Xoutpost.com - 2008 Corvette specs released by GM

Xoutpost.com (https://xoutpost.com/forums.php)

- The Lounge (https://xoutpost.com/off-topic/lounge/)

- - 2008 Corvette specs released by GM (https://xoutpost.com/off-topic/lounge/31072-2008-corvette-specs-released-gm.html)

Obv, the four of you are addressing the post I made. I'm not advocating more power. In fact I'm a proponent of having less power in a lot of these cars because they don't have the chassis' to support the transmission of all this power to the ground. Balance is the key to going fast (I don't mean handling).

When I hypothesized what BMW would able to do with displacement similar to American vehicles, I wasn't suggesting that they actually do it. I was rather suggesting that with their efficiency they'd give you a lot more for the same displacement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

So what's your opinion on the BMW 6.0L V12 that *only* has 438HP? hmmmmmmm, is that engine inefficent? ;)

Look at the application of this V12. It goes in a friggin 7-Series and redlines at 6,500rpm.. You think they were serious about making a lot of power? Plus..this engine debuted valvetronic..it's main purpose was to showcase the efficiency/economy of the technology.

they fixed that with the C6. The C6 looks great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trueX5er

Did they fix the sub-par interior?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

Tall 6th gear. Not only do they get great highway mileage if you're not stomping on it, but it's incredible to see the engine loping along at under 3kRPM's and you're doing 80 ;)

hmm. the C6 that I test drove lopped around at a little over 2K at 80!! time to upgrade! :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinuneuro

Yes. they were serious. why? all the other competitors with V12's are kicking their butts... Although the v12 in the 760 is smooth, it's a boat anchor and low tech so I wouldn't even go there. As for large displacement motors, GM pushrods and even the Viper motors have a hella lot more reliability built into it (just look at how competitive the C6Rs and not high stressed like the M motors. Even the PTG team is not using the m3 6) There is no replacement for displacement (except FI of course)

BTW, drove a Ford GT this weekend.. holy crap, what a beast...

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinuneuro

so we can discuss details when it's a BMW engine application but generalities when it's domestic, ok i get the rules now :) :nanana:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SANguru

hmm. the C6 that I test drove lopped around at a little over 2K at 80!! time to upgrade! :)

Last time i checked 2k was under 3k wiseass ;)

Speaking of lopeing,
here's a shot of my insturment panel, on the migration
back to the Mtn; it just burbles along in 6th.

And, a shot of my HUD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by soccerjunky

One of the amazing things about a high displacement motor is the amount tq it can make. And how fat the power band is. The power isn't peaky(although the vette isn't bad). So you don't have to have a big peak number to have it moving. . There is just gobs of power everywhere. Even as low as 1500rpm, many stock Vipers (GenII...think GTS) never make less than 350-370rwtq.
It's damn near impossible to lug the motor. I've tried. the car has so much tq that you can idle up a hill in 4th gear...and it will not stall. that..is tq. i can cruise in 6th gear close to 100mph around 2k rpm with no lugging.

The durability testing at Chrysler for the Viper had a V10 doing 300 consecutive hours at wide-open-throttle on an engine dyno... Other than Porsche, I doubt many import engines would fare well in that kind of test... They'd be lucky to make 40 hours and survive. This is where it's hard to beat a push-rod low BHP/liter engine. They just keep on going like the Energizer Bunny.

I get a kick out of manufacturers term "hand-built" engines. All engines are hand built for chrissakes, no one uses a robot. The only thing special about the way the ls7GM engine is built or the Ford GT engine or the Ford Mustang Cobra engine for example is that only one or two people build the entire engine up as opposed to regular high volume engine builds where you have maybe 30-50 people building up the engine. Marketing ploy I guess. I mean if you are only building let's say 8 cars a day that use this engine of course you don't set a line up with 30 people to build it, you probably only need one or two people. So the manufacturer puts in their ads that these are hand built engines. Haaaaaaa. Same goes for other car makers in Europe or whatever, they are all hand-built engines the only difference is just how many hands are involve

These cars, whether they be the Vette, Viper, M3 or 911 are designed for the track. On the track a high-revving wide powerband is what you want. You speak of tq..what do you think a transmission and diff/final do? F1 doesn't use high revving engines for no reason, and neither does Ferrari and company. And no, I don't want to hear about why you think Nascar is better.

Just because an engine doesn't make as much power as it should, that doesn't make it more durable. As far as you speculating at other engine maker's testing procedures..don't do it unless you know what you're talking about.

The whole push-rod design is inefficient..that's a bottom line.

No one uses a robot to build engines? lmao :rofl:! All of what you call major components are installed/assembled by robots in most production engines. So yes, when a company tells you the engine is hand-built it is very true.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gresch

so we can discuss details when it's a BMW engine application but generalities when it's domestic, ok i get the rules now :) :nanana:

What'r you talkin about? Compromises are made when an engine goes into the likes of something like a 7er. When GM builds their 'supercar', the Corvette, they are going all out. What you get is what they're able to produce..which isn't much. So yea, compare apples to appples and the arguements will seem more fair. :)