|
|
|
03-24-2011, 03:40 PM
|
#11
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic03SVT
i had also heard 5.5 DI engine in the base vette, from multiple sources, fwiw
Also, since when can you get a Z06 in anything but a 6 speed? Where'd you see that?
|
I've heard the 5.5 number being giving out too but it just doesn't feel right to me.
GM likes to use the Gen IV motors for there truck's too and I don't think they will be able to downsize the motor that drastically without some push back from customers that like the low end torque that comes with the larger displacement
I'm thinking a 6.0L for the new Gen V
I was thinking zr1 that has the auto option.
__________________
2006 CTS-V
1993 Trooper
1991 Impulse RS
1988 Trooper II SAS
1986 TrooperII (No Rear)
1988 Impulse (dead)
1983 K20
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 04:10 PM
|
#12
|
I, Vettezuki
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackax
I've heard the 5.5 number being giving out too but it just doesn't feel right to me.
GM likes to use the Gen IV motors for there truck's too and I don't think they will be able to downsize the motor that drastically without some push back from customers that like the low end torque that comes with the larger displacement
I'm thinking a 6.0L for the new Gen V
I was thinking zr1 that has the auto option.
|
I didn't know there was an auto option on the ZR1. I know the caddy has a TR6060 Auto, but didin't know it was available for the ZR1.
Ford's doing fine with their 5.0, I think GM will be fine with a DI 5.5. Who knows, they might even go to the great historical high revving 327. Whatever they choose, I'm sure it will be great, they're not likely to blow that too badly I don't think. I'm curious to see what they'll for design; will it be a somewhat incremental (e.g., C5 -> C6) or radical (C3 -> C4) change?
__________________
Motorgen on To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Motorgen on To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Motorgen Project Car To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (active)
Motorgen Project Car To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (back burner)
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 06:51 PM
|
#13
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki
I didn't know there was an auto option on the ZR1. I know the caddy has a TR6060 Auto, but didin't know it was available for the ZR1.
Ford's doing fine with their 5.0, I think GM will be fine with a DI 5.5. Who knows, they might even go to the great historical high revving 327. Whatever they choose, I'm sure it will be great, they're not likely to blow that too badly I don't think. I'm curious to see what they'll for design; will it be a somewhat incremental (e.g., C5 -> C6) or radical (C3 -> C4) change?
|
Well the ford 5.0 is a dohc so its hard to compare displacement to a ohv.
I kind of like all the concepts that have come out. They make the vett back to is roots but still keeping it fresh.
__________________
2006 CTS-V
1993 Trooper
1991 Impulse RS
1988 Trooper II SAS
1986 TrooperII (No Rear)
1988 Impulse (dead)
1983 K20
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 07:03 PM
|
#14
|
I, Vettezuki
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackax
Well the ford 5.0 is a dohc so its hard to compare displacement to a ohv.
I kind of like all the concepts that have come out. They make the vett back to is roots but still keeping it fresh.
|
THe current OHV's are spectacularly effecient. Comparing a 5.5 OHV to a 5.0 DOHC for power isn't that out of the question. It's all in the head design, OHV as come a LONG way in the last 20 years.
Personally, I'd like to see something in size slightly smaller than the current platform (though not as small as the Kappa), lighter if possible, and even smaller engine displacement with forced induction, like a factory twin turbo 4.8L V8. Retro styling to something a bit more dramatically curvy would also by me preference.
__________________
Motorgen on To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Motorgen on To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Motorgen Project Car To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (active)
Motorgen Project Car To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (back burner)
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 08:09 PM
|
#15
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 379
|
yeah...theres no auto option in a ZR1 either....cant get an auto in anything but a base vette or a GS...
Also...why not a 5.5? the biggest engine available in a standard 1/2 ton chevy atm is a 5.3...So it would actually be a step up in displacement.
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 09:57 PM
|
#16
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki
THe current OHV's are spectacularly effecient. Comparing a 5.5 OHV to a 5.0 DOHC for power isn't that out of the question. It's all in the head design, OHV as come a LONG way in the last 20 years.
Personally, I'd like to see something in size slightly smaller than the current platform (though not as small as the Kappa), lighter if possible, and even smaller engine displacement with forced induction, like a factory twin turbo 4.8L V8. Retro styling to something a bit more dramatically curvy would also by me preference.
|
I think something about 10% bigger then a kappa would be killer. and right about 2800 - 3000 would be a winner in my book.
And not a big fan of factory forced induction for the base car. I want a bigger NA motor.
__________________
2006 CTS-V
1993 Trooper
1991 Impulse RS
1988 Trooper II SAS
1986 TrooperII (No Rear)
1988 Impulse (dead)
1983 K20
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 10:00 PM
|
#17
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic03SVT
yeah...theres no auto option in a ZR1 either....cant get an auto in anything but a base vette or a GS...
Also...why not a 5.5? the biggest engine available in a standard 1/2 ton chevy atm is a 5.3...So it would actually be a step up in displacement.
|
I must of been high when i was thinking about the auto thing.
And you can get a v6, 5.3, 6.0 and the 6.2 in the gmc 1500
__________________
2006 CTS-V
1993 Trooper
1991 Impulse RS
1988 Trooper II SAS
1986 TrooperII (No Rear)
1988 Impulse (dead)
1983 K20
|
|
|
03-24-2011, 10:05 PM
|
#18
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 379
|
ah. used to the old v6, 4.8, and 5.3. Used to be the bigger 8s were only in the 8800 gvwr 1/2 tons.
|
|
|
03-25-2011, 02:55 AM
|
#19
|
pain's fun, hit me again
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,264
|
doesnt the 6.2l only come in the SS 1500 though? Thats a special "truck"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Lee
Forget about winning and losing; forget about pride and pain. Let your opponent graze your skin and you smash into his flesh; let him smash into your flesh and you fracture his bones; let him fracture your bones and you take his life. Do not be concerned with escaping safely — lay your life before him
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Stopping the world!
|
|
|
03-25-2011, 10:06 AM
|
#20
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,255
|
http://www.gmc.com/sierra/index.jsp
They list the 6.2 under the 1500 as an option
anyway i really want a look at the C7...and in a few years buy a c6 z06 carbon
__________________
2006 CTS-V
1993 Trooper
1991 Impulse RS
1988 Trooper II SAS
1986 TrooperII (No Rear)
1988 Impulse (dead)
1983 K20
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|