Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl
I think you are reading a lot into the statement made by one guy about one car (the Stingray) to come up with this broad generalization. If not, can you provide the quote in full so we can all see?
|
The statement wasn't just make by "one guy"...it was made by the Corvette chief engineer, who was quoted in Hotrod magazine as saying "the LT1 is faster, more responsive, and more efficient than a twin-turbo V6"
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl
Show me the data for one vehichle where the large V8 makes the same power as the TTV6 and as good or better fuel economy. That's all I'm asking.
|
Show me the data where a TTV6 gets better fuel economy than a V8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl
That is exactly the point and it is vailid. If you a engine that makes sufficient torque 2000 RPM to push the car at 70 MPH without lugging, and another engine that makes the same torque at 1200 RPM, then you would want different gearing to get optimal fuel economy for those two engines. So if they designed the transmission and differental gearing for the Stingray to work optimally with the torque curve of a 3.1L V4 (what the LT1 is running as when getting high fuel economy), then just stuck the TTV6 in there as a comparison, then they weren't trying to get the best mileage out of the V6 where they? Again, show me the data!
|
I don't know how gearing adds anything to this debate. It's not like the TTV6 and NA V8 would have much if any difference at all in gearing. They'd probably run within 100 rpm of each other at 70. The compression ratio differences between FI and NA would have more effect on efficiency than that. And if they didn't, if the V8 was able to run significantly slower than the TTV6 without lugging, wouldn't that seem to contradict the low RPM torque argument turbo proponents always make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMPrenger
What people like is that V8 rumble that is still possible with the LT1. If it weren't for that, it would change the argument significantly. I think the argument would be more about reliablity than anything else as some would say they want the TQ of the turbos, while others would say they'd rather have the N/A V8 and avoid costly turbo failure.
|
Exactly...I'd also like to add the more linear response/power delivery of a NA engine compared to a turbo engine.