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.
The leaked CAD and the overall packaging constraints in the C8 engine bay would seem to lend itself better to TT than SC I think are the main reasons people are assuming either TT or N/A.
The bay has room for a centrifugal supercharger as well… but I am not suggesting it will have that at all…… it can be anything I will just wait for the official release and not speculate
The bay has room for a centrifugal supercharger as well… but I am not suggesting it will have that at all…… it can be anything I will just wait for the official release and not speculate
How reasonable and not fun.
Can’t wait for the reveal so we can argue about other topics lol.
The bay has room for a centrifugal supercharger as well… but I am not suggesting it will have that at all…… it can be anything I will just wait for the official release and not speculate
Its hard to imagine that Corvette would hang a blow dryer off a DOHC FPC motor for a midengined car. Does the audio from any of the videos even suggest that? The engine bay has room for lots of stuff, sure.
I didn’t say that. That Lamborghini charges say $60,000, that does mean that it costs Lamborghini 10 times as much to build as it does for GM to build an engine that it sell for $6,000. Their margins are much higher.
It is a lot more accurate to state that the overhead of paying for what it takes to sell you the engine at $60K is amortized over fewer engines.
It is a lot more accurate to state that the overhead of paying for what it takes to sell you the engine at $60K is amortized over fewer engines.
Let me be clearer, with the purchasing power of VW, it does not cost Lamborghini 10 times as much to build their V10 in parts and labor, as it does for GM to build their V8. And when Lamborghini sells a replacement engine, their gross margin is higher. As much as you guys think there is a Corvette tax, the Lamborghini and Ferrari tax is much higher.
If we look at the Horsepower per Liter metric and assume that the HP is around 600HP that converts to a 109.09HP/L. There is a certain CF member that insists that GM Powertrain are trying to get 122HP/L or at least that is the goal. Here is a progression of the possible HP ratings where we can estimate a rational outcome. Also is a list of current up to date NA competitor engines for comparison. Note that I have shown the ZO6 as the projected 122HP/L rating. No doubt GM Powertrain will place this within their durability standards which could push it down to 650HP range and still pacify the big HP mongers.
Not going to come even close to 120 hp/liter. I dont think any american made engine (in a production car) even ever exceeded 100 hp/liter besides Ford’s vodoo. Pretty pathetic to be honest.
Not going to come even close to 120 hp/liter. I dont think any american made engine (in a production car) even ever exceeded 100 hp/liter besides Ford’s vodoo. Pretty pathetic to be honest.
Not a chance. A supercharger is less fuel efficient and raises the CG more than a brace of turbos hanging off the exhaust ports. I'd wager than turbocharging was one of the main points used to convince management to ok the mid engine design since there was no room for proper twin turbos on the C7. Proper meaning a short exhaust and intake path to and from the turbos for low lag. Cooling was already a challenge for the C7 with a supercharger so that would be even more challenging for twin turbos.
Now they have a spacious engine bay as their sandbox so they can add new toys. This twin turbo terror is destined for the ZR1 and I think they'll build more than 3000 of these monsters because demand will be insane.
No intercooler for the turbo boost? Can really make big power without an intercooler?
No intercooler for the turbo boost? Can really make big power without an intercooler?
See the violet boxes on the top of the engine, with the black boxes underneath? That is where the intercooler is. Water to air intercooler. The other end of the system to cool the water, is remote from the engine.
Not going to come even close to 120 hp/liter. I dont think any american made engine (in a production car) even ever exceeded 100 hp/liter besides Ford’s vodoo. Pretty pathetic to be honest.
Listening to the Corvette Today Podcast with Jim Mero was very interesting. He mentioned that he could not imagine the ZO6 with the LT6 being less than 650HP. It appears that GM Powertrain and Cosworth have collaborated on the LT6 and LT7. Be prepared to see this LT6 above 650. Although it probably is not that necessary to do so. And it now appears that the ZO6/ZO7 Corvette has the Cup 2R's after listening to the ring videos where no tire squeal or howl could be heard. I could hear some howl on the regular ZO6 which indicates using the regular Cup 2 tires. Jim Mero also discussed that the C7 ZR1 really needed it's own specific tire(Cup 2R) but was never done. Porsche will be scrambling to compete with this ZO6 !
Let me be clearer, with the purchasing power of VW, it does not cost Lamborghini 10 times as much to build their V10 in parts and labor, as it does for GM to build their V8. And when Lamborghini sells a replacement engine, their gross margin is higher. As much as you guys think there is a Corvette tax, the Lamborghini and Ferrari tax is much higher.
As I said, Yes, it does not cost 10× as much to make the Lamborghini engine in parts and labor. But since Lamborghini might only make 5,000 of those engines, the design, validation, certification of those engines are amortized over many fewer copies rather than GM's engines. These costs are down in the dollar per engine range for GM developed engines, and up in the way more than $1000 per engine in the Lamborghini range.
Let me be clearer, with the purchasing power of VW, it does not cost Lamborghini 10 times as much to build their V10 in parts and labor, as it does for GM to build their V8. And when Lamborghini sells a replacement engine, their gross margin is higher. As much as you guys think there is a Corvette tax, the Lamborghini and Ferrari tax is much higher.
