I was thinking the same thing. My 99 LS1 was rated something like 18/28 or something from the factory. With a manual it went to 19/29. Maybe they are sandbagging?

-Geoff

 

Well would you look at that, it's a 6.2L again and not 5.5L.

 

Seriously. Now where are all those folks that swore it was going to be 5.5L because the competition version was?

 

Oh I already resurrected a threat going back and forth about this over in the 5th Gen News section.

 

Oddly enough, I have not seen a response from 2010_5thGen. Shocking.....

 

Now that some better photos and information is out we'll start a new thread. There should be a lot new stuff to talk about.
https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/aut...4/#post6924170

 

Nah that's what the old C6 LS3 got. It's going to be better than that for sure. I would be surprised if the base model got anything below 30mpg highway. It has active fuel management, cylinder deactivation, direct injection... and possibly a 7 speed manual.


Well... Rumor has it that GM was testing a 5.5l at some point. There were a 1,000 different reasons they ditched it over the 6.2l though.

 

That's GM's estimate, not mine.

 

From GM's press release directly.

 

Just an estimated HP and Torque figure. They won't give away all the details before the C7 launch.

 

Apparently those bumps are for managing crankcase ventilation, with the inclusion of DI, there is no fuel spray on the backside of the intake valve to keep it cool or washed down or whatever making deposit build up a real problem on the backside of the valve.

 

Interesting chart. All it says is more than 26. There are a lot of numbers, infinite actually (there are quite a few we can rule out though), above 26.

 

Well you you go by recent history, the power and fuel mileage numbers should improve as the C7 moves closer to production.

 

Who cares! With 450hp and torque they could have called it PeeWee Herman.

The idea is to get more power with the same mileage. We might see an extra mpg when they finish the final gearing, but anyone expecting a 450hp engine to get the same fuel economy as a 320 horse V6 isn't being at all realistic.

Your '99 LS1 is rated by the old EPA standards. It changed in 2004. By the new standards, you'd probably be about 24mpg highway.... this one gives 26mpg with about 120 or so more hp.... just to give some perspective as to how big a deal the mileage of this engine is.


Actually, it's the last minute tuning and programming that gives the final horsepower. The reason it's estimated hp is that they haven't finished the final programming yet. They can work on this all the way up till the first model comes down the assembly line.... even afterwards (first production models are often held back in case any last minute changes happen, or product issues need resolved.

 

I think someone posted above that the preliminary hp ratings for the ZL1 and ZR1 motors were less than the final production numbers.
I looked at that and found that both engines had final ratings that were about 6% above the preliminary estimates.
Using that as a guide, we might be able to say that the new LT1 could put out 477 hp in it's final rating.
Furthermore, if that's the AFM automatic version, and we use the L99 vs. LS3 model from the Camaro, we can assume another 6% gain from the AFM version to the non-AFM version.
That would put the non-AFM version of the LT1 at 506 hp. Right at the LS7 numbers.

And I think someone said the torque on the LT1 looked like the same numbers from the LS7.
So maybe my estimates are not too far off.