Insight to the C7Z06 & ZR1
10-25-2013, 08:00 AM
#41
Drifting
No need to get thicker walls than the 6.2L for boost, so the 5.5L is purely a loss of displacement with no gain in any other metric (except efficiency in NA forms, not the case here).
8k rpms is useless in the 2 valve head. This head doesn't flow enough up top to make any more power up there. Sure, some cams are extreme enough to make power up to 8krpm but none of the engines would be profitable with a warranty, nor would they pass emissions. The other useful bit would be variable lift and overlap, but you can't do either with GM's VVT.
My best guess on this is no and on, no on 5.5L, and no on 8k rpm.
A 7.0L is probable, and it would get me to the dealer.
8k rpms is useless in the 2 valve head. This head doesn't flow enough up top to make any more power up there. Sure, some cams are extreme enough to make power up to 8krpm but none of the engines would be profitable with a warranty, nor would they pass emissions. The other useful bit would be variable lift and overlap, but you can't do either with GM's VVT.
My best guess on this is no and on, no on 5.5L, and no on 8k rpm.
A 7.0L is probable, and it would get me to the dealer.
10-25-2013, 09:24 AM
#42
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
I would veto the backseat idea. Adds more weight plus its not a STANG. Nope, Nope, Nope... 
10-25-2013, 10:10 AM
#43
10-26-2013, 09:16 PM
#44
Safety Car
TVS modifies the torque curve very little, again no benefit to rev higher.
Nascar engines don't get driven 100,000 miles nor do they have to pass emissions with those cam profiles.
Might have changed from '08 but still...: "The life expectancy of a NASCAR engine is one race."
http://americanmachinist.com/features/machining-nascar
See also the C6.R, peak power under 6000 rpm:
http://www.corvetteracing.com/2012-specifications.shtml
Last edited by SBC_and_a_stick; 10-26-2013 at 09:22 PM.
10-26-2013, 10:24 PM
#46
Safety Car
I'll say 670hp. Everything I've seen so far looks like past generation engine output+30hp. Given the formulas remain the same, the 7.0 would make 535hp, and the 6.2 SC would make 610hp in low cost trim and 670hp in hi-cost trim.
10-26-2013, 10:26 PM
#47
Le Mans Master
10-26-2013, 10:38 PM
#48
Safety Car
The torque difference is large however. I don't quite get one of my experiment results, but torque seems to matter in addition to power, somehow...
With a grain of salt, as this was a hack on the Gran Turismo simulator but:
ZR1 engine>Ferrari F1 engine
even
Z06 engine >Ferrari F1 engine
in the same car shell. I even made the F1 powered shell 50lbs lighter.
For reference, the Ferrari F2007 F1 car made 700hp. Somehow even the 505hp Z06 engine powered shell beat the F1 powered shell despite a near 200hp handicap. Torque? I do believe Gran Turismo does their homework in terms of dynamics.
With a grain of salt, as this was a hack on the Gran Turismo simulator but:
ZR1 engine>Ferrari F1 engine
even
Z06 engine >Ferrari F1 engine
in the same car shell. I even made the F1 powered shell 50lbs lighter.
For reference, the Ferrari F2007 F1 car made 700hp. Somehow even the 505hp Z06 engine powered shell beat the F1 powered shell despite a near 200hp handicap. Torque? I do believe Gran Turismo does their homework in terms of dynamics.
10-27-2013, 12:28 AM
#49
Burning Brakes
Member Since: Apr 2013
Posts: 859
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A ZR-1 is going to be difficult to pull off in this economy. Didn't the C6 ZR-1's end up getting sold at deep discounts? I am sure GM is closely watching the Viper debacle and hopefully taking notes. An American made car at that price is hard to market. Just a thought here though. What if they had a double clutch, paddle shifted, NA 427 with special track handling package; full active aero, wide body kit with wider tires, that came in under $100K? Change the rear tail lights back to round/oval whatever just not what is there now and give the ZR-1 special paint options. Playing the HP game is not where the money is at but it is where cost is at. Keep costs down, introduce the American market to an awesome paddle shift 6 or 7 speed and a car than out handles everything? I think that is where the future may lie but is it sacriledge?
