2009 Corvette ZR-1

[addyguy]

Seen this?

http://www.globeauto.com/servlet/story/R...lGlobeAuto/home

Supercharged 6.2-litre V-8 with 620 horses....wow. That'll be one fast 'Vette.....

 

[MrCritical]

Cool car indeed. The headline about weight reduction caught my eye.

The greatest obstacle in meeting future 35mpg CAFE is weight reduction. Why? Because weight reduction cost MONEY!

 

[glennc]

Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days, but also 96lb-ft/l of torque. Can anybody think of a production engine with a higher specific torque output? Not saying there isn't, just wondering....

I am impressed by the level of technology here, from a domestic manufacturer.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: glennc
...
I am impressed by the level of technology here, from a domestic manufacturer.


Bah-humbug!!! I won't be impressed until they release the hybrid 'vette! j/k, of course. Cool car.

 

[Steve S]

New vetts are really neat cars. A real value in a sport car.

 

[Steve S]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: glennc
...
I am impressed by the level of technology here, from a domestic manufacturer.


Bah-humbug!!! I won't be impressed until they release the hybrid 'vette! j/k, of course. Cool car.
A supercharged hybrid vette.

 

[glxpassat]

Originally Posted By: glennc
Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days,


I think it's even more remarkable today. Back in the 60's, factory horsepower was measured at the crank, but since the early 70's it's measured at the rear wheels. If they measured this motor at the crank, it would be more like 140 hp/l.

 

[mcrn]

Originally Posted By: glennc
Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days, but also 96lb-ft/l of torque. Can anybody think of a production engine with a higher specific torque output? Not saying there isn't, just wondering....

I am impressed by the level of technology here, from a domestic manufacturer.


The Mercedes AMG SL 65's twin Turbo 6.0 V12 has 738lb of TQ. There was an after market company that modified it and the only thing they used stock was the block. They ended up with over 1000 Lb's of TQ. They actually had to dial the TQ down because the cars anti slip or skid control stuff could not keep up with what all that TQ was doing to the rear end.

 

[Max_Wander]

If only the build quality can match the least of it's competitors, it would be quite attractive

 

[Warlord]

I'm not a fan of a supercharged vette. I love the sound of a normally aspirated v-8 and the whining and whooshing of a supercharger would ruin the whole experience for me. The c5-r 7.0L was normally aspirated and was rumoured to produce 700+ horsepower. Since the current Z06 engine is almost the same as the c5-r engine, why not just build that engine to 600+ hp. Those race engines were dead reliable.

 

[Tosh]

Originally Posted By: glennc
Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days, but also 96lb-ft/l of torque. Can anybody think of a production engine with a higher specific torque output? Not saying there isn't, just wondering....

2006 VW Golf TDI is close at 93 ft-lb per liter. Don't mess with a turbo diesel!

 

[Jonny Z]

Originally Posted By: glxpassat
Originally Posted By: glennc
Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days,


I think it's even more remarkable today. Back in the 60's, factory horsepower was measured at the crank, but since the early 70's it's measured at the rear wheels. If they measured this motor at the crank, it would be more like 140 hp/l.


No they are still measured at the crank. The old SAE standard pre 1970 uses gross HP; post 1970 calls for net HP - the engine must wear its belt and all the power robbing accessories.

 

[Buffman]

Originally Posted By: Jonny Z
Originally Posted By: glxpassat
Originally Posted By: glennc
Not only 100hp/l, which is not that remarkable these days,


I think it's even more remarkable today. Back in the 60's, factory horsepower was measured at the crank, but since the early 70's it's measured at the rear wheels. If they measured this motor at the crank, it would be more like 140 hp/l.


No they are still measured at the crank. The old SAE standard pre 1970 uses gross HP; post 1970 calls for net HP - the engine must wear its belt and all the power robbing accessories.


SI. I think it was pre 1972. New stuff is all measured as the motor would go in the car..

Matt

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: Max_Wander
If only the build quality can match the least of it's competitors, it would be quite attractive



You have to admit there has been tremendous strides in quality with each model year.

 

[Warlord]

The output of this engine isn't that impressive considering it is supercharged. A turbo 2.0L ecotec puts out 130lb/ft of torque/litre for a total of 260.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Max_Wander
If only the build quality can match the least of it's competitors, it would be quite attractive


So this car is not actually out yet, but we already know as a fact that it MUST have poor build quality???

WHY, because its a domestic/GM??
No, there is not too much GM/domestic bashing on this site, right?
I guess the importees on here must go after something, since stock for stock they have NOTHING that can answer the performance of this ride.

C'mon all of you Nipponphiles, let's hear some lambasting of the interior!!

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: Warlord
I'm not a fan of a supercharged vette. I love the sound of a normally aspirated v-8 and the whining and whooshing of a supercharger would ruin the whole experience for me. The c5-r 7.0L was normally aspirated and was rumoured to produce 700+ horsepower. Since the current Z06 engine is almost the same as the c5-r engine, why not just build that engine to 600+ hp. Those race engines were dead reliable.


I kind of agree, but you will NEVER get a full race engine totally DOT/EPA legal.
What you can do, albeit for a MUCH greater cost than this ZR1 will be is build a street legal C6RS.
Like the one Pratt & Miller/Katech built for Jay Leno (his can even run on E85), or anyone else with the coin.
It is BIG cube, NA power/torque, in a lightened body/chassis, and the newer ones will be available with a Hollinger sequential gearbox!!

 

[glennc]

Originally Posted By: Warlord
The output of this engine isn't that impressive considering it is supercharged. A turbo 2.0L ecotec puts out 130lb/ft of torque/litre for a total of 260.


Turbos and diesels have to be considered in a different category from a supercharged engine. Turbos are great if you want low-rpm power because they can give you high boost at low revs and blow off at higher revs.

Diesels run out of steam at 4000 - 4500rpm. If I'm not mistaken even the LeMans-winning diesels run in that range. They make a ton of torque but they have to, because they can not use high revs to get their power (hp = torque x rpm), and they have to have higher gearing to account for their lower revs, which cancels out a lot of their torque advantage. Modern diesels are GREAT engines even so.

The disadvantage of a turbo is lag and the disadvantage of a diesel is that their tremendous torque doesn't translate into equivalent high hp.

They're all just different, in terms of both the physics and their feel when driving.

Supercharged engines are nice partly because they feel just like extra-strong NA gas engines.

 

[Buffman]

Originally Posted By: Warlord
The output of this engine isn't that impressive considering it is supercharged. A turbo 2.0L ecotec puts out 130lb/ft of torque/litre for a total of 260.


That's a Direct Injection Motor also.

 

[Warlord]

I realize I was comparing apples to oranges but slapping a supercharger on the base engine seems like an easy way out to me (I also realize it isn't quite that simple). I would love it if gm worked with Lingenfelter Performance Engineering and put a LPE turbo vette into production.