How long before HSV get LS7?

[RedHotGT]

There it is....
A new Thread Mining record perhaps??

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Linkachu

Holdens answer to everything lately... IF THEY MAKE THEIRS MORE FASTERA WE MAKE BIGGER MOTOR HURR.

Seriously a 6ltr is big enough then they went a 6.2ltr to battle a 5.4 putting out just as much.

There's more to an engine than the power it makes you know.

[oranpark addict]

Originally Posted by loftie

There it is....
A new Thread Mining record perhaps??

So Loftie, I've come to the conclusion you have to much time on your hands. Just wanted to use the rules button as well but surely there are rules against this big a dig.

[Falcman0o7]

phhhh.....

In 20 years....

LS23 15.6 litres pushrod V16 500 Kws

Then there will be ford...3.0 V8 500 kws LMAO!

[buggo]

Originally Posted by Falcman0o7

phhhh.....

In 20 years....

LS23 15.6 litres pushrod V16 500 Kws

Then there will be ford...3.0 V8 500 kws LMAO!

No no no. In twenty years it will be

FPV GT-650Kw 2000Nm@1rpm from a duracell, recharges every time you gun it.

HSV Clubby (doesn't) R8- 400Kw from an onboard coal station. requires 200 full time workers to keep charged.

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by oranpark addict

So Loftie, I've come to the conclusion you have to much time on your hands. Just wanted to use the rules button as well but surely there are rules against this big a dig.

Thats the first time that someone has slapped the 'rules' emoticon at me!!! Nice one!!!

Good for a bit of a laugh...

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by paul7v7

very nice specs on the LS7. A monster engine. Wonder how big GM will let the displacement get on their engines. 7.0 is pretty big. Gotta sound good though.

Dodge viper has an 8.4 litre, so still some way off getting the biggest of all.

[glavas]

i dont see the problem with bigger engines? the bigger the better. yes im a holden man and if holden bought in small little engines for there v8 id be very angry. you know how the old saying goes theres no replacement for displacement.

im sure if ford/fpv had 6+ liters who guys wouldent be complaning. bring on the riverly!!!!!!!!! like days of old. i recall when you guys dident even have a v8 hahaha scary times they were.

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by glavas

you know how the old saying goes theres no replacement for displacement.

Thats why it is an old saying

Wait a minute, i just spent an threadmining truck full of dollars making my 5.4 a 5.8

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by glavas

im sure if ford/fpv had 6+ liters who guys wouldent be complaning. bring on the riverly!!!!!!!!! like days of old. i recall when you guys dident even have a v8 hahaha scary times they were.

I'm sure if Ford/FPV had no V8 (again!?!?) we'd still be whipping the pants of HSV...

F6 - Full Stop

[glavas]

Originally Posted by tweeked

Thats why it is an old saying

Wait a minute, i just spent an threadmining truck full of dollars making my 5.4 a 5.8

i bet your glad that you did? an extra 400cc is nice. i wish i could make my 6.2 a 7l.

the saying lives on my friend!!!!

[glavas]

Originally Posted by loftie

I'm sure if Ford/FPV had no V8 (again!?!?) we'd still be whipping the pants of HSV...

F6 - Full Stop

how could you compare the two tho? a na 8 to fi 6. no body really cares about a 6 anyway truely why would ya? bring on the V8 wars my friend yeeooowwww!!!!!!!!! GOOD TIMES AHEAD with fords new engine out. cant wait for hsv to counter. its like a well played game of chess.!!!!!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by glavas

how could you compare the two tho? a na 8 to fi 6. no body really cares about a 6 anyway truely why would ya? bring on the V8 wars my friend yeeooowwww!!!!!!!!! GOOD TIMES AHEAD with fords new engine out. cant wait for hsv to counter. its like a well played game of chess.!!!!!

So what you are saying is that other than:

Turbo charging.
Supercharging.
Direct injection.
Variable independent cam timing.

There is no replacement for displacement......

Why then is every single current FPV model significantly smaller displacement than every single currnet HSV model and yet the slowest FPV is quicker than the fastest HSV?

