FPC article
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 16,671
Likes: 7,738
From: NJ
There are lots of Ferraris that make well over 100K miles with nothing more than std factory maintenance.
These are not the ones the owner gets in once a month and redlines it from garage to garage through every gear.
Driven in an adult manner, Ferrari engines are nearly bulletproof.
It is the ones that sit around for weeks at a time that have more problems than the ones driven every day.
These are not the ones that get listed "for sale" because the owner still wants to drive it.
These are not the ones the owner gets in once a month and redlines it from garage to garage through every gear.
Driven in an adult manner, Ferrari engines are nearly bulletproof.
It is the ones that sit around for weeks at a time that have more problems than the ones driven every day.
These are not the ones that get listed "for sale" because the owner still wants to drive it.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,468
Likes: 4,084
From: Colorado
Not true. Getting the power isn't the problem, it's the fact that secondary vibrations are going to be a much more significant issue in a 5.5L vs a tiny 3.6L. You shouldn't be comparing hp/L in FPC engines that vary this much in size.
Last edited by SharkDiverZ06; Sep 14, 2021 at 06:09 PM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,468
Likes: 4,084
From: Colorado
Any base model DOHC CPC V8 will displace less than 6.2L for efficiency. Ford can exceed LT1 performance with only 5.0L so I wouldn’t be surprised by a new DOHC Stingray V8 with even less displacement.
In regard to reliability the LT6 will be a shitshow. It’ll probably suck for daily driving as well with all that vibration. I’m bummed they didn’t go with a 3.9TT FPC V8 for the ZO6 to keep vibes reasonable, but I suppose with twin turbos GM reliability would be even worse.
GM’s record with bespoke engines is…not good.
In regard to reliability the LT6 will be a shitshow. It’ll probably suck for daily driving as well with all that vibration. I’m bummed they didn’t go with a 3.9TT FPC V8 for the ZO6 to keep vibes reasonable, but I suppose with twin turbos GM reliability would be even worse.
GM’s record with bespoke engines is…not good.
No worries, you'll like the 4.6TT they're using even better than the 3.9.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 5,529
Likes: 1,943
From: Austin Texas
The 360 engine started life as a 3.0L engine (308) which had been bored to the block limit (F355) and stroked (328, 348, 355, 360) until it was at the limit of the block.
There is no such precondition for the 5.5L and GM is free to make the block with any deck height (and thus rod ratio) GM thinks is reasonable.
Secondarily, rumor has it that GM will quell the vibrations with magnetoresistive shock absorbing engine and tranny mounts.
(*) along with absolute displacement.
The Consigliere
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 23,003
Likes: 6,045
From: 2023 Z06 & 2010 ZR1
MR engine and tranny mounts would be great. I hope they include those. They can quell vibrations - but we should be clear for whom/what. They will quell vibrations for the occupants of the vehicle. They will do nothing to mitigate the punishment inflicted by the secondary harmonics (horizontal forces) on the engine bottom end/bearings.
Drifting
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,557
Likes: 1,275
From: EV is like bad sex with no moaning
MR engine and tranny mounts would be great. I hope they include those. They can quell vibrations - but we should be clear for whom/what. They will quell vibrations for the occupants of the vehicle. They will do nothing to mitigate the punishment inflicted by the secondary harmonics (horizontal forces) on the engine bottom end/bearings.
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,559
Likes: 4,501
From: North Dallas 40 TX
MR engine and tranny mounts would be great. I hope they include those. They can quell vibrations - but we should be clear for whom/what. They will quell vibrations for the occupants of the vehicle. They will do nothing to mitigate the punishment inflicted by the secondary harmonics (horizontal forces) on the engine bottom end/bearings.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer
Brett Foote
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Reasons the C6 Z06 is Still A Performance Benchmark After 20 Years
Joe Kucinski
How Much Horsepower Every Corvette Engine "LOST" in 1972
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 DOs and DON'Ts for Protecting Your Convertible Top!
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,245
Likes: 2,176
From: Cary NC
Unfortunately, they can't make an infinitely-long rod. Increasing the rod length from 5.8 to 6.375 does give about a 10% reduction in the secondary vibration, though, assuming a stroke of around 3.2. Much past this, and you're just adding rod weight and block weight.
I'm curious to see what they do with the mounts, and how effective the solution is; In the CAD drawings I've seen, the mounts are near-vertical; whereas secondary forces are exactly horizontal. These MR mounts are directional and won't effectively dampen a shear force like this. Maybe they will add another mount, a roll mount, which acts in the correct line. I haven't seen evidence of this yet. Or they may rely on getting partial damping from the vertical mounts taking out some of the rocking. Or they may rely on old school mounts; Most MR mounts are advertised to work up to 150Hz-200Hz, while the secondary vibration exceeds that operating range by a hundred hertz or so. None of these mount problems are insurmountable, though imo...
I'm curious to see what they do with the mounts, and how effective the solution is; In the CAD drawings I've seen, the mounts are near-vertical; whereas secondary forces are exactly horizontal. These MR mounts are directional and won't effectively dampen a shear force like this. Maybe they will add another mount, a roll mount, which acts in the correct line. I haven't seen evidence of this yet. Or they may rely on getting partial damping from the vertical mounts taking out some of the rocking. Or they may rely on old school mounts; Most MR mounts are advertised to work up to 150Hz-200Hz, while the secondary vibration exceeds that operating range by a hundred hertz or so. None of these mount problems are insurmountable, though imo...
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,245
Likes: 2,176
From: Cary NC
Last edited by RedLS6; Sep 15, 2021 at 09:05 PM.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 867
Likes: 148
From: N CA
Porsche used them in 1982 for the new 944's, I bought one new and they worked extremely well no vibrations of any kind at any rpm. I believe Mitsubishi pioneered them for cars if I remember correctly.
Last edited by 500; Sep 15, 2021 at 09:01 PM.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,245
Likes: 2,176
From: Cary NC
They do work. With some overhead. A guy named William Lanchester first patented the idea in 1912 or so, so it's been around and is pretty well known. In a four-cylinder, since the secondary vibration goes directly up/down parallel to the cylinder bores, the shafts can be located side-by-side as I drew above, but without creating a rocking couple. Flat-plane V8 is exactly the opposite, vibration goes right-left.
Burning Brakes
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 867
Likes: 148
From: N CA
They do work. With some overhead. A guy named William Lanchester first patented the idea in 1912 or so, so it's been around and is pretty well known. In a four-cylinder, since the secondary vibration goes directly up/down parallel to the cylinder bores, the shafts can be located side-by-side as I drew above, but without creating a rocking couple. Flat-plane V8 is exactly the opposite, vibration goes right-left.