[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Why stop at 480 tho? GM has shown that they're not above giving the Camaro every bit of power that the Vette has. They would have to actually spend resources turning it back. It would be stupid. Just send it. Throw all 490 at it.

It was mentioned earlier in the thread that because of the location of the cats in the LT2 mid engine set up they were able to get more out of it and pass cold start emissions. My guess is that the LT3 in the traditional front engine layout 480 might be the most/safest emissions wise. That is the only reason I could see capping it at 480

[oldman]

one again cam in cam technology that lets one change overlap will fix that and make 535 HP. Since the LT1 already has a phrase, the cost of the cam in cam would probably run say $300 OEM. That is dirt cheap for 15% bump in HP and the ability to change overlap.
http://chryslercorporationllc.blogsp...am-in-cam.html

As an aside and my crying (racing VTEC for 3 decades)! So many cars now run VTEC (duration and some like Honda and Subaru will add in lift) to dump raw fuel down the exhaust to light off the cat. Honda K20 type R has VTEC only on the exhaust primary for this. Subaru has variable duration on the exhaust for smog, volvo I5 has variable duration on exhaust for smog only. If is a crying shame VTEC technology that can yield big gains in HP is now used to dump raw fuel down the exhaust for ULEV and PZEV smog. Especially in the Type R, VTEC on the exhaust (also fancy plate on the engine in RED), zero effect on performance, 100% percent effective in the marketing department.

The LT2 has a pretty big change in cam phasing right? Something like 68 degrees!!!!!! OMG it is like an Atkinson / Miller engine at that point.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by shaffe

It was mentioned earlier in the thread that because of the location of the cats in the LT2 mid engine set up they were able to get more out of it and pass cold start emissions. My guess is that the LT3 in the traditional front engine layout 480 might be the most/safest emissions wise. That is the only reason I could see capping it at 480

I also wonder if they can fit an intake manifold equivalent to the lt2s in a camaro engine bay without needing a new hood as well.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by oldman

one again cam in cam technology that lets one change overlap will fix that and make 535 HP. Since the LT1 already has a phrase, the cost of the cam in cam would probably run say $300 OEM. That is dirt cheap for 15% bump in HP and the ability to change overlap.
http://chryslercorporationllc.blogsp...am-in-cam.html

As an aside and my crying (racing VTEC for 3 decades)! So many cars now run VTEC (duration and some like Honda and Subaru will add in lift) to dump raw fuel down the exhaust to light off the cat. Honda K20 type R has VTEC only on the exhaust primary for this. Subaru has variable duration on the exhaust for smog, volvo I5 has variable duration on exhaust for smog only. If is a crying shame VTEC technology that can yield big gains in HP is now used to dump raw fuel down the exhaust for ULEV and PZEV smog. Especially in the Type R, VTEC on the exhaust (also fancy plate on the engine in RED), zero effect on performance, 100% percent effective in the marketing department.

The LT2 has a pretty big change in cam phasing right? Something like 68 degrees!!!!!! OMG it is like an Atkinson / Miller engine at that point.

Cam in cam would be the gm small block's next big thing imo and possibly what'll allow it to be a viable engine for power and to meet emissions if it ever comes to fruition. I would love it assuming the price is right.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Why stop at 480 tho? GM has shown that they're not above giving the Camaro every bit of power that the Vette has. They would have to actually spend resources turning it back. It would be stupid. Just send it. Throw all 490 at it.

Long time no hear from. I’ll call off the cadaver dogs.

Shaffe pretty much explains it in his post. To get to 480 I started with the LT2 and backed out the headers that are very much C8 specific. As is the integrated dry sump, though that’s not gonna add hp.

Originally Posted by shaffe

It was mentioned earlier in the thread that because of the location of the cats in the LT2 mid engine set up they were able to get more out of it and pass cold start emissions. My guess is that the LT3 in the traditional front engine layout 480 might be the most/safest emissions wise. That is the only reason I could see capping it at 480

Pretty much spot on. GM will wring out as much power as they can, then throttle it back a bit to ensure achieving emissions as well as make it robust from a warranty standpoint.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Cam in cam would be the gm small block's next big thing imo and possibly what'll allow it to be a viable engine for power and to meet emissions if it ever comes to fruition. I would love it assuming the price is right.

