Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Perrine on May 25, 2011, 11:33:36 PM
-
:eek:
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2011/05/next-corvette-to-target-euro-supercar-fans-with-small-high-revving-turbo-v8/
I'm game... but this better offer smoothness of a BMW M3 and Honda S2000 when wrung out at high RPMs, the stoutness of a Toyota 2JZ that powered the Supra Mk IV, and the ultra-quick transmission with uninterrupted torque delivery found in the Nissan GTR :aok
-
I'm suprised.... Then again, Corvettes don't sell well in Europe.
-
I'm suprised.... Then again, Corvettes don't sell well in Europe.
The Corvette's market outside of the US, is both Middle East and Japan.
-
:eek:
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2011/05/next-corvette-to-target-euro-supercar-fans-with-small-high-revving-turbo-v8/
I'm game... but this better offer smoothness of a BMW M3 and Honda S2000 when wrung out at high RPMs, the stoutness of a Toyota 2JZ that powered the Supra Mk IV, and the ultra-quick transmission with uninterrupted torque delivery found in the Nissan GTR :aok
i'm a ford nut, and you guys all know that.
if chevy sets out to pummel the euro stuff......guess what? the euro companies better up their game a LOT. hell.....ford did it 40-some years ago, so chevy shouldn't have much trouble now. :aok
-
i'm a ford nut, and you guys all know that.
if chevy sets out to pummel the euro stuff......guess what? the euro companies better up their game a LOT. hell.....ford did it 40-some years ago, so chevy shouldn't have much trouble now. :aok
Let me get this straight. Your confidence is based on 40 years of coming second? baahhaha.
Although, I will say that it is impressive to see an American car with a small engine :aok
BTW, Corvettes are the only US made sports car I have seen in Europe. Not sure is means anything though. Maybe I just missed the others.
-
Let me get this straight. Your confidence is based on 40 years of coming second? baahhaha.
Although, I will say that it is impressive to see an American car with a small engine :aok
BTW, Corvettes are the only US made sports car I have seen in Europe. Not sure is means anything though. Maybe I just missed the others.
nope. i'm basing my confidence on the fact that when ford wanted to hammer the euro stuff into yesterday, they did just that. if ford did, then chevy can.
OH...WAIT.....
didn't ferreri pull their stuff out of competition, for that year or two, in order to not be beaten by a ford? i might be wrong on that part.......
-
nope. i'm basing my confidence on the fact that when ford wanted to hammer the euro stuff into yesterday, they did just that. if ford did, then chevy can.
OH...WAIT.....
didn't ferreri pull their stuff out of competition, for that year or two, in order to not be beaten by a ford? i might be wrong on that part.......
:rofl
-
:rofl
http://www.luxist.com/tag/ford+vs+ferrari/
-
http://www.luxist.com/tag/ford+vs+ferrari/
:rofl
-
That Daytona is B.A.!
You Brits should like this too. The only remaining 1966 Cobra Super Snake being auctioned @ Barrett Jackson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPES8hxU4dM
? Million was that?
-
vettes that can go round corners, engines with ~100bhp/litre, interiors that arent made from garden furniture-grade plastics ... did the US car industry finally wake up?
the recent recession may well have been the kick up the arse that the industry needed, keep going like this and you might still be building cars in 20yrs time :aok
-
vettes that can go round corners, engines with ~100bhp/litre, interiors that arent made from garden furniture-grade plastics ... did the US car industry finally wake up?
the recent recession may well have been the kick up the arse that the industry needed, keep going like this and you might still be building cars in 20yrs time :aok
my old boss has an 07 vette. it doesn't have any of what you mentioned.
if i was gonna buy a chevy, it would be a vette.
-
my old boss has an 07 vette. it doesn't have any of what you mentioned.
if i was gonna buy a chevy, it would be a vette.
Psssst, it is 2011
-
vettes that can go round corners, engines with ~100bhp/litre, interiors that arent made from garden furniture-grade plastics ... did the US car industry finally wake up?
the recent recession may well have been the kick up the arse that the industry needed, keep going like this and you might still be building cars in 20yrs time :aok
Many plastic parts today function better that cloth, leather, wood, or metal.
-
http://www.luxist.com/tag/ford+vs+ferrari/
Last time was a no go :neener:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/16/shelby-daytona-coupe-a-6-8-million-no-sale-at-mecum-auction/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/16/shelby-daytona-coupe-a-6-8-million-no-sale-at-mecum-auction/)
-
beautiful cars, but who in their right mind would pay that much for a car?
-
lol
-
beautiful cars, but who in their right mind would pay that much for a car?
Ummm... would you believe!
