The new BMW x5 M will have a TT 4.4 that generates 550 HP. You can go with a smaller V-8 and TT it, and it will scream. My wife drives a little 135 Vert and that little puppy moves, and gets an average of 22 MPG, and she has gotten 29 on the Highway....and it is a heavy little beast. I would just leave a V-8 in the Vette,,,,,but look at what happened to GM...and yesterday, Saturn.

 

Corvette owners being "tradionalists" would balk @ a 6 cylinder engine. (Unless it's a C1 with a blue fire six.)

Harley's future is liquid cooled. Period.

No guesswork here...

 

well considering that gm has been running v8 direct injection engines in their race cars (lemans) since 2007(!) i think its a safe bet that next gen (5) engines will have it. and what's not to like, you get more hp and more fuel economy.

 

I've lurked on the forum for years, but had to sign up JUST to respond to this thread!

First, I own both a Viper, and a Sky Redline, so I'm coming from both points. I do have the GM Turbo Upgrade package on my Sky which raised the output to 290hp/340ft.lbs torque while keeping factory warranty. Impressive for a 2.0 litre, sure, but let me get to the points listed above:

--Turbocharged V6s give nothing up in torque to their V8 counterparts.
Maybe in peak output numbers, but the area UNDER THE CURVE is what matters. Even with my dual scroll turbo in my Sky Redline (which is to reduce turbo lag), you have that moment of "come on, baby" when you hit it. The revs have to be up, and that sucks. My Sky Redline only has the factory upgrade, and it runs 13.34, but on the street in daily duty, you will be at low revs and hit it, and have to WAIT for that second for revs and boost to build.

--They are much more easily modified for more power. As with manufacturer tunes for the Solstice and Cobalt turbo models, you can just "turn up the boost" for 20% + more power (and keep your warranty!!).
As stated, I own one of these, and have the factory package done. BUT, with a Turbo V6, it will already be more stressed from the factory than a LS3 is. You can only crank up the boost so far, and you have to goto a bigger turbo because you run out of room with the factory one. The bigger the turbo, the BIGGER THAT LAG....And a 650hp Turbo V6 will not live NEARLY as long as a 650hp cam/head LS3.

--They have the potential to be FAR more fuel efficient than equivilant powered V8s.
Wrong. Porsche 911 Turbo and GT-R showing how a Turbo V6 can work....So, lets go to www.fueleconomy.gov and see what great gas milage those Turbo V6 cars get compared to the 7.0 litre 428cid Z06:

2009 Porsche 911 Turbo Manual-----16 city------23hwy
2009 Nissan GT-R---------------------16 city-------21hwy
2009 Corvette Z06--------------------15 city-------24hwy
2009 Corvette LS3--------------------16 city-------26hwy

As you can clearly see, the Turbo V6 cars do NOT get better gas milage.

So....A Turbo V6 does not give GM better milage in the C7 Vette. It will be a more stressed powerplant leading to more failures/warranty claims. Replacement engine costs are HIGHER for the 911 Turbo and GT-R than the Z06, so the Turbo V6 would be MORE expensive to use. So.....we end up back at the same place the Corvette team has found itself for the last 50 years or so.....If they use a small block V8 it will be less expensive, more reliable, and it won't impact fuel economy. Sounds like a winner to me.

Finally....I really do LOVE my Sky Redline. Small, only 2,950 pounds, and running 13.3s it is a quick car. But guys, I love the torque from my Vipers V10. I LOVE that V8 feel in the Corvette. You can not replace that.

The Original Poster did make sure he was clear that he was pointing out things "for the sake of the discussion", and I really enjoy that. A lot of what I have added here is just my opinion, that I wanted to toss INTO the discussion. Not enough of that attitude on the net. Too much "I'm a genius, and you're all idiots!". Hey, I'm here to learn.

 

I dont think GM would put a 6 back in the vette let alone a TT 6. The vette almost got canned because of the 6 remember? Secondly and most importantly the V8's used in the vette now are getting great fuel economy numbers. We are at 17/26 from a V8 now, and that still is better than most high output 6's out there now! So imagine in a few more years, that number is bound to go up.

 

You are comparing heavy cars to the light corvette. Also, said cars have awd. A more appropiate comparison would be to the camaro (16 city, 24 highway) and then estimate how much lower the fuel economy would be on the v8 camaro if it had awd. Additionaly, the other cars have more power. So...not as pretty of a picture as you paint.

