[Turkish01]

Originally Posted by oldman

The Blackwing has an absolutely tinny tiny intake port and intake manifold and associated head port which is also outside the the V. The intake ONLY works with twin turbo. To feed a much bigger 5.5 liter the engine would have to grow 30% or so and to get a conventional layout intake in the V, that could also breath would add another 10% or so. Ford 4.6 and 5.0 engines are HUGE, the 5.4 DOHC is even bigger. The only way to get a DOHC engine to breath NA is to raise the intake port and that makes the engine even bigger. The Blackwing uses FI (20 PSI) to achieve what essentially is mediocre power from a FI DOHC engine. 550 HP from a twin turbo V8 clean slate design is not very good. Then comes the excuse oh it is only 4.2 liters, LOL. Internal engine size is not a design criteria in the USofA. Lastly the Blackwing was limited in HP because of engine bay heat.... a killer for sure on a performance car with GM ready to race warranty. That what happens when you fill an engine bay up with a huge engine and two turbos. How many times has GM been bitten by a heat problem?


Here:
"Given Cadillac’s abrupt change of course, it’s amazing that the Blackwing engine even made it into production. The few examples of the twin-turbo V-8 were hand-built in Kentucky, at the Bowling Green plant where the Corvette is assembled. Each engine was constructed from start to finish by a single employee, one of just six appointed to this role. One source estimates that the Blackwing cost General Motors $16 million to develop—around $20,000 per example. You get the sense that the team behind it wanted to show Cadillac was capable of producing a world-class engine, even if the production run was extremely small."

I’m not debating if it makes sense to put a dohc engine in the Camaro, simply stating that it’s already been done. Arguing if it would fit is irrelevant, we know that it will.

[oldman]

I don't know if it will and neither do you, large DOHC engines designed for breathing are heck of tall. Just look at the Cobra R. The Blackwing may have fit at ahem 20K an example.. and a full 100 HP less than a LT4... please the DOHC badge is not going to sell performance Camaros... performance will.

BTW, I never said that a DOHC V8 won't fit, as there are tiny DOHC V8, I said a 600 HP NA DOHC V8 won't fit and it won't. The slightly taller LT2 intake barely fits. You think 4 cams and a raised intake port is gonna "fit". Next time when you are at the tracks look at a LS powered Mustang and notice how tiny the LS engine is in the bay, then go find a 5.0 or 5.2 Mustang.

[chaospiece]

I've never understood the love for high reving engines.
My mustang revs higher than my Camaro but it doesn't pull, so what's the point? High pitched sound that starts to overlap?
It's fake and annoying when cars are reving but they're not going.
Yes the engine components are spinning faster but what force are they putting out and how much resistance does it sustain?
I think people misinterpret horsepower all together.

600 hp dohc flat plane crank with low torque will have limited use and owners will brag about numbers they can't use on most tracks. I find this move silly and probably painful when maintenance is released by GM for these engines.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by chaospiece

I've never understood the love for high reving engines.
My mustang revs higher than my Camaro but it doesn't pull, so what's the point? High pitched sound that starts to overlap?
It's fake and annoying when cars are reving but they're not going.
Yes the engine components are spinning faster but what force are they putting out and how much resistance does it sustain?
I think people misinterpret horsepower all together.

600 hp dohc flat plane crank with low torque will have limited use and owners will brag about numbers they can't use on most tracks. I find this move silly and probably painful when maintenance is released by GM for these engines.

I understand what you are saying and mostly agree, but without long m6 gearing and only an 8 speed dct that'll keep it at high rpms most of the time, I think the lack of torque wont be a deficiency like it would be in an m6 car. It'll at least alleviate that imo.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by chaospiece

I've never understood the love for high reving engines.
My mustang revs higher than my Camaro but it doesn't pull, so what's the point? High pitched sound that starts to overlap?
It's fake and annoying when cars are reving but they're not going.
Yes the engine components are spinning faster but what force are they putting out and how much resistance does it sustain?
I think people misinterpret horsepower all together.

600 hp dohc flat plane crank with low torque will have limited use and owners will brag about numbers they can't use on most tracks. I find this move silly and probably painful when maintenance is released by GM for these engines.

From a subjective standpoint, a high-revving car will feel faster than it actually is. When I had my RX-8, it definitely felt that way. That car isn't fast, even compared to a V6 Camaro, but because of how happy it is to rev to 9000 RPM(while doing so smoothly because rotary), I still had my share of fun in it and it felt faster than I was actually going. Of course, the Camaro is very much fun while being much faster, it's a different kind of fun feeling you get.

As Robby said, part of it is also gearing. My RX-8 and the current MX-5 both have very aggressive gearing which makes those engines fun and again, feel fast(not really be fast). With the modern DCT, a high-revving engine could be kept in the powerband and short 1st and 2nd gears could sort of make up for the lack of low-end torque.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

From a subjective standpoint, a high-revving car will feel faster than it actually is. When I had my RX-8, it definitely felt that way. That car isn't fast, even compared to a V6 Camaro, but because of how happy it is to rev to 9000 RPM(while doing so smoothly because rotary), I still had my share of fun in it and it felt faster than I was actually going. Of course, the Camaro is very much fun while being much faster, it's a different kind of fun feeling you get.