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/19/1961-ferrari-california-spyder-sells-for-record-10-894-900/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2008/05/19/1961-ferrari-california-spyder-sells-for-record-10-894-900/)
Edit: Okay okay race cars sorry... :frown:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/18/ferrari-250tr-sells-for-record-breaking-12-2-million-at-rm-auct/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/18/ferrari-250tr-sells-for-record-breaking-12-2-million-at-rm-auct/)
Did he say the F word? :confused:
and then there is this little tidbit the car that was copied :aok
http://elitechoice.org/2010/05/14/rare-vintage-1963-ferrari-250-gto-fetches-25-million-to-30-million-in-exclusive-sale/ (http://elitechoice.org/2010/05/14/rare-vintage-1963-ferrari-250-gto-fetches-25-million-to-30-million-in-exclusive-sale/)
:cheers:
-
There's a couple EU-Ford models that come to mind when I think of a car that I might want as an every-day driver that aren't offered in the US. I've always been curious why many Ford US models don't make it to the EU and vice versa.
-
Whoever wrote that article has said some strange stuff.
He claims a 80.5mm bore and longer stroke which makes no sense.
I wonder what "longer" means in his book because a square engine of 80.5mm bore and 80.5mm stroke yields an engine in excess of 3.2 liters.
-
Whoever wrote that article has said some strange stuff.
He claims a "80.5mm bore and longer stroke" which makes no sense.
I wonder what "longer" means in his book because a square engine of 80.5mm bore and 80.5mm stroke yields an engine in excess of 3.2 liters.
-
Whoever wrote that article has said some strange stuff.
He claims a "80.5mm bore and longer stroke" which makes no sense.
I wonder what "longer" means in his book because a square engine of 80.5mm bore and 80.5mm stroke yields an engine in excess of 3.2 liters.
-
Whoever wrote that article has said some strange stuff.
He claims a "80.5mm bore and longer stroke" which makes no sense.
I wonder what "longer" means in his book because a square engine of 80.5mm bore and 80.5mm stroke yields an engine in excess of 3.2 liters.
-
so? what're ya tryin to say? :devil
-
Whoever wrote that article has said some strange stuff.
He claims a "80.5mm bore and longer stroke" which makes no sense.
I wonder what "longer" means in his book because a square engine of 80.5mm bore and 80.5mm stroke yields an engine in excess of 3.2 liters.
Ya I saw that too!!! but then a few things in that article just make it sound like speculations.....
Years ago GM talked about a small displacement turbo'd mid engine car,I think they even made a proto of it but nothing came of the project. I wont defend GM or Ford for that matter neither company has done anything in the last 20 years except to take our money for substandard products.
I have first hand experience on "Fords" job is quality 1.... did a quality control job,water leak tests!
First hour on the job I wrote up around 20 cars,they all leaked in the same place,then the foreman came to check on the "new" guy and looked at my report sheet...... :o I was told"are you trying to make us look bad", only 2 cars per hour were supposed to leak so for the next month I sat back and wrote up 2 random cars every hour and spent my time reading and drinking coffee...... Then I finally was told I was doing a great job........ :rolleyes:
I told my uncle what was happening on the line,for some reason I was moved to another department and the foreman was let go!! My uncle was the plant manager at the time........ :lol
I'll give them props though,they're paying back the loans......... miracles do happen and yes Virgina there is a Santa Claus
:salute
-
Ya I saw that too!!! but then a few things in that article just make it sound like speculations.....
Years ago GM talked about a small displacement turbo'd mid engine car,I think they even made a proto of it but nothing came of the project. I wont defend GM or Ford for that matter neither company has done anything in the last 20 years except to take our money for substandard products.
I have first hand experience on "Fords" job is quality 1.... did a quality control job,water leak tests!
First hour on the job I wrote up around 20 cars,they all leaked in the same place,then the foreman came to check on the "new" guy and looked at my report sheet...... :o I was told"are you trying to make us look bad", only 2 cars per hour were supposed to leak so for the next month I sat back and wrote up 2 random cars every hour and spent my time reading and drinking coffee...... Then I finally was told I was doing a great job........ :rolleyes:
I told my uncle what was happening on the line,for some reason I was moved to another department and the foreman was let go!! My uncle was the plant manager at the time........ :lol
I'll give them props though,they're paying back the loans......... miracles do happen and yes Virgina there is a Santa Claus
:salute
so what you're saying, is that the union guy didn't want to look bad? i'm not asking that to be a wise arse........
-
Actually Cap the Foremen are company guys,they didnt want to look bad,the union had nothing to do with it except take money from my paycheck every week!
What I'm saying is that they build cars that are far from perfect and it's all about production,gotta pump those 60 cars an hour out the door! Even if they're not selling. Atleast the Japanese car makers learned from it and try to make a good product but they too are product driven.
