It sounds like this is the truck version of this engine that currently starts out at 380hp in the GMC models and goes up to 403 in the Cadillacs. Maybe the "450" horsepower is the GMC model? Then the "well over" part is for the Caddy making 470ish hp? And remember, this is the truck version!

The LS3 in the Corvette (with optional exhaust) is 33hp up on the Caddy. Could this mean that the base Corvette version could reach the 500hp mark??? It would be like the transition from the LS1/LS6 to the LS2/LS7. The 04 Z06 made 405hp. The base 05 made 400hp.

I wonder how the LS7 would respond to Direct Injection and more compression? 550hp on gas? Who needs a blower?

 

I would have to guess a DIG LS7 would be crazy!

 

I call media bias!!!

j/k

sounds good..

 

Nice to know that performance is not dead yet!

 

I do.

650hp (DI/FI 6.2) > 550 hp DI 7.0.

FI FTW.

 

You have $100k lying around to throw down on said car?

I'm with dream. It's time to start holding power levels, and working on fuel economy. Sure you can make fuel economy gains while gaining power, due to the airflow efficiencies that go with both, but I suspect there's more to be gained if power is held constant.

 

True, leave at least something to the aftermarket. I buy a car to mod and enjoy the work i've done on it.

When it comes with 650hp (or whatever), only modding would be tranny, suspension, gears, etc...

No need to mod the engine, what fun is that?!

 

I also agree with keeping power levels decent and increasing fuel economy.

At the same time, you guys *know* that as soon as a Ford or Chrysler would one-up us on power, we'd all be screaming for more power ourselves, even if the other car ends up being heavier/slower (Shelby anyone?)

 

The vette went from 18/28 to 16/26 with the new ratings - so getting the number to 30 or 31 I would say would be a serious accomplishment for GM.

A 350-400hp Camaro with 20/30 still isnt a guarantee and wont be easy with the new ratings. 35mpg for a v8 will be a stretch. What people will get though will vary- so who knows - but the window sticker war is still important.

I am curious to see the total effect of the new engine with final ratings of the new hybrid drive as well. That should prove interesting.

 

Count me in here as well.
Do many people on this board (much less the rest of the world) realize just how hard it is to keep 500hp planted firmly to the road? For any period of time? I had a '71 Mach 1 with about 425hp get away from me on a dry 2-lane road when I was 20... I pulled out to pass about 6 cars that were poking along at 40 in a 55 zone... I downshifted 2 gears and nailed the gas at the same time I did the lane shift into the left lane... rear broke loose and came around on me clockwise. From that day forward I found new respect for real power, and I totally understand how hard it can be to handle. That's why even I think these 600hp Vipers and 725 hp SuperSnakes are simply over the top and should not be allowed on the streets.

Anyone read about this... AutoBlog.com Freelance Writer Frank Filipponio Involved In Fatal Shelby GT500 Wreck
Here is a person who supposedly knows about cars and power, yet he is responsible for the death of a girl because he couldn't handle the car in the environment they were in. He had no business doing what he did in an area where people were walking, but the fact is it got away from a guy who knows how to drive hot cars - it CAN and does happen - even to the best.

Once you surpass 250-300hp in todays vehicles, there is simply NO USE for the excess power. A run from 15-70 to merge onto a freeway in 13-16 seconds or a 10-second 30-70 high-speed pass is all that should ever be needed from a passenger car. Anything more than that is simply wasting energy on the streets IMO.

I said 2-3 years ago on this board that I want to see cars stop the power surge and start the efficiency surge instead.

I have several V8 rocket-ships at home, and yet I drive a 4-banger to work every day to reap the 40mpg savings. Those savings help allow me to play when I want. I have seriously thought about spending some time and money on my 93 4-banger Mustang to see just how far I can take it into the mpg stratosphere... like swapping the 3.45:1 for a 2.73:1 gear, going from 14"rims to 15 or even 16" rims and max O.D. tires, removing the silencer in the air box, etc, etc. My best so far (stock) is about 40.8 mpg achieved this past May. Averaging 35-38 during the summer (A/C running is a hit in the afternoons). Not bad for 1993 technology, 87 octane gas, and 171k miles to boot. If we could do it then, we should be able to do it now, just add more power to the 105 hp engine and keep everything else the same and I'd be exstatic.

Honestly, it would be awesome to have 200-240hp in a LIGHTER car that still stoked about 40 mpg. That IS and should be an achievable goal in this day and time IMO.

I personally think the direct injection prospects are good, but I think they are just a stepping stone to another technology - I don't think they will provide the long-term solution for more efficient gas vehicles. As I have said before, I personally see the long-term future in electrical motivation.
It would not surprise me to see electrical propulsion erode the market out from under all gas and diesel vehicles in my lifetime - maybe even in the next 2 decades.

So for now, let's start looking at lighter more efficient cars instead of basic "more power" strides.

 

Man that story disappeared quick, unless it was really old, I couldn't find a thing on it.

does anybody know the target weight for the F5? If it weighs in at around 3900 lbs total weight (driver, gas, ect) that'd be an 11 second car. Man just think of what the insurance would be on a factory sub 30k 11 second car with a top speed probably in the 160 to 180ish area

 

People that do know are hinting at best. My recollection is that someone hinted that they were aiming for 3600 for the V8 model. Whether 3600 or 3900 or 4000, it'll be quick & fast.

My bet is still for 3800 for the V8 models as tested by the magazines (i.e. well-optioned). But that's not based on any inside info.

 

I for see stability control and traction control that you can not completely turn off on some of these high powered high porduction vehicles. Kind of like what Chrysler has done with the LX cars. Its a way to let the driver have fun with the power, but not give them complete control to kill themselves and others and keep another Ralph Nader away from another Convair.

 

That was pretty much a Daimler-Chrysler thing. You cannot completely turn off TC in most of their vehicles.

 

That would not be good on a Camaro (or Challenger for that matter). Can you imagine not being able to do burnouts? Even if for no other reason than to heat/clean off your tires at the dragstrip.