GM's new 7L 500hp 7100rpm pissing competition.

[Billzilla]

I've often wonderd if when the popular engines went from side-valves to overhead valves did people debate like we are here?
And again did said people with NFI what they're talking about keep adding their $0.02 because they don't understand engines but think they do?

[BigMuz]

Nah mate, if the side valvers were replaced by ohv of half the capacity and 2/3 of the power it woul dbe the same. The side valvers would still be faster :D

Muz

[jampac]

The price of 65k US is in the US right. If it was sold here it would be close to 150k AUS? Getting close to merc or beamer money? Umm lets see, a GM or Merc/beamer. GM build quality and reliablity? GM after sales service? Maybe if you lived in the US, this is a bargain if you got the cash, but in OZ, it doesn't look that great.

But in the end 500hp is 500hp, and as long as its in a resonablely light nimble car, then its a winner, if the price and build quality is right.

Just wonder how the japs are going to go in the coming years with no more 206kw limit in place. Could we see even cheaper, better built 500hp sports cars, even thru their engines are slightly dimensionally bigger. I don't understand why this is such a big issue? Surely if it was, everyone saying this would be slobbing all over rotaries.

[PLAYA]

The rotary thing would open up the whole argument about its actual displacment is 3 times its claimed volume from mazda etc, then we would have 2 arguments not 1 lol.

[evil_weevil]

interesting read thats for sure!

many pages back, i agree with the hp/kg not per litre when looking at sports/performance cars cars!

[bugle]

Teh Piazza has 75hp/litre.. 4ZC1-T > LS7? :rotflol:

[Nero]

Not really an interesting read given its source. By that I do not mean that Autospeed has simply published a marketing article from GM (wonder how much they got paid?) but that none of the figures etc are independantly tested or verified in any way. Good marketing spin, irrelevant for Australia, Corvette's are generally crap on bumpy roads and who here can put 500bhp down on a real road with corners etc?? The traction control would stifle any use of the power and thus you would be using no more than 350bhp most of the time or you would fry the tyre/spear into a tree.
Will this be used in a HSV...probably in demo ones to see what the market thinks ala' 7lt Monaro and about as real a result.
The whole 'dinosaur engine' thing... give it a break. The car companies are there to make money and that is all they are there for. The american industry is set up for low tech production and their local market (or at least the really large part of it) demands low tech so that they feel they can fix it, though most could not even with the service manual and bob the mechanic leaning over their shoulder.
GM is in financial trouble, their big share of the SUV market has dropped by 12-15% and the japs are picking up the slack due to high fuel prices and long running quality control issues at GM USA. It is easy for GM to take the soft option and grab limelight, it is cheap for GM to take the low tech option as that is what they are set up for and many people will swallow wholesale the marketing spin, think GM is doing ok and forget about the rest of the cars.

[craigy]

The real question is profit.
If they sell enough to make a tidy profit, commercially thats all that matters. It is all good to make a really advanced car, but if you can't sell any, whats the point? There has been many examples of this before. I really don't think GM give a toss about some blokes on a forum (most of who will never purchase their car) who think their pushrod engine is outdated.

[DoctorEvil]

Is it lazy or economical? It is shitpiles easier (there fore cheaper) for chev to just bump up SB displacement (even to 10l if you like) than it is to develop a whole new engine.

While I appreciate the sentiment a stage 2 nizpro XR6T engine isnt all factory...

It is both lazy and economical, but it suits the target market therefore so be it. The point is its still a lazy motor in the grand scheme of things no matter which way you look at it really. It certainly does the job quite well and I'm sure it hauls quite fast mind you.

It isnt all factory, but then again it aint far from it either, and there would be no reason other than marketing and positioning reasons that Ford couldnt do the same thing for a few extra dollars (lets say an additional $10,000 for arguments sake).

[DoctorEvil]

The real question is profit.
If they sell enough to make a tidy profit, commercially thats all that matters. It is all good to make a really advanced car, but if you can't sell any, whats the point? There has been many examples of this before. I really don't think GM give a toss about some blokes on a forum (most of who will never purchase their car) who think their pushrod engine is outdated.

You are probably right but the whole point of a forum is for people to get together and theorise and talk shit right?

[hamish]

The LS7 is Highbrow Lowbrow, an M5 engine is Highbrow Highbrow.

[trent from punchy]

sounds like a decent engine..

now imagine how good it would be if it had 4 valves per cylinder and VVT.

[Sturmovik]

sounds like a decent engine..

now imagine how good it would be if it had 4 valves per cylinder and VVT.

Now imagine picking up a M5 5.0L V10 for $20,000, how good would that be....

[John]

CNC machined heads? Wow!! Marketing bullcrap or what??

I wonder how this might be different from how normal heads are manufactured?

Titanium rods? Now that is surprising. Can anyone verify this marketing article with a tech article somewhere?

Titanium valve springs? Again, I am amazed they went to this length.

John

[bugle]

lol CNC machined heads.. Haven't they been doing this for atleast 20 years? Or as long as CNC machining was possible?
Standard marketing bullshit though anyone with a DOHC V engine craps on about "quad cams" like it's some major advancement in engine design..