Hey, maybe so . Although I didn't know the 5th-gen was going to be getting a ~600 HP engine, so I'm still "assuming" we're getting something around ~450 HP, in which case there's no NEED for a s/c (since it's proven they can do up to 505 HP NA, with a 5-year / 100k warranty ).

 

The next corvette engine is the LS3 which is a 6.2L naturally aspirated V8 which should be make in the 450hp range.
GM is also developing LS9, which (rumor has it) is a 6.2L s/c V8 that will make between 600-650hp.
That's why I was saying for LS7 numbers, they can make it naturally aspirated. LS7 is on the ragged edge durability wise though, so hopefully the new LSX block will be better.
But if they want 600+hp then it will be tough to due it with all motor, and keep the cost down.

 

Who said it would have to be just for the Camaro? I betcha that 427 powered Impala SS's and Silverado SS's would outsell Camaro SS by a long shot!

The LS7 uses the same rod specs, other than the material, as the LS2. That would allow use of the same hypereutectic piston as the LS7. The heads, rockers, springs, etc are already in production, nothing new to design. They could pull out the old 2002 LS6 204/218 12565308 cam and throw it in to get .582/.573" lift with the 1.8 rockers. The crankshaft is forged, but so would the crank from the supercharged motor, so no difference there other than it is already in production. I estimate output would be 475hp/450tq with a 6300RPM redline. Maybe for the Silverado SS put the LS2's smaller 200/203 cam in with a longer runner intake to make a solid 450hp/450tq with a 5800RPM redline.

GM has a BUNCH of parts already available to make awesome engines. No doubt whatever they do come up with will be world class!

 

And if ANYBODY thinks that GM will produce 600hp Camaros, then please check yourself into the nearest loony bin...

 

And every different cam in this engine would have to be certified which is highly expensive, they will stick with one cam most likely.The 427 isn't gonna happen in the Camaro and probably neither will the supercharger. Like I said we'll probably get a NA 6.2 with a ram air package and stickers for the special edition. I'd be happy if either motor actually made it they both have advantages and disadvantages, 427 lightweight better handling, harder and more expensive to modify (already at the limits), S/C 6.2 more weight worse handling, better ability to mod cheaply. The S/C 6.2 is still my preference just based on easy/ cheap modification. Heck just look at the Cobra's, they are still pulling premiums on 3 year old cars.

 

I never said the LS9 was going in the Camaro.
But GM is supposibly (I understand that info is only as accurate as the source) working on a LS8 (a s/c something, 6.0L or 6.2L) that will have less power then then LS9.

GT500 has 500hp today, so I would think GM will produce something to compete, and 450 hp is not enough.

My bet is L76 will be the Z28 motor, and LS8 will be the SS.

 

450HP will work if the car weighs 3550 lbs

I know, it is not going to happen

 

I'm not trying to start a pi$$ing contest here, really I'm not ...

... but how do you figure the current LS7 is already at its limits?? Check out over on the 'Vette boards ... I think with headers, free flowing intake and a tune, guys are getting closer to ~500 at the wheels vs. the stock ~450 - 460 RWHP. The factory camshaft is a "baby" for a 7.0L ... it may be good for a ~5.7L or 6.0L, but for the shear displacement of the LS7, and the heads on it, it can handle way more camshaft. Sorry, I don't have "specifics" (haven't read around there lately) but I wouldn't hesitate to say ~600 HP from the engine alone is quite feasible ..... well, as an example, think of the '02 GMMG "ZL-1" Camaros! They used a 427 LSx engine, and made 600 HP / 575 TQ!

I agree that simply changing a pulley and netting ~600+ HP is "easy". But I think AdioSS and I are on the same page here ..... there are logical benefits to using a 427 based engine (does not have to be "LS7") that they could use across the board in more vehicles than just the Camaro, AND it would carry a certain "heritage factor" with it that a 6.2L does not have. AND it would still perform damn well!

But hey, different strokes for different folks, right?

 

"Heritage factor"? How do you figure? While there were limited numbers of 427 Camaros, they weren't the kind of cars most Camaro buyers purchased. The most common "performance" Camaro of its day was the SS-350. Besides, where is the "heritage" when the original 427 Camaros were big blocks? If you're really concerned about heritage, then you should be asking for a N/A 5.7L. With gas prices headed back north of $3/g (I just paid $2.999 for unleaded last night) fuel economy is going to figure into the equation as much as performance.

I can see your arguments for a "big" small block (by your I mean all of you pro 7.0L supporters), in fact I used to be in the same camp. However the s/c 6.2L has so much more performance potential. Think about it. The 6.2L would be factory tuned to run on a supercharger. A pulley swap, and some reprogramming and tuning and you're at 600 hp. And a 6.2L could also be "bored and stroked" to 7.0L and taken to the next level. This gives you a low cost approach to "extra" performance all the way up to big performance gains by major engine work. (Big bucks.)

On the other hand to reach the same level with a N/A 7.0L, you're going to have to add a supercharger to a car that didn't come with one from the factory. This might need some custom fabrication, or at least paying $$$ for a one-off kit designed just for the Camaro. As 7.0L is getting close to the limit of how big you can take an LS block, the same approach to increasing the displacement of the 6.2L won't net you much (and it would roughly cost you the same $). Besides, do we really want a cheaper mass produced version of the current LS7?

The s/c 6.2L clearly has much more performance potential. Just ask your wives and girlfriends... size doesn't really matter.

