Next vette a small disp. turbo V8?
05-26-2011, 03:11 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can people even begin to take this story seriously? It doesn't even remotely pass the sniff test hence the reason why I said it should have come out on April 1st.
1. What are the odds that GM will develop a totally single purpose motor for the Corvette? Engines are expensive to develop. The last Vette only motor was the LT5 and that was back when GM seemed to have no idea what they were spending where. A 3L V8 would mean it shares nothing with existing motors. So now we are talking about perhaps $100 million in R&D if it's done on the cheap. The idea that GM would spend that kind of money on a dedicated motor for the Corvette is crazy. More so given how good the current motors are. GM's not going to give Cadillac a new V8, it makes no sense to give only some Corvettes a new V8.
2. They claim this is for good mileage... the things that allow a motor to get to 10,000 RPM are almost always bad for mileage. A 3L 10,000 RPM motor is not going to be the way to get good mileage. Most turbos that get decent mileage (IE none with a Subaru badge
) are actually lower reving motors.
3. 10k redline is very high for a street motor. As hard as it is to get to 9k, 10k is that much harder.
My only question is where did this rumor start? Either way, I'm going on record saying the whole this is BS and I can't believe anyone actually took it seriously.
1. What are the odds that GM will develop a totally single purpose motor for the Corvette? Engines are expensive to develop. The last Vette only motor was the LT5 and that was back when GM seemed to have no idea what they were spending where. A 3L V8 would mean it shares nothing with existing motors. So now we are talking about perhaps $100 million in R&D if it's done on the cheap. The idea that GM would spend that kind of money on a dedicated motor for the Corvette is crazy. More so given how good the current motors are. GM's not going to give Cadillac a new V8, it makes no sense to give only some Corvettes a new V8.
2. They claim this is for good mileage... the things that allow a motor to get to 10,000 RPM are almost always bad for mileage. A 3L 10,000 RPM motor is not going to be the way to get good mileage. Most turbos that get decent mileage (IE none with a Subaru badge
) are actually lower reving motors. 3. 10k redline is very high for a street motor. As hard as it is to get to 9k, 10k is that much harder.
My only question is where did this rumor start? Either way, I'm going on record saying the whole this is BS and I can't believe anyone actually took it seriously.
05-26-2011, 03:19 PM
#32
I don't get it, what's so hard about a 10k rpm revving motor nowadays with a turbo?
Looks like you're all forgetting that Ferrari first busted the 9k rev limit in 1980's with the F40. Which BTW is also a 3.0 liter 9k revving V8.
There was nothing special about the AP1 hitting 9k rpm other than the fact that the car was cheap and affordable. It's been done before on a higher displacement block, more cylinders, etc.
Yes I am an F40 fanboy
That being said, I don't think these changes will happen to the vette. Would just be weird.
Looks like you're all forgetting that Ferrari first busted the 9k rev limit in 1980's with the F40. Which BTW is also a 3.0 liter 9k revving V8.
There was nothing special about the AP1 hitting 9k rpm other than the fact that the car was cheap and affordable. It's been done before on a higher displacement block, more cylinders, etc.
Yes I am an F40 fanboy
That being said, I don't think these changes will happen to the vette. Would just be weird.
05-26-2011, 05:32 PM
#35
In the 70's the corvette was going to have a Rotory, in the 80's Chevy was going to offer a value corvette with a v6. None of that ever happens because GM does know one thing. Corvettes are known one way... Big V8 up front, lots of fiberglass in the middle (SMC now) and rear wheel drive with indipendent rear suspension (63 and later). They will not mess with that formula.
If GM wants to make a car with 3.0 V8 turbo, they will name it something else. Vette has too large and loyal of a following to be messed with. It will be worse than New Coke.
05-26-2011, 05:46 PM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 2,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would you make it so high revving when you have a turbo attached? You'll have a hard time getting a turbo to bridge a rev range that big and still be efficient or effective throughout. There's a reason they make so many turbo sizes and why so many turbo cars have lower redlines. If they revved to 10,000 rpm, I'd expect more like 450 hp even with boost tapering off at higher revs.
The Corvette is pretty light already but I'd love to get a 375 hp version in a 2900 lb body with a smaller chassis and body. I'll take less power and less weight over more power and maintaining the weight.
The Corvette is pretty light already but I'd love to get a 375 hp version in a 2900 lb body with a smaller chassis and body. I'll take less power and less weight over more power and maintaining the weight.
So basically, you'd either be making like 600hp, or the torque would be fat down low and die off substantially at higher revs
05-26-2011, 05:48 PM
#37
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 2,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JonBoy' timestamp='1306420521' post='20617977
Why would you make it so high revving when you have a turbo attached? You'll have a hard time getting a turbo to bridge a rev range that big and still be efficient or effective throughout. There's a reason they make so many turbo sizes and why so many turbo cars have lower redlines. If they revved to 10,000 rpm, I'd expect more like 450 hp even with boost tapering off at higher revs.
The Corvette is pretty light already but I'd love to get a 375 hp version in a 2900 lb body with a smaller chassis and body. I'll take less power and less weight over more power and maintaining the weight.
The Corvette is pretty light already but I'd love to get a 375 hp version in a 2900 lb body with a smaller chassis and body. I'll take less power and less weight over more power and maintaining the weight.
So basically, you'd either be making like 600hp, or the torque would be fat down low and die off substantially at higher revs
05-26-2011, 06:04 PM
#38
Registered User
I'm thinking it is total BS. But back in dreamland... GM does have the pockets (thanks Uncle Sam!) to develop that motor. Sometimes they do think big and outside the box (ala high volume painted carbon fiber, transverse polymeric springs, hydroformed chassis, ...) Just seems so unreasonable and like Rockville said, fuel efficient and high rev's? Sh'yea, in the land of zero friction maybe.
Is the Corvette selling so badly they need a major new direction? Seems to me they could fill in their sports car line with a lighter-weight fighter. You can buy a vette from $50K to $110K, right? Technically they have the Camaro below that but it is a retro tank, lacking sporting credibility. It would be nice to see a better Solstice/Sky roadster from them at around $35K.
Is the Corvette selling so badly they need a major new direction? Seems to me they could fill in their sports car line with a lighter-weight fighter. You can buy a vette from $50K to $110K, right? Technically they have the Camaro below that but it is a retro tank, lacking sporting credibility. It would be nice to see a better Solstice/Sky roadster from them at around $35K.
05-26-2011, 06:12 PM
#39
Registered User
It would be nice to see a better Solstice/Sky roadster from them at around $35K.
It would be nice to see a few sub 3000lbs RWD cars on the horizon.
05-26-2011, 07:17 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [DT
;20618109]10K RPM? Why design a street engine that requires that kind of tolerances and that's targeted at longevity? That'll never happen. The current 6.2L power plant is simple, reasonably light, and has terrific economy of scale. I say they simply go DI, maybe some kind of cam-phasing tech, heck, improve MPG and hit 475-500HP, then just keep the supercharged variant for specialty vehicles. I'm assuming we'll see the 7.0L Z06 motor disappear soon too.
Keep the "heart" of the car, and just redo the things people are critical about: fit/finish, interior, electronic options, etc.
Keep the "heart" of the car, and just redo the things people are critical about: fit/finish, interior, electronic options, etc.