Latest on C7 and C8
05-05-2010, 09:22 PM
#81
Instructor
Member Since: Apr 2010
Location: Dalton Georgia
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This llink shows the Fuel mileage of the XJ220 at 13 MPG. http://www.exoticcarsite.com/pages/jaguar_xj220-1.htm
..........................
Others extol the virtues of the DOHC as highly advanced adn wonderful as compared to the OHV tractor engine in the Vette. Yet no one is giving examples in production cars that have the vanted DOHC that gets the same horsepowe, fuel mileage, weight, cost and compact configuration needed to fit in the Corvette engine bay. If it was easy, cost effective, and fuel efficient, it would have been done. it hasn't.
The LS3/LS7 is a highly advanced weight/space/fue/costl efficient engine package. People keep denying this without producing factual evidence of a better package. Hp per liter is meaningless unless you are building to a displacement restricted design criteria due to arbitrary taxes or racing rules. The rest is meaningless from a practical production engineering process. From a marketing to the ignorant masses perspective all the smoke and mirror, and shiny whirling bits do matter. They just do not impress me, and are not why I buy a sports car.
You are right just because know one builds 500+ HP turbo 6 that gets better mileage than the LS7 doesn't mean they can't. I eagerly awaiting that advancement in mass produced auto market.
Of course, when they do, GM will add direct injection and raise the bar by 10-15% on both HP and fuel efficiency.
..........................
Others extol the virtues of the DOHC as highly advanced adn wonderful as compared to the OHV tractor engine in the Vette. Yet no one is giving examples in production cars that have the vanted DOHC that gets the same horsepowe, fuel mileage, weight, cost and compact configuration needed to fit in the Corvette engine bay. If it was easy, cost effective, and fuel efficient, it would have been done. it hasn't.
The LS3/LS7 is a highly advanced weight/space/fue/costl efficient engine package. People keep denying this without producing factual evidence of a better package. Hp per liter is meaningless unless you are building to a displacement restricted design criteria due to arbitrary taxes or racing rules. The rest is meaningless from a practical production engineering process. From a marketing to the ignorant masses perspective all the smoke and mirror, and shiny whirling bits do matter. They just do not impress me, and are not why I buy a sports car.
You are right just because know one builds 500+ HP turbo 6 that gets better mileage than the LS7 doesn't mean they can't. I eagerly awaiting that advancement in mass produced auto market.
Of course, when they do, GM will add direct injection and raise the bar by 10-15% on both HP and fuel efficiency.
05-06-2010, 01:10 AM
#82
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2000
Location: North Dallas 40 TX
Posts: 6,451
Received 4,375 Likes
on
2,066 Posts
The lincoln mark viii had a 4.6liter 281cubic inch back in 1993. (I have one that ive owned for years) This motor turned 280hp and 280lbs of torque way back then. That is a horse and lb of torque per cubic inch. The motor has a DOHC design and it will make that big fat lincoln move very respectably especially considering it is an early 90's car. My licoln gets about 17mpg in solid city driving and it gets an honest 30mpg on the interstate and it does this while hauling that big fat lincoln body that is HEAVY!! This motor has been dead reliable all the years that I have owned it and at 180K there still has not been any motor work done to the car. It uses no oil and still runs like a champ. The motor is going to end up outlasting the body.
I am not sure how that answers the mail. I don't know that the engine would fit under the hood of a Corvette. The highest performance NA version of that engine is the 5.4L in the Mustang rated at 412HP and rated at 22 MPG HWY.
The 5.4 DOHC engine is about 130 pounds heavier and about an inch wider and taller than the LS3, although it is a little shorter in length. That may not be the specs for the 2010 version of the 5.4 So the intake configuration may change it's dimensions some. In the Navigator configuration it is 8 inches taller!
The extra weight goes against lower the weght of the Corvette to improve milage and performance. I will vote to keep the up coming Gen V GM SB OHV configuration over the Ford configuration.
