[DenverTaco07]

Originally Posted by Mountain

Understand that, but, from what it seems, the LT2 is a reworked LT1. Not some totally brand-new engine, with a bunch of new crazy tech that was developed fresh just for the C8 and it's electronic architecture.

What I am saying is that the engine, itself, has no absolute tie to the C8 architecture. The intake, exhaust, ignition, etc, are all things that could be "tuned-in" to work with the Camaro's engine controller and adjusted to the Camaro's current systems; if anything, a similar part that is compatible with the Camaro's system could be used for the data input/output. It's not like there are specific sensors, throttle bodies and whatnot made specifically for the LT2/C8 combination that HAVE to be used otherwise you cant control the LT2 (thus making the LT2 exclusive to the C8). It's still a Gen V, LT-family, OHV V8...



I saw some cut-aways of the LT2. The two things I noted were that (1.) the throttle body is bigger (LT5 95MM?) and (2.) the intake manifold is a similar design as the LT1, but looks to have longer and wider runners. Of course, the headers (3.) are drastically different. Likely, the heads (4.) are improved and the camshaft (5.) is optimized for the new intake system, headers and improved cylinder heads.

I think the Camaro, if and when a 7th gen eventually comes out, will be a new animal from what is used to...

Throttle body:

87mm single bore (electronic)

according to released specs.

Well, maybe they can work on LT1 then IDK. but, i should have realized because i live it everyday...nothing done right is ever easy.

[ModernCamaroZ28Fan]

Probably not, the SS 1LE beats the 2014 Z/28 in every way, and there is no way they are going to make a Z28 with less power than before without crazy weight reduction.

The rumor is too easily debunked my friend. The only place you can get expect the LT2, is in the 2014 Camaro SS.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Mountain

Understand that, but, from what it seems, the LT2 is a reworked LT1. Not some totally brand-new engine, with a bunch of new crazy tech that was developed fresh just for the C8 and it's electronic architecture.

What I am saying is that the engine, itself, has no absolute tie to the C8 architecture. The intake, exhaust, ignition, etc, are all things that could be "tuned-in" to work with the Camaro's engine controller and adjusted to the Camaro's current systems; if anything, a similar part that is compatible with the Camaro's system could be used for the data input/output. It's not like there are specific sensors, throttle bodies and whatnot made specifically for the LT2/C8 combination that HAVE to be used otherwise you cant control the LT2 (thus making the LT2 exclusive to the C8). It's still a Gen V, LT-family, OHV V8...



I saw some cut-aways of the LT2. The two things I noted were that (1.) the throttle body is bigger (LT5 95MM?) and (2.) the intake manifold is a similar design as the LT1, but looks to have longer and wider runners. Of course, the headers (3.) are drastically different. Likely, the heads (4.) are improved and the camshaft (5.) is optimized for the new intake system, headers and improved cylinder heads.

I think the Camaro, if and when a 7th gen eventually comes out, will be a new animal from what is used to...

We probably agree more than we seem to. I'm mostly coming at it from the perspective that, since there are a number of unknowns ... I don't assume it'll be easy. And the more GM has to do, the less likely they are to do it. Call it laziness, call it pragmatism, call it efficiency, whatever.



And like I said, it could be a very trivial task and we'll see it in a year or so on the 6th gen SS.

[Jeb114]

The motor was built to be a mid engine mounted motor. No Bosses for motor mounts, rearward intake system. dry sump oiling system with rearranged flow for mid mounting. and its a high deck motor which means too high for front mounting. This motor was designed for a mid engine car and the whole architecture will not work in a front mount location. this is a C8 only motor.

[GrimReaperSS]

Here's the Motortrend article the pictures above are from, more engine details in the article as well (after testing the link, I found it takes you to a set of pics first, just click the X in corner of the pic box and the article will appear). I.e. the dry sump is part of the engine, not bolted to the car anymore. 3 oil pumps in engine (2 in the crankcase and 1 in the valley), 7.5 quarts of oil, virtually no oil pan. As stated before, the intake is taller and equal length runners, mounted backwards on the engine. Headers are obviously different, equal length 4 into 1 tubes designed for mid-engine placement. The cam profiles are virtually the same with the exception of the exhaust lobes, slightly taller. The new intake and exhaust are what really help this engine breath better and account for more power. If you put it back in a front engine application, those things will need to change and likely be right back to where the LT1 is.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/take...vette-engine-3

[GrimReaperSS]

As much as I would love to see a new Z/28, I don't believe the LT2 (which would likely be named something else, like LT3, for a front engine configuration) would be the engine to power it. Maybe a 6.5L (396 c.i.) or a 6.6L (402 c.i.) engine would work, seeing they could go beyond the 500 hp of the Gen5 Z/28 and still get away with sneaking in some heritage there in the form of a 396 equipped Camaro (even though this time it would be a small block and likely meant for high winding horsepower, not low end big block torque). Even 402 works as it's known that later "396" cars of the early 70's were actually 402 c.i. Who knows, they've been working on the C8 for the last 5 years, in that time maybe there was an engine development that was decided it wasn't appropriate for the C8 but could work perfectly for a Camaro.