However you can read my previous posts in this and see Im still on your side about keeping the V8.

 

I wouldn't call 3495lbs for the 911 turbo heavy though. Motor Trend had an article that agrees with what JeffInDFW says, namely that turbo V6's aren't the answer to CAFE regs or much better fuel economy numbers in general, when comparing to V8's.
Keeping the V8 should be a no brainer, the technology is available to maximize fuel econ and power output.
I am with those that would rather see the TT V6 in cars like the camaro and not the vette.

 

Trust me, that weight is likely the dry weight. And once again may I repeat it has a less efficient drivetrain than the camaro. The engine itself is likely very good.

 

As taken from porsche's website

2009 GT2 3.8 liter 435hp curb weight 3,075 lbs 16/23 mpg
(note GT2 is RWD)

The argument is MUCH more complicated than simply saying smaller engine = better gas mileage.

 

Another poster beat me to the punch to point out the GT2 Porsche weighs less, is rear wheel drive only, and gets worse fuel economy than the Z06 Corvette.

Also, your comment about the other cars having more power....Ignore the standard LS3 Corvette and look at the numbers I posted for the Z06. The Z06 makes more power than both those cars, is heavier than the GT2 which is rear wheel drive only, and the Z06 gets better gas milage. The LS3 Vette gets even BETTER milage and still has 436 horsepower.

The other big point is, the LS3 and LS7 are NOT direct injection either. Direct Injection is really incredible. When GM adds direct injection to the LS series V8s, you will see a big jump in horsepower and a big jump in milage. The 2.4 litre Ecotech in the Solstice makes 177hp and gets 25mpg highway. The 2.0 direct injected turbo Ecotech in the Solstice makes 260hp and gets 28mpg highway. Almost 80 more horsepower and 3mpg better.

Now, if you take your turbo Solstice/Sky back to the dealership and give them $700, they will install 2 new sensors and reflash the computer. You keep your full factory warranty, and the car will NOW have 290hp 340ft/lbs. Now, a GM engineer is on the Solstice forum, and when the factory turbo upgrade came out, people started claiming their milage had gone up by another 3-4mpg! This, in addition to the extra 30 horsepower and 80 foot pounds of torque the upgrade gave the car! The GM engineer explained the car got the extra gas milage after the upgrade because they were able to write the fuel tables for PREMIUM FUEL instead of having to write the tables to be able to run on 87 octane. His explanation went way over my head at that point, but the point HE was trying to make was, if you write the engine management code for PREMIUM FUEL ONLY, you will be able to get better milage. You can read his posts on www.solsticeforum.com and search for FlashsOwner if anyone is interested.

My opinion is, GM will go with a slightly smaller displacement V8 to help them get better fuel economy, but will make up the power and get better milage by using direct injection and variable valve timing (like in the 2.0 turbo Sky/Solstice). They can only use so much lightweight material without the price going thru the roof, so to lose more weight, I think they will shrink the OVERALL size of the car.

Now, the great news is.....Fritz Henderson himself has said "Corvette pays its way. Corvette is safe at GM". Add to that the fact that Team Corvette is full of real CAR GUYS. Not bean counters. The bean counters are happy because the car is a steady profit center, and leave the engineering staff at Corvette alone. Team Corvette will do everything possible to keep performance. Also, GM sells millions of cars every year. The number of Corvettes sold don't hurt their CAFE numbers. GM will continue to sell a huge number of trucks that pay for development of V8s. We are all good.

 

You can add about 200 pounds to whatever Porsche tells you on their website. That point has been made numerous times on this forum. Look at a magazine article and look at quoted weight vs test weight. In addition, the gt2 has more horsepower than the z06 and one of the most aggressive gear ratios on the market. In addition the gt2 makes tons of downforce at speed where as a z06 lifts. Add competitent down force to a Z and "proper" gear ratios such as the ones in the zr1 and watch as the fuel economy falls. Every one seems to ignore the fact that gm uses the ls2/3 in other cars. The corvette gets its fuel economy because its light as heck.

Now you guys are making me seem like a v8 hater. On the contrary, I love a big displacement v8 (or v12). My point being that the displacement of an engine is actually a small factor in over all fuel economy. If gm wants to save the v8 for the corvette they just have to make sure that the c7 isnt any heavier than the c6 and add fuel saving technology like direct injection. Applied technology like this will allow corvette owners to have their cake and eat it too.

