[NW-99SS]

Yeah, that's Koenigsegg tech only at this point - though I do love the thought of infinitely variable valve events!

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

Yeah, that's Koenigsegg tech only at this point - though I do love the thought of infinitely variable valve events!

I don't care who's egg it belongs to, I just want it. And not just because it will deliver a much improved power band, it could also deliver a much improved emissions profile, which in turn, could extend the ICE for quite a bit longer.

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

That would be nice, but the math just isn't there. If we went to camless design where computers open and close the valves, and variable intake runners, you can add some torque back down low, but when you put the peak HP up high in the RPM range, you have to put torque up there too. Because the simplified equation for power is rpm's x torque at that rpm. So if you have high RPMs and low torque at that RPM, you won't make power. Plus, in an N/A motor, the total amount of torque is directly proportional to the displacement. So, at any given volume, there is only so much torque that can be put somewhere in the RPM range. In other words, the displacement of an N/A motor gives you the total area under the torque curve. Higher RPMs flattens the curve, giving you less PEAK torque. And if you make the torque curve put peak torque up high were you need it to make peak HP, there won't be any left for down low.

That's where camless design and variable intake runner length come in. Those are what you adjust to adjust the torque curve. If they are variable via a computer, you can have your cake and eat it too, so to speak, BUT, you still have to fill the whole torque curve up with at least some area all the way to redline, so the torque curve has to be flattened even still...

So, there has to be a balance.

Agreed, but I think there IS likely to be variable intake manifolds and almost definitely valve timing on this motor, and while it may not match the LT1/LT2 low-end torque curves exactly because of lower displacement I do think it's possible to achieve far better low rpm results vs the Ford Voodoo. I'm not sure Chevy is willing to make the same sacrifice.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

Agreed, but I think there IS likely to be variable intake manifolds and almost definitely valve timing on this motor, and while it may not match the LT1/LT2 low-end torque curves exactly because of lower displacement I do think it's possible to achieve far better low rpm results vs the Ford Voodoo. I'm not sure Chevy is willing to make the same sacrifice.

I would love to see variable intake length, and I'm sure there will be VVT. But if we were to compare the torque curves of the LT1/2 to a theoretical 5.5L FPC 9000 RPM screamer, you will definitely see significantly less torque at lower RPMs. Otherwise, there won't be power up high, which wouldn't make sense.

I do agree with your point though. Chevy is going with a traditional FPC arrangement (allegedly) and firing order, so it will have two separate throttle and intake systems, which helps this issue a bit too. So, there may not be a dramatic cliff in the torque curve like the Voodoo, the increase in torque may be more linear as it builds. And judging by how well Chevy has been at the performance aspect of their performance cars, this thing will be amazing. But make no mistake, any 5.5 N/A engine with a super high peak HP, will have less torque down low than the LT1/2 engines.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

C8 order is cancelled. I'm gonna wait and see what happens with this whole virus before I make another huge purchase. If things look right in the next 6 months then I'll be looking to buy something a bit more...faster...than the current C8s, lol!!


That doesn't sound legal at all. I would advise your friend to walk off that site or report it to OSHA. Or, give me the info and I will report it for him.

They went up the chain of command at the site and got everything squared away with thier protective gear but thanks for the offer. He said it was quite the sh*t show over there for a few days but all is good.

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

This exactly.

No one is considering that a 5.5l DOHC NA motor is going to share the same issue with torque that the Voodoo has...they are dogs below 4K rpm. Hardly an exciting street car unless you keep it high in the RPMs at all times - like I used to do with my CBR 600RR.

Yep. I am very curious to see how people change their tune once this motor comes out.

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I would love to see variable intake length, and I'm sure there will be VVT. But if we were to compare the torque curves of the LT1/2 to a theoretical 5.5L FPC 9000 RPM screamer, you will definitely see significantly less torque at lower RPMs. Otherwise, there won't be power up high, which wouldn't make sense.