05-06-2010, 06:56 PM
#83
Safety Car
Civics... Yawn....
The Vette will never be an <3000lb car. Too many gizmos, emissions and safety equipment.
GM Powertrain has almost 60 years experience with small block, pushrod V8s. They build the best motor in the world in this category. Most power, most efficiency and most durability. And thats without VVT, displacement on demand or forced induction.
As long as the platform is the front mid-engine, rear wheel drive/transmission we won't see displacement on demand as I understand the torque tube generates a vibration at certain rpm that GM can't cancel out.
You guys calling for read mid engines and V6s and AWD need to look at the Corvette. This is a car that still uses the same basic leaf spring suspension it has for 30 years. The layout of the chassis hasn't changed in generations and I very much doubt GM would do something to change the essential character of the car unless sales fail to pick back up.
Sales, not political correctness, drive changes to Corvette.
IF GM even considered a forced induction V6 anywhere it'll be in a Buick or maybe a rework of the CTS-V, but it'll have to go aways to best the LS line of V8s anywhere but in weight.
The Vette will never be an <3000lb car. Too many gizmos, emissions and safety equipment.
GM Powertrain has almost 60 years experience with small block, pushrod V8s. They build the best motor in the world in this category. Most power, most efficiency and most durability. And thats without VVT, displacement on demand or forced induction.
As long as the platform is the front mid-engine, rear wheel drive/transmission we won't see displacement on demand as I understand the torque tube generates a vibration at certain rpm that GM can't cancel out.
You guys calling for read mid engines and V6s and AWD need to look at the Corvette. This is a car that still uses the same basic leaf spring suspension it has for 30 years. The layout of the chassis hasn't changed in generations and I very much doubt GM would do something to change the essential character of the car unless sales fail to pick back up.
Sales, not political correctness, drive changes to Corvette.
IF GM even considered a forced induction V6 anywhere it'll be in a Buick or maybe a rework of the CTS-V, but it'll have to go aways to best the LS line of V8s anywhere but in weight.
05-08-2010, 05:39 PM
#85
You guys calling for read mid engines and V6s and AWD need to look at the Corvette. This is a car that still uses the same basic leaf spring suspension it has for 30 years. The layout of the chassis hasn't changed in generations and I very much doubt GM would do something to change the essential character of the car unless sales fail to pick back up.
The chassis has also changed a lot over the years. The C3 was body on frame. The C4 was a welded up structure centered around the rockers for strength. The C5 and C6 famously use the hydroformed rails and a strong central back bone.
Basically, while it is correct to say the car is an evolution rather than 100% new in concept car each time, the engineering of the car has definitely not been stagnate for 30 years.
05-10-2010, 12:29 PM
#86
Le Mans Master
The latest issue of Automobile says they will achieve under 3000lb on the C7 by making the brakes smaller and wheels more narrow and by using turbo V6. Rear window will be split. Work began last fall with intro 2014. Certainly my idea of a dream car. I guess my next sports car will be a GT3.
06-04-2010, 10:06 PM
#87
Instructor
Member Since: Apr 2010
Location: Dalton Georgia
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the vette has to fear dying. The corvette is owned by older people mainly because it is older people who can afford them and even more importantly older people can afford the insurance. The corvette is gm's test bed for their latest and greatest. sometimes it isn't to great.... Think crossfire here and optispark here.... but it is their testbed and their newest performance gadgets get tried out on the vette.
06-04-2010, 11:22 PM
#88
stingray
06-05-2010, 02:49 PM
#89
Racer
And we care...why? I think I'm with you FutFixr...If I can read between the lines. Do any of the other countries that "don't like us" practice what they preach; NO! At what point do we set political correctness aside for the betterment of our own country...or am I being politically incorrect by even thinkning that we need to worry about ourselves for a change? LOL I've been all over the world and to some real LOVELY places with people that "don't like us" and I can tell you...they could care less about practicing what they preach and want to knock us down any chance they can. In many ways they already have...heck, our biggest export is AIR in empty cargo containers heading back to China to resupply WalMart.