 

Too bad we can't have both then you can debate it while a $500 modded S/C 6.2 is leaving your 7.0 in the dust.

 

Capn Pete,

Certainly I'm treating this as a discussion between intelligent individuals. I confident that I don't know everything, nor does anyone else on this site.

Maybe a different perspective on some of your points:
- I didn't mean that the LS7 wasn't capable of producing more power, however from the information that I have received it is at the limit for durability. That may not matter to everyone, but if we are talking about powertrains from the factory, it does. If the LS7 was the best option to up the performance of the Corvette (or whatever car), they wouldn't be doing the LS9. The are not stopping the LS7 for the same reason they stopped the LS6. The LS6 stopped because they jumped generations in their v8's, where as the LS7 (especially it's cyl. head) is the basis for the new LS3 (the LS3 is using L92 heads, which were an early iteration of the now LS7 head). They are using a s/c powertrain to increase performance because they can not get the performance they want in the new corvette and meet durability.

- As for the ZL-1 Camaros, I don't believe that was a factory option or came with a factory warrenty, or passed emissions (but I could be wrong). If the engine doesn't pass emissions then all bets are off. You can dump more fuel, you can add more cam, and totally lose low speed/part throttle driveability if the upgrade to ZL-1 was aftermarket. That might not be a good example because emissions and driveability are very important for any powertrain leaving the factory.

- As for packaging in other vehicles, if they can package the s/c in the corvette, it will fit in anything. The roof line on a corvette makes it almost impossible to package a s/c and intercooler without the intercooler technology that Cadillac uses on the STS-V and XLR-V. So a s/c v8 will package in all their other vehicles as well (impala, camaro, corvette, truck, suv, etc), just as easy as 427. The intercooler and lines don't take up that much space because they are water lines, not the air hoses that turbo often use.

If you want 600hp with torque (say 575 from your example), from the factory, the s/c 6.2L V8 is the only way it's going to happen. If you talk about more then 7.0L (aka Viper), then of course you can get there. But I was assuming we were stopping at 427.

Just my thoughts

 

Here is a good article about the COPO Camaros. Below is a quote about the factory 427's...

"By the end of 1967 it was clear that Yenko couldn't keep up with the demand for 427 Camaros, so he approached Chevrolet about the possibility of getting factory equipped 427 Camaros. Chevy was hesitant about this at first, but the people in the Special Projects Division were eager to give it a shot. According to Jim Mattison, who worked in the division at the time, the result was that Chevy agreed to supply factory equipped 427 Camaros to Yenko in 1968 on the condition that he keep it a secret. Don Yenko agreed, and until recently it was thought that all 68 of the 1968 Yenko Camaros had dealer installed engines, just like the 67's, but they were actually factory installed. At the end of the 68 model year the cars had proved to be both reliable and desireable. This led to the birth of two special options for 1969, COPO 9561 and COPO 9737."

 

Valid,

I have to retract an earlier statment. I found out that 2002 ZL-1 Camaros were available from the factory with warrenty at the 600hp mark. But how much did they cost. Is double the regular Camaro about right? And I don't think it was street legal (offroad use only), which means it didn't pass emission, pass-by noise, etc.

I don't think we can compare the performance of a engine in the late sixties to that of one today. We may have more technology and understanding for optimizing the engine, but the car companies of today have to meet emissions standards that were inconceivable, and driveability standards that were impossible in the sixties.

Take a yenko to an emissions lab today (not going to happen). You can't drive a real Yenko on pump gas, and it still doesn't meet emissions. There's a reason why when emissions standards came into effect the hp of the big 3's motors dropped so much. Pull out spark, remove valve overlap, reduce valve lift, add restriction in the exhaust due to cats, reduce fuel consumption, change to unleaded fuel, which forces reduced compression. All the technology that we now have is just getting us back to even with the new emissions standards that need to be met.

 

I'd disagree with that. I'm willing to bet that we make more power per cube on less gas than we did in 1969. I'd put a GMMG ZL-1 against a COPO or "real" ZL-1 any day.

A 1969 427 Camaro would probably run right with a 2002 427 Camaro on the strip (maybe even beat it), but you wouldn't have 2 more gears, A/C, power windows, decent stereo, or leather seats for the drive home. A 2009 427 would probably destroy a COPO at the strip with the A/C on.

Not to mention the fact that the ZL-1 was pretty stout stuff in 1969, but would you care to guess what GM could do with an aluminum big block today? The modern equivalent of the 427 would probably be the 502. it ain't the biggest, or the most radical, but it's crate big block. How much horse do you think one of those bad boys puts out when built right and equipped with all the modern goodies?

I love the '69- don't get me wrong- but do you really think that we are just now coming even with 1969? We've been pulling similar performance from smaller motors in heavier platforms with more creature features for years, and the gap is only going to get wider.

 

understood,

however I don't understand how we can compare straight up an engine designed in the sixties to an engine design today.
If my facts are correct, and the ZL-1 that was produced in 2002 is sold for "off road use only", then it still doesn't meet emissions, which means they can do things to get more power out of the motor.
If we really want to get specific, the performance test procedures have even changed. Today engines are tested with full accessory drives, in the sixties it was just crank and water pump.

Can anyone confirm or deny that the ZL-1 was 50 state legal.

Why is it that no one is making the kind of numbers we are taking about 600hp and 575 lb-ft in a 50 state legal car with less then 7.0L, without forced induction, and at the price range we are talking about. Because it would be too expensive. Not impossible, but too expensive - which if I remember correctly what started this tangent in the first place.