Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Dyno Max
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons

Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-22-2008, 10:12 PM   #1
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
A Gen V hint?

On Leftlane News they have an article about the future of the Corvette in the face of the new CAFE regulations (linked below). I found one quote particularly interesting:

"Wallace added: "I don't think we're going to design a 700 horsepower Corvette."

Instead, Wallace says the next Corvette will have a heavy emphasis on pounds per horsepower. Although no figures are set, Wallace said that if the C7 Corvette were to shed 300 or 400 pounds, it could use a 4.7L V8 with 150 less horsepower than found in the 2008 models and still maintain the same performance. Lighter weight would also translate into better handling."


So does anyone else think this might indicate that one Gen V engine could be a 4.7L? The 280 hp figure just doesn't seem right though. They could easily make 280 hp with a V6. A 4.7L should get at least high 300 hp, nearly 400.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/corvette...gulations.html
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2008, 10:24 PM   #2
SilverTurtle
Reality Check Specialist
 
SilverTurtle's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 Z28, 2012 45th SS
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ATX
Posts: 1,724
Send a message via AIM to SilverTurtle Send a message via Yahoo to SilverTurtle
as a point of reference, the supercharged 4.4L Northstar in the XLR-V makes 443hp and the 4.6L with VVT in the regular XLR makes 320hp
__________________
got tequila?
SilverTurtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2008, 10:32 PM   #3
Scotsman
Auto Pilot
 
Scotsman's Avatar
 
Drives: Gunmetal
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,307
As long as we get to keep the V8 engine I'm stoked. If not; these cars will end up being some of the bastardized products I've seen yet from our beloved. I can make-do with less power as long as they engineer a way to make it a performance marvel, and there are definitely ways of doing that (BMW, Lotus,... anyone???).
__________________
"Let the rest of the world dream of Ferraris, Lamborghinis and dinky little British two-seaters. In this country speed doesn't look like that." Got SS?
Scotsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2008, 11:36 PM   #4
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by stovt001 View Post
So does anyone else think this might indicate that one Gen V engine could be a 4.7L? The 280 hp figure just doesn't seem right though. They could easily make 280 hp with a V6. A 4.7L should get at least high 300 hp, nearly 400.
I definitely think that it's a Gen V hint. But I also think that the hp humber was just a relative number to gloat(much deserved) and say - "you know we could do this....".

And although a V6 can make 280hp easily...IMO, V8's are easier to work with, and yield better results. Take that DI V6 right now...with all it's tech, it still 'only' gets nearly the same mileage as the LS3 in the Vette.

Now, on the other hand - put the Legendary performance, durability, and economy of a Chevy Small Block into a smaller package. Imagine the savings - in all three areas!!
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2008, 11:44 PM   #5
Scotsman
Auto Pilot
 
Scotsman's Avatar
 
Drives: Gunmetal
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
Now, on the other hand - put the Legendary performance, durability, and economy of a Chevy Small Block into a smaller package. Imagine the savings - in all three areas!!
Now THAT sounds like a great idea. GM has too large a resource pool not to make the V8 engine more efficient.
__________________
"Let the rest of the world dream of Ferraris, Lamborghinis and dinky little British two-seaters. In this country speed doesn't look like that." Got SS?
Scotsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2008, 01:29 AM   #6
TAG UR IT
www.Camaro5store.com
 
TAG UR IT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 ZL1 #705
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SA, Texas
Posts: 26,386
Calling jenny craig....could our Camaro end up weighing in at even less than the hoped 3,750? And, with a Gen V???
TAG UR IT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2008, 05:22 AM   #7
asrapid
 
asrapid's Avatar
 
Drives: Stratus
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Croatia
Posts: 75
If we look at LS3 it develops around 70 Hp/liter..so with V8 4.7 l displacement engine based on ls3 could develop around 330 hp..without using DI vvt etc. Maybe he thinks on Z06 engine since zr1 isn't on sale yet. So roughly 505 -150 = 355 hp..which could be achieved with DI, vvt etc in smaller diplacement engine. And if they need more they could turbocharged/supercharged it.
I hope GM didn't cancel Gen V ohv like they did canceled Northstar 2, and that it will get DI (and maybe 3 valve head)