There was once a time when the man the the biggest muscles always won the battle, now the battle is won by the man with the brain and the gun.....

[Kamshaaft]

How are those replacement for dispalcement though, when you can do all of them to an engine of larger displacement too? And forced induction is just manufactured extra displacement anyway - the engine pumps more air per cycle.

And while you didn't bring it up I amy as well also mention that 'DOHC isn't superior to OHV' is a fallacy, as there are many different aspects in which they can be compared and pushrods come out on top in just as many of mthose aspects. More like horses for courses.

[Kamshaaft]

Originally Posted by glavas

im sure if ford/fpv had 6+ liters who guys wouldent be complaning. bring on the riverly!!!!!!!!! like days of old. i recall when you guys dident even have a v8 hahaha scary times they were.

...number of cylinders doesn't mean a whole lot more than engine balancing and smoothness at given rpms, really.

And it definitely doesn't dictate weight.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by Kamshaaft

How are those replacement for dispalcement though, when you can do all of them to an engine of larger displacement too? And forced induction is just manufactured extra displacement anyway - the engine pumps more air per cycle.

And while you didn't bring it up I amy as well also mention that 'DOHC isn't superior to OHV' is a fallacy, as there are many different aspects in which they can be compared and pushrods come out on top in just as many of mthose aspects. More like horses for courses.

I can't think of 1 factory pushrod production engine that can produce more KW/L of displacement than any modern OHC performance engine.......
OHC engines are simply more efficient at getting power from their displacement.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Kamshaaft

How are those replacement for dispalcement though, when you can do all of them to an engine of larger displacement too? And forced induction is just manufactured extra displacement anyway - the engine pumps more air per cycle.

And while you didn't bring it up I amy as well also mention that 'DOHC isn't superior to OHV' is a fallacy, as there are many different aspects in which they can be compared and pushrods come out on top in just as many of mthose aspects. More like horses for courses.

Are you serious?

Engines are designed to demonstrate torque and therefore power over a range of revs.

Two of the KEY components are friction and efficiency.

The bigger the physical displacement the more surface area. The more surface area the higher the friction so therefore the less efficiency.

The bigger the phyicial displacement the heavier the moving components and therefor the more energy wasted overcoming inertia as the pistons move up and down so therefore the less efficiency.

Engine design is constantly evolving. Some make them bigger other make them smarter. Smarter always wins.

Obvious example, the LS7 is not the top of the tree anymore, the LS9 has repaced it and guess what.......it has a smaller displacement.

Another example, there are many forced induction 5.4 V8s on here but no one has managed to go quicker than a T6. (I can tell because if one ever did AFF would need an extra terabyte just to hold the thread about it)

[Falcman0o7]

Originally Posted by buggo_gt

No no no. In twenty years it will be

FPV GT-650Kw 2000Nm@1rpm from a duracell, recharges every time you gun it.

HSV Clubby (doesn't) R8- 400Kw from an onboard coal station. requires 200 full time workers to keep charged.

LMAO!

[Franco Cozzo]

Just to let you guys know, Chevrolet does a V8 engine of 572ci which you can buy.

http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/En...8793&engCat=bb

Originally Posted by wikipedia

Chevrolet began offering a 572-cubic-inch (9.4 L) "crate motor" in 2003[15] which produced 720 hp (537 kW) and 685 lb·ft (929 N·m) of torque,[16] and more recently a 620 hp (462 kW) / 650 lb·ft (881 N·m) version capable of running on 92 octane street gasoline.

So, GM has beaten Dodge haha.

[CAT600]

Lets put fuel economy to one side for a minute (Because smaller engines will always be better on fuel no doubt)

I have a problem with those that would say an LS engine is an "inefficient" performance engine due to produced HP/L.... who gives a rats. A performance engine should be measured by HP/KG or HP/m2, in other words how many kilos it weighs or how much under bonnet real estate it takes up to make X amount of horsepower.

A 427cid all-alloy LS engine is very compact, lightweight and makes great power, and that's all that matters.

