When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Can you help me out please. I'm @ Chevy C8 website trying to spec a Z51 C8 with the 560rwhp 170% VE engine.
Sorry man, ya gotta know a guy. I know that guy and we've already allocated the only engine they're making like that for the next few years. It'll be in my car soon.
Sorry man, ya gotta know a guy. I know that guy and we've already allocated the only engine they're making like that for the next few years. It'll be in my car soon.
First of all, it was 123.2 mph, secondly it was an instrumented test at Fontana which has no 1/4 mile course, but I agree with you on the last point, there is not much you can tell me.
What could have GM done to the car to make that much extra power and still have the engine act like an oem NA engine without crazy lope and obviously increased redline, etc? During the entire dyno operation there's no way they could have missed any sort of forced induction.
It's also a Mustang current brake dyno that requires precise setup for each vehicle, and MT acknowledged that they didn't know the final drive or gear ratios when performing the test. Their published final drive rear end ratio is still not consistent with the leaked engineer presentation, so it's not confirmed they have the correct ratios even now.
I'm happy to be proven wrong be actual facts and discussion, but right now nothing really adds up to MT dyno results being possible, because it doesn't seem possible that GM could get an LT2 to that power level while still passing for oem nvh.
Something tells me this guy is going to die on his hill that the LT2 is a hp monster well above SAE.
GM has been pretty good to sticking with SAE numbers, and while there are occasional factory freaks which do better than advertised, they don't do that much better. The acceleration to 60mph is completely explained by the mid engine design and good gearing, no rigging of engines there. The final trap speed and 1/4 mile support the acceleration rate you'd get with that power along with the weight of the car. I've had 2 camaros and 3 corvettes that all put down 1/4 mile numbers that match up to their weight and 1/4 mile trap speeds along with their SAE corrected dyno readings. I'm sure a ton of other members can and will attest to this fact.
What could have GM done to the car to make that much extra power and still have the engine act like an oem NA engine without crazy lope and obviously increased redline, etc? During the entire dyno operation there's no way they could have missed any sort of forced induction.
It's also a Mustang current brake dyno that requires precise setup for each vehicle, and MT acknowledged that they didn't know the final drive or gear ratios when performing the test. Their published final drive rear end ratio is still not consistent with the leaked engineer presentation, so it's not confirmed they have the correct ratios even now.
I'm happy to be proven wrong be actual facts and discussion, but right now nothing really adds up to MT dyno results being possible, because it doesn't seem possible that GM could get an LT2 to that power level while still passing for oem nvh.
Isnt what they call Breakthrough? Nobody else has came close to making 650hp @ 5,900 rpm. GM did it first!
First of all you claim the engine that its this particular Corvette have a Volumetric Efficiency of 170%. No engine in this world (probably other worlds as well LMAO) has ever came close to those numbers.
Only on planets with over 60 in-Hg of atmospheric pressure.
Let's stick a pin in this. In a few months' time when Motor Trend gets a production car and they run it down the quarter, I'll bet you one of my sizeable pay check that they get a trap speed in the low 120s again. From there, they'll take it back to their dyno shop and run it. This time, it'll come in at the appropriate rear-wheel torque number we'd expect from an SAE-measured 470 crank. Between then and now, the dyno operator in question will have realized his set-up mistake and he'll have corrected it.
The key point here will be: same trap speed, but different rear-wheel torque number. You'll be expected to explain that. Thus the pin.
I don't own the opinion of more HP than claimed by GM. That opinion belongs to Motor Trend. They stood behind it, said they are certain of it and I'm repeating it. I would have expected you above all the shills to know the difference at your pay grade. I do however own the narrative that supplying a ringer was Chevrolet's way of assuring a successful 1st test, so that Motor Trend could say that GM "kept its promises." If you want to pin that, go for it. I actually hope that I am wrong about it, but automakers cheating is not new.
I don't own the opinion of more HP than claimed by GM. That opinion belongs to Motor Trend. They stood behind it, said they are certain of it and I'm repeating it. I would have expected you above all the shills to know the difference at your pay grade. I do however own the narrative that supplying a ringer was Chevrolet's way of assuring a successful 1st test, so that Motor Trend could say that GM "kept its promises." If you want to pin that, go for it. I actually hope that I am wrong about it, but automakers cheating is not new.
You're a moron... automotive journalism is dead, print media is dead. What we have now is fake news for clicks/traffic which equals money. MT cooked up a fraudulent test they knew would stir controversy and ran with it for the clicks. Period.
You're a moron... automotive journalism is dead, print media is dead. What we have now is fake news for clicks/traffic which equals money. MT cooked up a fraudulent test they knew would stir controversy and ran with it for the clicks. Period.
First of all, it was 123.2 mph, secondly it was an instrumented test at Fontana which has no 1/4 mile course, but I agree with you on the last point, there is not much you can tell me.
Being that you can’t be told much, I’m asking you to explain how the emission’s legal LT2 made more torque than a max effort 5.9L NASCAR engine in 2014 which was the last year before being restricted? Common sense says that’s not possible, hopefully the below is enough proof so you can stop making yourself sound as foolish as Motortrend...
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette
Slideshow: A Jaguar designer's personal project imagines what a modern front-engined Corvette might look like if Chevrolet revisited the golden age of the Stingray.