I do agree with your point though. Chevy is going with a traditional FPC arrangement (allegedly) and firing order, so it will have two separate throttle and intake systems, which helps this issue a bit too. So, there may not be a dramatic cliff in the torque curve like the Voodoo, the increase in torque may be more linear as it builds. And judging by how well Chevy has been at the performance aspect of their performance cars, this thing will be amazing. But make no mistake, any 5.5 N/A engine with a super high peak HP, will have less torque down low than the LT1/2 engines.

It will be very interesting to see where the numbers end up. The Ferrari 458 which they were photographed benchmarking made 562 HP @ 9K and 398 lb/ft @6k. Now thats a 4.8 FPC. I think Chevy can beat those numbers because they will have more displacement, but I agree its going to have less tq than the LT2

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I don't care who's egg it belongs to, I just want it. And not just because it will deliver a much improved power band, it could also deliver a much improved emissions profile, which in turn, could extend the ICE for quite a bit longer.

Hahaha! Fully agree!

Same as the other points - variable intake runner length can do a little, but the physics of a smaller displacement FPC capable of 8500+ rpm lend to high HP lower torque - as evidenced even with the exotics.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

Awesome! Just like I said, VIR Full extremely favors high hp and the GT500. Big Willow even favors high hp somewhat so 1.6 seconds there is an awesome win for the C8. When he gets his CFTP i bet its not 1.6 seconds in front of the C8.

Also amazing that SP is a good driver and Randy lapped the Redeye faster than SP lapped his GT500.

This. Pretty much what everyone with a brain who can reason was saying about VIR full. Run them at VIR grand and it would have probably been similar to what SP experienced.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by shaffe

They went up the chain of command at the site and got everything squared away with thier protective gear but thanks for the offer. He said it was quite the sh*t show over there for a few days but all is good.



Yep. I am very curious to see how people change their tune once this motor comes out.



It will be very interesting to see where the numbers end up. The Ferrari 458 which they were photographed benchmarking made 562 HP @ 9K and 398 lb/ft @6k. Now thats a 4.8 FPC. I think Chevy can beat those numbers because they will have more displacement, but I agree its going to have less tq than the LT2

WAIT! It may turn out to have similar PEAK TQ numbers, but as you can see from the Ferrari you referneced, it will be at 2k higher RPMs. So, suppose the new 5.5L has 455 lbft at 6k rpms (the same as the LT1). The torque curve will have to have less area under it in total, AND 6k RPMs are much farther away on the curve from idle. SO, the torque curve from idle up to 6k RPMs will be a gentler slope. Which translates to lower power at lower RPMs (since power = rpms x tq(at that rpm).

The LT1 puts out about 315 lbft of torqe at 1,000 RPMs. There is no way there will be that much torque down low for the 5.5L. Also, the LT1 puts out over 400 lbft (which is a touch more than the Ferrari at peak) at about 2,200 RPMs all the way up to max HP (at 6000 RPMs). That is a fat torque curve! That is why you have power available early on in the RPM range.

Expect the 5.5L to have much lower torque numbers in the lower end of the rev range as compared, but it may have a similar peak number (but still might be lower), and it will build up to the peak at around 6k RPMs.

[GuywithL86]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

That would be nice, but the math just isn't there. If we went to camless design where computers open and close the valves, and variable intake runners, you can add some torque back down low, but when you put the peak HP up high in the RPM range, you have to put torque up there too. Because the simplified equation for power is rpm's x torque at that rpm. So if you have high RPMs and low torque at that RPM, you won't make power. Plus, in an N/A motor, the total amount of torque is directly proportional to the displacement. So, at any given volume, there is only so much torque that can be put somewhere in the RPM range. In other words, the displacement of an N/A motor gives you the total area under the torque curve. Higher RPMs flattens the curve, giving you less PEAK torque. And if you make the torque curve put peak torque up high were you need it to make peak HP, there won't be any left for down low.

