He are a few thoughts about the future of C7.

At the big annual Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) meeting in April 2014, GM will be presenting a paper on their new eight-speed automatic transmissions. Such a paper traditionally coincides with the item entering production. ( http://www.sae.org/servlets/techSess...GROUP_CD=TSESS )

If you want to read the technical paper describing the Gen V, small-block, here's where to buy it: ( http://papers.sae.org/2013-01-1732/). Papers 2002-01-2658 and 2004-01-0033 and -0034 are also probably directly relevant. Also, see US patent 6651611 and, maybe, 6745745.

GM has several patents on camshafts which are commonly called cam-in-cam designs. The patent numbers are

8534252
8443499
7966983
7866293
7849829
7789054

You can quickly look at them with these two sites:

https://www.google.com/search?num=10....0.rnMbMeVqQb8

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/res...it=&patents=on

Next, engines. An improvement to the current small-block would be an added intake valve. This has been a topic of discussion since at least 2001 when GM displayed the XV8: ( https://www.google.com/search?num=10...610&q=xv8%20GM ). With cam-in-cam designs, a second camshaft is not needed. That leaves us with the single-cam, 3V engine. For patents regarding this family of engines, see:

6505589
6505591
6962134 - Oddball design
7523729
7854215

A long while back, it looked like it was just over the horizon ( http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...fWKDeeVJ86Rcag ). One other thing is that Fred Rozario is a key player in this engine. Patent 8234788 has him discussing titanium valves.

If you want to see the likely combustion chamber design of the 3V engine, here's what it looked like for the twin-can, 3V engine: patent 6668546.

Here's some of Chrysler's 3V work: 6895925 & 7228833. Ford had a 3V design (6267096) but appears to have moved to a new design (7861680).

Remember, mileage standards get tougher for MY2016. That means that weight must come down and engine thermal efficiency must go up. C7 is way too heavy as are most cars. It appears GM has made significant investment in magnesium technology but this hasn't hit the streets yet. The idea of polycarbonate windows is pretty quiet these days. Given a fixed selling price for C7, it looks like the bank went empty after an aluminum frame and DI engine were included. The Z06 and ZR1 selling prices will allow for other areas to get addressed which weren't in the base model. Look for those changes made to the Z06 and ZR1 to eventually trickle down to the base model. An example would be the cam-in-cam camshaft. Also, introducing the 3V engine in the ZR1 would set the stage for that engine to become standard in a few years. With the advent of the 3V engine, efficiency dictates that engine displacement be reduced.

 

Thanks, and good to see you still posting here RK. Informative as always.

May have been marketing BS, but I was told by the GM VLE I spoke with that the new 8-speed auto will be "revolutionary" in that it will blur the line between auto and DCT from a performance perspective to the point that the DCT and attendant expense will become obsolete. We'll see.

 

So, maybe the 8 speed automatic for C7 2015 model year...I hope.

 

I've seen some mention on web pages in the past about a GM DCT with a torque converter on the front end. I wonder if that counts for a revolutionary tranny

 

Thanks for the info. Would be nice if the '15 Stingray had an 8 speed auto.

 

What they are basically saying is that the shift logic in manual mode has gotten so fast that it can mimic a DCT at a fraction of the price. Autos, or at least GM ones have made HUGE strides in the last 2-3 years. I drove an ATS with the autobox and the shifts were lightning-quick, with full rev matching. I have also driven a Boxster Spyder S with the PDK and the two trannies are damn close. Not quite DCT, but damn close. Based on my observations with tha car, I am inclined to believe GM's hype on the new tranny.

There may be something else in the works as you describe for the high-powered cars. We'll see.

 

Here's a patent application that is very promising (to me, at least). It's about special titanium alloys called gamma titanium aluminides.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20130121869.pdf

Here are two brief discussions of the material. The idea here is to get some weight out of the connecting rods and valvetrain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium_aluminide
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...MumTJ0jN17tn9Q

 

v. interesting. I was under the impression that for a lot of reasons there'd be only one hi perf model. so maybe everything gets put in one car. and then possibly into future stingrays.

 

Thank you for taking the time to research this and post this information. Very interesting.

 

+1 Excellent read..

 

C7 arrives at a time of great change. Car and truck fleets will need to get substantially better mileage very soon (MY2016).