Last edited by asrapid; 01-23-2008 at 06:28 AM.
asrapid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2008, 01:24 PM   #8
Grape Ape
 
Drives: 96 Bronco w/ a 5 speed
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: PNW
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
I definitely think that it's a Gen V hint. But I also think that the hp humber was just a relative number to gloat(much deserved) and say - "you know we could do this....".

And although a V6 can make 280hp easily...IMO, V8's are easier to work with, and yield better results. Take that DI V6 right now...with all it's tech, it still 'only' gets nearly the same mileage as the LS3 in the Vette.

Now, on the other hand - put the Legendary performance, durability, and economy of a Chevy Small Block into a smaller package. Imagine the savings - in all three areas!!
I don’t think that the mileage is comparable until GM offers both engines in the same car.

Considering how fat, wide (wind resistance) and stuffed full of power sucking doodads the Cadi is compared to the Vette, I think that it is pretty impressive that the Cadi even comes close on MPGs, even allowing for the missing 130 horses.

I do think you’re right that the 280 is nothing, hell the turbo 4 in the Kappas makes 260. I suspect the quote refers to the LS9. He is saying that the next step from the ZR1’s LS9 is not a 700 horse V8. Instead they are going to get Jenny Craig to help build a Vette that scoots with 470 horses (620-150).

A 470HP 4.7L would be worth bragging about, that works out the about 1.6 horses per cubic inch. And unless it was hand built like the LS7, there is probably a fair chance of the Camaro getting it as an option since the Vette’s weight advantage would be unassailable.
Grape Ape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2008, 04:44 PM   #9
The_Blur
Jayhawk USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 6.2L of AWESOME! 2011 L99 2SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NAS Whiting Field
Posts: 14,276
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
There's a lot that could be reduced to make less horsepower go farther. For example, if the Camaro uses fiberglass or aluminum panels, the weight could be significantly less than 3,700 lbs. I'm sure GM has some tricks up their sleeves.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2008, 09:23 PM   #10
camarocrazy28
 
camarocrazy28's Avatar
 
Drives: 1990 Camaro RS
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Loves Park, IL
Posts: 92
With direct injection, and super/turbocharging many things are possible--even 400 hp. Remember, GM' s high feature 3.6 liter V-6 with direct injection has like 300 hp and the turbocharged I-4 Ecotec in the Saturn Sky Redline, Pontiac Solstice GTP and the new Cobalt SS (coming soon) has 260 hp.
camarocrazy28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2008, 12:12 PM   #11
asrapid
 
asrapid's Avatar
 
Drives: Stratus
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Croatia
Posts: 75
Guys , what do you think are chances we will se something like this in future- XV8 engine from 2001. Two cam in block , direct injection, 3 valves.
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_1193/article.html
I think it could with tune up for sports car and more displacement develop around 400 hp.
asrapid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 01:29 PM   #12
mprhead5
 
mprhead5's Avatar
 
Drives: 04 MAzdaspeed miata 250whp
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kunsan AFB Korea
Posts: 48
lower displacment and more tech will be a good thing. If they can pull 350-400hp in a 2900 lb corvette it will kick ass. the vette is already a fairly light vehicle though. they will have to come up with some new materials to shed that weight. unless they can mass produce cheaper carbon fiber
__________________
87 camaro v6 m5, 89 Trans-Am GTA, 96 Camaro Z28 M6.

current Ride: 04 Mazdaspeed MX-5 250whp 13.3 1/4m
mprhead5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 01:52 PM   #13
Scotsman
Auto Pilot
 
