2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray unveiled

[torana355]

A mildly modified Small Block will result in a drastic increase in power. Small Block's are famous to be mod friendly.

I don't know why you're so fixated on HP/liter. It's an irrelevant statistic mostly. Corvette's are fuel efficient already despite having a 6.2 liter V8, OHV makes packaging easier( smaller than BMW's 4.0 V8....), lighter( 15 lb. lighter than Ford's 5.0 Coyote V8), etc. Like I said, both engine designs have their pro's and cons. But, saying an engine is pathetic simply because it has a low HP/liter is the pathetic part in this. Because you can scream HP/liter all you want, it doesn't make the competition a better sports car than the Corvette necessarily.

BTW, OHC is an older design than OHV. So GM is with the times with the most modern ICE tech.

The coyote engine, which is used here in Aus also in the Ford FPV DESTROYS LS engines. Even LS3's with a Cam, exhaust and tune package cant match the Coyote motor out of the factory. Ford actually understate the power that they make, when you chuck one on a dyno they put out a heap more power. This is common knowledge over here in Australia in the modified car scene.

 

[quagmire]

Ok another example is the new Ford supercharged 5L motor that is used in the Mustang over there in the states aswell as the FPV Ford over here in Aus. It is Lighter and more powerful then the Chevy motor with much better fuel economy. Like i said that 6.2L LS motor is a dinosaur.

There is no way the supercharged 5.8 liter V8 is lighter than the LS3. I already posted a few pages back that Ford's 5.0 liter V8 weighs 430 lb where the LS3 weighs 415 lb. So the supercharged 5.8 liter is not lighter than 415 lb.

 

[torana355]

There are dozens of RX-7, 5 series, 3 series running around with LS engines where I live. I wonder why lol. I'm gonna go ahead and say it. OHV pushrods are better than OHC engines.

LOL. Refer to my previous post.

----------

There is no way the supercharged 5.8 liter V8 is lighter than the LS3. I already posted a few pages back that Ford's 5.0 liter V8 weighs 430 lb where the LS3 weighs 415 lb. So the supercharged 5.8 liter is not lighter than 415 lb.

Its a supercharged 5L not 5.8..... Where did you get 5.8L from?

 

[quagmire]

The coyote engine, which is used here in Aus also in the Ford FPV DESTROYS LS engines. Even LS3's with a Cam, exhaust and tune package cant match the Coyote motor out of the factory. Ford actually understate the power that they make, when you chuck one on a dyno they put out a heap more power. This is common knowledge over here in Australia in the modified car scene.

Right "destroys" the LS engines. That's why the Mustang GT and Camaro SS are pretty much equal in performance( if the 5.0 is underrated, the lighter Mustang should destroy the heavier Camaro).......

----------

Its a supercharged 5L not 5.8..... Where did you get 5.8L from?

The Mustang GT500 has a 5.8 liter Supercharged V8. Since you referenced the Mustang having a supercharged engine, that is the only supercharged V8 the Mustang offers from the factory.

 

[Muscle Master]

LOL. Refer to my previous post.

----------


Its a supercharged 5L not 5.8..... Where did you get 5.8L from?

I'll raise you the titanium 7.0 LS7...

I'm a big fan of the 5.0 myself... But to say its better than the LS3... Come on

 

[torana355]

Right "destroys" the LS engines. That's why the Mustang GT barely edges out the Camaro SS in performance metrics( if the 5.0 is underrated, the margin for the lighter Mustang should be bigger than a tenth of a second.....).......

The same two engines are used in the FPV's and Commodores over here and the Ford puts out much more power on a dyno. Im not sure on the weight difference between the Mustang and Camaro or if the Mustang motor is detuned over in the states but in Aus the Coyote engine dominates.

----------

The Mustang GT500 has a 5.8 liter Supercharged V8. Since you referenced the Mustang having a supercharged engine, that is the only supercharged V8 the Mustang offers from the factory.

Ok now were are getting somewhere, it seems ford Australia use a different version of the coyote motor, We have a 5L supercharged V8, not 5.8. What power does the 5.8 L put out?

 

[quagmire]

The same two engines are used in the FPV's and Commodores over here and the Ford puts out much more power on a dyno. Im not sure on the weight difference between the Mustang and Camaro or if the Mustang motor is detuned over in the states but in Aus the Coyote engine dominates.

