[Schlok]

Originally Posted by shaffe

regardless of what goes into the Z/28, I don't see it outperforming the Z06. As of right now the Z06 is the top of the food chain. If its an N/A motor, it wont make more power than the LT4, the Camaro will weigh more and be less aerodynamic. IMO there would be to many things in the Z06's favor to make it faster around the track. I just cant see a Camaro with 500-550ish hp being faster around a track than a Corvette with 650 HP.

And I believe Bhobbs was taking about the mid engine zora vette needing to outperform the current Z06

Now if its got a power adder, than that changes things.

Agree with all of this. The Gen V Camaro had the ZL1 and Z/28 with the Z/28 being the faster track car. They (GM) debuted the LSA in the CTS V then it moved to the Camaro and received a horsepower bump. The only way the Z/28 does what it is supposed to do is with less mass and a killer suspension. It was about an 80 HP difference as well as 200 lbs...

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by fradaj

One of the advantages of the turbo is torque at low RPM. Some of the new turbo motors have almost their maximum torque right above idle and it stays flat almost to redline.

Yes, but if you think about it, the only way for maximum torque at such a low RPM is to add boost with a larger turbo with a waste gate. So, you end up getting boost early on in the RPM range. What does that do to MPGs? It lowers it significantly. No MPG advantage anymore, so what's the point? Plus, these engines tend to hit their HP peak quite early in the RPM range, and fall off sharply after that. You end up having to short shift the car, and you don't get good performance either. So, you end up sacrificing MPG gains (that you would have gotten with an older turbo design) to get less high end performance, to get low end torque and get rid of turbo lag.

If low end torque is the goal, just buy an LT1. 315 lbft at 1000 RPM is amazing. 455 HP at 6000 RPM is awesome, and 28 highway MPG's make it better in every metric. The SS produces more power, performs slightly better in a straight line, and gets significantly better MPG's than the M4. And it has more torque at low RPMs than the BMW's turbo engine. And then there is the turbo lag (while minimized, it is still there) and shitty exhaust note. Most things in life are a trade-off. You usually trade performance for MPGs for example. I can't really think of an advantage of the BMW engine at all. What did you get by going I6 Turbo instead of N/A V8? I am guessing it's a bit lighter, but apparently not enough to help out in terms of performance. Of course, if you mod your cars, turbos are easier and cheaper to get significant HP gains, but then you are back to big turbo lag, and even worse MPGs.

[fradaj]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

Yes, but if you think about it, the only way for maximum torque at such a low RPM is to add boost with a larger turbo with a waste gate. So, you end up getting boost early on in the RPM range. What does that do to MPGs? It lowers it significantly. No MPG advantage anymore, so what's the point? Plus, these engines tend to hit their HP peak quite early in the RPM range, and fall off sharply after that. You end up having to short shift the car, and you don't get good performance either. So, you end up sacrificing MPG gains (that you would have gotten with an older turbo design) to get less high end performance, to get low end torque and get rid of turbo lag.

If low end torque is the goal, just buy an LT1. 315 lbft at 1000 RPM is amazing. 455 HP at 6000 RPM is awesome, and 28 highway MPG's make it better in every metric. The SS produces more power, performs slightly better in a straight line, and gets significantly better MPG's than the M4. And it has more torque at low RPMs than the BMW's turbo engine. And then there is the turbo lag (while minimized, it is still there) and shitty exhaust note. Most things in life are a trade-off. You usually trade performance for MPGs for example. I can't really think of an advantage of the BMW engine at all. What did you get by going I6 Turbo instead of N/A V8? I am guessing it's a bit lighter, but apparently not enough to help out in terms of performance. Of course, if you mod your cars, turbos are easier and cheaper to get significant HP gains, but then you are back to big turbo lag, and even worse MPGs.

Torque at lower RPM may become more of an advantage with the new 10 speed transmissions.

[BradfordCamaro]

MPG concerns with a Track Car? I don't think anyone would care as long as it was a Beast on the Track.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by fradaj

Torque at lower RPM may become more of an advantage with the new 10 speed transmissions.

