View Poll Results: What engine would you rather see?
7.0---427!
148
52.11%
6.2 S/C
136
47.89%
Voters: 284. You may not vote on this poll
7.0 or 6.2 S/C
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 694
From: Brighton, IL
Reason I brought my buddies car into the discussion is for a comparison of Torque gains with nitrous. Now imagine: same setup as the white car, but on a 427 cubic inch motor with LS7 (or equivalent) heads. Do you really think that dollar for dollar a S/C smaller inch motor is going to even come close to being able to touch it? Im still confused as to how you think something with a smaller inch motor will make as much torque as a larger motor...
(BTW, the white car at 5.87 (1/8) is damn close to running 8's (1/4), still has factory GM fuel injection (no DFI) still has factory crank.)
And to re-iterate about the cylinder heads...IMO theres no way GM puts the "LS7" heads on a s/c platform which would make it out perform their top dog the z06! Theres going to be some sacrifice there. IMO power adder would warrant the absence of the good cylinder heads.
I dont see how youre comparing a LT1 to your friends application. (Im guessing cobras?) Thats a completely unfair comparison. Maybe if it was apples to apples (LT1 with heads and a S/C and nitrous for example) How much more was the cobra than your car to begin with..
Im sure that your buddies are spending a lot more money than your giving them credit for. I know how much it costs to change superchargers, buy tuning programs, add ice boxes, nitrous etc. to cobras. Theyre not cheap to mod. and usually take TWO power adders to make impressive numbers.
EXACTLY. add that to a car that already is at the 36K mark MSRP...
(BTW, the white car at 5.87 (1/8) is damn close to running 8's (1/4), still has factory GM fuel injection (no DFI) still has factory crank.)
And to re-iterate about the cylinder heads...IMO theres no way GM puts the "LS7" heads on a s/c platform which would make it out perform their top dog the z06! Theres going to be some sacrifice there. IMO power adder would warrant the absence of the good cylinder heads.
I dont see how youre comparing a LT1 to your friends application. (Im guessing cobras?) Thats a completely unfair comparison. Maybe if it was apples to apples (LT1 with heads and a S/C and nitrous for example) How much more was the cobra than your car to begin with..
Im sure that your buddies are spending a lot more money than your giving them credit for. I know how much it costs to change superchargers, buy tuning programs, add ice boxes, nitrous etc. to cobras. Theyre not cheap to mod. and usually take TWO power adders to make impressive numbers.
EXACTLY. add that to a car that already is at the 36K mark MSRP...
I guess you never thought about the power you would make if you added spray to the FI 6.2? And yes, dollar for dollar, a smaller CI FI motor WILL make as much power as the larger CI N/A engine. I don't know where you are coming from with this? Let's say you have a 500 hp 427 and a 500 hp S/C 6.2 motor and you put a 150 shot on both of them. You are saying that the N/A motor is going to produce more power? God, I hope not. I can get some dynographs of a S/C engine before and after nitrous. If you want I will post them and we can go from there.
And your argument for GM not putting a good head on the new engine is flawed anyway. You're comparing an engine that will be out in 2-3 years to the modern Z06. The top dog Corvette will have a S/C 6.2 by then so there will be no "stepping on the toes" of the Camaro's big brother.
Finally, I don't remember 650/650 with one power adder (KB car) as being unimpressive. Face it. The 427 is going away and a multitude of FI 6.2 motors are on the way.
Last edited by 95firehawk; Mar 26, 2007 at 12:36 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 694
From: Brighton, IL
I had my car dynoed last night and saw a couple of dyno sheets that should shed some light on this nitrous debacle. There is a local guy that owns both a C6 Z06 and a GT500. His GT500 with a pulley (total 12 lbs of boost), tune, and longtubes dynoed 595 hp and 610 ft/lbs of torque to the wheels. They also had just installed a wet kit on the Z06 and with a 150 shot it dynoed 576 and 610. So for roughly the same price in parts and labor these two cars dynoed almost identical numbers. So for the sake of arguments yes the smaller FI motor can make as much power as the larger motor with spray, dollar for dollar.
Now its time to go add spray to that FI motor.
Now its time to go add spray to that FI motor.