I like your dual clutch transmission idea though.
10-27-2013, 12:32 AM
#50
Melting Slicks
Just curious...does anybody here lusting for 600 plus horsepower version,...have actually driven the c7 in current form....if yes,team Ferrari seems to have an opening next year to second Alonso...
10-27-2013, 01:01 AM
#51
11-14-2013, 08:38 AM
#54
Le Mans Master
I expect only 1 hi performance model not two! Similar displacement to the stingray and low pisi roots based FI nothing earth shattering imo. Just hope it puts out around 650-670hp.
11-14-2013, 09:48 AM
#55
how much is spent and how much is lost are two different things. Preliminary testing of systems for the C7 were used on that car. A lot of the R&D cost were going to be spent anyway. With the direct costs that would be spent anyway I would be curious how much extra a ZR1 costs GM not factoring any R&D that was factored for the C7 and it's possible HiPo versions.
11-14-2013, 09:53 AM
#56
Safety Car
Rumormill says they've retained the ZR1 name and that there will be only one performance model for now. That would jive with the original Jalopnik leak showing the ZR1 badge in the side cove. The spy shots all jive with the original Jalopnik render i.e. front splitter, rear cooling inlets on the rockers etc. Only thing is the mules are clearly widebody vs. the Jalopnik render being the standard C7 width.
11-14-2013, 10:23 AM
#57
Your description of motor is highly probable.
Regardless of the motor configuration, it will be interesting if the car is marketed as Z06 "ish" (i.e. street able track car) or as ZR1 "ish" (i.e. heavily optioned King of the Hill trac able street car). Either way, one would think that it will be a wide body/wheels/tires with bigger brakes likely.
11-14-2013, 01:22 PM
#58
Le Mans Master
Skank says we will see a NA and FI model....he is in the know! ( At least I hope he is )
11-14-2013, 03:48 PM
#59
Race Director
I've said this before and I'll say it again.
The new motor will share more with the LT1 did than the LS7 or LS9 shared with the LS3.
You have to remember, when GM built those motors, they had to go use exotic materials which drove costs waaaay up. Custom valves, custom pistons, custom cranks, custom rods, etc. GM is trying to keep costs down with this setup.
Second, in regards to turbo's, you guys have to realize packaging and service is a huge deal with these. On turbo setups, even aftermarket stuff, its expensive, and the packaging is a HUGE pita; not only do they have to squeeze the turbo's in there, but they also have to manage to install 2 air to air intercoolers vs a SC'd setups single air to liquid.
Also, compound all of this with a computer controlled boost controller, people would be buying a $300 mail tune, cranking the boost way up, popping motors, setting everything back to stock, then bitching at GM to fix it under warranty. A SC'd variant is more of a rigidly controlled boost setup. That is, it takes a lot more effort to increase the boost on a SC car.
Further evidence the new car will NOT be turbo, just look at the old pictures of the C7 prototype dash:
That's a PD blower icon, not a turbo.
The current limitation on the new motor under development, which is a SC'd 6.2L, are the rod bolts. They stretch, things break. New setup, expect ~585HP.
The new motor will share more with the LT1 did than the LS7 or LS9 shared with the LS3.
You have to remember, when GM built those motors, they had to go use exotic materials which drove costs waaaay up. Custom valves, custom pistons, custom cranks, custom rods, etc. GM is trying to keep costs down with this setup.
Second, in regards to turbo's, you guys have to realize packaging and service is a huge deal with these. On turbo setups, even aftermarket stuff, its expensive, and the packaging is a HUGE pita; not only do they have to squeeze the turbo's in there, but they also have to manage to install 2 air to air intercoolers vs a SC'd setups single air to liquid.
Also, compound all of this with a computer controlled boost controller, people would be buying a $300 mail tune, cranking the boost way up, popping motors, setting everything back to stock, then bitching at GM to fix it under warranty. A SC'd variant is more of a rigidly controlled boost setup. That is, it takes a lot more effort to increase the boost on a SC car.
Further evidence the new car will NOT be turbo, just look at the old pictures of the C7 prototype dash:
The current limitation on the new motor under development, which is a SC'd 6.2L, are the rod bolts. They stretch, things break. New setup, expect ~585HP.