GM took a long look at cam-in-cam many years ago. Definitively before 2007. I remember the date because I was in the middle of a job change at the time and wound up on two different sides of the research based on the two different jobs. The fact that it is not in production indicates that something else looks better from a cost / benefit standpoint.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by oldman

one again cam in cam technology that lets one change overlap will fix that and make 535 HP. Since the LT1 already has a phrase, the cost of the cam in cam would probably run say $300 OEM. That is dirt cheap for 15% bump in HP and the ability to change overlap.
http://chryslercorporationllc.blogsp...am-in-cam.html

As an aside and my crying (racing VTEC for 3 decades)! So many cars now run VTEC (duration and some like Honda and Subaru will add in lift) to dump raw fuel down the exhaust to light off the cat. Honda K20 type R has VTEC only on the exhaust primary for this. Subaru has variable duration on the exhaust for smog, volvo I5 has variable duration on exhaust for smog only. If is a crying shame VTEC technology that can yield big gains in HP is now used to dump raw fuel down the exhaust for ULEV and PZEV smog. Especially in the Type R, VTEC on the exhaust (also fancy plate on the engine in RED), zero effect on performance, 100% percent effective in the marketing department.

The LT2 has a pretty big change in cam phasing right? Something like 68 degrees!!!!!! OMG it is like an Atkinson / Miller engine at that point.

I would think cam-in-cam would cost more than that if you consider the R&D. If it's really cheap, they would have done it already.

As for Type R VTEC, correct me if I am wrong, but I would think it's good for reducing turbo lag. It could use the low-lift profile to have higher-velocity exhaust to help spool it up quickly, then use the high-lift profile to have the volume of exhaust gas once the turbo spools up.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

As for Type R VTEC, correct me if I am wrong, but I would think it's good for reducing turbo lag. It could use the low-lift profile to have higher-velocity exhaust to help spool it up quickly, then use the high-lift profile to have the volume of exhaust gas once the turbo spools up.

Honda PR hype, sounds much better than we use VTEC to get the cat hot. Is there some truth to it? Probably a smigen. If you want power the VTEC goes on the intake.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

GM took a long look at cam-in-cam many years ago. Definitively before 2007. I remember the date because I was in the middle of a job change at the time and wound up on two different sides of the research based on the two different jobs. The fact that it is not in production indicates that something else looks better from a cost / benefit standpoint.

I'm sure the royalty cost is one of them. Come now how much can a multi-piece welded cam cost?

I would speculate that the current displacement on demand looked better because we were just about to get hit with a massive increase in CAFE standards should Clinton have won in 2016. If there is a clear Trump victory in 2020, then the more relaxed CAFE standards would allow for cam in cam. Just my thoughts.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Long time no hear from. I’ll call off the cadaver dogs.

I been doing the motorcycle thing lately. Plus I got tired of reading all the people BSing about the 27th version of a Hellcat that has a different name but basically will dyno to be only about 20 more RWHP than the original or yet another PP2-ish Bullitt-ish GT350(non-R)-ish Mustang except this one has an auto trans option but pretty much is the same run of the mill GT with boltons that won't perform any better than the aforementioned lame versions even tho it now sports a new badge. But the Camaro sucks because they won't claim an extra 10 miracle HP and give it a new name with a new badge and a different hood and try to pawn it off as something new and exciting when it is really just the same as using pancake batter to make a waffle or cupcake batter to make a cookie.

Funny thing is that none of these people fawning over all these "new" and "exciting" trims are actually buying them. And when the Camaro does have a new trim with awesome performance that rivals and beats the competition for like $10K less, they all claim they wanna pay SS prices for it and MSRP is way too much. But the "Mach 1" which is basically a PP2 prices at $67K they'll all be like "oh why won't GM answer to this". So I'm good. I pop in and out and that's about it.

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Shaffe pretty much explains it in his post. To get to 480 I started with the LT2 and backed out the headers that are very much C8 specific. As is the integrated dry sump, though that’s not gonna add hp.


Pretty much spot on. GM will wring out as much power as they can, then throttle it back a bit to ensure achieving emissions as well as make it robust from a warranty standpoint.

