Anyone have any estimates on what a 427 version of this would be capable of in a Z06 type model? Could we get to 605hp naturally aspirated or is that in crack smoking land?

I agree as well. For example the Subaru BRZ has a 2 liter thats direct injected and has varible cam timing as well. The current model has 200 horse power with the new model rumored two have 240. Granted it has four valves per cylinder. This new engine does some serious breathing of its own. So considering that a 6.2 liter could easily make 600 horse power all thing being equal. Even though we no that isn't going to happen. They have plenty to work with in the furture.

Perhaps one of the reasons the LT-1 has not seen a substantial boost in power is the current 6 speed automatic. Since it is a carryover and an all new 8 speed is just around the corner perhaps GM didn't want to invest any money in certifying the 6 speed for a lot of extra torque and at the same time didn't want to have to using 2 somewhat different engines ( 1 4 the manual) While I know you can get an automatic ZL-1 it doesn't have the same torque off the line that the new LT-1 does.

I imagine they estimated the numbers very conservatively for a few reasons:

1) They would look like idiots if they overestimated. Now, if final verification comes back at 460-480, they can all pat eachother on the back and say what an awsome design it is.

2) They know they are leaving power on the table in tuning. It is much better to under tune and have a reliable engine with less power than to put it all in there and have them blow up. It's under warranty ya know.

3) They're probably not completely done tweaking the powertrain yet. In one interview, forget which one, they said they still have some tweaking to do on the exhaust. So, see #1.

4) Leaving something in the tune will indeed make later higher output versions look that much better for the extra money.

Then you should also know that the LSA was estimated at 550 HP for the 2009 Cadillac CTS-V and when SAE certified, it was 554 HP. The LSA used in the Camaro is not the same identical LSA as used in the CTS-V. They revised the air intake and the supercharger, eliminated the power steering pump plus some other changes that increased the horsepower from 554 to 580 from when it was used in the CTS-V. GM did not lowball the LSA at 550 horsepower and then it magically came in at 580 when put in the Camaro. There were physical changes made to the engine that increased the horsepower from 554 to 580.

I have been thinking the same thing ever since I read the specs. Just take the stock LS3 and raise the compression ratio from 10.7 to 11.5 and you'll be over 450 horsepower.

They must have a REALLY conservative tune on that thing.

I think the reason the official numbers haven't been released yet is because they still want to sell Z06's. I'm sure they have the numbers, they are just being coy with them.

I do think more than 450 will be made, how much I don't know, but they did raise the power up to the base C6 to C5Z level of power when it came out.

and I think maybe slightly underrated is more what we will see .. Final numbers might be more in the 460 to 465 range tops .. They need to leave themselves room to grow down the line.. Like they did with the C6 as you mention ., interesting this happened in the C5 run , really only with the C5Z 2001 Ls6 making 385hp ands then in 02 they bumped it to 405 hp

I've had the same insurance agency since 1969. I've always had 2 or 3 Corvettes insured with them along with the DD's. I pay $650 a year for full coverage on my C6 08. Also, with 5000 miles max allowance, I pay $350 a year for full coverage on my ZZ4 powered C3 68. Apparently with no collision accidents they consider me to be house broken; i.e I'm not going to sh*t on their floor. I live in metropolitan Los Angeles, and I believe these insurance rates are really cheap.

About muscle cars, I believe I'm correct in saying that a base engine C6 will outrun a late 60's early 70's muscle car at the drag strip. So $650 a year for an 08 base car that is also a "muscle" car is not bad. I haven't told them I put a supercharger on it!!!

Based on GM's track record in the past of estimating conservatively either out of caution or deliberate sandbagging I won't be surprised in the slightest if actual numbers are a little higher.

Hi,
By artificially restricted...do you mean chevy would "detune" rather than maximize the HP it could get , stock?
I do wonder how turn key canned tuners are able to "find" 20 hp and 25 lbs torque with no mods...did chevy hold back maximizing their own brand new engine?

Gotta love it when a thread that's older than a year is resurrected from the dead

That is only 5 HP. Just adding the exhaust already brings the HP up to 460.

Yep, happens too much.

Hi,

When Chevy rates the Corvete C7 HP they are not doing to the rear wheels, correct? So when you dyno the car you get the lower than advertised number because to the rear wheels...how do you then convert that number to tell if numbers are underrated to Chevy's HP numbers? Do you add a 10% or 15% for driveline loss, to get back to the Chevy HP figure? Just curious...

A Diablo tuner post shows a dyno chart of their tuned results on A6 C7 that reads 432 HP made.

If you assume a 15% driveline loss for an auto trans, is it fair to say the engine after their tune is 496 HP (to the flywheel) vs. the advertised 455 HP Chevy advertised engine figure?

BTW, I am told everyone only cares about the HP to the rear wheels...so why do companies publish only HP numbers to the flywheel? (Besides the fact they are higher numbers?)

thanks!

Diablo dyno numbers are 412 RWHP stock and 432 RWHP after tuning. If the stock engine puts out an advertised 455 BHP the 412 RWHP translates to about 9.4% parasitic driveline drag. So that would be about 472 BHP or so for the new numbers. The parasitic drag on manual tranny cars will be even less.