GT350 vs. Z/28

[thePill]

My fear is that the six gen 1le might give a good run for the gt350 for its money! If you look at the current 1le stats which is even faster around the track than a m4 or m3 the new gen 1le might be some fearless track warrior! Again i m all assuming this according to the motortrend laptimes for 1le, m4, m3 and lexus rcf! Lets hope i m wrong! Cause i can't imagine a car that good for $42,000 :(

They don't have an NA V8 with the b@lls...

Sponsored

 

[1320']

I enjoy very much how the GM faithful are saying it wasnt possible to make a N/A motor with enough power for a new Z06 or how likely the Z/28 or ZL1 or 1LE or whatever alphabet soup overrated hunk of crap GM sells to the sheep...then Ford brings out a minimum 520 HP 5.2L N/A motor.

No GM, it wasn't impossible, you're just out of ideas and a lazy, arrogant company.

 

[Todd15Fastback]

I enjoy very much how the GM faithful are saying it wasnt possible to make a N/A motor with enough power for a new Z06 or how likely the Z/28 or ZL1 or 1LE or whatever alphabet soup overrated hunk of crap GM sells to the sheep...then Ford brings out a minimum 520 HP 5.2L N/A motor.

No GM, it wasn't impossible, you're just out of ideas and a lazy, arrogant company.

They (GM) needed more bailout monies to make a N/A motor

 

[Doc Holliday]

It is my impression from reading on the GM sites that they were working on a high output NA engine for the Z06, but were having trouble getting it to pass emissions at the power levels needed. Thus, the LT4 was born as a viable alternative. GM's 'problem' (if you want to call it that) is that they've fully invested themselves in sticking with the OHV, cam-in-block design while the rest of the automotive world (aside from Chrysler) have been moving full steam ahead with OHC designs that are capable of producing more hp/L. In NA form, GM's designs have relied more heavily on cubic inches to make more horsepower, which I think can make meeting emissions more challenging. I can appreciate the simplicity of the OHC design, and the the new GM LT series definitely appears to be the most technically advanced evolution of that design. However, you have to pause for a minute and think that there must be a reason that most of the world's manufacturers have abandoned the OHV design in favor of OHC designs.

 

[Erik427]

I enjoy very much how the GM faithful are saying it wasnt possible to make a N/A motor with enough power for a new Z06 or how likely the Z/28 or ZL1 or 1LE or whatever alphabet soup overrated hunk of crap GM sells to the sheep...then Ford brings out a minimum 520 HP 5.2L N/A motor.

No GM, it wasn't impossible, you're just out of ideas and a lazy, arrogant company.

TRUTH!

 

[Erik427]

It is my impression from reading on the GM sites that they were working on a high output NA engine for the Z06, but were having trouble getting it to pass emissions at the power levels needed. Thus, the LT4 was born as a viable alternative. GM's 'problem' (if you want to call it that) is that they've fully invested themselves in sticking with the OHV, cam-in-block design while the rest of the automotive world (aside from Chrysler) have been moving full steam ahead with OHC designs that are capable of producing more hp/L. In NA form, GM's designs have relied more heavily on cubic inches to make more horsepower, which I think can make meeting emissions more challenging. I can appreciate the simplicity of the OHC design, and the the new GM LT series definitely appears to be the most technically advanced evolution of that design. However, you have to pause for a minute and think that there must be a reason that most of the world's manufacturers have abandoned the OHV design in favor of OHC designs.

MORE TRUTH!

 

[Erik427]

Ford needs a Voodo Stock class in the nhra!

 

[thePill]

Doc speaks the heavy truth :( and it will cost them to go the other direction now. Fingers are crossed for a DOHC in the Zora at least.

It was a very poor decision to stay with an OHV V8. Chevy has spent so much money trying to fix the pushrod issue over the last decade it isn't funny.

Starting with the LS2, the issue was the pushrods protruded through the intake ports and restricted airflow. Come the LS3, they spent $$$ and engineered a fix... or so they thought...

The fix was moving the intake pushrods 0.25 of an inch into the head casting and out of the way of the intake port. Fixed right?