Cap answer me this,how many fords went to the garage to have Mr Ford listen to them to make sure they sounded like a ford??
:salute
-
Actually Cap the Foremen are company guys,they didnt want to look bad,the union had nothing to do with it except take money from my paycheck every week!
What I'm saying is that they build cars that are far from perfect and it's all about production,gotta pump those 60 cars an hour out the door! Even if they're not selling. Atleast the Japanese car makers learned from it and try to make a good product but they too are product driven.
Cap answer me this,how many fords went to the garage to have Mr Ford listen to them to make sure they sounded like a ford??
:salute
last question first....i've not a clue.
i know that they build imperfect cars. i'm kinda surprised to hear that the formen are company men, rather than union guys. i'm not much for unions......
as for car quality......there's a reason that the "Wednesday car" thing came about. and to be honest, no one of them is better than the other in that dept in my opinion.
what i can do though, is go into my invoicing program, and find the most commonly serviced cars at my shop. or i could just state it here.
i work on a lot of mid/late 90's to early 2000's gm's....more chevys and buicks. quite a few of the "W" bodys. most of the fords i work on are regular maintenance, as are most of the toyotas.
chrysler(although i drive one right now) is the worst. these things have the most inexplicable problems. not many hondas, other than regular maintenance, although i did have that one with the slipped timing chain.
bmw's seem to start "nickel and diming" their owners at around 100 to 110k miles. mercedes's i only seem to do basic maintenance on. audis.........don't get me started.......
i've probably left a couple out.....
back to the op.......regardless of whether or not that engine is real, if given the choice, i'd buy the same corvette that's been around. i don't need or want to wind an engine to 10k rpm to get the power.
-
Last time was a no go :neener:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/16/shelby-daytona-coupe-a-6-8-million-no-sale-at-mecum-auction/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2009/05/16/shelby-daytona-coupe-a-6-8-million-no-sale-at-mecum-auction/)
Gotta go with Ford's Pedigree champ.
1949 - First NASCAR race run on June 19 at Charlotte, N.C., won by Jim Roper in a Lincoln.
1951 - Jim Flock is first driver to qualify quicker than 100 mph, he does so driving a Lincoln at the old beach race course at Daytona Beach, Fla.
Look up the GT40 MkII/IV's that kicked Ferrari in the nuts from 66-69. Also the MK IV (67) IIRC, is STILL the only American built race car to win overall at Le Mans.
Ayrton Senna almost won a 4th GP Driver's Title in a SEVERELY underpowered McLaren/Ford in 1993 (managed 5 wins and 2 2nd's on his skill alone).
Ford has a successful Rally Program. GM and Dodge cannot hang in WRC, nor will they ever.
-
nope. i'm basing my confidence on the fact that when ford wanted to hammer the euro stuff into yesterday, they did just that. if ford did, then chevy can.
OH...WAIT.....
didn't ferreri pull their stuff out of competition, for that year or two, in order to not be beaten by a ford? i might be wrong on that part.......
English designers, bravo Ford :aok
-
English designers, bravo Ford :aok
but ford power, and at least partial ford suspension. :devil
-
Cap,
maybe foreman is the wrong term,they were supervisors and defenitely salary employees. Oh and the water leaks were just a simple example of the kinds of things that went on.
I will say this though of the "big"3 I think ford is the better manufactor with GM a close second,especially in the last few years both companies have built some very good cars. Saddly the Mopars have never been great cars,oh they made some real muscle cars back in the day but the fit and finish left alot to be desired.
I still dont think the artical on the vet is anything more than speculation and a rehash of an old story!!
:salute
-
Gotta go with Ford's Pedigree champ.
1949 - First NASCAR race run on June 19 at Charlotte, N.C., won by Jim Roper in a Lincoln.
1951 - Jim Flock is first driver to qualify quicker than 100 mph, he does so driving a Lincoln at the old beach race course at Daytona Beach, Fla.
Look up the GT40 MkII/IV's that kicked Ferrari in the nuts from 66-69. Also the MK IV (67) IIRC, is STILL the only American built race car to win overall at Le Mans.
Ayrton Senna almost won a 4th GP Driver's Title in a SEVERELY underpowered McLaren/Ford in 1993 (managed 5 wins and 2 2nd's on his skill alone).
Ford has a successful Rally Program. GM and Dodge cannot hang in WRC, nor will they ever.
I don't want to downplay Ford's achievement in beating Ferrari at Le Mans, but it's still nothing parading around like you are "the big dog". :confused:
Ford sure prepared hard and achieve their goals to beat Ferrari at Le Mans for 4 years in a row, ending 6 consecutive years of Ferrari domination ... domination at Le Mans they never got back BTW. But still 4 victories is as much as Alfa Romeo :uhoh, short of Jaguar, short of Bentley ... half from Ferrari/Audi 9 victories ... and way short of Porsche's 16 wins.
