GrandSport 2017

With the advancement in low tension ring packs and the ability to keep cylindricity to ridiculously tight tolerances with GM's new honing process, the parasitic losses are way down, ring seal is way up, oil contamination and consumption is way down. So larger engines like the LT1 have less parasitic rotational drag than 4 cylinder engines of 10-15 years ago.
Its common to see .9mm top compression rings .8mm oil scraper rings and 1.2mm oil control rings these days. These ring packs have very low pull thru numbers.
The oil pumps are now variable displacement to also reduce parasitic losses and the valves are lighter to allow lower spring pressures. Of course roller lifters.

The hp required to move a C7 at 45 mph on level ground is the same regardless of the engine used. Parasitic losses with cylinder deactivation is a small percent of power required to move the car at 45mph. So when comparing the LT1 to a 2L turbo engine there both going to use about the same amount of fuel to move the car at 45 mph.
The same goes for a 10% up hill grade or a 20%. The car requires what it requires to get it up the hill regardless of the engine in the car.

People think the 4cyl truck would get better gas mileage and produce less emissions and be "greener" and perception in marketing is everything.
The 4 cylinder engine working harder all its life for a given power output would certainly have more wear and a shorter life expectancy in the real world. Granted that most people with trucks rarely need half the hp they have on demand with either engine. But as Americans we like our HP and it has nothing to do with "need" for most people.

JerryU

Heck I’ll just replace one of those superchargers with a 671 like “TV Tommy Ivo!” That was before he went to 4 engines.

I’ll actually be happy with the Vette version of the 550 hp engine they are building in BG they will probably call the BlackHawk so the fired Pres of Caddilac is not mad! Oh forgot they are building the Caddy front engine Blackwing in BG because there was no room 9n the Caddy plants! It’s not like they wanted to machine and assemble engines as Ferrari does in their manufacturing/assembly plant!

But will Drive my Grand Sport until they release the higher hp “Z06” version that has wider tires and bigger brakes than the base model we saw in Germany. I would opt for the lower 550 hp, Grand Sport version with the wider tires and larger brakes. In fact it will problem have the Andy Piligim “leaked” FWD electric KERS. No problem springing for that $100,000+ price tag.

Warp Factor

It's not that there wasn't room in Caddy plants. Bowling Green is currently where all the "hand-assembled" engines have been shifted. Economies of having methods, techniques, and scale, all in the same place.

Yes, a variant of the Blackwing engine is scheduled to go into the C8 at some point.

JerryU

No it’s people thinking they are smarter than the engineers who have real data in real world driving conditions not just the EPA drive cycle.

Look at the way you have to drive a C7 M7 to get the EPA published mileage! It’s in the Owner’s Manual under when to shift for best mpg. Your shifting out of 1st to 4th at 17 mph because “skip shift” comes in at the low rpm they suggest. Then your shifting to 5th at 25 mph, similar through 7th- at very low rpm, I recall one was ~900 rpm. Yep might be OK for an EPA required drive cycle but I would never lug the engine or think of driving like that! Sure at very low rpm friction is lower.

A GM truck exec said real world 2.7 Liter data is better than published EPA #’s. Another said they tuned for higher performance and torque. Fact is you can tune for anything. With dual cams you can independenlty alter intake and exhaust valve timing. That gives a great deal of flexibility in tune. So much so it’s not allowed in an IMSA engine. In fact those that think GM can just get ~50 more hp from the LT1 since they got more than that for the crate engine version might recall they had to eliminate even the limited amount they have in the C7 version or with the higher lift and altered duration cam timing, valves would hit pistons.

Yep, like the higher hp LT1 crate motor, when folks who wanted the “extra hp” looked at the torque it was not significantly more. Sure in good hot rod fashion we often increase hp at high rpm giving up low rpm torque. Ever driven a car like that on the street or around the pits- no fun!