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...cafe-standards

You can see that GM's 2008 trucks needed some significant changes by 2016. That's why the Gen V small-block is DI. That's why an eight-speed automatic is needed. This is only peripherally related to Corvette. Not meeting the mileage requirements will have serious financial consequences. The new engines and transmissions will increase the amount of chemical energy in the fuel that makes it to the pavement. By 2025, when the fuel requirements get even more stringent, engines and transmissions will need to get more efficient. That's when they start rolling out the nine- and ten-speed transmissions. Then, there is the issue of how the energy is used. Since aerodynamics in cars and small trucks doesn't have many technological surprises, that leave us with vehicle mass.

The car makers are caught between a rock and hard place. The customer wants a low price and new models with ever increasing features, performance and safety. The law tells them that they must get extremely good mileage and emit negligible pollutants. The only path to surviving this situation is the prodigous application of new techologies.

In the near future, look for iron brake rotors to get a makeover for weight reduction purposes. See these GM patents and patent applications;

8210232
8408369
20120067537
20120312647
20130048447
20130048448
20130112514

While I am not an expert on this matter, aluminum metal-matrix composites look pretty good. I wonder what material is used on the C6 ZR1 rotors. Whatever it is, it is insanely expensive. New technical solutions are needed that reduce weight and are much less expensive.

http://www.mc21inc.com/automotive.html
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...b02Nd53UcNEE4Q
http://www.relinc.net/adv-materials/...rix-composite/

For magnesium, there are cast items and sheet items. The sheet ones are more interesting to me. Here's a GM patent, 8454078, on using magnesium for door panels. For aluminum and magesium stampings, see 7260972, 7661282 and 7766414. For cast magnesium alloys, look at 8361251 and 20110286880.

Here's another GM patent application on titanium, 20100040500. Titanium is getting cheaper and titanium MMCs are only partially titanium. Here is a video on how low-cost titanium powder is being produced ( ). Here's the producer ( http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cristal.com%2FCorporate%2520Fact%2520Sheet%2FCristal%2520Metals%2520Ottawa%2520Fact%2520Sheet.pdf&ei=r5eeUviANuWKjALKg4DIBQ&usg=AFQjCNESRgAgV8sWlYf25KEI0QdSvnivxw&sig2=sq5oILoFHu3WYjelyd1alA )

This one is bizarre to me. It is an engine which is both OHV and OHC: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20120186544.pdf

 

Vehicle mass has to come down. Period.

1980 Datsun Pickup? 39 city, 48 hwy.
1981 Mercury Lynx? 28 city, 44 hwy.

This is with terribly inefficient engines and horrible drag coefficients.

We need to focus on getting weight down and not trying to make our cars into cocoon-like tanks that can absorb any and all damage. Let's enforce better driver education in this country and stop letting any mouth-breather with a pulse get a license and lower the number of accidents.

 

Where did you get those numbers??? I just did a quick google search and came up with only 2/3rds of that.

 

Its here, the '81 Lynx! http://hatchheaven.com/archives/2081 Yep folks, its all over. We need to go back to 1981 to solve our resourses problem. Burn the SAE papers from 2013 and everybody grab a history book!

 

Well, the auto manufacturers have to follow the safety regulations. So if the laws are somehow made more lenient, then the weight-adding safety measures can be taken off, thus lightening the car. No way that'll happen. There'd be lawsuits all over, blaming the car makers for not arming the cars with as much safety measures as possible. As much as you want to go back to the 80s, ain't gonna happen.

 

post of the decade!

 

Base C7 weighs 90 pounds more than the base C6. Of that increase, I believe that less than 20% was due to weight added to meet additional safety regulations.

 

Managing engine/drivetrain internal friction seems to me as an area of substantial gain left sitting on the table. I would think that the addition of more weight and yet more bearing surfaces would be counter-productive. Given the relatively poor efficiency of our current technology I would guess that we can probably kiss goodbye to long stroke/large bore low rpm engines as we have today. Radically oversquare turbo charged and smaller displacement engines with ancillary energy recovery devices seem to be just over the horizon.
I'll be looking for new lubrication technologies and rotating mass surface treatments to help with the internal friction issues as well.

My 2 cents.

 

Thanks for the informative post....exciting times are ahead.

 

OP, try using carriage return once and awhile. When my IPad auto-sizes the chrome window, due to your very long lines, the print size is so small I need a magnifying glass.