wait until you all sit in it and pick apart the interior and fit and finish.
wait until you all sit in it and pick apart the interior and fit and finish.
Flight Service wrote:bravenrace wrote: In reply to Flight Service: He was talking about the inside dimensions, not outside.I know but the 2P also took the OP to be displacement not dimensions.
It's big because of the heads, and the heads are why it makes so much power from such a small displacement.
Don't get me wrong, I like the Vette, and I'm impressed with what GM has done with the pushrod style engine. I just don't think that 455hp out of 6.2 l of displacement is all that spectacular. It's good, its even impressive, but it tends to get hyped up almost as much as the physical size of the Coyote does.
Neither are worth getting as worked up about as the interwebz do.
fidelity101 wrote: wait until you all sit in it and pick apart the interior and fit and finish.
The C7 is alot nicer at the illusion of "quality" interior materials than the last C6 I was in('12 ZR1 with 60 miles) I cannot complain, it'll take seeing how it ages before I can say anything else about its insides.
bravenrace wrote:Flight Service wrote:It's big because of the heads, and the heads are why it makes so much power from such a small displacement. Don't get me wrong, I like the Vette, and I'm impressed with what GM has done with the pushrod style engine. I just don't think that 455hp out of 6.2 l of displacement is all that spectacular. It's good, its even impressive, but it tends to get hyped up almost as much as the physical size of the Coyote does.bravenrace wrote: In reply to Flight Service: He was talking about the inside dimensions, not outside.I know but the 2P also took the OP to be displacement not dimensions.
Do you have to do this every time?
Compare the HP/liter between diesels, or turbocharged cars, or two strokes, or rotaries... it makes just about as much sense. The two are fundamentally different methods of making the valves open and close, each with their own advantages and disadvantages - worse yet you know this, so let's just be happy with a world where a crazy fast vette with a super low hoodline and light weight can exist alongside a crazy fast Mustang.
tuna55 wrote:bravenrace wrote:Do you have to do this every time? Compare the HP/liter between diesels, or turbocharged cars, or two strokes, or rotaries... it makes just about as much sense. The two are fundamentally different methods of making the valves open and close, each with their own advantages and disadvantages - worse yet you know this, so let's just be happy with a world where a crazy fast vette with a super low hoodline and light weight can exist alongside a crazy fast Mustang.Flight Service wrote:It's big because of the heads, and the heads are why it makes so much power from such a small displacement. Don't get me wrong, I like the Vette, and I'm impressed with what GM has done with the pushrod style engine. I just don't think that 455hp out of 6.2 l of displacement is all that spectacular. It's good, its even impressive, but it tends to get hyped up almost as much as the physical size of the Coyote does.bravenrace wrote: In reply to Flight Service: He was talking about the inside dimensions, not outside.I know but the 2P also took the OP to be displacement not dimensions.
Yes, we have to do this every time. Why? Because everyone knows that GM can't make something good.
bravenrace wrote: It's big because of the heads, and the heads are why it makes so much power from such a small displacement. Don't get me wrong, I like the Vette, and I'm impressed with what GM has done with the pushrod style engine. I just don't think that 455hp out of 6.2 l of displacement is all that spectacular. It's good, its even impressive, but it tends to get hyped up almost as much as the physical size of the Coyote does.
I believe we are on the same page on this one.
In reply to Bobzilla & Tuna55:
I think he was more the less pointing out how stupid it is to:
A.) Call a 6.2L a small engine
B.) Claim it makes a lot of power from said small engine
tuna55 wrote: so let's just be happy with a world where a crazy fast vette with a super low hoodline and light weight can exist alongside a crazy fast Mustang.
Ford and Chevy fans get along???
and after all this thread jacking you guys wonder why I just post in the GGA and hotlink threads. 
In reply to tuna55:
First, I don't do "it" every time, whatever that is. Second, this is an automotive message board. If you don't like it, don't read it. Third, my original response was just pointing out that the Coyote made more HP per liter than the Vette. Not saying it's better, not saying it's equal. It was in "response" to another post that made it sound like the power of the Vette engine was something close to ground-breaking.
Lastly, you seem to want to inform me that the engines are different, right after I pointed out that the engines are different. Not seeing the point in that one myself.
Oh, and you apparently missed my
In reply to Flight Service:
Interestingly, I'm not a Ford or a Chevy fan. In fact I'm not a fan of any particular brand over another. I like all cars, and shockingly enough, I have opinions about them!
yamaha wrote: In reply to Bobzilla & Tuna55: I think he was more the less pointing out how stupid it is to: A.) Call a 6.2L a small engine B.) Claim it makes a lot of power from said small engine
A.) physically the LT1 6.2L IS a small engine. It has a lot of displacement, yes but it is physically small. B.) making 455hp/430tq from a 2 valve engine is a lot of power without forcing air into the cylinders.
In reply to Bobzilla:
How does one find 5th gear w/o getting lost? Is 7th gated like reverse?