As Robby said, part of it is also gearing. My RX-8 and the current MX-5 both have very aggressive gearing which makes those engines fun and again, feel fast(not really be fast). With the modern DCT, a high-revving engine could be kept in the powerband and short 1st and 2nd gears could sort of make up for the lack of low-end torque.

Agreed, my 19 GT feels faster and more dramatic past 6k rpm even though in the end it's not really faster.

Same with the NB Miata, it is slow as crap but so aggressively geared that its at 3800rpm in top gear at 70mph and feels fun and quick lol. Newer Miatas are quite a bit faster and have that same effect which really make them enjoyable.

[shaffe]

I think they hit it on the head its probably mostly a subjective thing, knowing it that the engine can keep making power and keep going while its screaming.

[chaospiece]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I think they hit it on the head its probably mostly a subjective thing, knowing it that the engine can keep making power and keep going while its screaming.

But it's not making power, it's just spinning faster, probably being absorbed by the torque converter anyway.
Higher reving engines have the same basic power band just stretched out. So less power is being put out per rpm.

And gearing can only do so much when it's absorbing the torque for so much more rpms as well until you start to hit 1:1 where spinning faster means gearing spinning faster, not transforming it into torque.

Lower aggressive gearing gives more torque less hp.
Longer gearing only works well for 1:1 applications.
But how fast is your car going when at 1:1?
Where do you enjoy that car?

I guess what I'm saying is where is the fun? Because the noise isn't good, they worked on the voodoo to get it to sound good.

I have 373 gears from factory on my mustang and it still feels gummy, I love my mustang, but I can't say it feels fast.
I guess my perception has to include that.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by chaospiece

But it's not making power, it's just spinning faster, probably being absorbed by the torque converter anyway.
Higher reving engines have the same basic power band just stretched out. So less power is being put out per rpm.

And gearing can only do so much when it's absorbing the torque for so much more rpms as well until you start to hit 1:1 where spinning faster means gearing spinning faster, not transforming it into torque.

Lower aggressive gearing gives more torque less hp.
Longer gearing only works well for 1:1 applications.
But how fast is your car going when at 1:1?
Where do you enjoy that car?

I guess what I'm saying is where is the fun? Because the noise isn't good, they worked on the voodoo to get it to sound good.

I have 373 gears from factory on my mustang and it still feels gummy, I love my mustang, but I can't say it feels fast.
I guess my perception has to include that.

There is a noticeable difference between the Gen 2 and Gen 3 Coyotes - both in mid range torque and top end hp. The A10 gen 3 Coyote has a very flat hp curve at the top 1500 rpm and a broader mid-range torque curve than earlier Coyotes. That flat hp curve at the top is why the A10 GT runs 120 mph in the 1/4 mile and the Gen 3 M6 traps 115 mph (A10 keeps the avg hp up compared to the M6). The Gen 3 M6 is geared longer than the Gen 2 M6, and even still, it traps 2-3 mph higher than the Gen 2 Coyote cars, and several tenths quicker e.t.

IMO what makes a car feel "fast", or rather, "quick" is torque - not revs. Revs just make a car sound like it's going fast, tricking people. Many people who drive the A10 GT PP1 talk about how it doesn't feel that fast, but then they look at the speedo and realize they're going 100+ mph or much faster than they would expect given the time in throttle. There's a running joke on the Mustang forums where some people think the Ecoboost is a better daily driver than the Coyote (they are nuts) because it "feels" like it has more torque than the Gen 3 Coyote and to those people it "feels" faster. The difference there is the Ecoboost comes onto boost at part throttle and feels like it has more low end torque than the Coyote (at part throttle), even though that is proven false with dyno curves under full throttle - the Gen 3 Coyote makes more torque throughout, even at the low end, compared to the Ecoboost. The difference is the Ecoboost comes to full torque output at part throttle, whereas the Coyote is a more linear torque response under part throttle.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by chaospiece

But it's not making power, it's just spinning faster, probably being absorbed by the torque converter anyway.
Higher reving engines have the same basic power band just stretched out. So less power is being put out per rpm.

And gearing can only do so much when it's absorbing the torque for so much more rpms as well until you start to hit 1:1 where spinning faster means gearing spinning faster, not transforming it into torque.

Lower aggressive gearing gives more torque less hp.
Longer gearing only works well for 1:1 applications.
But how fast is your car going when at 1:1?
Where do you enjoy that car?

I guess what I'm saying is where is the fun? Because the noise isn't good, they worked on the voodoo to get it to sound good.

I have 373 gears from factory on my mustang and it still feels gummy, I love my mustang, but I can't say it feels fast.
I guess my perception has to include that.