The Mustang is significantly lighter than the Camaro. So if the 5.0 is underrated, the Mustang's numbers should be a lot better than the Camaro's rather it being a wash....

Ok now were are getting somewhere, it seems ford Australia use a different version of the coyote motor, We have a 5L supercharged V8, not 5.8. What power does the 5.8 L put out?

The 5.8 makes 662 HP/631 lb.-ft. of torque.

Despite the Camaro ZL1 being down 80 HP and 50 some lb. ft. of torque and again weighing significantly more than the GT500, it is still faster around the track. Better handling and brakes FTW.

 

[Muscle Master]

The Mustang is significantly lighter than the Camaro. So if the 5.0 is underrated, the Mustang's numbers should be a lot better than the Camaro's rather it being a wash....

It's really a drivers race on the quarter mile. 5.0s nice that they are. Are not all that mod friendly. I believe that #9 piston likes to snap once in a while lol

 

[torana355]

The Mustang is significantly lighter than the Camaro. So if the 5.0 is underrated, the Mustang's numbers should be a lot better than the Camaro's rather it being a wash....

Here is a link to the motor Ford Australia use. Its a supercharged 5L.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/15/fpv-announces-450-hp-supercharged-gt-rspec/

----------

The Mustang is significantly lighter than the Camaro. So if the 5.0 is underrated, the Mustang's numbers should be a lot better than the Camaro's rather it being a wash....



The 5.8 makes 662 HP/631 lb.-ft. of torque.

And that motor in the Mustang does not destroy the Camaro, excuse my questions as im from Australia, we don't have either car here.??

 

[Muscle Master]

Here is a link to the motor Ford Australia use. Its a supercharged 5L.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/15/fpv-announces-450-hp-supercharged-gt-rspec/

----------



And that motor in the Mustang does not destroy the Camaro, excuse my questions as im from Australia, we don't have either car here.??

Not impressed... Chrysler's 6.4 Hemi makes 475 Hp and torque.. And it's underrated

And that motor in the Mustang does not destroy the Camaro, excuse my questions as im from Australia, we don't have either car here.??

Not really.. There really close to each other with the edge going towards the mustang

 

[quagmire]

Here is a link to the motor Ford Australia use. Its a supercharged 5L.

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/15/fpv-announces-450-hp-supercharged-gt-rspec/

That doesn't destroy the new LT1( again the 450 HP numbers aren't final....)

And that motor in the Mustang does not destroy the Camaro, excuse my questions as im from Australia, we don't have either car here.??

In power yes. The LSA in the Camaro ZL1 makes 580 HP/553 lb.ft. of torque( the LSA is a detuned LS9).

But, despite the weight and huge power advantage the Mustang GT500 has, the ZL1 is faster around a track because it handles better and has better brakes.

 

[torana355]

Not impressed... Chrysler's 6.4 Hemi makes 475 Hp and torque.. And it's underrated

Well that FPV on the Dyno actually puts out the 450BHP At the wheels, that is how underrated it is lol. It also uses a hell of a lot less fuel that a 6.4L hemi lol.

 

[Muscle Master]

Well that FPV on the Dyno actually puts out the 450BHP At the wheels, that is how underrated it is lol. It also uses a hell of a lot less fuel that a 6.4L hemi lol.

That's a bit fair to say... On the highway it's gets 25mpg

But who cares bout mileage when buying high horsepower cars when half the time it's rpms are always above 5k

 

[quagmire]

Well that FPV on the Dyno actually puts out the 450BHP At the wheels, that is how underrated it is lol. It also uses a hell of a lot less fuel that a 6.4L hemi lol.

450 wHP unmodified? Impressive. Thought it had to be underrated considering a NA 5.0 makes about 400-420 HP( depending on model).....

I would be hesitant to use fuel economy since Australia and the US have different fuel economy testing procedures and the models being used are not for sale in both countries. But going off a review that I found of that Falcon with the 4.0 V6, they got 27 MPG. The Corvette is more than capable of hitting those numbers( especially since the C7 will be more fuel efficient than the C6 which is currently rated at 26 MPG and real life owners have managed to get 26-28 MPG from what I have read).....

 

[torana355]

450 wHP unmodified? Impressive.

.