 

What is your point? The car, regardless of weight, or which engine it utilizes it is still getting tolerable MPG numbers right?

And the LS3 used in the other cars arent tuned as the vette engine is. It is only the same block.

 

http://www.williamshybridpower.com/

also

http://www.nextenergy.org/successes/case000004.aspx

http://www.artemisip.com/

http://www.lightninghybrids.com/

Easily apdopted. Point is that I agree with the idea of a lighter Vett with variable vale timing, direct injection and variable displacement. I DO NOT want a trunk load of batteries!!! If energy capture, storage and re-use is desirable, use a different means than batteries.

 

GM has done both series and parallel hybrid technologies.

The truth is that you can combine all those technologies you mentioned AND parallel hybrid technology without the use of batteries. You can simply use a single 90KJ capacitor. They're compact and weigh only 70Lbs...


Ideally, I would think a twin turbo 4L V8 with direct injection, and variable displacement would be great to combine with a parallel hybrid motor for off-the-line performance. BMW did a concept that was parallel-hybrid a while ago and gained some serious performance off the line while saving about 5MPG on the streets. Basically, it used an electric motor to assist in 0-40MPH acceleration, and then used the gas engine for everything else. F1 racing is using similar technology right now as a "power boost".

I can see the Corvettes doing something like this.

 

I'd rather see GM experiment with hybrid stuff on a lesser sports car such as a soltice / sky reincarnation. Hybrid technology will just raise the price of a corvette and likely the weight. Let the corvette remain GM's premier sports car and let another car(s) make a political statement.

 

You're here to learn then allow us to help.

The example you gave here fails to take into account the overwhelming difference in gear ratios between the cars. The LS3 (and Z06, which only comes in manual) you listed is MPG for the MANUAL car. The end gearing on the Corvette is .50:1, while 5th gear is also much taller as well than the Porsche. Ever try to max out a Vette in 6th? We basically have a 4.5 speed in the Vette because not only can you not max 6th, you also can’t max out 5th either. This was GM's cost effective way to make the cars look more fuel efficient.

The ZR1 has a properly geared Trans and you pay gas guzzler on them because of it. Given the same gearing on the Porsche I could safely assure you that the Porsche will end up will at the LEAST equal or even better the fuel mileage.

 

I think 100% electric will be the future powerplats for vehicles. The battery technology is almost there. Can you imagine hardly any moving parts, no gas stations, no oil changes, instant torque?

I dont think it will be hard to get used to. Until then, corvette will have a simple V8 (either NA or SC) rightfully so.

Supercharging is awesome. no pipes everywhere to take up space and weight (as in turbo). Its the more simple approach to FI.

 

I would love to see this happen. But GM has said they'd never make another BEV ever again. That could change but I really really really doubt it. I think they'd rather go under than do another BEV.

That aside, I'm getting ready to convert my daily driver Nissan 300zx 5-speed into a BEV. I may experiment later with making it a hybrid, but for now I'll start simple. I've always had a passion for BEVs and always will. The day we don't have to deal with combustion engines will be the day I dance the jig on my roof top. I got my dancing shoes ready.

 

[QUOTE=Vetter Atl;1571823791]I think 100% electric will be the future powerplats for vehicles. The battery technology is almost there. Can you imagine hardly any moving parts, no gas stations, no oil changes, instant torque?

I dont think it will be hard to get used to. Until then, corvette will have a simple V8 (either NA or SC) rightfully so.

Supercharging is awesome. no pipes everywhere to take up space and weight (as in turbo). Its the more simple approach to FI.[/QUOTE]

I THINK if supercharging was a more simple approach to FI, then almost every Semi truck on the road would not use a turbocharger. Simply because they aim for efficiency, and simplimcity, to keep costs down.

 

Actually, Semi's use Turbos because they're more efficient and diesel engines already make enough torque. The turbo supplements the power fall of in a diesel and helps to improve economy, whereas the supercharger will not.

Those trucks get about 5-7 MPG. The truckers do every single thing in their power to increase fuel economy to reduce their personal cost of doing business. The majority of trucks on the road are privately owned contractors. They're paid by the mile and therefore try to save every penny in that mile that they can.