We all know that is not a legit reason. These engines are rated at the crank. Which means this all happens before the engine is even in the car. Those exhaust manifolds are not gonna take 10 HP. No way. No how. It is not possible. Especially since these manufacturers have been using less restrictive exhaust components. There is no reason why that same 490/495 HP engine cannot go into the Camaro. Except they want to keep it seperate from the Vette which is stupid. Don't get me wrong, 480 HP will more than suffice. But they could have just done it up with the full menu and sent it.

BTW, the ZL1 and Z06 had the difference of wet sump vs dry sump and the HP rating was exactly the same. Also true with the LT1 Camaro and LT1 Vette. So that does not explain why the upgraded Camaro will not have the same 490/495 that the C8 has.

[BlaqWhole]

Not for nothin, but this is the clown that GM and Ford made sure he got a C8 and GT500 (respectively) before anyone else. This dude. And it doesn't surprise me that he would stage another BS lying video like he's done in the past. I bet you won't be able to even find that video now...just like the video where he claimed a Ford rep gave him the price of the GT500 before it was announced and the entire video was staged. This kid is a complete liar and a fraud. I bet you anything that he is an exec's son or someone high up has paid him to go around doing this stupid childish immature BS. I hope GM and Ford are proud of him.

https://www.thedrive.com/news/33479/...day-was-staged

After reading this I don't even want a C8 anymore. Not if people like this are driving them. Thank God he isn't out there doing this dumb stuff with Camaros.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

....
Shaffe pretty much explains it in his post. To get to 480 I started with the LT2 and backed out the headers that are very much C8 specific. As is the integrated dry sump, though that’s not gonna add hp.


Pretty much spot on. GM will wring out as much power as they can, then throttle it back a bit to ensure achieving emissions as well as make it robust from a warranty standpoint.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

...
We all know that is not a legit reason. These engines are rated at the crank. Which means this all happens before the engine is even in the car. Those exhaust manifolds are not gonna take 10 HP. No way. No how. It is not possible. Especially since these manufacturers have been using less restrictive exhaust components. There is no reason why that same 490/495 HP engine cannot go into the Camaro. Except they want to keep it seperate from the Vette which is stupid. Don't get me wrong, 480 HP will more than suffice. But they could have just done it up with the full menu and sent it.

BTW, the ZL1 and Z06 had the difference of wet sump vs dry sump and the HP rating was exactly the same. Also true with the LT1 Camaro and LT1 Vette. So that does not explain why the upgraded Camaro will not have the same 490/495 that the C8 has.

Yes they are rated at the crank, and they are rated on a stand, not in a car. But they are certified with full production exhaust. That’s why the Z51 has more hp than the base. Different exhaust restrictions. And I did say that the sump does nothing to add hp. I was simply noting that it will likely not be included in Camaro because of how and where it is located on the LT2.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

GM took a long look at cam-in-cam many years ago. Definitively before 2007. I remember the date because I was in the middle of a job change at the time and wound up on two different sides of the research based on the two different jobs. The fact that it is not in production indicates that something else looks better from a cost / benefit standpoint.

Yea I assume the price isn't right for a mass production small block. The Viper pulled it off, but taking a page out of the Viper playbook is not a profitable strategy lol.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by oldman

Honda PR hype, sounds much better than we use VTEC to get the cat hot. Is there some truth to it? Probably a smigen. If you want power the VTEC goes on the intake.

The thing is that, as far as my general understanding goes, intake design on a turbocharged car doesn't matter as much as it does on an NA car. You have boost shoving in the air anyway, you just have to make sure that the intercooler is working well to cool the intake charge. On the other hand, exhaust design becomes more critical on a turbocharged car than an NA car - there is more exhaust to shove out, but you have turbo acting as a restriction. You also want to reduce turbo lag.

So in essence, it serves the same purpose as it has always done - you get good low-end and high-end flow. Intake VTEC meant you can have good high-end power without the low-end torque being more pathetic than they already were, while exhaust VTEC meant you can have good amount of boost while reducing turbo lag. Also, intake VTEC on a turbocharged Honda probably doesn't do enough for Honda for bother with it, just like how exhaust VTEC was a fancy feature on the past NA Honda's - it really didn't do much for Honda to justify the additional cost on most cars.

BTW, VTEC being used for emissions and economy isn't anything new. Even in the NA days, a lot of the i-VTEC systems are used for fuel economy on Honda family cars, like the R18 i-VTEC system for 8th Gen Civics.

Sent from toaster or something