ZL1-LSA-MR+LS7+Pedders Coilovers = Z28?

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

This is by no means a pissing contest..all just speculation and point of view...I refer back to the comment that says GM won't build a "one off" engine just for the Z/28..engines are all about heads and cams, I am SURE they can get 480hp out of a GenV 5.3, and why wouldn't they do a "one off"? FORD did. Since all of this is speculation anyway cause as was previously pointed out, we know jack about the GenV motors anyway. Let's just say its possible, GM doesn't have to do anything to this mystery engine when the 6th gen rolls around 3-4 years from now and the car is already lets say 400lbs lighter..the stats for the 6th gen would best the 5th gen just for that one reason.

And I still say GM won't do a one-off for a Z/28 right now. Now they might take a 5th gen SBC from the Vette and drop it into a Z/28, but I truly don't think they will do a one off for the Z/28 alone (even just heads and cams requires research, testing, validation, certification and oh yes, a bigger budget. I'm really not trying to be a pessimist here, I'm just going with their recent trends. Ten to fifteen years ago, it could happen, today and the near future I don't think so, but that's just my opinion based on what I've seen Chevy/GM doing the last number of years. How about the awesome one off they did for the ZL1 (the most powerful Camaro ever!)? Oh, that's right, it was the LSA out of the CTS-V. Or maybe the SS engine they did for the fifth gen. Camaro. Oh, that was the LS3 out of the Vette. Or how about that great V6 they did for the fifth gen. Camaro? Oh yeah, that one came over from Cadillac too. See where this is going? It's not that they don't have the knowledge and expertise to do it, I think in the post bailout GM with the economy where it currently is, they don't want to do it, not can't do it. Then again, you may be absolutely right and GM will surprise us, it has happened before and could happen again.
Clyde

[Mikes SS]

I see you're point but don't forget the LSA got quite a power bump before putting it in the ZL1..catch my drift? I think it is too expected for GM to slap an LS7 into a Camaro and call it a day, I personally feel that they have a trick or two up their sleeve. All this "FAITH" we are supposed to keep and that's all we get? Nah I don't think so. I may be naive but that's what I am hoping for. We all may want different things here and there, but what we all on this forum have in common is we want the car and we want it to perform. GM knows that and I don't think they want to be in the business of disappointment. New technology is on the brink we have no clue about numbers yet and yet some are ready to throw in the towel. I just don't want to under estimate what they have going on and have them get the feeling that the only way we'll buy the car is if it has an LS7 in it.

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

I see you're point but don't forget the LSA got quite a power bump before putting it in the ZL1..catch my drift? I think it is too expected for GM to slap an LS7 into a Camaro and call it a day, I personally feel that they have a trick or two up their sleeve. All this "FAITH" we are supposed to keep and that's all we get? Nah I don't think so. I may be naive but that's what I am hoping for. We all may want different things here and there, but what we all on this forum have in common is we want the car and we want it to perform. GM knows that and I don't think they want to be in the business of disappointment. New technology is on the brink we have no clue about numbers yet and yet some are ready to throw in the towel. I just don't want to under estimate what they have going on and have them get the feeling that the only way we'll buy the car is if it has an LS7 in it.

I don't underestimate their capabilities and I'd buy a technically updated 302cid Chevy in a heartbeat, I just don't see it happening. I just happen to think that at the moment the LS7 is the only logical engine in their lineup that meets the criteria for the current Camaro, the lighter Alpha chassis version opens up other possibilities. I'm axious to see what they bring to the table with the next gen SBCs beyond what little we have heard rumored.
Clyde

[Bhobbs]

I thought the LSA got a power bump because they used different intakes and exhausts, not because they changed the long block itself.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

I thought the LSA got a power bump because they used different intakes and exhausts, not because they changed the long block itself.

You would be correct. It was in the packaging.

[Bhobbs]

If the blocks are all the same size and almost the weight, and there aren't any displacement limits, why not go with the biggest motor you can?

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

If the blocks are all the same size and almost the weight, and there aren't any displacement limits, why not go with the biggest motor you can?

That's what I keep asking. There are no more BB being put in new cars, yet I think some are still confused regarding that.

[Mikes SS]

Sounds like y'all have size issues...if you can get comparable HP out of a smaller motor, then why not? Gas mileage is better and higher revving

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

Sounds like y'all have size issues...if you can get comparable HP out of a smaller motor, then why not? Gas mileage is better and higher revving

Smaller motor does not automatically translate to better gas mileage, so maybe, maybe not. Higher revving is also not a given with a smaller motor. And generally the smaller motor will have less torque though that is not an absolute either. The total engine design determines the final outcome, not displacement.
Clyde

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

Sounds like y'all have size issues...if you can get comparable HP out of a smaller motor, then why not? Gas mileage is better and higher revving

Not necessarily. Depends on many things.

[Bhobbs]

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

Sounds like y'all have size issues...if you can get comparable HP out of a smaller motor, then why not? Gas mileage is better and higher revving

Well what if it doesn't?

[DGthe3]

Mike ... I truly didn't mean to reply to 3 of your posts with this (and nobody elses). Believe me when I say that I'm not trying to single you out here. But thats just the way things work out sometimes.

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

Why shouldn't it? you mean to tell me the engineers in Dearborn are better than the ones in Detroit?

Since when is 'hp/L' the only criteria for making a better engine?

hp, torque, powerband, cost, weight, fuel economy, durability ... all these things figure into whats 'better'. This is also why I feel that the LS series of engines are currently the best in the world. Not because of the hp/L (because what kind of enthusiast takes that stat as anything more than a means to an end?) but because as an overall package, it kicks ass. I expect more of the same with the new LT series in a year or two.

