JoesC5

Then what was the purpose of your post? Every reader knows what you were trying to insinuate.

Foosh

No purpose other than to pass on info as to where the assertion about the Blackwing came from, and that he was no longer in a position to try to enforce his declaration. It may mean something, it may mean nothing. For all I know, the new Caddy Prez agrees with him. Moreover, a Division head can always be overruled by corporate higher ups.

A person who believes they know exactly what someone else is insinuating is called stupid, as was your post responding to my simple sentence, which was 100% accurate.

Look you don't like me, and I don't like you. I typically don't bother commenting on your posts unless I happen to agree with you, which does happen from time to time, and I typically "thank" you when you've made what I consider to be a good point. However, arguing with you is like debating a brick wall . . . not worth it.

JerryU

I have not ignored it. Heck I can put KERS on my Street Rod with it’s 502 BB. Would work with that if I put an 871 blower on that engine as well!

However despite those who wish to think all small, tiny cid engines are because folks in Europe just like to hear the buzz and use those engines just for fun, the optimum combo for a sports car is a small efficient higher tech engine with KERS to accelerate before turning on the ICE.

Know some are big pushrod engines forever BUT with that attitude we’ll have EVs very soon. Perhaps some young folks (anyone under 40 is young to me) don’t care as one said rather have an EV that a complicated engine!

Things can be done to improve a ICE efficency. Turbo’s use otherwise wasted exhaust energy (~30% of the energy in the gas we use in our C7’s goes out the exhaust.) I even showed in WWII toward the end of the war some airplane engines used compound Turbo’s after the one that provided boost. These extra turbos powered the crank directly and added 500 hp at takeoff and 250 hp when cruising. Yep gaining efficency isn’t cheap and adds complication.

Smaller cid means less cylinder and cylinder head area exposed to the very hot combustion and exhaust where another ~30% of the energy in gasoline is wasted, into the coolant and then air.

11 to 15% is wasted idling, which some on the Forum want a switch to defeat or they won’t buy the car.

Only ~12% of the energy in gasoline gets to power the car as the other ~6% that gets to the rear wheels is wasted braking.

These are not my numbers, that is the latest EPA data (of course an average.)

Some won’t like my “Use Stop/Start and KERS” and not start the ICE engine until at cruising speed for normal driving. They will be the first to cry when the alternative EVs are the choice!

I prefer doing what we can so when I put to the floor (frequently) I get all those horses pushing me forward! But when cruising waste less gas and keep CO2 emissions low.

PS: Know I’m a PIA to some Forum members but I post for the silent majority who mostly visit these Threads and seldom or ever post. One of old product manages was on the Corvette Forum when we both had C6 Vettes but only looked, never even joined. He has a C7 now and have lost contact-but bet he still is not a member! Hi Bob!

Mark045

I’m just saying I hear so much about the C8 ( when initially released) will have 500HP. and only 1 available engine. I’m hoping it has “ atleast “ 550HP

Warp Factor

Why, when some of these big pushrod engines get better fuel economy than your smaller "modern" engines? You like to talk lots of entry-level theory, but have a lot more 'splainin' to do!

Why does the Corvette with that big old-fashioned LT5 pushrod engine make more power, and get better fuel economy than the smaller overhead-cam turbo Ford GT?

sstonebreaker

Europeans originally went with DOHC because the taxes over there favored smaller displacement engines. It used to be that a big 5.7 liter V8 would pay over €2,000 per year while a little 1.8 liter volkswagen might only pay €150. Now the taxes are still based on engine size but also take into account CO2 emissions and fuel economy, so big displacement pushrod engines with all the modern functionality (displacement on demand, etc.) aren't penalized so much. However, the Europeans are already used to DOHC, so they don't see a reason to switch over to smaller, lighter but bigger displacement OHV engines.

JerryU

Without repeating details of 4 points I have already posted: 1) less friction, 2) less area exposed to combustion/exhaust temps, 3) turbo’s using some wasted exhaust energy 4) independently variable intake and exhaust cam timing; this is another key point re EPA number comparisons some like to make.

Check the C7, M7 shift points the owner’s manual says to use for best mileage. The shift from 1st to 4th is 17 mph so “skip shift” is forced. 2nd and 3rd are not used. The shift to 5th is to be made at 25 mph. The shifts to 6th and 7th at similar low speeds/rpm. As I recall one is at ~900 rpm. Yep you can get max mpg in the EPA test using lots of tricks. Any engine can be tuned for max mpg or max hp. So these comparisons some make using old and new EPA data (not you) are not relivent. Sure at very low rpm’s the higher friction of a large cid is low-if anyone drives like that! That is why I sited ~100 engines switching to 2 Liter 4 cylinders in another Thread.