The torque converter problem is why S2000 only came with a manual trans while RX-8 automatics had lower redline(7500 RPM versus 9000 RPM of the manual) and thus less power. Nowadays, however, dual clutch transmission solves that issue because there is no torque converter, and this is on top of faster shifts as well as more gears to keep the car in powerband for longer.

Aggressive gearing doesn't decrease power. Power is just the product of your acceleration and speed. Basically aggressive gearing magnifies the torque more while it lowers the top speed in that given gear, except because the engine redline is higher, even with the more aggressive gearing, you can still get to a reasonable top speed at the engine redline.

The real problem with aggressive gearing and part of the reason why you don't see these high-revving NA engines anymore is the scarifice in fuel efficiency and likely emissions. With those engines, you have to spin them faster on the highway while you can lazily cruise a Camaro SS/C7 below 2000 RPM at 70+MPH because there is enough low-end torque to allow this, and that's how we can get close to 30 MPG on highways while cars like the Cayman GT4 and GT350 will do worse.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by chaospiece

But it's not making power, it's just spinning faster, probably being absorbed by the torque converter anyway.
Higher reving engines have the same basic power band just stretched out. So less power is being put out per rpm.

And gearing can only do so much when it's absorbing the torque for so much more rpms as well until you start to hit 1:1 where spinning faster means gearing spinning faster, not transforming it into torque.

Lower aggressive gearing gives more torque less hp.
Longer gearing only works well for 1:1 applications.
But how fast is your car going when at 1:1?
Where do you enjoy that car?

I guess what I'm saying is where is the fun? Because the noise isn't good, they worked on the voodoo to get it to sound good.

I have 373 gears from factory on my mustang and it still feels gummy, I love my mustang, but I can't say it feels fast.
I guess my perception has to include that.

As far as making power or not that depends on the engine, pretty sure a Ferrari FPC doesn't make peak power till 8K rpm lol

I guess that's the beauty of choice. It's a sensory thing like others said. Same reason probably 80-90% of the people here would still choose a V8 even if there was a turbo 6 option that was faster in every way because sound

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

There is a noticeable difference between the Gen 2 and Gen 3 Coyotes - both in mid range torque and top end hp. The A10 gen 3 Coyote has a very flat hp curve at the top 1500 rpm and a broader mid-range torque curve than earlier Coyotes. That flat hp curve at the top is why the A10 GT runs 120 mph in the 1/4 mile and the Gen 3 M6 traps 115 mph (A10 keeps the avg hp up compared to the M6). The Gen 3 M6 is geared longer than the Gen 2 M6, and even still, it traps 2-3 mph higher than the Gen 2 Coyote cars, and several tenths quicker e.t.

IMO what makes a car feel "fast", or rather, "quick" is torque - not revs. Revs just make a car sound like it's going fast, tricking people. Many people who drive the A10 GT PP1 talk about how it doesn't feel that fast, but then they look at the speedo and realize they're going 100+ mph or much faster than they would expect given the time in throttle. There's a running joke on the Mustang forums where some people think the Ecoboost is a better daily driver than the Coyote (they are nuts) because it "feels" like it has more torque than the Gen 3 Coyote and to those people it "feels" faster. The difference there is the Ecoboost comes onto boost at part throttle and feels like it has more low end torque than the Coyote (at part throttle), even though that is proven false with dyno curves under full throttle - the Gen 3 Coyote makes more torque throughout, even at the low end, compared to the Ecoboost. The difference is the Ecoboost comes to full torque output at part throttle, whereas the Coyote is a more linear torque response under part throttle.

I still find it hilarious that in other threads you'll try to call someone out for claiming a trap speed on the higher end of the spectrum (even if they list a range) for a Camaro but have absolutely no problem only claiming the highest tested trap speeds for Mustangs every time lol.

I do agree with the gist of your post however.

[ParisTNDude]

That's certainly my pet peeve about GM/Chevy. They complain about lagging sales and they never produce a tire burning promotion video of the Camaro. The only commercial I've seen with a new Camaro in it shows the entire Chevy lineup with one 2 second glimpse of a Camaro. Beyond that, I can't think of any solo Camaro commercials ever.

As far as the DOHC discussion, to hear the engine at the RPM that sounds sweet, even in first gear you'll be well above most speed limits even in suburbs. I would like to see it built by Chevy for the Camaro, but it seems unlikely unless they do a "last Hoorah" model before stopping production.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

That's certainly my pet peeve about GM/Chevy. They complain about lagging sales and they never produce a tire burning promotion video of the Camaro. The only commercial I've seen with a new Camaro in it shows the entire Chevy lineup with one 2 second glimpse of a Camaro. Beyond that, I can't think of any solo Camaro commercials ever.

As far as the DOHC discussion, to hear the engine at the RPM that sounds sweet, even in first gear you'll be well above most speed limits even in suburbs. I would like to see it built by Chevy for the Camaro, but it seems unlikely unless they do a "last Hoorah" model before stopping production.

And that was with a low-trim Camaro with the guy saying he switched from BMW.

Come on, at least have an SS or ZL1 in the background. That would make the ad look more convincing.

Sent from toaster or something