Daniel

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by CAT600

Lets put fuel economy to one side for a minute (Because smaller engines will always be better on fuel no doubt)

I have a problem with those that would say an LS engine is an "inefficient" performance engine due to produced HP/L.... who gives a rats. A performance engine should be measured by HP/KG or HP/m2, in other words how many kilos it weighs or how much under bonnet real estate it takes up to make X amount of horsepower.

A 427cid all-alloy LS engine is very compact, lightweight and makes great power, and that's all that matters.

Daniel

Daniel,

with respect you cant put fuel economy to one side if were talking about this from a production vehicle perspective.
If you look at this from a view of totality you must accept fuel economy will be a determiner to a greater or lesser degree for any purchase, even with performance vehicles.
FPV will exploit this if its an advantage, any company would, especially into the future with the green push...
Sooner or later HSV will suffer at the hands of "bigger is better" and the image issues FPV can now create..
FPV; "were making more power and better performance with smaller more efficient engines"...
They need to embrace smaller more efficient engine technology to move forward.
Engine bay realestate is really a non issue if the engine fits, lets face it, most people dont even open their bonnets regularly and its not like you can store stuff in there.
Engine weight is a factor from a total vehicle weight and balance perspective, but in isolation there maybe some benefits a few extra kilo's are worth living with to gain as a trade off.. Superchardger comes to mind?

For me KW/L is a great way to look at how an engine "works", if smaller is better than it goes hand in hand that KW/L is a great measurement.

[HLC]

This thread is truly hilarious.

all the debates going on not realising its 5 years old :

classic.

[CAT600]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Daniel,

with respect you cant put fuel economy to one side if were talking about this from a production vehicle perspective.
If you look at this from a view of totality you must accept fuel economy will be a determiner to a greater or lesser degree for any purchase, even with performance vehicles.
FPV will exploit this if its an advantage, any company would, especially into the future with the green push...
Sooner or later HSV will suffer at the hands of "bigger is better" and the image issues FPV can now create..
FPV; "were making more power and better performance with smaller more efficient engines"...
They need to embrace smaller more efficient engine technology to move forward.
Engine bay realestate is really a non issue if the engine fits, lets face it, most people dont even open their bonnets regularly and its not like you can store stuff in there.
Engine weight is a factor from a total vehicle weight and balance perspective, but in isolation there maybe some benefits a few extra kilo's are worth living with to gain as a trade off.. Superchardger comes to mind?

For me KW/L is a great way to look at how an engine "works", if smaller is better than it goes hand in hand that KW/L is a great measurement.

Perhaps fuel economy comes into it but this is a PERFORMANCE market. Keep in mind that the last generation of 5.4L Boss was just as hard on fuel as the 6.2L LS3.... each car won and lost a few of the tests if my memory serves.

On the flip side?

* Low engine weight aids lower car weight.
* Low engine weight aids handling.
* Smaller dimensionally allows a lower and more rearward mounting position which allows better handling, a shorter wheelbase and overall length for a given passenger compartment size.... this leads to reduced weight by way of a "smaller" car
* Larger capacity vs forced induction has some merits in the way of simplicity of operation and cost of manufacture

You have to also realise that I am not going off bias here, my own mantra is of small capacity OHC FI.... exactly the opposite of what I am saying here... but I am a Ford man so I work with what Ford start with.

But that mantra will be changing one day soonish.

Daniel

[Express]

I know its been said before but there is more to a car than just an engine.

I’ve never been overly concerned about who’s the fastest, in the end it usually comes down to, how deep are your pockets.

Anyway an old thread deserves an old review.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIPBP...1&feature=fvwp

Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (LS7) vs Ford Shelby GT500KR (5.4lt Supercharged - Air to Water Intercooler)

Corvette Z06
3.6sec 0-60mph
¼ mile 11.7sec @ 123.2mph

Shelby GT500KR
4.9sec 0-60mph
1/4mile 12.8sec @ 114.6mph

These times are of cause the review times and don't necessarily mean much in the real world.

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by HLC

This thread is truly hilarious.

all the debates going on not realising its 5 years old :

classic.

Hence the reason I dug so deep!!!

Truely Classic!!!