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

I see you're point but don't forget the LSA got quite a power bump before putting it in the ZL1..catch my drift? I think it is too expected for GM to slap an LS7 into a Camaro and call it a day, I personally feel that they have a trick or two up their sleeve. All this "FAITH" we are supposed to keep and that's all we get? Nah I don't think so. I may be naive but that's what I am hoping for. We all may want different things here and there, but what we all on this forum have in common is we want the car and we want it to perform. GM knows that and I don't think they want to be in the business of disappointment. New technology is on the brink we have no clue about numbers yet and yet some are ready to throw in the towel. I just don't want to under estimate what they have going on and have them get the feeling that the only way we'll buy the car is if it has an LS7 in it.

That 'bump' is largely due to the Camaro allowing freer intake & exhaust flow over the CTS (good for around 20 of the 24 hp gain). Not sure what the reasons are exactly, but if I had to guess I'd say that its because even a supercharged Cadillac needs to be somewhat quiet & refined. These issues are less important for a musclebound Camaro.. As for the remainder? My guess is that its from the electric power steering.

Now, would I be willing to accept a Z28 as something other having an LS7? Sure. But an LS3 with a CAI & loud(er) exhaust won't exactly cut it either. Developing a special engine with various unique aspects isn't really the GM way. They tend to take off-the-shelf parts & combine them to make something special. Knowing that, I feel the best chance we have of seeing a proper Z28 lies with the LS7.

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

Sounds like y'all have size issues...if you can get comparable HP out of a smaller motor, then why not? Gas mileage is better and higher revving

For the record, the LS7 is the highest revving V8 in GM's lineup (and is one of their highest revving engines of any type s well)

If I'm ever given the choice of displacement or rpms for equivelent power, I will take dispacement every day of the week (& twice on Sunday). Why? Area under the curve. More cubes = more torque (generally speaking). More torque = more low/mid rpm power. More low/mid rpm torque = more fun/options when driving. I remember reading an older Corvette (C4-ish) review where they included a line something like "Any corner, any gear, any time" as a little thank-you to the torque that the engine produced. I think that perfectly sums up the logic that most of us have for wanting an LS7 in the Z28.

If you've got an engine that only works at high revs, it becomes rather aenemic at low rpm levels (ie, where you spend the bulk of your time driving on public roads). If you've got to work around a specific rules (such as racing displacement limits & homalgamation) then you make the best of what you're given. But in the grand scheme of things? There is no replacement for displacement.

[wildpaws]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Mike ... I truly didn't mean to reply to 3 of your posts with this (and nobody elses). Believe me when I say that I'm not trying to single you out here. But thats just the way things work out sometimes.
Since when is 'hp/L' the only criteria for making a better engine?

hp, torque, powerband, cost, weight, fuel economy, durability ... all these things figure into whats 'better'. This is also why I feel that the LS series of engines are currently the best in the world. Not because of the hp/L (because what kind of enthusiast takes that stat as anything more than a means to an end?) but because as an overall package, it kicks ass. I expect more of the same with the new LT series in a year or two.



That 'bump' is largely due to the Camaro allowing freer intake & exhaust flow over the CTS (good for around 20 of the 24 hp gain). Not sure what the reasons are exactly, but if I had to guess I'd say that its because even a supercharged Cadillac needs to be somewhat quiet & refined. These issues are less important for a musclebound Camaro.. As for the remainder? My guess is that its from the electric power steering.

Now, would I be willing to accept a Z28 as something other having an LS7? Sure. But an LS3 with a CAI & loud(er) exhaust won't exactly cut it either. Developing a special engine with various unique aspects isn't really the GM way. They tend to take off-the-shelf parts & combine them to make something special. Knowing that, I feel the best chance we have of seeing a proper Z28 lies with the LS7.


For the record, the LS7 is the highest revving V8 in GM's lineup (and is one of their highest revving engines of any type s well)

If I'm ever given the choice of displacement or rpms for equivelent power, I will take dispacement every day of the week (& twice on Sunday). Why? Area under the curve. More cubes = more torque (generally speaking). More torque = more low/mid rpm power. More low/mid rpm torque = more fun/options when driving. I remember reading an older Corvette (C4-ish) review where they included a line something like "Any corner, any gear, any time" as a little thank-you to the torque that the engine produced. I think that perfectly sums up the logic that most of us have for wanting an LS7 in the Z28.

If you've got an engine that only works at high revs, it becomes rather aenemic at low rpm levels (ie, where you spend the bulk of your time driving on public roads). If you've got to work around a specific rules (such as racing displacement limits & homalgamation) then you make the best of what you're given. But in the grand scheme of things? There is no replacement for displacement.

Well said and full of factual info! Listen, as much as I loved the DZ302 in my '69 Z/28, it was a little aggravating to live with in traffic around town due to the lack of torque. I bought that Z/28 because of it road handling capabilities, not because of it's small displacement engine which btw probably had one of the worst mpg fuel economy in the Chevy lineup that year, even when you tried to drive gently and conserve gas. The DZ engine was certainly designed and purpose built and very good at accomplishing it's designed mission, but it was not the perfect engine for every application just because it was a smaller displacement.
Clyde

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by wildpaws

Well said and full of factual info! Listen, as much as I loved the DZ302 in my '69 Z/28, it was a little aggravating to live with in traffic around town due to the lack of torque. I bought that Z/28 because of it road handling capabilities, not because of it's small displacement engine which btw probably had one of the worst mpg fuel economy in the Chevy lineup that year, even when you tried to drive gently and conserve gas. The DZ engine was certainly designed and purpose built and very good at accomplishing it's designed mission, but it was not the perfect engine for every application just because it was a smaller displacement.
Clyde

I'm sure mpg was really awful with the cross-ram dual carbs on it.