Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Rumorpile: What Will Corvette Stingray Z06 Produce Power Wise?

    By William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    February 19, 2013

    With the introduction of the new Corvette Stingray, everyone is wondering what will be in store for the Z06 and ZR1. Motor Trend has some early indications of what to expect.

    The Z06 will stick naturally aspirated 7.0L engine with the power output possibly reaching 600 horsepower. The power output for Z06 will not be made till they get the final power output for the ZR1. If the ZR1 produces 700 HP, then the Z06 will have 600 HP. If the ZR1 produces somewhat less than 700 HP, expect the Z06 to be somewhere in the mid 500s.

    The ZR1 will use a variation of the Stingray's LT1 V8 with a supercharger.

    Source: Motor Trend

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    This is my prediction:-

    ZR-1 goes on a hiatus and will not return until 3~4 years into the C7's life cycle. When it does, it gets a supercharged version of the LT1 6.2 -- let's call it an LT9 -- making about 700 bhp.

    Z-06 goes on a hiatus until the 2nd model year, returning with a stroked version of the LT1 -- let's call it the LT5 -- displacing 6.8 liters and making about 550 hp naturally aspirated. The reason I believe that it'll be 6.8 liters in particular is because this is what you get from using the LT1 bore with the LS7 stroke. This allows them to not have to redesign the piston or remodel the combustion chamber; shorter rods will allow the chamber geometry to be identical to the LT1 at top-dead-center while increasing compression ratio to 12.7:1 (right about where it needs to be and where it can be tolerated with 91 octane). Getting to 550 hp isn't hard. The displacement increase alone gets you from 450 to about 493 lb-ft, a 1.2 point bump in compression alone is worth about 30~35 lb-ft for a total of about 525. If that torque peaks at about 4800 rpm and with the same fall off as a the LS7 you get about 550 bhp. Bump the torque peak slightly to ~5200 rpm and you actually get closer to 575 bhp. Not bad for an engine that's 485 lbs dressed and wet.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Problem starts to become how do you put all that power to the ground on a rear drive car that isn't very heavy and it still has leaf springs too doesn't it? Unless you have all wheel drive.

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Dwight, we are assuming all the lt1's "bells and whistles"? maybe not AFM?

    The LT1 doesn't really have a lot of bells and whistles. They decided against cam-in-cam independent VVT. They decided against a variable valve lift system (which would have displaced AFM).

    So, yes, I expect any of the LT1's derivatives to have DI and synchronous VVT. AFM is a maybe. AFM limits revs because of the mass it adds to the actuated valve train. Eliminating AFM gets you the ability to go maybe 500~600 rpm higher on the redline. But, you don't need that to make 550 or 575 bhp out of 6.8 liters. In fact, if you look at the LS7 (which revs to 7100 rpm) most of the upper rev range doesn't contribute to a faster car -- power peaks at 6300 rpm and falls off quite rapidly after that. Short shifting that engine probably get to better acceleration.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This car will be very soon and the ZR1 will not be far behind.

    The is also some speaking of a base sub Stingray Corvette that may have a 5.3 in the low 400 HP range. This car would have a fixed roof and not be loaded up. The intent of this car is one to give the club racers and modifiers a cheaper car to base a race car or play car on. The second intent is to attract younger buyers that they sorely lack.

    The Corvette is much like Cadillac and needs to attract new and non traditional buyers that will lower the average age of the buyer.

    The future lies in the hands of those now buying these cars now.

    Also the HP on these cars is expected to be spaced out once the ZR1 is locked in. GM intends to make the 700 HP mark and if so insiders expect the Z06 to fall in the 600 ranger and the ZL1 and CTS V to slot in near 600 HP also.

    Getting the power to the ground is not an issues with electronic controls. The present ZR1 engine can do all of GM's Warranty test and emissions test up to 725 now so a DI version should have no problem. The simple fact is there is no need for this much power as few will ever come near to using it all. Even the race cars from Pratt and Miller are not even this high but it sells cars to have large magic numbers. The Vette team wishes the automakers would come to a limit on power and work in other areas to increase performance but they know that is not going to happen.

    Edited by hyperv6
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is my prediction:-

    ZR-1 goes on a hiatus and will not return until 3~4 years into the C7's life cycle. When it does, it gets a supercharged version of the LT1 6.2 -- let's call it an LT9 -- making about 700 bhp.

    Z-06 goes on a hiatus until the 2nd model year, returning with a stroked version of the LT1 -- let's call it the LT5 -- displacing 6.8 liters and making about 550 hp naturally aspirated. The reason I believe that it'll be 6.8 liters in particular is because this is what you get from using the LT1 bore with the LS7 stroke. This allows them to not have to redesign the piston or remodel the combustion chamber; shorter rods will allow the chamber geometry to be identical to the LT1 at top-dead-center while increasing compression ratio to 12.7:1 (right about where it needs to be and where it can be tolerated with 91 octane). Getting to 550 hp isn't hard. The displacement increase alone gets you from 450 to about 493 lb-ft, a 1.2 point bump in compression alone is worth about 30~35 lb-ft for a total of about 525. If that torque peaks at about 4800 rpm and with the same fall off as a the LS7 you get about 550 bhp. Bump the torque peak slightly to ~5200 rpm and you actually get closer to 575 bhp. Not bad for an engine that's 485 lbs dressed and wet.

    Thanks for this very cool insight.

    Question for you and everyone else. If the 6.8 can get you 550HP and about 525Lbs of torque, why not use it to supercharge rather than the 6.2? Seems you can get allot more out of this 6.8 than the 6.2 based on what I have been reading?