Bobzilla wrote: Wow... big power, decent economy and a pretty package. Now if it was only $25k instead of $52k I'd own one tomorrow.
Wait 3 years. It'll be $25k. Way to go GM!
GM chose pushrods and displacement as the route to the HP/torque/economy/emissions targets and packaging benefits (it's small and relatively light). Whether last year's LS3 or the new LT1 -- it's a great compromise of power/torque and economy. You can compare HP with Ford's Coyote if you want to, but that doesn't really tell the whole story. It's the torque that's available from the 6.2L right off idle that makes the difference both in drivability and fuel mileage --- and it illustrates perfectly why GM made the choice to go with more displacement instead of more valves.
The car doesn't do much for me (don't like the required gold chain necklaces) but I look forward to crate versions of the new direct injected motor being available. Should drop right into the brick...
MichaelYount wrote:Bobzilla wrote: Wow... big power, decent economy and a pretty package. Now if it was only $25k instead of $52k I'd own one tomorrow.Wait 3 years. It'll be $25k. Way to go GM! GM chose pushrods and displacement as the route to the HP/torque/economy/emissions targets and packaging benefits (it's small and relatively light). Whether last year's LS3 or the new LT1 -- it's a great compromise of power/torque and economy. You can compare HP with Ford's Coyote if you want to, but that doesn't really tell the whole story. It's the torque that's available from the 6.2L right off idle that makes the difference both in drivability and fuel mileage --- and it illustrates perfectly why GM made the choice to go with more displacement instead of more valves. The car doesn't do much for me (don't like the required gold chain necklaces) but I look forward to crate versions of the new direct injected motor being available. Should drop right into the brick...
Hasn't the Supercharged ZR1 been out for 3 years now? Why can't I find one for 25k. Come on Michael find me one and I'll buy it.
Bobzilla wrote:yamaha wrote: In reply to Bobzilla & Tuna55: I think he was more the less pointing out how stupid it is to: A.) Call a 6.2L a small engine B.) Claim it makes a lot of power from said small engineA.) physically the LT1 6.2L IS a small engine. It has a lot of displacement, yes but it is physically small. B.) making 455hp/430tq from a 2 valve engine is a lot of power without forcing air into the cylinders.
generally OHC engines are larger due to the cams being in the head being forced to push down on the valves. I think one of the few manufactorers to get away with it are Honda and BMW who use rockers on their cams, but they are still "tall" engines compared to a pushrod engine.
you only need to compare the Ford 4.6 SOHC and DOHC to the original 5.0 to see the difference in size
If they can't produce a 6L+ V8 that gets at least 100hp and 100ft/lbs per liter, packages up into the space of a rotary, returns over 30mpg on the freeway, and produces less emissions than a hamster fart, packaged in a good handling, RWD platform that retails for under $30k with with A/C, ABS, and power everything with a 10year/100,000mile warranty, then screw them! I ain't buying!
Cotton wrote: Hasn't the Supercharged ZR1 been out for 3 years now? Why can't I find one for 25k. Come on Michael find me one and I'll buy it.
C'mon Cotton - even you can try apples to apples. ;) Or, if you like, find me a Supercharged ZR1 that sold for $52k new, and I'll find you a 3 year-old one for $25k.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2013-Chevrolet-Corvette-why-buy-used-6-speed-new-/151048615041?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item232b32f481#ht_897wt_1182
Bobzilla wrote:yamaha wrote: In reply to Bobzilla & Tuna55: I think he was more the less pointing out how stupid it is to: A.) Call a 6.2L a small engine B.) Claim it makes a lot of power from said small engineA.) physically the LT1 6.2L IS a small engine. It has a lot of displacement, yes but it is physically small. B.) making 455hp/430tq from a 2 valve engine is a lot of power without forcing air into the cylinders.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I guess I will in pointing out that it's not the physical dimensions that make the power.
It is as far as I'm concerned. I can fit an LT1 in a Miata, but a Coyote isn't gonna work. So yay pushrods! 
Flight Service wrote: The package is small, not the displacement.
That's what she said
This thread is silly.
Yeah when is the LT1 crate motor coming out :)
30+ mpg in something lighter maybe and 450hp?
Crate motor LT1 Exocet? Where do I sign up?
From a completely unbiased perspective: With the exception of displacement limited racing classes, HP/L is a completely worthless measurement for comparing any meaningful attributes of engines. It's no more valid when comparing a Coyote to a LT1, than it was when comparing a F20C to a LS1. At the end of the day the only factors that contribute or detract from an engines abilities are total output, overall efficiency, long term durability, running weight, and packaging envelope.
That being said, I wonder if they've elected to fix the prolonged high speed cornering oil starvation issues that they chose to completely neglect when "updating" the Gen III engines into the so-called "Gen IV" engines.
Hod Rod magazine had an article on the new LT1. One of the rigs in the picture let the engineers run the engine on an angle, simulating sustained high-g. Read into that what you will.
According to some sources, the LT1 crate will not be around immediately. GMPP is going to wait and see if there's demand.
You'll need to log in to post.