Yep those engineers that developed an tested those 2 Liter engines knew what they were doing. Don’t get me wrong, I think Chevy engineers have done a remarkable job with the small block ENGINE. From the one I had in my ‘56 through the tough times in the early 1970’s when all they could get and meet EPA requirements was max ~200 hp to what I have had in my 5 Vettes and today’s LT1.

But just like Porsche has built a great handling car with one arm tied behind their back with the engine in the wrong place- the time has come to change!

David Robert

The current LT motor has nothing in common with a 1955 small block.

It also not a truck engine as the torque profile of a truck engine is completely different from the Corvette LT engine.

But if if someone wants a more complex dohc engine, that costs more, weights more, has a higher center of gravity, will be less reliable, more susceptible to heat soak, has turbo lag and more expensive to maintain/repair/modify so they can save a few cents at the pump, well... they are special, more power to them.

Warp Factor

So you have some fantasy about being smarter than the engineers at Ford, GM, and Chrysler?
I'd toss junk like that out the window in a heartbeat.
Often, observers do a lot better, than those who are highly invested in their politics.

/QUOTE]

JerryU

4GM has been so successful with the small block Chevy because of the Tonawanda engine plant! My ‘56 had the same bore spacing as every small block, including the LT1! The ability of GM to achieve machining tolerances matching race engine shops, superior balancing etc comes from spending many hundreds of millions in that facility. Sure it’s evolved but some of the inherent advantages still exist.

I heard a rumor the plant will be machining double overhead cam, 4 valve/cylinder engines in the future!
Understand there is a tombstone ready as they will burry the last “small block pushrod engine” they make as a tribute.

At 76 I probably appreciate the “small block” more than most on the forum. But like I evolved from a “slip stick” to the first PC that replaced my Ti-59 programmable calculator to computers, iPad and iPhone- ready to progress! Yep these modern devices are more complex than my slip-stick (which if I look through boxes shipped though many moves I’ll find stilll works fine) but they are better.

Could not justify all this time on the Forum if I wasn’t communicating with customers and potential customers (not car related) using these more modern devices in my part time Internet business that pays for my car toys!

jvp

GM has been so successful with the SBC not because of the plant it's (currently...) being built at. It's been so successful with the SBC because of:

1. The engine's ability to power anything: cars, trucks, boats, airplanes, generators, chainsaws(...I'm not kidding), etc.
2. The engine's ability to change with the times: Today's fifth gen SBC shares little in common with the first gen from the 50s other than the bore center spacing.
3. The engine's ability to fit into places that physically larger engines just can't.
4. The engine's ability to produce prodigious amounts of torque given its diminutive size.
5. The engine's ability to repeatedly meet if not exceed CAFE standards.
6. (Thus far) the engine's ability to meet emissions standards.

It's the sixth bullet point that might be the SBC's death knell. I can't emphasize MIGHT enough.

JerryU

Nope I don’t think I’m smarter to the Chevy, Ford, Volvo etc etc engineers (except perhaps re welding!)

(In fact now that I think about it have a number of Tier 1 suppliers using my Argon saving patented products, like Tenneco. Also Harley just placed another order and now has ~100 arc welding robots cutting Argon waste. Not a lot of arc welding done in car assembly plants but probably could cut the Argon waste/cost in a Bowling Green by ~40%, looking at the weld lengths etc! )

No it’s not me that thinks I’m smarter re engine engineers, the computer tools available and the extensive amount of testing that is done. Far from it.

vndkshn

Keep in mind, Chevy didn't always use that plant. I'm reminded of the 70s and early 80s v8s that came from a plant in Mexico, and the camshafts were not of the same caliber as the US cams and as a result, I replaced many a camshaft in a mid to late 70s and early 80s Corvettes.

BEAR-AvHistory

Large percentage of the crate engines also came from the Mexico plant.

dcbingaman

"Thought this was an interesting article showing the number of companies moving to 2.0 Liter double overhead cam, turbo engines because they “think” they get better fuel economy!