Scotsman's Avatar
 
Drives: Gunmetal
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: L.A.
Posts: 1,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by mprhead5 View Post
unless they can mass produce cheaper carbon fiber
It's said that that's another ten years out. However, CAFE may change that.
__________________
"Let the rest of the world dream of Ferraris, Lamborghinis and dinky little British two-seaters. In this country speed doesn't look like that." Got SS?
Scotsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 04:03 PM   #14
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by mprhead5 View Post
lower displacment and more tech will be a good thing. If they can pull 350-400hp in a 2900 lb corvette it will kick ass. the vette is already a fairly light vehicle though. they will have to come up with some new materials to shed that weight. unless they can mass produce cheaper carbon fiber
They could also make it smaller, though one of the Corvette's selling points is better than average interior and cargo room for a sports car.
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 05:22 PM   #15
2010_5thgen


 
2010_5thgen's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Acadia Denali
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,274
good thing thats just a rumor. i wont settle for less than the 6.2 unless....they lighten up the camaro by 600+lbs nd they put a 6.0 in it. but i dont think this motor will be an option for the much heavier camaro.
__________________

2012 Porsche Panamera 4
2010_5thgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 07:00 PM   #16
Mr. Wyndham
I used to be Dragoneye...
 
Mr. Wyndham's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Camaro 1LE
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 25,788
Send a message via AIM to Mr. Wyndham
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010_5thgen View Post
good thing thats just a rumor. i wont settle for less than the 6.2 unless....they lighten up the camaro by 600+lbs nd they put a 6.0 in it. but i dont think this motor will be an option for the much heavier camaro.
The displacement really doesn't matter when you factor in all this technology. I've heard you comment about the 6.2, and the 6.0, etc before...and I still don't understand your reasoning, 2010 5thgen......

"No replacement for displacement" is true enough. But why would any sane person/company continually increase the size of an engine (therefore increasing wieght and hindering handling, ect) when you could shrink the engine, while at the same time make it soooo much more potent, sooo much more fuel efficient - and then increase size from there as applicable.

Think 5.0/5.3/5.7 with 400hp... That would be Awesome!!
__________________
"Keep the faith." - - Read Before You Post.
SIGN UP for 2014 Camaro5 HPDE @ Gingerman Raceway!
Mr. Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 07:29 PM   #17
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
To be honest GM's specific output disappoints me a little. Most other V8s now are making close to the same power with displacements in the high 4 or low 5 liter range. I'd rather have a smaller V8 with more specific output, just as long as they don't tune it too tight making it a hand grenade. I'd be happy if they shrunk the V8s, so we can have our efficiency and still have that great V8 rumble.
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 08:04 PM   #18
DGthe3
Moderator.ca
 
DGthe3's Avatar
 
Drives: 05 Grand Am GT
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Niagara, Canada
Posts: 22,170
Send a message via MSN to DGthe3
but a bigger engine has more build up capacity. Also, smaller engines that make high hp have to give up something, either torque, durability, or both. For example, the F430 has a high revving 4.3L V8 that makes 483 hp at 8500 rpm but only 343 ft lbs of torque. Now granted this is a Ferrari and cant be used in a direct comparison to a Camaro but the idea is the same. But thats also part of the point, you cant compare the high strung V8's from Europe to big North American ones. As far as specific output goes, I'm happy with anything in the area of 1hp/cu (60/L) and torque that is equal to or exceeds the horsepower. At least this isnt the 80's where you have 5.7L engines making under 200 hp

As was said before on this site (or at least something similar)
Quote:
horsepower is how fast you hit the minivan, torque is how far you take the minivan with you
__________________
Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them
__________________
don't believe a thing you read about the next gen Camaro -- as history has proven time and time again:

WE DO NOT TALK ABOUT FUTURE PRODUCT PLANS PERIOD FbodFather
__________________

Camaro5 Fest sub-forum
DGthe3 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 08:35 PM   #19
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
Yeah I see what you're saying and I agree with it.I just think we have some wiggle room to get a little more specific output here without sacrificing too much torque or durability. I don't want us to go completely like the Europeans, buuuut I think we can go a bit smaller. Small compromises.
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 10:19 PM   #20
Splicerguy
 
