertrain was involved in development. However, most of the LT5 was indeed built here. Stillwater Oklahoma, by Mercury Marine, so your argument that it was dropped by GM because "most of it wasn't built here." just doesn't hold water. Did you mean to say that it wasn't designed here?

I can't find the article, but Dave Hill essentially said the reason for a pushrod V8 for the C5 was size and cost. Think of it this way... you're designing the C5. You already have a 400 Hp motor that's been designed and had a production run, yet you design another motor. Smells like a bean-counter issue to me.

They probably didn't lie... more like they didn't tell you the whole story, or you were thinking about that Corvette you'd get when you could afford it The LS2 will be rated at 400 Hp. The LS6 is rated at 405 Hp. The LS2 will be able to accelerate a vehicle more quickly down the 1/4 mile. Why? Power under the curve. The LS6 on has a 5 Hp advantage at about 6300 rpm and up. At every rpm point under that peak, the LS2 has a torque advantage. More power under the curve will generally beat a slightly greater peak Hp advantage.

It has nothing to do with trying to sound intelligent. It's just simple fact that over and over again, decisions are made based on cost. Yes, it's true that amortizing the costs over more motors would reduce the individual price, but the fact still remains that the LT5 motor was far more expensive to build than the current LS6 motor.

Just look at the price differential between the base C4 and the ZR1 and the base C5 and Z06. The price difference between a base C5 and a Z06 is roughly $10K. Wasn't the price difference between a base C4 and a ZR1 more like $20K? I know the Z06 also added better suspension; was the same true of the ZR1?

As I've also mentioned, Dave Hill said that they chose a pushrod motor design because of space and cost considerations. Even after the LT5 had already been designed AND produced, the bean counters at GM determined it would be cheaper to design and build a new pushrod motor than to use the LT5.

Gas milage on my Z06: 21 mph city, highway mix. Pure highway, 32.5 mpg at 70 mph cruise, 30 minute trip. Will be going to Las Vegas in a month, so may have better long trip gas milage numbers.


[Modified by nuke61, 11:17 PM 6/13/2004]

 

Let me go the the GM parts counter. I'd like a set of LS6 fuel rail covers, a set of Z06 fender badges, a couple of air screens for the front bumper and let me also get a set of the brake ducts for the rear of my 99/00 FRC. I've already got a set of aftermarket rims and a exhaust nobody will know the difference.

ZR-1. Well, let's buy the two doors, the whole rear clip and lower valance. The solar glass and a completely different offset rear rim. Now, I've got the look...... but what do I do when I pop the hood and show people my L98/LT1/LT4

As far as price. My ZR-1 stickered at 59,xxx. A 2001 Z06 stickered at 48,xxx and change. Not that much of a diffence. But factor in you see a Z06 on every corner

ZR-1
90 3,049
91 2,044
92 502
93 448
94 448
95 448

Total of 6,939

Z06
01 5,773
02 8,297
03 8,635
04 (I imagine it will be another 8,000)

Total of 30,705


When will a Z06 do this?
NEW INTERNATIONAL RECORDS

100 Miles @ 175.600 MPH

500 Miles @ 175.503 MPH

1000 Miles @ 174.428 MPH

5000 KM @ 175.710 MPH

5000 Miles @ 173.791 MPH

12 Hours Endurance @ 175.523 MPH

24 Hours Endurance @ 175.885 MPH for 4,221.256 Miles


WORLD RECORDS - IRRESPECTIVE of CATEGORY or CLASS


5000 KM @ 175.710 MPH

5000 Miles @ 173.791 MPH

4,221.256 Miles @ 175.885 MPH


Or is GM, to afraid of ring failure and excessive oil consumption?

 

Jeff, I don't understand the attitude that you have. I never said the Z06 was a better car, or that the LS6 was a better motor. All I've attempted to do is explain why GM chose not to use the LT5 in the Z06. They will be using the LS2 base motor in the next Z06 as well. As I've said, bean counters.

Uh, wonderful, but that wasn't the question. I asked what the price difference was between a base C4 and a ZR1. If you don't know the answer, it's O.K. to simply say "I don't know."

Oh brother... now you're starting to sound like some Ferrari and Lamborghini owners

With that attitude, you should be overjoyed that GM isn't going to use the LT5. It makes your car all that much more rare. I actually like the idea that if I pop the motor in my Z06, I can just go out and get another one. To each his own.

 

Nuke,

If you are going to start talking common sense forget about it with ZR1 owners....Lord knows I've tried.......I like to keep it simple and powerful!!!!

 

if i recall correctly, the ZR-1 cost was about 80 grand, and a C4 was about 40. Now its about 45 grand for a C5, and 50(earlier years) for a ZO6.

 

I just found the information about the C4/ZR1, and you're quite a bit off on the ZR1. The 1990 base MSRP was $32K, the ZR1 MSRP was $59K, and according to the following website "and many sold for much more than MSRP" (referring to the ZR1)
http://www.musclecarclub.com/musclec...istory-4.shtml

It turns out my earlier guess of a $20K price difference between the base C4 and ZR1 was low. That nearly $30K price difference helped pay for the then state-of-the-art motor.

Bean counters get involved in all sorts of decisions that might initially surprise you. I just read in Automobile Magazine that Honda will likely NOT produce a successor to the NSX. Why? It's easier to get financial approval to make a followup to the Civic for the masses than a niche car with a niche motor.

Doh... I just checked Jeffvettes profile and he's an accountant... maybe that's why he has a chip on his shoulder

 

By "built here" I, like most of us, mean that the motor wasn't built "in house". The motor was designed, built as a prototype and up until final production by a British company. The motor was never built in house at all. The final production model was built by a company in OK. The only part that involved the LT5 was GM droping it into the car. Ask the Callaway guys how GM treats them. They get the same thing the ZR-1 owners do. GM barly recognizes the fact that the car exists.

edit: also, what is the largest that you can bore a LS1/6 out. I remember reading that a 383 or was it a 39x was the largest you could go. I can't remember.


[Modified by 90 Corvette ZR-1, 9:56 PM 6/13/2004]