Scot

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2012...n=awdailydrive


hard to complain about 450hp in the base model!

CosmosMpower

Would've thought the base would be closer to 500 kind of like how the C6 base was in the same ballpark as the prevous C5 Z06.

Kenny_Stang

450 HP will be plenty

Now I just want to see what the car looks like, to this point I haven't been too impressed with the test mules and renderings going around the web.

sahtt

Well done GM engineers. It hits all the major points as long as it's not significantly heavier. When I saw dry sump I did a quick search on C6's; wasn't aware the GS and zo6 models etc. have dry sump already. 50 lbs/tq at lower RPMS is a big improvement.

suprmonky73

will be confusing calling it the new LT1 versus what the C4 has

AngryTurtle

Yeah but then the C7 z06 will need 605hp and the zr1 will just have a jet engine strapped on.

I dont like this idea either. But it isnt the first time theyve done this.

CosmosMpower

Looking at the potential of the motors in the aftermarket the C7 Z06 could easily make 605 HP and the ZR1 could make 700 if GM wanted it to. A few bolt ons and tune to both those cars can hit those power levels. The trick is making it civil enough to pass emissions, be quiet and reliable enough for the masses.

S2kRob

Looking at the potential of the motors in the aftermarket the C7 Z06 could easily make 605 HP and the ZR1 could make 700 if GM wanted it to. A few bolt ons and tune to both those cars can hit those power levels. The trick is making it civil enough to pass emissions, be quiet and reliable enough for the masses.
[/quote]

LT1 designation has been used several times in the past by Chevrolet, first time was about 1972 or so. So dusting off the designation is nothing new.

Also, the engine will at minimum put out 450hp in the Corvette. It could easily be more. The official line was 450+hp.

rockville

I wonder if GM is in a situation where marketing is holding the power back. Porsche clearly does this all the time. It seems like every three years they just "find" some extra power yet they the Cayman engineers can never quite find as much power as the 911 engineers using the exact same engine. It's almost like they are told to leave power on the table...

I could see GM doing the same thing. It's not like GM is losing the HP race. So long as they are winning and so long as the C7 offers a number of things other than power to entice buyers to go for a C7 vs left over C6 I don't see them feeling the need more than a modest bump to sell the new cars.

I suppose there is also the question of just how much is too much. Traction and stability controls have helped make what were ZR-1 power levels more manageable for the masses (I still surprised the old car didn't have something like a 150hp valet mode). There is also a notion of cost. The LS7 clearly showed the LS family could produce more power than the 432 of the LS3. However, I suspect the LS7 cost quite a bit more to make. A few of the upgrade parts might add substantially to the overall cost of the motor. IIRC (and I may not) the rods were quite a bit more expensive than the LS3 rods. The valves would also require a premium (sodium filled vs solid). There were probably a number of other parts that result in a significant increase in build cost. It's possible that the LS3 was about as good as the LS family could do without a big bump in cost. Things like DI might have allowed GM to get that bump in performance without resorting to forged rods and the like.

Anyway, the 450 number is as likely as not what GM decided to give the car rather than any limit of the motor or even limit at a set price point. It will be interesting to see how far GM takes this new motor.

One final thing, I haven't driven an LS3 but the LS2 Vette I drove was not overly smooth at idle. Not rough mind you but not glass smooth like say a Tundra V8. I've always assumed this was a combination of the way the motor was mounted in the Vette plus the need for a relatively high lift cam. I'm wondering if the new motor will be smoother.

NuncoStr8

I think that was the implied issue - potential confusion due to use of the same designation for multiple motors.