    Second question, what about reliability and long life using 6.8 versus the 6.2?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is my prediction:-

    ZR-1 goes on a hiatus and will not return until 3~4 years into the C7's life cycle. When it does, it gets a supercharged version of the LT1 6.2 -- let's call it an LT9 -- making about 700 bhp.

    Z-06 goes on a hiatus until the 2nd model year, returning with a stroked version of the LT1 -- let's call it the LT5 -- displacing 6.8 liters and making about 550 hp naturally aspirated. The reason I believe that it'll be 6.8 liters in particular is because this is what you get from using the LT1 bore with the LS7 stroke. This allows them to not have to redesign the piston or remodel the combustion chamber; shorter rods will allow the chamber geometry to be identical to the LT1 at top-dead-center while increasing compression ratio to 12.7:1 (right about where it needs to be and where it can be tolerated with 91 octane). Getting to 550 hp isn't hard. The displacement increase alone gets you from 450 to about 493 lb-ft, a 1.2 point bump in compression alone is worth about 30~35 lb-ft for a total of about 525. If that torque peaks at about 4800 rpm and with the same fall off as a the LS7 you get about 550 bhp. Bump the torque peak slightly to ~5200 rpm and you actually get closer to 575 bhp. Not bad for an engine that's 485 lbs dressed and wet.

    Thanks for this very cool insight.

    Question for you and everyone else. If the 6.8 can get you 550HP and about 525Lbs of torque, why not use it to supercharge rather than the 6.2? Seems you can get allot more out of this 6.8 than the 6.2 based on what I have been reading?

    Second question, what about reliability and long life using 6.8 versus the 6.2?

    Lengthening the stroke while shortening the rods increases the piston side loads. You can avoid that by raising the deck, but that'll be a new block architecture and basically uneconomical. You can also raise or lower the crank height which creates and offset at TDC and accomplishes the same goal, but again that's a new block design. The 101.6mm stroke is tolerable up to 7100 rpm as shown in the LS7 so I guess that have "proven" that they can get away with it.

    Traditionally, they used the 6.2 instead of the 7.0 because of the thicker cylinder walls which are more tolerant of forced induction's extra heat and pressures. With the 6.8 having exactly the same wall thickness (in fact it can be the same exact block) they can supercharge the 6.8 instead of the 6.2. The reason I don't think they will is because of the presumption of a 700 hp target -- there is no need to increase the displacement. Besides, with forced induction -- within reasonable limits -- increasing displacement and running lower boost has the same power result as not increasing displacement, running higher boost with lower compression. With turbocharged engine the latter produces more lag. With superchargers there is zero lag so it really doesn't matter except that higher displacement with higher static compression and lower supercharger pulley ratios is probably slightly more fuel efficient at cruise.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • GMC Hummer EV drivers can now charge their gargantuan EVs on Tesla Superchargers, according to an announcement on GMC's website. Enabling Supercharging requires an update to the myGMC app; however, users can use the Tesla app and register temporarily as a Rivian R1S until the app update completes. Drivers who expect to use the Tesla Superchargers network regularly may wish to sign up for a $12.99 subscription through the Tesla app, which grants a 10c/kWh discount.  With a 200 kWh battery, just two charges from 20% - 80% per month would cover the membership fee. The myGMC app will also allow owners to purchase an official NACS to CCS adaptor.  While third-party NACS to CCS adapters are available for purchase, they are not officially approved for use on Tesla's network. With this change, GMC says that Hummer EV drivers now have access to approximately 195,000 charge points across North America.  Most Tesla Superchargers are of the 250kw variety, and while not specified in GMC's announcement, we suspect that the Hummer EV is not eligible to charge on the 150kw chargers, much like the Ford EVs, which cite the same 15,000 number for eligible Superchargers.  Limited to 250kw charging speeds, Hummer EV drivers may wish to limit the use of Tesla stations to a last resort while traveling as they will not reach the full 350kw charging speeds their vehicle is capable of. GM has also partnered with Flying-J / Pilot to offer 350kw charging at truck stops nationwide and is a founding member of the new IONNA Network that will offer both CCS and NACS charging without an adaptor. There is no announcement yet on Tesla Supercharger Access for their other EVs.  Drivers can identify 250kw chargers by the black collar at the end of the charging cable. View full article
    • COST, Apartment owners are very stingy even here in Liberal PNW, there is city mandates now to get apartment owners to install chargers as renters are complaining. Yet up north by my area where I live around Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Edmonds and Mukilteo Apartment owners who have installed L2 chargers rarely have vacancy so yes, it is valuable I believe and of course the Tesla Supercharger stations are packed all the time. Workwise, Seattle has been very progressive in having building owners install chargers and I had at one time posted pictures of all the chargers at my work where 2 years ago, there were 4 and now there is 20 and still they are filled up, so demand is truly there, but resistance to change is still very hard among older folks. With GOP Trump having control of the Rural he has them sold on Toxic Diesel is the life and EVs need to die, so I doubt rural will get chargers without the Feds forcing the install and then we have to deal with the idiots cutting the cables or icing the chargers. I hope there is a future way to have the cables shock the idiots that attempt to cut the cables as it is just stupid.
    • That's hella ugly, but people will buy it because it says "off road"   Look at how it tackles that gravel road that a Nissan Sentra could easily navigate.
    • True, but some larger apartment complexes or parking garages could put in level 2 chargers, maybe even level 1 for places like an airport extended parking.  If people have their car sit 12 hours at their apartment, or 8 hours in a parking garage while at work, there is opportunity there also for charing without having to build out expensive super chargers. And really it is rural America that should be embracing EV's way more because there aren't many gas stations when you get into farm country, you might have to drive 30-40 minutes to find a gas station in some parts of rural America, but they have houses with electricity and can easily charge.  
    • Meh, just another forgettable appliance...styling very similar to the Polstar something something...
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search