Ford John

Cadillac ATS:
naturally aspirated 3.6-liter V6 gasoline
engine that produces 321 horsepower
Direct Injection .... all same engine technology as LT1 C7

Thus
321 (hp)/3.6 (liters)
89.16 hp/liter

Corvette C7 LT1
450 hp/6.2 Liter
72.58 hp/Liter

sooo
6.2L x 89.16 hp= 552.8 HP May this be future???
without the supercharger???

dbs1vette

Maybe tuned to the extreme, as I think it's certainly capable of it, but doubtful for this first go around. 465-485 on 91. 490-525 on E85.

Monkey D. Luffy

I think 552 hp is wishful thinking. that would be a 100 more than what they are estimating now.

RC000E

If only engines were so simple....lol.

1990 Honda CRX....1.6 Liter 160hp...100hp/liter
2000 Honda S2000...2.0 liter...240hp...120hp/liter

Variable Valve lift and good technology....

GM finally got with the program, but 90hp/liter in an N/A V8 on pump gas is tough. Chamber design, reciprocating weight, friction...all makes a V8 a tough motor on pump gas, from an OEM to make that kind of hp/liter..

JoesC5

Yep, if a NA Honda can get 120HP/L why can't GM engineers get off their asses and give us a 744HP LT1 engine. (120 X 6.2).

Batman 357

550 HP Z06 sounds do able......

SCM_Crash

It definitely doesn't work like that.

And I think 485HP on 91 isn't happening at all. Maybe once someone breaks the ECM and can tune the crap out of the LT1, but definitely not stock. I'm skeptical of the LT1 making 490 on E85 as well. I definitely WANT it to make that kind of power on E85, though.

Ford John

89.16 Hp per Liter is what the production ATS has now. What if the LT1 equals the same specific output.

RC000E

I understand what you're saying entirely, I'm just telling you, as a professional engine/car builder of 15 years...it doesn't work like that.

The 3.6 liter is a DOHC engine, which immediately makes it an apples to oranges comparison. DOHC generally means pentroof chambers and 4 valves/cyl, which is the case for the 3.6. From a general, mass production perspective, this is a more efficient platform. I say that in VERY general terms though...I'm not saying that's a rule.

Direct injection is a game changer in many ways. You can do things with DI that people can't imagine when it comes to V8's. You have to throw a lot of your thinking out the window, in terms of what the engine is capable of. DI leads to combustion stability, on pump octane, that by any other fueling method, is simply not possible from a mass production perspective.

I'm not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE that it could do that hp/liter. In fact it IS possible...I guarantee...but is it possible to do it on a mass production, assembly line scale, with a warranty, in all the temperatures and elevations the car will be sold, on 91 octane cali gas, etc....probably not.

On the E85 front, I was one of the first people tuning ethanol when it came to market at the pump. I've had forced induction 4 cylinders, street driven, making in excess of 500whp on ethanol without even trying. I can tell you, with variable cam timing/ignition timing, and DI, coupled with this compression...E85 can do things that people don't think are possible. I wouldn't make any assumption about these motors until you see the numbers from outside/tested sources.

South40

GM already makes the 6.2 putting out 480 hp. You can buy it right now as an aftermarket engine. So, that isn't a stretch. Expect that to be offered by 2016 with the lates fuel management stuff. They may decide to bring that out when they bring out the 5.5 version making 430 or so. Add a suopercharged 6.2 to the line-up and get the weight down uder 3200 over time and the C7 could be both a bomber and an econocar! I think GM will try to get the 5.5/430 version to make 30 mph on the highway. That'd be a hoot! Plus, if they feel they must, they could also redo the 7.0 with the latest in fuel management technology AND a driver controlled turbo and have a machine that could be both economical and a Eurocar killer at the same time. A 700hp car that could make 28 mpg on the highway? Hope GM stays healthy enough to keep the dream alive.

JoesC5

GM also makes 454 ci engine (LSx) with 620 HP with a carburetor. Ever wonder why it isn't in a Corvette? It also will drop right in. Maybe the EPA has something to do with it, you think?

RC000E

What many people don't consider is, when you compare crate to production, it isn't a proper comparison.

Those who are shopping the crate market, want max performance and are not as hamstrung by federal regulations. In the crate market, all you're selling...is the crate motor.

When you're talking production car equipment, you need to balance reliability, current competitive market as well as leave room for mid year power increases, etc. If you can dial back the motor 10%, you could gain a very calculable amount of reliability. Run that engine for 2 years before pumping up hp 6%, and you may have decreased risk by a certain margin. Here, the engine is only part of the product, versus the whole product.

Apple, GM, Motorola, etc...all hold back. You don't want to give it all you can, because you can milk what you've got for profit....then trickle it out to keep buyers comin.

sampaschal

Higher displacement engines with a single cam/two-valve configurations can never match the horsepower output when compared with smaller displacement multi-cammed/multi-valved engines. Look at motorcycle engines that develop more than two hundred horsepower with just over a liter of displacement.....their technology have alway be in the forefront of engine design. It is unfortunate that GM still holds on to old technology that has long been looked upon as flawed by the rest of the engineering world. The Corvette should have adopted a DOHC power plant mounted behind the passenger compartment, not to copy the rest of the high performance world, but to advance an American designed sports car that is truly on par with anything anywhere. The price would surely be more than $60,000....unfortunatley.

SCM_Crash

This response fails. I'm on my phone right now so I'm not going to explain how absolutely incorrect it is, but is.

racebum

gm would need to use cylinder heads that flow per cc like a honda AND a dohc design for true variable valve timing and twin lobe cams. one of the biggest reasons honda was able to get that kind of hp per cubic inch was with a high redline, excellent heads and a twin lobe profile that married a street cam and race cam on one stick that crossed over in most cases between 5000 and 6000rpm

if you made an 8000rpm v8 that used that kind of cylinder head it would absolutely be possible

and it would absolutely be expensive

the other lesser discussed topic is what happens to a honda in a track environment. they are well designed and balanced and do hold together. BUT with those kinds of piston speeds they eat rings like no other.

2K3Z06

GM likes to dole out the horsepower, slowly. A 475HP base C7 would be awesome.

JoesC5

Sometimes is a little hard to read sarcasm in my posts.

dbs1vette

This LT1 with a hot factory tune IMO is capable of 500hp. The 1st Z version will be north off 550 by 70-80hp. The big dog FI version somewhere between 700-800 wild ponies me thinks.

You have to look at what GM sees as the competition. Direct competition with the Z06 is the new viper with 640hp. I believe that is the mark that GM sees as the Z06 competition so it will need lighter weight,better handling and similar hp numbers to better it.

I think in 2-3 yrs GM will release their most powerful version designed to take on virtually all comers. It is going to need to be packing something close to 800hp to do that and I think the general is gunning for that in some type of FI variant.

johnglenntwo

The little guys are actually more high TECH then our new big boy (DOHC & 7200RPM vs pushrod & 6600RPM), go figure!

C7 Heaven

Another reason to wait a year or 2.