Last edited by Alaska SS; 06-05-2010 at 02:54 PM.
06-06-2010, 03:21 PM
#90
Successful Plumber
Member Since: Feb 2001
Location: Top of the hill, 3rd mailbox on the right. Texas
Posts: 43,830
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
CF NCM Ambassador
CI 6-7-9-10 Veteran
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09-'10
NCM Member '09
Not to be overly critical of your post but the suspension of the Corvette has changed dramatically in 30 years. I wouldn't claim that just because a BMW 2002i used coil springs the latest M3's suspension is the same as that of a 2002i. The C3 used a single trailing arm that was fixed to the rear upright. It used two lateral links, one was the half shaft. The C4 took that idea a step further by using two trailing links thus creating a much longer virtual trailing arm. It still used the half shaft as a suspension link. The C5 and C6 have closely related double A-arm suspensions. They no longer use the half shaft as a link. They don't use trailing links. That constitutes a rather large change between the C3 and C4 and an even bigger change to the C5. The way the spring is used also changed significantly between the C4 and C5 as the C3 and C4 used a fixed center which isolated the left and right spring halves. The C5 and C6 use the dual pivot setup which has fooled people into thinking the car has a suspension cross talk problem.
The chassis has also changed a lot over the years. The C3 was body on frame. The C4 was a welded up structure centered around the rockers for strength. The C5 and C6 famously use the hydroformed rails and a strong central back bone.
Basically, while it is correct to say the car is an evolution rather than 100% new in concept car each time, the engineering of the car has definitely not been stagnate for 30 years.
The chassis has also changed a lot over the years. The C3 was body on frame. The C4 was a welded up structure centered around the rockers for strength. The C5 and C6 famously use the hydroformed rails and a strong central back bone.
Basically, while it is correct to say the car is an evolution rather than 100% new in concept car each time, the engineering of the car has definitely not been stagnate for 30 years.
Not that there haven't been substantial improvements and even some major changes within the basic layout - technically the Vette is a mid-engine now with the mass of the engine set back behind the front wheels. Moving the transmission to the rear was a brilliant engineering feat as are the suspension changes you point to. Same thing with powertrain - on the surface it's the same old pushrod Small Block Chevy... but there's never been an SBC like the ones in the Z06 or the ZR1.
My point is that Corvette is about evolutionary changes and tweaks throughout it's life. Expecting it to suddenly turn into a fiberglass Fiero with a twin turbo Direct Injection VVT V6 -- IMHO: that ain't happening.
06-06-2010, 03:27 PM
#91
Successful Plumber
Member Since: Feb 2001
Location: Top of the hill, 3rd mailbox on the right. Texas
Posts: 43,830
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
CF NCM Ambassador
CI 6-7-9-10 Veteran
St. Jude Donor '06-'07-'08-'09-'10
NCM Member '09
If a young person has the financial means, all GM has to do is get them to drive the car once. If you've spent your afterschool years trying to hotrod a Honda to get to 230 HP out of a 4 banger, twice around the block in a 430hp V8 will make you wonder why you wasted all that time.
06-06-2010, 03:52 PM
#92
Racer
Why? Before the meltdown they could sell 35-40,000 at a profit every year.
If a young person has the financial means, all GM has to do is get them to drive the car once. If you've spent your afterschool years trying to hotrod a Honda to get to 230 HP out of a 4 banger, twice around the block in a 430hp V8 will make you wonder why you wasted all that time.
If a young person has the financial means, all GM has to do is get them to drive the car once. If you've spent your afterschool years trying to hotrod a Honda to get to 230 HP out of a 4 banger, twice around the block in a 430hp V8 will make you wonder why you wasted all that time.
Oh so true and I couldn't agree more.
