CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,319
- United States
Why go back to a name from the 80's/90's?
Corvette C7
- Thread starter boomee
- 2,702 comments
- 219,363 views
- 434
- JurupaValley,Ca
- marluxiaXI11
The LT1 name is from the 70's
ShobThaBob
Premium
- 2,651
- rosooftw
Because that's typical for GM engine naming. The LT1 engine designation was also used in the 70s. The 80s/90s use was already a rehash.
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
The LT1 name spanned from the '70s through the early '90s.
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
The overwhelming majority of what I had read was that it was going to drop. Imagine the look on my face this morning when I read that it was not the case. Beyond going back to the 'LT1' designation, keeping the engine the exact same size (but still gaining 100 lbs) really caught me off-guard. Still, direct-injection, cylinder deactivation, variable timing and aluminum construction are all spot-on. I find it pretty interesting that GM consistently mentions how much smaller, lighter and equally powered it is to BMW's 4.4L Turbo. Since when did they worry about that?
Color me interested on what they do with the Silverado when that show's up as well. That makes me assume that the top-tier V8 will essentially be the same as this, and that they'll be dropping the smaller versions in favor of a turbocharged V6.
...Still, it makes me wonder what GM has planned for their Z06 successor. Or for that matter, what they'll do with the ZR1. I could still see a street version of their racing 5.5L V8 making an appearance, but, who knows.
And as a total side note, I'm banking on an EPA highway rating of at least 30 MPG. I wouldn't put a rating of 32 MPG too far out of the realm of possibility. With cylinder deactivation being more aggressive, that super-tall 7th gear, and a weight that is give/take similar than the current car... Anything less than 30 MPG would be extremely disappointing.
- 27,219
- United Kingdom
I was thinking that too. GM says it'll "exceed" the current car's 26, and given all the new tech I'd be very surprised if 30 isn't in the offering.
Which is pretty impressive with 450bhp.
Still pushrod too, by the looks of things. Good to see GM is still keeping it simple, despite all the new injection bits and bobs.
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
I can't wait to see the finished product!
- 9,058
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
I like how some people dog on the 911 for not being "innovative" or the "state of the art" but here it is suspiciously following two prototype corvettes.
If GM and Nissan still hold themselves against the 911, then how is the car not the "standard"?
Sorry I just had it bugging my mind and had to say it.
If GM and Nissan still hold themselves against the 911, then how is the car not the "standard"?
Sorry I just had it bugging my mind and had to say it.
gamerdog6482
(Banned)
- 6,233
- Venom, USA
- Gamerdog6482
I like how some people dog on the 911 for not being "innovative" or the "state of the art" but here it is suspiciously following two prototype corvettes.
If GM and Nissan still hold themselves against the 911, then how is the car not the "standard"?
Sorry I just had it bugging my mind and had to say it.
I somewhat agree.
Go to Nissan's website, they directly compare the 2012 GT-R to the Carrera S (As well as the R8 V10 and the ZR1, notably).
The 911 seems to be becoming an "entry level" super (if that) car.
- 1,274
- Denver,Miami,Vegas
- terryparker15
sumbrownkidI like how some people dog on the 911 for not being "innovative" or the "state of the art" but here it is suspiciously following two prototype corvettes.
If GM and Nissan still hold themselves against the 911, then how is the car not the "standard"?
Sorry I just had it bugging my mind and had to say it.
I haven't heard to many adults and folks that have been around for a little bit have to many bad things to say about Porsche personally. If your a purist and true car lover overall and not just a brand FANBOY as they say to anything in particular, the 911 has been known as the benchmark for quite some time. Hate or love it, you have do have to admit it is an engineering marvel. :-)
- 9,473
- QLD, Down Under
- GTP_Paulie
- Paulie LDP
Yeah. That's not going to get confusing or anything GM. Thanks.
Kinda surprised that it is the same size as the current one. I figured they would have dropped it back down to 5.7 at the very least. Everything Brad was saying was suggesting even smaller than that, too. Though if they are pushing fuel economy up even more, who cares.
I read that they're keeping it at 6.2L because of the cylinder deactivation tech. Any less displacement and it wouldn't make enough power when running on 4cyl and would therefore have to be in V8 mode more often thus negating the fuel saving advantages of having cylinder deactivation. That was someone from Chevy that stated that.
- 2,121
- Chicago
- mustang622006
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
We've had it on our trucks since '03, the first high-performance application being the LS4 that went into the W-Body cars a year later. Our automatic-equipped Camaro SS' have them, although I rarely see it pushed as a selling point.
We've got it on our Avalanche, and you really don't notice the transition to four-cylinders on the highway. But hey, we manage pretty good economy on the highway. I'd say it works pretty well.