Nope... With Direct Injection on the table, Chevy engineered DI into an LS3 (in a Prototype Caddy Truck if I remember correctly). The issue now, the pushrod was in the way of the injectors :(

So... lets spend $820,000,000 on a new LT1 that elevates the cam in block design and flattens out the pushrod position. Now, the pushrods clear the damn ports and gave room to DI.

Because of the inefficient design, a pushrod V8 would need almost 7 liters to produce the power the 5.2 is. However, once that feat is accomplished, it will no longer pass emissions. The Cam in Block VVT isn't as independent and tunable as TiVCT. LT1's will require AFM and that blows...

They could of had a world class DOHC by now.

The issue is packaging, parasitic loss and emissions

 

[Erik427]

Doc speaks the heavy truth :( and it will cost them to go the other direction now. Fingers are crossed for a DOHC in the Zora at least.

It was a very poor decision to stay with an OHV V8. Chevy has spent so much money trying to fix the pushrod issue over the last decade it isn't funny.

Starting with the LS2, the issue was the pushrods protruded through the intake ports and restricted airflow. Come the LS3, they spent $$$ and engineered a fix... or so they thought...

The fix was moving the intake pushrods 0.25 of an inch into the head casting and out of the way of the intake port. Fixed right?

Nope... With Direct Injection on the table, Chevy engineered DI into an LS3 (in a Prototype Caddy Truck if I remember correctly). The issue now, the pushrod was in the way of the injectors :(

So... lets spend $820,000,000 on a new LT1 that elevates the cam in block design and flattens out the pushrod position. Now, the pushrods clear the damn ports and gave room to DI.

Because of the inefficient design, a pushrod V8 would need almost 7 liters to produce the power the 5.2 is. However, once that feat is accomplished, it will no longer pass emissions. The Cam in Block VVT isn't as independent and tunable as TiVCT. LT1's will require AFM and that blows...

They could of had a world class DOHC by now.

The issue is packaging, parasitic loss and emissions

Very correct...they could have had a world class motor. But they chose to go the cheap route instead.

 

[DABKO]

From this morning's Jalopnik website:

"The outgoing Chevrolet Camaro is good at a lot of things, like burnouts and sending people to jail for speeding and keeping up with Porsches on the race track. One thing it isn't is light — your average Camaro SS comes in around 3,900 pounds. Fortunately, the 2016 Camaro stands to lose "more than 200 pounds" on its new platform.

That's the official word from General Motors this morning, which is nice because it saves us from months of speculation about the car's weight like we did with a certain pony car from Ford. Still, there's no specific weight figures just yet, simply "more than 200 pounds" compared to the fifth-generation car, and GM doesn't say which model or models that refers to.

But if it's about 200 pounds across the board, an educated guess could be about 3,500 pounds for the V6 and 3,700 pounds for the V8. If that's true, the new Camaro's weight will be about in line with the 2015 Mustang.

As the Camaro moves to the Alpha platform used by the excellent Cadillac ATS and CTS, we knew some weight loss was inevitable.

How'd they drop the pounds? All sorts of ways, the General says:

A new architecture, one of the most mass-efficient ever from General Motors, is responsible for much of the weight savings. Additionally, dozens of small changes cumulatively contributed to shedding pounds. For example, the beam that supports the instrument panel is now made of aluminum, saving 9.7 pounds (4.4 kg) over the steel beam on the current generation Camaro.

In addition, the front and rear suspension assemblies are now aluminum, and links on some models feature an intricate, structurally optimized design made with a rigid composite material that’s even lighter than aluminum. As a result, the total weight for the suspension is 21 percent lighter compared to current steel-intensive assemblies."


http://jalopnik.com/the-2016-camaro-will-be-at-least-200-pounds-lighter-tha-1694488984

 

[Sasuketr]

Holly crap son of a guns did it! I will be impressed if a loaded ss will be right around 3700 lbs and a 3600 lb base ss! Ford needs to do something cause power to weight ratio is about to go to camaro this time! Camaro always had the hp and torque advantage and now if they suceed in weight then its game on!

 

[traxiii]

The new Mustang "platform" lost around 200lbs. too, but added more than that in mandated new safety equipment and features. I doubt Camaro loses much at all in total weight.

 

[Sasuketr]

The new Mustang "platform" lost around 200lbs. too, but added more than that in mandated new safety equipment and features. I doubt Camaro loses much at all in total weight.