That's where camless design and variable intake runner length come in. Those are what you adjust to adjust the torque curve. If they are variable via a computer, you can have your cake and eat it too, so to speak, BUT, you still have to fill the whole torque curve up with at least some area all the way to redline, so the torque curve has to be flattened even still...

So, there has to be a balance.

Whoa whoa whoa, hold up a sec, who is talking about camless engines?

You are also way underestimating it. It will literally reinvent the combustion and potentially set back electric cars by 20+ years. It is way way more incredible then your post is making it sound.

Having full independent control of the valves to open and close whenever and however you want = the holy grail of combustion engines.

A 5.5L camless v8 would make like 1000hp NA and get 60mpg on the highway, easily.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by GuywithL86

Whoa whoa whoa, hold up a sec, who is talking about camless engines?

You are also way underestimating it. It will literally reinvent the combustion and potentially set back electric cars by 20+ years. It is way way more incredible then your post is making it sound.

Having full independent control of the valves to open and close whenever and however you want = the holy grail of combustion engines.

A 5.5L camless v8 would make like 1000hp NA and get 60mpg on the highway, easily.

I'm not underestimating it's value at all, I agree with you. That's why I mentioned it would extend the life of the ICE. But, I don't think it's coming in time to make companies abandon electric at this point, AND I certainly don't think it's coming in the next Z06. In fact, it would probably be in a Ferrari first anyway. I could go on and on about camless, but it's a mute point.

I was just saying to expect not much low-end torque from a 5.5L FPC engine with peak HP north of 8,500 RPMs, relatively speaking, of course. As said above, take a look at the characteristics of similar engines (like the 458) and extrapolate.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by GuywithL86

Whoa whoa whoa, hold up a sec, who is talking about camless engines?

You are also way underestimating it. It will literally reinvent the combustion and potentially set back electric cars by 20+ years. It is way way more incredible then your post is making it sound.

Having full independent control of the valves to open and close whenever and however you want = the holy grail of combustion engines.

A 5.5L camless v8 would make like 1000hp NA and get 60mpg on the highway, easily.

The technology would be impressive (if it worked as advertised without any issues), but would not hit those #s in a production engine.

[GuywithL86]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

The technology would be impressive (if it worked as advertised without any issues), but would not hit those #s in a production engine.

Why not?

Hopefully backed by knowledge beyond mine

[BlaqWhole]

I have to agree with the sentiment that whatever Ford does, GM will do much better. I do not think the Z06 engine will suffer the same failures that the Voodoo did. Although it may have the powerband features that are characteristic to these engines, it will not be an utter failure. And GM will probably find some awesome way of countering these issues. I'm not opposed to a NA V8 DOHC FPC if GM builds it even if my plans include trips to Mexico. But I would like to see how it performs against some actual Supercars. I'm done with seeing comparisons against GT500s and Hellcats. I wanna see some of these cars take on the elite classes of cars and see how they stack up even if they get destroyed. I saw a ZR1 vs the 720S and at no point in the race did the ZR1 stand a chance. And it was cool to see just how far off it is. Maybe it would have done better against the Aventador. And maybe it would have matched the 520S. But I couldn't care less about the Shelbys and how the Vette compares because it is obvious that the GT500 is only capable of beating cars with much less HP. Anyway, when the Z06 comes out I'll see what it does and how much it costs and if it is worth buying.

Incidentally, I can always pick up a stray C8 Z51 that might be sitting on a lot somewhere. Plenty of them will be available. And that might be the best bet as I'll be able to throw a blower on it if I want. So I would not say a C8 Stingray is completely out of the picture. More that I'm putting my next purchase on the back burner for now to see what happens with this virus. Plus like I said, if I take a contract for the next year or so, then I won't be able to enjoy anything anyway.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by GuywithL86

Why not?

Hopefully backed by knowledge beyond mine

I bet you wouldn't be seeing those numbers on a production camaro or mustang type of vehicle in the introduction phase of a camless engine or well after that. Perhaps boutique and hyper cars.