[DorkMissile]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Part of the reason why I would hold off on a C8 unless plan on staying stock. The DCT and Diff has yet to prove itself far as strength and reliability. No guarantee that the ECU will be tuneable either.

Well - my best friend works at the GM Prooving Grounds as a technician, the DCT & Trans on the C8 is all developed by McClaren. Its really the same setup they have used in the MP4-12C. At least the rear half of the drivetrain. They will have one drivetrain package for the rear half of the car, and it is being built to handle the Chevy variant of the Blackwing (SOHC vs DOHC). The trans will be fine for the LT2

The AWD variant - I'm sworn to secrecy - but its something that GM has never done before.

[oldman]

IMO, AWD will be two electric motors in the front.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by DorkMissile

Well - my best friend works at the GM Prooving Grounds as a technician, the DCT & Trans on the C8 is all developed by McClaren. Its really the same setup they have used in the MP4-12C. At least the rear half of the drivetrain. They will have one drivetrain package for the rear half of the car, and it is being built to handle the Chevy variant of the Blackwing (SOHC vs DOHC). The trans will be fine for the LT2

The AWD variant - I'm sworn to secrecy - but its something that GM has never done before.

I'm assuming you mean dct & diff lol... but isn't it a tremec unit? Or is it a McLaren design being produced by tremec?

[oldman]

Ferrari Superfast 6.5 liters 789 HP is 121.4 HP per liter NA V12

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by oldman

Ferrari Superfast 6.5 liters 789 HP is 121.4 HP per liter NA V12

Yea very impressive.. the Lambo Aventadors 6.5 is up there too with 770 hp.

[avalonandl]

You people are forgetting :

$/HP - The LT1 is way up there
# of moving parts- FEWER IS BETTER. V12 and V10 w/ DOHC are way higher in # of parts.....

[BlueShadow]

Originally Posted by Redline_2ss

I know I'm probably late to this but just wanted to say HP per liter is a stupid measurement used by people with low HP vehicles

I had a 2016 cruze before I got my camaro and the HP per liter shows close to nothing in terms of performance.
Cruze 1.4l has 153 HP that's almost 110HP per liter

When talking about naturally aspirated engines HP/L is a good indicator of that engines volumetric efficiency (VE%) without actually knowing exactly what the VE% is or how to get it. It doesn't make a difference when you're talking about a N/A 1.6 liter Honda because who cars about them right? But when you start getting into the kind of technology (VTEC, VVTLI, any variable valve tech) needed to get those kinds of VE% and start applying them to other engines or higher displacement engines then that's where things get interesting. Like for example the older Honda/Acura NSX which have 3.2L 290hp engines.



A loooong time ago i did a bit of researching into Honda B and H series engines to see what their VE% was and a B18C was around 102%. An H22 out of a Honda Prelude was 102% and for the S2000 F20C it was 112%. There are some online VE calculators that you can use if you want to see roughly how much VE% a certain engine has. But basically VE% is why the OP's math is wrong. The VE% for a 3.7L Camaro is not the same as a 6.2L Camaro which is why they don't have the same exact HP/L.


I did a quick search and here is one VE calculator that you can try out. I havent used it before so i dont know how accurate it is.



https://atgtraining.com/atg-volumetr...cy-calculator/

[Lafourche1]

I do know that it is a LSX swap for the world. Everything from a Miata to a 911 Turbo's engines are swapped out for the LS1-X. The LS engine is small, light and produces reliable power.

The current generation of signed AMG powered cars (the ones with the signature plaque) require $800-$1,200 services (Yes, I own one and pre-paid for service). To service a 911 Carrera S, you literally have to pull the entire rear end off of the car and / or drop the engine for service. I remember the $15,000 Ferrari service where you had to pull the engine to change the belts.

Fly your McLaren F1 to England for service anyone? I know the folks who owned the local supercar driving experience. They dropped the McLarens due to the exorbitant costs of service. This is compared to the costs of Lambos and Ferraris.

OK - I am fair game for feeding the troll.

[JROC]

Other than HP per displacement the GEN4/GEN5 LS and LT series of motors are some of the most efficient out there. Good fuel economy, broad/liner power, displacement per lb or per space occupied, HP per lb, they respond well to mods, they fit in most everything and are an easy swap. (particularly the LS series as they're a little simpler)

HP per ci is important to two people. One being people trying to make themselve feel better about their cars they're fans of that male more HP per ci, and the other been people who race in leagues with displacement limitations.

BTW for a 2V motor a LT1 is pretty efficient. To match a 4V's motors power with a 2V you need a larger bore to fit larger valves to get as much flow with one intake valve as two intake valves, and one exhaust valve as two exhaust valves. Look at old Modular 2V 4.6L's vs 4V 4.6L's. Trying to flow much air into a cylinder with a puny 3.552" bore with only 2V's per cylinder is almost a lost cause.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by JROC

HP per ci is important to two people. One being people trying to make themselve feel better about their cars they're fans of that male more HP per ci, and the other been people who race in leagues with displacement limitations.

True dat.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by BlueShadow

When talking about naturally aspirated engines HP/L is a good indicator of that engines volumetric efficiency (VE%) without actually knowing exactly what the VE% is or how to get it. It doesn't make a difference when you're talking about a N/A 1.6 liter Honda because who cars about them right? But when you start getting into the kind of technology (VTEC, VVTLI, any variable valve tech) needed to get those kinds of VE% and start applying them to other engines or higher displacement engines then that's where things get interesting. Like for example the older Honda/Acura NSX which have 3.2L 290hp engines.

Yep Viper went with cam in cam for about 10% gain in HP per liter. Pentastar went with VTEC on their V6 with a nice gain in HP and torque and MPG. I'm sure it would be relatively simple to put true VTEC on a OHC engine just that even a much simpler cam in cam has only been used in one application. Meaning the 2V does a really good job of balancing, power, economy, torque, cost to make, cost to own. Also 2v engines feature tumble, and only complicated IVTEC or even 2 stage VTEC can get the tumble, that is why the Civic HX, VF and most Honda K20 are lean burn only with 1 valve / 2 valve VTEC. Enter the most unusual setup was the 1.5 twin 3 stage VTEC with 1 valve then 2 valve then big lift / duration. So litterally HX fuel economy with better than EX power. With my GT25 turbo my HX was getting 40 MPG and making about 220 HP to the wheels at 2400 lbs. So realistically it was abount as fast as a R/T Challenger with hybrid like economy. Miss that car. I was so close to doing a 3 stage on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-stage_VTEC