Are you talking about acceleration or fuel economy?

[fradaj]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Are you talking about acceleration or fuel economy?

Maybe both.

[mcsoul]

The winged beast from the ring videos has an LT-4 in it to my ear.

[oakaro68]

I hope not! LT5 does not indicate in any way a 427...which is sad...but it DOES possibly indicate a 302 like the original. so...maybe nostalgic.

[BradfordCamaro]

Originally Posted by oakaro68

I hope not! LT5 does not indicate in any way a 427...which is sad...but it DOES possibly indicate a 302 like the original. so...maybe nostalgic.

302.. maybe if it comes with a Warp Coil.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by fradaj

Maybe both.

Well, for acceleration the entire point of adding more gears is to keep the rpms higher. Smaller steps between gears means less of a drop when upshifting, keeping the engine closer to peak power for longer. Making more low rpm torque doesn't improve this by much, if at all.

I don't know enough about the fuel economy side to say whether or not having more low rpm torque would help or not.

Originally Posted by oakaro68

I hope not! LT5 does not indicate in any way a 427...which is sad...but it DOES possibly indicate a 302 like the original. so...maybe nostalgic.

The number means very little.

The LS1 was not a 1L
The LS2 was not a 2L
The LS3 was not a 3L
The LS4 was not a 4L
The LS6 was not a 6L (though it was close at 5.7)
The LS7 was a 7L
The LS9 was not a 9L

The LT1 is not a 1L
The LT4 is not a 4L

Based on that history, there is more reason to think that an LT5 won't be a 5L than to think it will be.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

Yes, but if you think about it, the only way for maximum torque at such a low RPM is to add boost with a larger turbo with a waste gate. So, you end up getting boost early on in the RPM range. What does that do to MPGs? It lowers it significantly. No MPG advantage anymore, so what's the point? Plus, these engines tend to hit their HP peak quite early in the RPM range, and fall off sharply after that. You end up having to short shift the car, and you don't get good performance either. So, you end up sacrificing MPG gains (that you would have gotten with an older turbo design) to get less high end performance, to get low end torque and get rid of turbo lag.

If low end torque is the goal, just buy an LT1. 315 lbft at 1000 RPM is amazing. 455 HP at 6000 RPM is awesome, and 28 highway MPG's make it better in every metric. The SS produces more power, performs slightly better in a straight line, and gets significantly better MPG's than the M4. And it has more torque at low RPMs than the BMW's turbo engine. And then there is the turbo lag (while minimized, it is still there) and shitty exhaust note. Most things in life are a trade-off. You usually trade performance for MPGs for example. I can't really think of an advantage of the BMW engine at all. What did you get by going I6 Turbo instead of N/A V8? I am guessing it's a bit lighter, but apparently not enough to help out in terms of performance. Of course, if you mod your cars, turbos are easier and cheaper to get significant HP gains, but then you are back to big turbo lag, and even worse MPGs.

I believe the TTV6 in the ATS V accomplishes this electronically. It's been awhile since I did any reading on that engine, can't recall exactly how the system works, however, the point is that they found a way to eliminate or at least greatly reduce turbo lag at low rpm using some type of electronic valve. Perhaps someone here knows the specs on this.

Which is why I wouldn't be overly surprised, only a little surprised, if the z/28 had a derivative of this engine with a very sophisticated suspension, whatever that might be. I do think it would take a lot of guts for GM to not put a V8 in the Z/28 though. If they make a Z/28

[kingbambino22]

4.125 bore x 3.622 stroke. 6.3L. 388ci. Similar cam to LS7 for Gen V LT1 engine. 520-540hp 7000-7500 rpm

[doc7000]

Originally Posted by kingbambino22

4.125 bore x 3.622 stroke. 6.3L. 388ci. Similar cam to LS7 for Gen V LT1 engine. 520-540hp 7000-7500 rpm

That would make for a legendary engine which means no chance of GM doing something like that at this point in time.

[doc7000]

We know nothing about the LT5 engine and we know next to nothing about the Z/28 Camaro so people shouldn't get their hopes up based on what they read in here.