It did as a platform maybe but addition of irs evened it out, and yes ton of air bags and other safety equipment with added luxury! I m sure a loaded camaro will still be more than 3700 lbs!

 

[mustangletback]

From this morning's Jalopnik website:

"The outgoing Chevrolet Camaro is good at a lot of things, like burnouts and sending people to jail for speeding and keeping up with Porsches on the race track. One thing it isn't is light — your average Camaro SS comes in around 3,900 pounds. Fortunately, the 2016 Camaro stands to lose "more than 200 pounds" on its new platform.

That's the official word from General Motors this morning, which is nice because it saves us from months of speculation about the car's weight like we did with a certain pony car from Ford. Still, there's no specific weight figures just yet, simply "more than 200 pounds" compared to the fifth-generation car, and GM doesn't say which model or models that refers to.

But if it's about 200 pounds across the board, an educated guess could be about 3,500 pounds for the V6 and 3,700 pounds for the V8. If that's true, the new Camaro's weight will be about in line with the 2015 Mustang.

As the Camaro moves to the Alpha platform used by the excellent Cadillac ATS and CTS, we knew some weight loss was inevitable.

How'd they drop the pounds? All sorts of ways, the General says:

A new architecture, one of the most mass-efficient ever from General Motors, is responsible for much of the weight savings. Additionally, dozens of small changes cumulatively contributed to shedding pounds. For example, the beam that supports the instrument panel is now made of aluminum, saving 9.7 pounds (4.4 kg) over the steel beam on the current generation Camaro.

In addition, the front and rear suspension assemblies are now aluminum, and links on some models feature an intricate, structurally optimized design made with a rigid composite material that’s even lighter than aluminum. As a result, the total weight for the suspension is 21 percent lighter compared to current steel-intensive assemblies."


http://jalopnik.com/the-2016-camaro-will-be-at-least-200-pounds-lighter-tha-1694488984

i wouldnt believe anything coming from Garbage Motors,until it could be looked at and tested by some people other than chevy trend,i mean motor trend and their side kick randy.as we all know they send out RINGER cars.:lol::lol:

 

[thePill]

The Corvette lost 99lbs too...

...but ended up heavier in the end.

The structure has to have lost some weight. I speculated a few post ago about 150 in the shell and another 50 in the panels.

However, they need to gain ZERO content weight now. That is the difficult part.

Just got word that the Alpha Short was almost 150lbs lighter than the Zeta. This needs more confirmation but it's a decent number.

This is also assumed to be the BIW only, no suspension or support panels.

I have no idea how much heavier the ATS-V's BIW was over the base Alpha Short. I also have no idea how much weight was gained from widening and maybe lengthening the 6th Gen.

I was told they could drop 75lbs every inch they reduced the wheelbase by. I'm not sure that is even remotely true.

3905 minus that 150 is 3745lbs. That would be monumental in this day and age.

...They are still pretty adamant that there is weight gain in every major component area. That 150lbs won't last long when standard equipment is so heavy now.



The C7 lost 99lbs in the BIW but ended up gaining 190lbs overall. The C7 switched to an all aluminum space frame and increase wheelbase and track.

According to Chevy, the C7 lost 99lbs in the frame and 37lbs in panels (150lbs overall). It went on to gain over 210lbs in content.

I am willing to bet the 6th Gen lost an additional 50-60lbs in panels along with the 150lbs.

The huge issue is the content weight. Even if they remove 200lbs from the structure, all that Corvette's 210lbs will be present on the Camaro. That gain will likely be a bit more due to heavier equipment.

All said and done, it could end up being 3900lbs again. Which would be pretty good considering it's a parts bin car.

No, I can't tell the future. I select my "random" topics based on future (or potentially future) press releases. I have some pretty decent sources now it seems.

The challenge now is saving that 200lbs from being absorb by content. We can expect that 210lbs of C7 content to weasel it's way into the Camaro. It will be a struggle to beat it. I also see the suspension was included and used to offset some weight. Brakes, wheels, tires, drivetrain, interior and safety still not accounted for.

Edit: Nor is any NVH material figured in yet... Thanks guys...

Sponsored