West South Central Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
what that ever really a question? that a smaller forced induction motor can make the same power as a larger nitrous motor? Geez, you'd think that IHRAmight've figured that out when they allow nitrous motors to be considerably larger than forced induction motors. And even then FI powered cars must be several hundred pounds heavier to race in the same class.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 694
From: Brighton, IL
what that ever really a question? that a smaller forced induction motor can make the same power as a larger nitrous motor? Geez, you'd think that IHRAmight've figured that out when they allow nitrous motors to be considerably larger than forced induction motors. And even then FI powered cars must be several hundred pounds heavier to race in the same class.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
I really dig the 7.0 liter V8, but given the architecture and its limited modability, I'd say 6.2 S/C, you got tons of room to grow plus once you've gone through all the big engine mods (stroker, cam, heads, exhaust, etc) even more power is just a bigger blower and pulley set away.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
5.0 2v 245hp = 50 hp/liter (5.0 Cobra)
4.6 2v 260hp = 56.52 (2v GT)
4.6 3v 300hp = 65.22 hp/liter (regular GT - however I suspect this might be a bit underated)
4.6 4v 320hp = 65.22 hp/liter (last n/a cobra V8)
4.6 3v 320hp = 69.56 hp/liter (Shelby GT, Hertz GT, FRPP perf packs)
5.4 4v 390hp = 72.22 hp/liter (R model Cobra)
5.0 2v 225hp = 45 hp/liter (last 305 IIRC)
5.7 2v 245hp = 42.98 hp/liter (mullett special)
5.7 2v 275hp = 48.25 hp/liter (cried the day that motor came out and GT still only had 225hp)
5.7 2v ???hp = ??????? - I can't remeber all the Firehawk mutations, seems to me the very forst had 350hp - if somebody can jog my memory here???
5.7 2v 350hp = 61.40 hp/liter (Seems to me this is around the actual output in the F4)
5.7 4v 425hp = 74.56 hp/liter (LT5 motor IIRC)
6.0 2v 400hp = 66.67 hp/liter (GTO)
7.0 2v 505hp = 72.14 hp/liter (maybe more I dunno???)
Okay, there we go, except for the 350hp 5.7 (the concensus being that there is no difference between the F4 and C5 Motor) those are all factory powerplants. Only back in the 2v mod days and 5.0 liter days could GM lay claim to besting Ford at hp/liter. --->edit<--- almost forgot about the LT5, so one time in 27 years). In total power and torque (the only thing that matters unless you live, breathe, sleep VTEC) GM has smoked Ford and that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no replacement for displacement.
Last edited by bossco; Mar 27, 2007 at 01:26 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,049
From: Confederate States of America
Only honda owners brag about hp per liter, I could care less about that. Just give me a decent amount of hp and even more tq and I'm happy. Beside GM already has a 2.0 turbo that puts out 100hp per liter which is the highest output per liter of any GM engine. Would you want it in a 3700lb Camaro? I wouldn't. Now if I could have a turbo 6 then we might have something.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 694
From: Brighton, IL
You forgot the 03/04 Cobra 4.6L 4v 400hp = 86.96 hp/L
And the GT500/GT 5.4L 4v 505hp = 93.51 hp/L.
I know they aren't N/A but its till a factory motor and from the looks of it a pretty solid argument for wanting one in the new Camaro.
And the GT500/GT 5.4L 4v 505hp = 93.51 hp/L.
I know they aren't N/A but its till a factory motor and from the looks of it a pretty solid argument for wanting one in the new Camaro.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Was just going for the N/A stuff, I had thought about adding S/C'd engines but I think that would've invalidated the comparison.
I wonder how an average HP/Liter comparison would work out? Would probably be more telling since peak numbers are really misleading. Maybe thats how they should rate engines in the business, by average hp/average torque.
I wonder how an average HP/Liter comparison would work out? Would probably be more telling since peak numbers are really misleading. Maybe thats how they should rate engines in the business, by average hp/average torque.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Was just going for the N/A stuff, I had thought about adding S/C'd engines but I think that would've invalidated the comparison.
I wonder how an average HP/Liter comparison would work out? Would probably be more telling since peak numbers are really misleading. Maybe thats how they should rate engines in the business, by average hp/average torque.
I wonder how an average HP/Liter comparison would work out? Would probably be more telling since peak numbers are really misleading. Maybe thats how they should rate engines in the business, by average hp/average torque.
5.7L 2v 405hp = 71.05 Hp/Liter
That is right up their with the NA 4v 5.4 Cobra motor, which was actually rated at 385hp, not 390.
Last edited by RussStang; Mar 28, 2007 at 12:21 PM.
2010 Camaro Moderator/Disciple
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,087
From: Chester, NY
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