“This mad rush from larger-displacement V6s to smaller, turbocharged four-cylinders was first fueled by the automakers' need to improve fuel economy to meet customer demand as well as more stringent government regulations. Fewer cylinders mean fewer parts, which means less internal friction. This makes the engine more efficient, so it burns less fuel.

The automakers we spoke with say that the downsizing of engines will continue, so for the near future at least the 2.0-liter turbo is here to stay.

New Models Available with a 2.0 liter Turbo"

Let me give you another advantage - even is the gas mileage argument is weak at best. An I-4 Turbo of 2L is simpler to build, lighter weight and has half the parts of a DOHC V-6 or V-8. If GM can simply break even on gas mileage with the Silverado 2.7L I-4 Turbo, then it still comes out ahead on parts count and touch labor. As your list illustrates, like it or not, 90% of the IC engines in the world going forward are turbo I-4's of 2.5L or less displacement. I would expect that this will be the last generation of IC engines as EV's eventually take over.

Warp Factor

And a little further down the road, IC engines will likely make a resurgence, when too many plug their EV's into the grid, and we start having brownouts and blackouts. The gasoline infrastructure is already in place. The increased electrical capacity isn't anywhere close.

JerryU

^^
I’m all for folks getting EV’s if:

1. The up to $7500 Federal subsidy for buying one is gone.
2. They pay ~$300/year road and bridge tax that we gas buyers pay.
3. Buy a generator so we all don’t get hit with huge costs of increasing the utility adding generating capacity when all that solar power is not available when it rains or wind doesn’t blow. Makes no difference if that is infrequent or only lasts for a few nights, as you say it’s capacity “someone must add” either as individuals or the electrical utilities or it’s a blackout for all! Even if the dream that solar and wind can ever fullfil the need could happen!

NBVette4U

They base Stingray will use a LT2 with DI and VVT

JerryU

My 502/502 crate motor used CNC ported heads and port match intake manifold produced by Edelbrock. The short block with forged crank, and pistons was assembled by Mercury Marine as they used it for boats. Not sure where the block was produced.

Mikec7z

Help me understand why manufacturers dont just go with the highest technology and then charge people for it.

Just throwing a wild idea out, and then tell me why it would not work...

lets say GM put a smaller version of this engine in their flagship car. Lets say the engine cost every bit of 70 grand with mass production.

Okay, so you have a fully dressed z06 car with all the brakes and rear ends to hold as much power as possible, and then you throw something like this in the car, and sell it as a limited edition for 250 grand.

you know how many ferrari and lambo and mclaren owners would say... "alright, i want the 1500hp vette please."

I say 1500hp because it would come with smaller turbos or maybe a massive blower... but its capable of producing over 4000hp if a customer wanted to go crazy with it with different power adders, fuel systems, and transmissions later.

Why couldn't GM do that and put themselves in first place and make everyone's jaws drop?

Then take that technology and what you learn from it, and take it to the next car, and the next car, but in smaller more efficient packages?

And lets say you are really not a fan of OHV, and lets say GM is not either, still, a fully aluminum billet block and engine in a production car, would drop jaws, and everyone would have to have one who has big money. Instead of 1000 Porsche 918's or 500 ford GT's, GM makes about 500 of these cars with the special motors in them and charges 250 grand a pop, and they would sell for over sticker. Announce up front how many are going to be made, number them, and let people fight over the allocations (what they should have done with the zr1)

It kind of bothers me GM does not have the ***** to do something profound like this.

It would change the perception of "corvette" and even people with base vettes would be approached in the parking lot by people saying "wow, i cant believe what GM did with that new flagship vette, how do you like yours?"

I just dont see why they hover in second and third place in weird ways, when they could just destroy everyone and make headlines... it would not be hype, it would be real power, and cars breaking into the 8's in the quarter mile, before dodge does with their "angel", let alone anyone else.

Car manufacturers in the USA used to want to release the most advanced technology and show it off, maybe de-tune it for emissions, but still brag what it could do if a person wanted to turn it into a race car.