Drives: 2002 trailblazer
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 57
I wouldn't mind seeing a GenV aluminum 302 with DI, VVt, AFM with between 375 to 400 hp. That would make me happy.
Splicerguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2008, 11:31 PM   #21
stovt001


 
stovt001's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Cobalt, 2004 Taurus wagon
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,817
I think that would make everyone happy. That just screams Z28
stovt001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 03:10 PM   #22
2010_5thgen


 
2010_5thgen's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Acadia Denali
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
The displacement really doesn't matter when you factor in all this technology. I've heard you comment about the 6.2, and the 6.0, etc before...and I still don't understand your reasoning, 2010 5thgen......

"No replacement for displacement" is true enough. But why would any sane person/company continually increase the size of an engine (therefore increasing wieght and hindering handling, ect) when you could shrink the engine, while at the same time make it soooo much more potent, sooo much more fuel efficient - and then increase size from there as applicable.

Think 5.0/5.3/5.7 with 400hp... That would be Awesome!!
becasue i feel the 6.2 is a better engine than all of those you listed there. im not saying they were terrable engines, they were good for their time. well now times have changed and i like where they are now with the 6.2. its a beefy motor and it fits the car. having anything less than that just doesnt do the car justice. the motor has to fit the car, you cant just throw any thing in it. if this were the case they would just throw a 3.4 v6 in for the gas mileage and say F it about the performance. but performance matters and im sure they are coming up with sweet lighter motors with lesser power but in the end the lesser power doesnt drop lbs off of the actually body pane of the car.
__________________

2012 Porsche Panamera 4
2010_5thgen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2008, 03:40 PM   #23
asrapid
 
asrapid's Avatar
 
Drives: Stratus
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Croatia
Posts: 75
I have a question for you guys:
What would you like to see -5.0 l V8 ohv with DI and maybe 3 valves per cylinder(i don't know if GM is even planing to put that on future LS series ) with around 400 hp or LS3 with 440 hp? We aren't talking about top engine but below top engine (which will probably be LS8 according to rumors)
asrapid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2008, 10:38 AM   #24
radz28
Petro-sexual
 
radz28's Avatar
 
Drives: Ultra-Grin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Crapramento, Crapifornia
Posts: 13,045
Pushrods for me, however, the more power the better...
__________________
"...What IS true: We anticipated that this would happen - we are never finished - and yes, Ford DOES deserve to win now and then. To think that GM can come out with a car to make ford throw in the towel is simply foolhardy..." - fbodfather
radz28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2008, 06:01 PM   #25
a12ozbottle
 
Drives: 2006 GMC Yukon
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Jacksonville, fl
Posts: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoneye View Post
The displacement really doesn't matter when you factor in all this technology. I've heard you comment about the 6.2, and the 6.0, etc before...and I still don't understand your reasoning, 2010 5thgen......

"No replacement for displacement" is true enough. But why would any sane person/company continually increase the size of an engine (therefore increasing wieght and hindering handling, ect) when you could shrink the engine, while at the same time make it soooo much more potent, sooo much more fuel efficient - and then increase size from there as applicable.

Think 5.0/5.3/5.7 with 400hp... That would be Awesome!!

Increasing engine displacement does not have much affect on the weight of the engine. There are kits out there that take a ls1 to 455 cubic inches(little bit more crank but less block material)and probably weighs the same.
a12ozbottle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'm not sure if I'll buy a 5th Gen. Camaro Moose 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 68 06-13-2009 06:18 PM
Camaro ls3 news...true or false? Dark Knight Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 74 06-05-2008 06:29 PM
Gotcha! 'Gen V' Engine Details... DOHC! LSxcellent Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 28 10-10-2007 04:23 PM
Chevy Rev It Up Tour Dates-Featuring the 5th Gen Concept TAG UR IT 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 3 06-29-2007 04:30 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.