Yes i thought so, a few dyno operators i know over here that specialize in LS motors were blown away by the figures the little Ford 5L put out. Here is a link to their race car

http://www.castlehillperformance.com.au/page.php?id=14

 

[GermanyChris]

I think the vette will end up closer to 525 than 450..

for reference:

C63 AMG
451/443

6.4 Hemi
470/470

6.1 hemi
425/420

 

[trvsglr]

I just got this on Gran Turismo 5 the other day, Great car!

 

[jasonvp]

I think the vette will end up closer to 525 than 450..

Very unlikely that the base car will have anything approaching 500 ponies from the factory. A few folks have mentioned the magic "fuel economy" phrase a few times, and unfortunately it's playing much larger role in the Corvette development than in previous generations.

DI tech helps raise both HP and fuel economy, but only to a point. After that point, it's a give-and-take formula just like it is with any other engine: to increase FE, you have to either tune it very lean (dangerous) or you drop the HP.

The chief engineer, Tadge Juechter, has been quoted as saying he can't create the car in a vacuum when it comes to fuel economy. He knows the car will end up being a drag on GM's overall CAFE numbers, but he still has to reduce that drag as much as he can.

Given that, I'll bet he has a MPG number he's trying to hit. Once he's got the tune in place to deliver that MPG, he'll submit the engine for SAE certification and we'll all know the final HP and torque numbers. Expecting it to approach 500HP is probably wishful thinking.

jas

 

[GermanyChris]

Very unlikely that the base car will have anything approaching 500 ponies from the factory. A few folks have mentioned the magic "fuel economy" phrase a few times, and unfortunately it's playing much larger role in the Corvette development than in previous generations.

DI tech helps raise both HP and fuel economy, but only to a point. After that point, it's a give-and-take formula just like it is with any other engine: to increase FE, you have to either tune it very lean (dangerous) or you drop the HP.

The chief engineer, Tadge Juechter, has been quoted as saying he can't create the car in a vacuum when it comes to fuel economy. He knows the car will end up being a drag on GM's overall CAFE numbers, but he still has to reduce that drag as much as he can.

Given that, I'll bet he has a MPG number he's trying to hit. Once he's got the tune in place to deliver that MPG, he'll submit the engine for SAE certification and we'll all know the final HP and torque numbers. Expecting it to approach 500HP is probably wishful thinking.

jas

Fuel economy is effected as much or possibly more by wind resistance that HP. Especially given modern cylinder de-activation.

Here is quick google search.

http://phors.locost7.info/phors06.htm

It's a bit old but still applies.

It takes lost of HP to overcome wind resistance, reduce wind resistance and you can reduce power i.e. improve fuel economy.

 

[torana355]

I would be hesitant to use fuel economy since Australia and the US have different fuel economy testing procedures and the models being used are not for sale in both countries. But going off a review that I found of that Falcon with the 4.0 V6, they got 27 MPG. The Corvette is more than capable of hitting those numbers( especially since the C7 will be more fuel efficient than the C6 which is currently rated at 26 MPG and real life owners have managed to get 26-28 MPG from what I have read).....

A few points, the 6 cylinder Ford use is a straight six (not a v6) and its actually a fairly old engine and not the most economical, i was just using it as an example of the poor power output from the Chevy motor. Secondly a Corvette is not going to get the same mixed fuel consumption (both highway and city driving) as a lower CI motor. For example the 3.6L SIDI Alloytec V6 will have much better MPG then the LS motor in the Corvette. Don't kid yourself into thinking a 6.2L pushrod Corvette is more fuel efficient then say a 5L motor with a more modern engine.

 

[jasonvp]

Fuel economy is effected as much or possibly more by wind resistance that HP. Especially given modern cylinder de-activation.
[clip]
reduce wind resistance and you can reduce power i.e. improve fuel economy.

Of course. The car's shape is set in stone at this point. We know the Cd is around .30 give or take. The frontal area is known (at least to GM, I don't know the measurements). The aero for the car is done.

On top of that, like with any other Corvette, they have to tune the aero for more than just wind resistance. Bear in mind the car needs down force at speed, and down force is drag which affects the car's slipperiness. Every time they reach into the air flow to cool something or provide down force, like:

• The intake in the front that rams air into the radiator and then vents it through the hood and over the car
• The intake in the front that vents air towards the front brake rotors
• The intakes on the rear haunches that vent air over the heat exchangers for the transmission and differential
• The intakes under the rear of the car that vent air towards the rear brake rotors

..that upsets the smooth flow of air over the car. All of these interruptions are perfectly functional, useful, and even needed. But they cut into the car's aero and make it less slippery.