JerryU

^^^
That is not GM’s business model! They build the Corvette as a sports car many folks can afford which should not bother you.

Folks who would pay $250,000 for such a car (which would be very cheap as the few who are around charge several million) are not coming to a Chevy Dealer to buy one!

Not the best analogy but for folks who don’t think about marketing consider why Walmart sells Timex watches but not Rolex. And Rolex dealers don’t sell a Timex. Selling $250,000 cars requires an image and a matching dealer sales and service network. Self check out at Walmart won’t do it!

At 1500 hp you’lre talking about a boutique shop who builds one of a kind cars with the inherent lack of reliability all the parts that go with a 1500 hp engine, I.e. transmission, rear end, chassis etc. Even if GM could build such an engine, who will build the transmioon etc. Not folks like Tremic or ZF who built them now for Chevy, Porsche, Ferrari etc. Yep there are some race transmissions that can handle that power level for a race distance or two, but not 50,000 or 100,000 miles.

GM has enough issues with keeping up with a rapidly changing Car World where folks don’t want the sedans that had been their big sellers. They are closing plants and trying to see how they will compete in their very large market in China where it’s rapidly changing (or appears to be) to EVs. They have so many changes needed to deal with, your idea would be the furthest thing from your mind!

Be easier if you started a company and bought a 1500 hp engine from the many shops that build them, get a race prepared Powerglide that could handle the power and start your own boutique car company. Set up in a place the folks who can afford it would be happy to fly to and vacation at the same time- like Vegas!

Mikec7z

well, i guess now we are back to that jesko transmission idea, but thats another thread. It just bothers me that none of the big 3 find it appealing to go for the jugular and have the baddest car on the planet once again. Its like they have surrendered to the idea that the exotics will always be better cars, but will cost more.

Theres no reason why GM couldnt have the best car in a lot of ways, and still cost less, and get well over sticker for it. GM could be exotic if they wanted to. Ford is with the GT and its body. GM's body is not that exotic, its commonplace by now amongst the other super cars and hypercars... so they should be shooting for big power.

If im a millionaire, and im a guy who likes speed, if GM announced a 1500hp vette, im in, The end. Thats a torphy car that i can be more proud to drive than a 918 or a la ferrari... but GM wont do it, they come in second on purpse... 1100hp has been done, its old news, but thats a big deal for the vette. Its a lame mindset.

If the govt wants to make big power cars illegal, good, MAKE THE GOVT MAKE THEM ALL ILLEGAL THEN... but make sure you are in first place before they do.

Meanwhile, if im an engineer, i take GM seriously as a place I want to work. Im throwing my new ideas at GM instead of ferrari or lambo mclaren, etc.

USA has no where for a patriotic engineer to land... he has to cross the pond to be in the big leagues, or he has to pull a Shelby/Lingenfelter/Hennessey/Callaway and produce his own version of an existing car, because he knows the big 3 have no interest.

Why cant GM have the mindset do that on their own accord?

Ben franklin would be pissed

The amount of money GM would make off shirts and hats and royalties would be crazy. Instead we have "eh, yeah, its a vette, ill buy a vette shirt if i have one maybe, but its not a car i go out and buy a shirt because i dream of owning one like i do a ferrari or koenigsegg or even a viper when they first came out (trophy car, first place in power at the time compared to ferrari and lambos, think about it)"

And if lemans and all the other racing circuits dont want to let you use your real engines and make you downsize, so be it, start your own event... invite other supercars in their full form to come and compete in a real set of competitions. I would much rather watch that than indy car or nascar or forumula 1.

No one has the gumption to take control of the situation and do something amazing. People are lame

JD_AMG

You live in a sad sad narrow little world, can't answer any questions and can't back up a single thing you say...
Here is a table of displacement based taxes you have to pay in China (the fastest growing auto market right now that everyone is scrambling to be a part of).
You will notice its no coincidence that many manufacturers are basing their engines displacements right off of this in order to sell in china and mass produce enough to be profitable.