[ChevyRules]

HP/liter is heavily biased towards DOHC vs OHV. The engine breathes better due to 4 valves vs 2 valves in the OHV setup and can rev more than the OHV. Thus you don't need to have a big of a displacement to make the power. But you do need to rev the engine out to make such power( the Voodoo V8 is a perfect example of this) and is a physically bigger motor thus creating packaging issues( the Coyote V8 will not be able to fit in the Corvette).

The OHV design can't breath as well nor can rev as high as the DOHC architecture, so need displacement to make power. The benefit of using displacement to make power is a ton of torque being made down low. Also, an OHV engine is physically compact. How the LT1 can fit in the Corvette. Heck its the reason why the Small Block V8 is such a popular crate engine. Can throw it in a Porsche, Miata, etc with very little mods.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

Let's look at the MY18 Mustang's 5.0 with 460hp. It gets worse fuel economy, not lighter, and external size is larger than the LT1.

Tell me: What's that smaller internal displacement buying me, from an engineering standpoint?

Regarding being "far behind in efficiency": Please list off other 455hp/455lb-ft engines with better fuel economy ratings than the Corvette and Camaro.

This.

End thread.

[F1FTY]

I’m confused - I thought I was on a Camaro forum, not an RC engine forum?

https://www.thoughtco.com/how-is-rc-...asured-2862919

[Goal seeker]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

HP/liter is heavily biased towards DOHC vs OHV. The engine breathes better due to 4 valves vs 2 valves in the OHV setup and can rev more than the OHV. Thus you don't need to have a big of a displacement to make the power. But you do need to rev the engine out to make such power( the Voodoo V8 is a perfect example of this) and is a physically bigger motor thus creating packaging issues( the Coyote V8 will not be able to fit in the Corvette).

The OHV design can't breath as well nor can rev as high as the DOHC architecture, so need displacement to make power. The benefit of using displacement to make power is a ton of torque being made down low. Also, an OHV engine is physically compact. How the LT1 can fit in the Corvette. Heck its the reason why the Small Block V8 is such a popular crate engine. Can throw it in a Porsche, Miata, etc with very little mods.

This guy has the right idea. The coyote will demonstrate a higher volumetric efficiency due to the DOHC and 4 valve head. All of this will be become much easier to compare when the 6.2 DOHC is released by GM ( I'm guessing in the C8 vette). I'm betting it will have the same stroke as all of the gen 3 and gen 4 veteran engines (except LS7). Hell, look at the SB4 7.0 from Mercury Racing, and it's not even direct injected.

http://www.mercuryracing.com/automotive/

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by Goal seeker

This guy has the right idea. The coyote will demonstrate a higher volumetric efficiency due to the DOHC and 4 valve head. All of this will be become much easier to compare when the 6.2 DOHC is released by GM ( I'm guessing in the C8 vette). I'm betting it will have the same stroke as all of the gen 3 and gen 4 veteran engines (except LS7). Hell, look at the SB4 7.0 from Mercury Racing, and it's not even direct injected.

http://www.mercuryracing.com/automotive/

That doesn't change the fact that power per unit of internal displacement is a useless metric.

The engineers are targeting a specific power curve, brake specific fuel consumption, emissions, physical size, weight, and cost. Those are the items that really matter.

If an engineering team created a 7L engine that made 550hp, physically smaller AND lighter than a LT1 or Coyote, EPA rated 25city/40highway, and cost less than a LS1, would you consider that a poor design because it's HP/Liter is not very high compared to others, even though it nails all the metrics that matter?

[6spdhyperblue]

Originally Posted by formare

HP per liter is a measure of engineering prowess. Agree with all your points. The best builders aim for maximum torque with the broadest area under the curve. We still have the issue of the LT1 being far behind in efficiency.

Haha...no

That Efficiency you and other “car” people refer to is taken out of context from that engineering book. Outer dimesnsions are the tangible element. Internal displacement doesn’t effect me whether it’s 2 or 6.2 liters inside. It runs the number and gets the mpg

[formare]

If an engineering team created a 7L engine that made 550hp, physically smaller AND lighter than a LT1 or Coyote, EPA rated 25city/40highway, and cost less than a LS1, would you consider that a poor design because it's HP/Liter is not very high compared to others, even though it nails all the metrics that matter?

Its a less efficient design. 7L @ 550HP would only be 78hp per liter. GM can (and does) easily produce an engine that is +90hp per liter.

Your logic reminds of the L75. 7.4L with 27hp per liter. I had one in an f-body. If you care to search my pics, you'll likely find a few pics of her.



With the world moving toward a "road tax" based on engine volume, HP per liter is THE metric for many global car companies. Great conversation folks. I for one am looking forward to the day when GM decides to crank out the V8 beasties. The current generation engines are good, very good when compared to the past, but the future has lots of room to improve.


__________________

[Mr. Wyndham]

I dunno...it sort of seems to me like you posted a question...didn't like any of the responses, so you rejected them.

Just had to say it. I feel baited.

[formare]

Actually, I like many of the responses and appreciate the time it has taken to read and reply to this thread. It is an interesting and passionate group.

[KyBoy]

First is my M6. Second is my wife's A8.

[T-Man]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

I dunno...it sort of seems to me like you posted a question...didn't like any of the responses, so you rejected them.

Just had to say it. I feel baited.

100% - nail on the head

This was a troll post. There was no discussion. OP's views are set in stone regarding HP/L. It is THE benchmark for "engineering prowess"

[FATTEMUNK]

Originally Posted by KyBoy

First is my M6. Second is my wife's A8.

How the hell do you get 30mpg in the glorious sounding camaro ss. I drove my parents backup camry hybrid for a week while my car was getting fixed and I got 21 mpg lmao.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

Power/internal displacement is a useless metric and not a measure of engineering prowess.

These are useful:
Power / fuel economy
Power / physical external size
Power / engine weight

Who cares if you make a ton of power our of a relatively small internal displacement if the fuel economy sucks, engine is heavy, engine is physically huge, etc?

Let's look at the MY18 Mustang's 5.0 with 460hp. It gets worse fuel economy, not lighter, and external size is larger than the LT1.

Tell me: What's that smaller internal displacement buying me, from an engineering standpoint?

Regarding being "far behind in efficiency": Please list off other 455hp/455lb-ft engines with better fuel economy ratings than the Corvette and Camaro.

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

This.

End thread.

To sum up, I believe the torque curve is a much better measure of efficiency than HP/Liter. Torque is the measure of how hard the engine has to work to achieve the result, and the LT1 doesn't have to work nearly as hard as the other engines mentioned.

[KyBoy]

Originally Posted by FATTEMUNK

How the hell do you get 30mpg in the glorious sounding camaro ss. I drove my parents backup camry hybrid for a week while my car was getting fixed and I got 21 mpg lmao.

That particular SS has a Borla ATAK with secondary cat delete.

Heath