Zora Arkus-Duntov could not get GM to buy into the mid-rear design back in the day, and I doubt that we'll ever see it now.

 

 

The ZR1's engine, the LS9, sits in the same exact position in the frame s the LS7 and the LS3. If you carefully view the hood of the ZR1 you will notice it has a raised center section (where the peek-a- boo window resides), that provides the necessary clearance for the supercharger's intercooler.

BTW, you can install a Edelbrock E-Force supercharger on top of a LS2, LS3 and LS7 without lowering the engine or raising the hood's center section for clearance.

 

Yes, that's exactly what happened.
Please.






And I suppose the removal of the pop up headlights was strictly the government's fault as well? LOL






Do we know that for sure?
Is the Gen V truly notably smaller in physical outside dimensions than the current engines?

 

From the Corvette Museum web site:
http://www.corvettemuseum.org/specs/.../chassis.shtml

 

I doubt it is much smaller but that is what I keep hearing.

 

So, in your opinion (or is it actual pure fact?), the 2014 was absolutely, positively, without a doubt going to be a mid engined if not for the bankruptcy/'government loans' situation?
Really?

 

Well, he also couldn't get them to buy into AWD...a system he patented that went on to be adopted by Acura.

Never know...different times now with different competition and different upper management. GM didn't participate in factory racing then either but are into it big time now!

 

A guy I think is one of the best automotive writers in the business, Peter Delorenzo , said a few years back that GM was going to build a mid engined Corvette. He father was at GM for 20 years and I think Peter worked there too. I would love to see the design that they may have used.

 

I don't know where they got that info, but the LS9 does not sit lower.

To lower the engine, without reducing the ground clearance, several items would have to be redesigned. The flywheel would have to be smaller in diameter along with a change in the bellhousing and the starter redesigned. Then the engine cradle would have to be redesigned to provide the necessary clearance to the front of the oil pan. Just dropping the engine cradle would not be sufficient as it would then be closer to the ground. Reducing the thickness of the engine cradle would not do it as it would be to weak. Moving the engine cradle forward, so it's not under the engine is impossible as it is also the lower suspension mounting points as well as the motor mounts locating points.

The oil pan sump would have to be shallower(the LS9 and the LS7 and the LS3 dry sump, all use the same pan) and the oil filter would have to be shorter( all use the same UPF48R filter). So as to retain the ground clearance. Lower the engine and you have to redesign the exhaust as it will also be closer to the ground.

Look at the engine build photo and stop at 37 seconds to see the crankshaft throws. The front of the oil pan can not be reduced as it has to clear the counterthrows. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PlzktN4Ql4

That same NCM link also says "To optimize the weight balance, the battery is located in the rear cargo area, behind the right rear wheel."

The reason the battery is in the trunk is because the oil reservoir is located in the space the battery resides in the base C6. No other place to put the battery in the engine compartment. Of course, there is a weight transfer to the rear of the car with the 35# battery being back there, but putting the battery in the truck is a more viable solution then putting the oil reservoir in the trunk. The NCM write up also makes you believe that the rear battery location is a ZR1 improvement, but as we know, it was done for the 2006 Z06 and is now being done in the GS dry sump and the 427 Convertible. The rear mounted battery is not a change made exclusively to the ZR1 as the NCM article reads.

Here is the link to the NCm on the 2006 Z06 specs.http://www.corvettemuseum.org/specs/2006/index.shtml

"The aerodynamics of the Z06’s exterior were shaped by the experiences of the Corvette racing program, where high-speed stability and cornering capability are paramount. And while the racecars use large rear wings, the Z06’s elevated spoiler provides sufficient downforce to balance the road-worthy front splitter without adversely affecting aerodynamic drag. The Z06’s Cd is .31."


Notice the museum says the Cd is .31. Well, that's also incorrect and all of GM later spec sheets say the Z06 has a Cd of .34.

 

If the GenV engine retains the same 4.4" bore centers(as has been reported), I doubt if it could be made much smaller then the excisting engines.

 

Well, you can go call the Corvette Museum up and tell them how wrong they are. This isn't the first time I've heard this. I'd be interested in knowing how you know better than they do.

 

I think they should go with this one.

 

Something at least in this ballpark and I would be interested

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/lotus/2...-ar116021.html

 

Well, that car is available now if you want to buy it, but GM does not have to make the 'vette similar.

Lotus builds some of the best handling cars ever, and has since Colin Chapman introduced his cars, the Lotus 7 the earliest I had any exposure to. However, they can be some of the noisiest cars on long trips, sometimes 'klutzy' to operate, and generally hard to get in and out of. IMHO, they are 'hard' to live with compared to most sports cars available. Again, they are a hard core driver's car, and fabulous on the track.

 

Not this topic again....

 

Yup.

 

Well....at least its not about "Will Corvette FINALLY get a Turbo V6?"

 

Ya got that right.

 

Jesus the v6 things has been proven ineffective TIME AND TIME AGAIN.








My source at GM confirmed it'll be an inline 6...