[triggerjerk]

The question in my mind is this: Would gm give it a wet sump pan, relocate the coil packs to the valve covers, engine mounts, and give it standard exhaust manifolds? If so, I could see it in an SS soon.

Yes, it is a shame GM developed an LS3 only to scuttle the next Z/28. Maybe it will see the light of day in the C8. I mean, ok, so a "Z/28" with all of its myriad upgrades is dead. Why not give the Camaro SS just the LS3 (maybe as an option) and call it something else?

[whiteboyblues2001]

The LT2 will never power a 6Gen Camaro Z/28. IF there is a 6gen Z/28, it will use the NEXT Corvette engine, which is rumored to be a 5.5L (or 5.4L) DOHC FPC N/A 9000RPM 600+ HP motor (which would make a nice Z/28 motor, don't you think?).

The next motor is rumored to be that same engine but twin turbo'd for 800+ HP, and once that version comes out, there could be a Z/28 with the previous N/A Corvette engine. AND, this is only possible because of the extension (2 extra years) of the 6Gen platform.

Do I think this will happen? No. Not at all. But, that's the only path to a 6Gen Z/28 Camaro that I see, not an LT2 Z/28.

If they do an LT5 6Gen (which would be awesome), don't call it a Z/28, please...

[KarFan]

Originally Posted by Jeb114

The motor was built to be a mid engine mounted motor. No Bosses for motor mounts, rearward intake system. dry sump oiling system with rearranged flow for mid mounting. and its a high deck motor which means too high for front mounting. This motor was designed for a mid engine car and the whole architecture will not work in a front mount location. this is a C8 only motor.

Originally Posted by GrimReaperSS

Here's the Motortrend article the pictures above are from, more engine details in the article as well (after testing the link, I found it takes you to a set of pics first, just click the X in corner of the pic box and the article will appear). I.e. the dry sump is part of the engine, not bolted to the car anymore. 3 oil pumps in engine (2 in the crankcase and 1 in the valley), 7.5 quarts of oil, virtually no oil pan. As stated before, the intake is taller and equal length runners, mounted backwards on the engine. Headers are obviously different, equal length 4 into 1 tubes designed for mid-engine placement. The cam profiles are virtually the same with the exception of the exhaust lobes, slightly taller. The new intake and exhaust are what really help this engine breath better and account for more power. If you put it back in a front engine application, those things will need to change and likely be right back to where the LT1 is.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/take...vette-engine-3

Looking over those pictures and the Motor Trend article info. It's clear this LT2 is purely for mid mounted application. The retrofit process to put in a Camaro would seem to just take it back to LT1 specs.

That intake is quite different and tall.

Good info

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by triggerjerk

The question in my mind is this: Would gm give it a wet sump pan, relocate the coil packs to the valve covers, engine mounts, and give it standard exhaust manifolds? If so, I could see it in an SS soon.

Yes, it is a shame GM developed an LS3 only to scuttle the next Z/28. Maybe it will see the light of day in the C8. I mean, ok, so a "Z/28" with all of its myriad upgrades is dead. Why not give the Camaro SS just the LS3 (maybe as an option) and call it something else?

LS3? Do you mean LS7? That was developed for the C6 Z06 and as has been pointed out GM said that engine couldn't be further developed as it was topped out against emissions requirements.

Which makes this LT2 all that more amazing as it's right up against the LS7s 505 HP and apparently meets emissions standards.

[Zack46]

Originally Posted by Smokin19

Sorry guys but, the Z/28 party is over.

[6spdhyperblue]

I’m thinking the LT2 is not Z worthy. It’s just a base engine

[triggerjerk]

Originally Posted by Number 3

LS3? Do you mean LS7? That was developed for the C6 Z06 and as has been pointed out GM said that engine couldn't be further developed as it was topped out against emissions requirements.

Which makes this LT2 all that more amazing as it's right up against the LS7s 505 HP and apparently meets emissions standards.

Sorry, I meant the LT3.

[samurai]

I honestly doubt that. They could have done Alpha 2 LT2 Camaro Gen 7 easily, but obviously decided not to do that. So I'm not seeing bringing the LT2 to the 6th Gen, the engineering for that would be way too expensive.