As Rodney Dangerfield said, You left out a bunch of stuff. Among other things, both companies have to DESIGN the new engine and test it. Both companies have to RETOOL a factory to build a new engine. These fixed costs get amortized over the entire production run of an engine.
For hypothetical purposes, assume the development and retooling costs are exactly the same for GM and Ferrari. The development and retooling costs get spread out over what, 5,000 engines for Ferrari? But millions of engines for GM. So I doubt the profit margin is going to be much more for Ferrari or Lamborghini.
As I said, Yes, it does not cost 10× as much to make the Lamborghini engine in parts and labor. But since Lamborghini might only make 5,000 of those engines, the design, validation, certification of those engines are amortized over many fewer copies rather than GM's engines. These costs are down in the dollar per engine range for GM developed engines, and up in the way more than $1000 per engine in the Lamborghini range.
So, we are in agreement.
The development cost and tooling cost are built into the new car program and their cost model. Ferrari typically know exactly how many they will produce. The replacement engines that they sell later are icing, and they look at the incremental cost, and the brand value they want to convey. Selling an additional replacement engine does not add to their development and certification cost. The price they charge has little to do with the cost to build, and everything about having a captive audience for the replacement part. How many aftermarket companies are producing Ferrari replacement engines, zero. They price the engine to what the market will bear. And they don't want every hot rodder out their plopping Ferrari crate engines in a Rat Rod, so they price them high! Ferrari is about exclusivity.
I think the Camaro 3.6L V6 is the best GM has done (93.1 hp/L at 6800 RPM - incidentally this is 11% better than the LT2 scaled to the same speed showing the value of DOHC)
Scaling linearly with increased peak power speed 8250 RPM = 113.0 hp/L = 622 hp 8500 RPM = 116.4 hp/L = 640 hp 8750 RPM = 119.8 hp/L = 659 hp 9000 RPM = 123.2 hp/L = 678 hp
I don't think anyone has shown hard data above 8,250 RPM, so that would extrapolate to 113 hp/L. Maybe there is another bump due to the sliding cams (like the 2.7 turbo) or other fancy intake design, etc like some others have suggested. To get 650 hp at 8250 RPM would need to be 4.5% better than the Camaro V6. That doesn't seem that crazy to me.
As Rodney Dangerfield said, You left out a bunch of stuff. Among other things, both companies have to DESIGN the new engine and test it. Both companies have to RETOOL a factory to build a new engine. These fixed costs get amortized over the entire production run of an engine.
For hypothetical purposes, assume the development and retooling costs are exactly the same for GM and Ferrari. The development and retooling costs get spread out over what, 5,000 engines for Ferrari? But millions of engines for GM. So I doubt the profit margin is going to be much more for Ferrari or Lamborghini.
One only has to look at their financials to determine that Ferrari has higher gross margins.
I am a finance guy with over 35 years of experience and worked for two of the largest manufacturing companies in the world. I understand what fixed costs are. I know what sunk costs are. I fully understand that cost and price are loosely related. For most companies cost (fully loaded) is hopefully the floor for the price. But when push comes to shove, incremental cost is a lower barrier, and when thing go feet up, get what you can get. Price is a function of supply and demand. Ferrari limits supply and spends a lot of money to create demand beyond that supply. Everybody that has had economics has heard of price elasticity, and that demand goes down as prices goes up. Except when it doesn't, because humans are not rational. There is the famous case of the Scotch company that raise prices and demand went up. They were able (along with marketing) to use the higher price as an indicator of the quality of the product (taste) and thus increase the value and demand for the product. Goes along with the joke that "I wouldn't join any club that would take me as a member." because that means it is not a very exclusive and prestigious club.
One of the biggest complaints against the Corvette is that a Chevy, and therefor not as good, even when quality surveys show that it is better.
I think the Camaro 3.6L V6 is the best GM has done (93.1 hp/L at 6800 RPM - incidentally this is 11% better than the LT2 scaled to the same speed showing the value of DOHC)
Scaling linearly with increased peak power speed 8250 RPM = 113.0 hp/L = 622 hp 8500 RPM = 116.4 hp/L = 640 hp 8750 RPM = 119.8 hp/L = 659 hp 9000 RPM = 123.2 hp/L = 678 hp
I don't think anyone has shown hard data above 8,250 RPM, so that would extrapolate to 113 hp/L. Maybe there is another bump due to the sliding cams (like the 2.7 turbo) or other fancy intake design, etc like some others have suggested. To get 650 hp at 8250 RPM would need to be 4.5% better than the Camaro V6. That doesn't seem that crazy to me.
HP is not necessarily going to scale linearly with rpm, but I agree if GM can make tripower camshaft work in this engine, they could make a lot of power by having a set of lobes for use over 5,000 rpm, one set for below 5000 rpm, and the last lobe for V4 mode. The over 5000 rpm lobes could be pretty radical since they don't need to be livable at idle, support fuel economy, or not buck during parking lot maneuvers.
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.