In fact the Alfa I was mentioning as an example is now surpassed by the Volvo double overhead cam, turbo+ supercharger with an electric hybrid driving the none ICE powered wheels; 415 total hp with 494 ft-lbs on torque. That is the ideal combo, IMO and the Swedes took over from the Italians with that offering you can buy now!

Now for my C8 be happy with a ~500 hp version of the Blackwing and ~150 hp short duration hybrid powering the front wheels that they allowed Andy Pigrim to leak.

That option will not doubt cost >$100,000, which is no problem as long as it has wider tires than those animic 305 section width tires on the base model seen in Germany and bigger brakes!

Warp Factor

LOL, that is no explanation whatsoever. Just more humping on your poorly-based emotional beliefs.
Again, why does the Corvette with that big old-fashioned LT5 pushrod engine make more power, and get better fuel economy than the smaller overhead-cam turbo Ford GT?

PCMIII

Which raises the obvious question, why would Corvette develop a turbo engine for the ME when the LT5 is sitting on the shelf ready to go with more power and better fuel economy?
To me it is simply a no-brainer to use the LT4 and/or LT5 in the ME instead of fooling around with something more complex that could easily fail.

sstonebreaker

Except the engine in the ME prototype is apparently a little more powerful than the LT5. There was a report the other day that the engine was making so much torque it flexed the frame enough to crack the engine cover glass.

84 4+3

Taller gearing (read lower rpms) slightly better drag coefficient and probably lighter wheels and tires. Gt runs a 20/20 where the zr1 runs a 19/20 with a much smaller sidewall than the gt iirc. Also the lack of skip shift using the dct probably changes it up too.

Warp Factor

Yet the ZR1 turned a faster lap time at VIR than the Ford GT.

Excuses, excuses. When will you be able to admit that the ZR1 is simply better-engineered than the megabuck Ford GT?

84 4+3

Those aren't excuses, those are facts, lower sidewall profile = better handling and lighter wheels equal less unsprung weight. The LT5 with the super charger produces more bottom end so the deeper gears in the ZR1 allow it to utilize a broader rpm band... in other words less shifting around for gears on the track... the only real down side to the taller gearing is you'll lose your license by the time you rev out second gear on any public road.

The zr1 does exactly what it was designed to do, it's a beast. The GT was designed to be a low numbers technology showcase for ford. The tuning and optimization done on the ZR1 is nothing short of fantastic, and if GM let loose on the GT it would probably be much closer than it is now.

JD_AMG

Its like your some kind of broken robot on repeat irrelevant information mode, my god just stop already. Can you not answer anyones questions?

There no tricks here, its called having a proper engine with part throttle low end torque and using it. Try doing that kind of driving with a 2L I4 and the engine will be choking , wheezing and cutting out while the LT1 is just chugging along like there is nothing to it. Its what Ive been saying the whole time. With the old LS1 you could put the car in 5th gear at damn near idle speeds and the car would just pull itself along, doing that in an I4 the car would bog immediately.

If you are putting around town like you would be in a normal car why wouldn't you be driving like that? You can't come in here expecting good gas mileage with any powerful car constantly going full throttle and hooning around that goes EVEN MORE so with turbo cars, once you get into boost say goodbye to any kind of good gas mileage.

Due to trying to get sales in the Chinese market with their displacement taxing, nice try though.

Oh dang, 415hp while having to use a turbo charger, supercharger, DOHC and electric motors to get that? That would have been kinda impressive in the 80s...


And this goes right back to it, why would you want a heavier/more expensive 500hp BW C8 when you could have a lighter and cheaper 500hp LT1 C8? The LT1 with 500hp would be literally all around faster car due to the lower weight and better balance because of it. Why would you want a blackwing V8 with the same power as an LT1? Please explain that to me, that makes no sense unless you are just that much of a hardcore bench racer.

I could see you saying having over 750hp BW V8, actually taking advantage of having DOHC and TTs, but at 500hp that is a huge waste of weight, size and money when the LT1 can do it being lighter/smaller and cheaper.

torquenstein

when do you guys think we can actually have a car? what's realistic, not so much any special order but just to be able to go to the dealer and buy one. thank you

JerryU

That is the $64 question.

Lots of speculation in this section. Anyone giving you a date would be strictly a guess with NO basis.

metal

bigsapper

ME == Caddy

NY09C6

this again is CAFE at work. Ultimately a turbo is more efficient than a belt driven supercharger. turbos are a far shittier driving experience but hey... yay government ,you will comply