What's left? Add lightness to the car (an uneasy task) and tune the engine.

Guess which one they're not done doing yet? ...

jas

 

[GermanyChris]

Of course. The car's shape is set in stone at this point. We know the Cd is around .30 give or take. The frontal area is known (at least to GM, I don't know the measurements). The aero for the car is done.

On top of that, like with any other Corvette, they have to tune the aero for more than just wind resistance. Bear in mind the car needs down force at speed, and down force is drag which affects the car's slipperiness. Every time they reach into the air flow to cool something or provide down force, like:

• The intake in the front that rams air into the radiator and then vents it through the hood and over the car
• The intake in the front that vents air towards the front brake rotors
• The intakes on the rear haunches that vent air over the heat exchangers for the transmission and differential
• The intakes under the rear of the car that vent air towards the rear brake rotors

..that upsets the smooth flow of air over the car. All of these interruptions are perfectly functional, useful, and even needed. But they cut into the car's aero and make it less slippery.

What's left? Add lightness to the car (an uneasy task) and tune the engine.

Guess which one they're not done doing yet? ...

jas

The CoD Will most likely be less than .30 being that the 12 model is .29. the 11 ZO6 had 505HP out of a 7.0L and got 24MPG. So your saying that in three years we can't reduce the CoD, make the same close to the same HP with 800cc less displacement and increase efficiency? especially with GM getting better with active fuel management..

 

[jasonvp]

The CoD Will most likely be less than .30

It isn't.

being that the 12 model is .29.

This car is: wider, longer, and uses far more passive air ramming and venting than the C6 does. Those increase the Cd.

So your saying that in three years we can't reduce the CoD, make the same close to the same HP with 800cc less displacement and increase efficiency? especially with GM getting better with active fuel management..

GM doesn't need "the same" fuel economy, they need MORE fuel economy out of the base Corvette. You're comparing an uprated model that didn't sell in any noteworthy volume to the base model which does sell in volume. The Corvette's curse of success is the volume in which it sells, and the affect that volume has on GM's total CAFE numbers. Because of that, they have to push the FE number to much higher levels.

When they get that number and are happy with it, we'll know the final HP numbers. They're done with the car's shape and its mass. The last part of the formula is engine tuning.

jas

 

[GermanyChris]

It isn't.



This car is: wider, longer, and uses far more passive air ramming and venting than the C6 does. Those increase the Cd.



GM doesn't need "the same" fuel economy, they need MORE fuel economy out of the base Corvette. You're comparing an uprated model that didn't sell in any noteworthy volume to the base model which does sell in volume. The Corvette's curse of success is the volume in which it sells, and the affect that volume has on GM's total CAFE numbers. Because of that, they have to push the FE number to much higher levels.

When they get that number and are happy with it, we'll know the final HP numbers. They're done with the car's shape and its mass. The last part of the formula is engine tuning.

jas

We're still a MY out nothing is set in stone, and we're not talking redesign were talking adjusting the flow characteristics of cooling.

I didn't compare the sales numbers to the ZO6 and I care very little about CAFE. The point was simple 7.0L+505HP=24MPG 3 years prior. It's not a stretch the say 6.2L+505HP=29MPG. Again AFM is an engine tweek..

 

[jasonvp]

We're still a MY out nothing is set in stone, and we're not talking redesign were talking adjusting the flow characteristics of cooling.

We're not really a MY out. The new cars will be delivered in the fall to customers. The magazines will have their hands on them in the summer for testing. They need to be done with all of that tuning and whatnot before summer. And since the Power Train engineer has said they intend to submit the LT1 for SAE certification during "first quarter of 2013" it means they're going to be done with the tuning before the end of March.

I didn't compare the sales numbers to the ZO6 and I care very little about CAFE.

I know you didn't; I'm trying to enlighten you to all of the concerns GM has when it comes to power, FE, etc for the car. THEY have to care aboue CAFE numbers. For whatever reason, it's not getting through to you.

It's not a stretch the say 6.2L+505HP=29MPG. Again AFM is an engine tweek..

It's not going to happen. It'll be closer to 460 or so, plus or minus a few.

jas