Let's not forget Ferrari owned Ford before the GT40 and after the GT40 on their on turf with "the other" famed endurance race, the 12H of Sebring. 3 Ford victories compared to 12 by Ferrari, 18 by Porsche, 9 by Audi ... heck even Nissan beats Ford with 4.
Rally being traditionally dominated by little nimble Euro/Asian shoeboxes, American manufacturers don't have much to offer. Lucky GM had a couple of Opel they could throw in their in the 80s, and lucky Ford has that Euro shoebox called the Fiesta that they decided to make a push with to increase their market share. Still despite their 06/07 championship, Ford scored 3 total, compared to 10 by Lancia, 6 by Citroen, 5 by Peugeot ... neck to neck with Subaru/Toyota's 3 championships.
I think where Ford shined was building engine for F1s, and got an early start with Lotus ... racking up 10 Engine championships ahead of Renault (9) ... but still way short of Ferrari 16, and Ferrari makes their own cars.
Anyway, each manufacturer has his fetish series, and when their set their mind/$$$$ can de-throne who ever is on top in a specific niche, but the real achievement is to stay on top. On a side note, I'm really looking forward to see how Audi/Peugeot will adapt to this year's Le Mans drastic changes and who's going to end up on top.
-
I don't want to downplay Ford's achievement in beating Ferrari at Le Mans, but it's still nothing parading around like you are "the big dog". :confused:
Ford sure prepared hard and achieve their goals to beat Ferrari at Le Mans for 4 years in a row, ending 6 consecutive years of Ferrari domination ... domination at Le Mans they never got back BTW. But still 4 victories is as much as Alfa Romeo :uhoh, short of Jaguar, short of Bentley ... half from Ferrari/Audi 9 victories ... and way short of Porsche's 16 wins.
Let's not forget Ferrari owned Ford before the GT40 and after the GT40 on their on turf with "the other" famed endurance race, the 12H of Sebring. 3 Ford victories compared to 12 by Ferrari, 18 by Porsche, 9 by Audi ... heck even Nissan beats Ford with 4.
Rally being traditionally dominated by little nimble Euro/Asian shoeboxes, American manufacturers don't have much to offer. Lucky GM had a couple of Opel they could throw in their in the 80s, and lucky Ford has that Euro shoebox called the Fiesta that they decided to make a push with to increase their market share. Still despite their 06/07 championship, Ford scored 3 total, compared to 10 by Lancia, 6 by Citroen, 5 by Peugeot ... neck to neck with Subaru/Toyota's 3 championships.
I think where Ford shined was building engine for F1s, and got an early start with Lotus ... racking up 10 Engine championships ahead of Renault (9) ... but still way short of Ferrari 16, and Ferrari makes their own cars.
Anyway, each manufacturer has his fetish series, and when their set their mind/$$$$ can de-throne who ever is on top in a specific niche, but the real achievement is to stay on top. On a side note, I'm really looking forward to see how Audi/Peugeot will adapt to this year's Le Mans drastic changes and who's going to end up on top.
My post was merely a comparison between Ford, GM and Chrysler. I never said thy eclipsed the euros in the # of championships.
Of course Ferrari came back on top in 70.
-
Ford have always done great in rallying, but its always been Ford (Europe), so British designed and built stuff originally, and more recently European collaboration (Germany/Belgium?).
wrt F1 thats the Cosworth DFV, although sponsored by Ford it was developed and built by Cosworth, a British Company, from the Ford Anglia 4-pot, again designed and built by Ford (Europe).
GT40? 95% British car.
[/flagwaving]
;)
-
I definitly agree with that, didn't mean to single you out. Yours was the last post mentioning the GT40, wanted to post my 2cts.
I wonder how the big 3 compare along the years in road racing. Like I haven't heard of viper domination since the 90, Chevy rules GT1 in the us as well as Le Mans, didn't check how they are doing in GT2. The Mustang did great in Europe I think.
Wonder how'd they stack up if we add all the lesser world road racing series from around the world since the 70s. I d bet Ford would win hands down.
-
Ford have always done great in rallying, but its always been Ford (Europe), so British designed and built stuff originally, and more recently European collaboration (Germany/Belgium?).
wrt F1 thats the Cosworth DFV, although sponsored by Ford it was developed and built by Cosworth, a British Company, from the Ford Anglia 4-pot, again designed and built by Ford (Europe).
GT40? 95% British car.
[/flagwaving]
;)
:cheers:
-
95% British? Sorry RT. That is probably more applicable to the MKI, MKII's. But Carroll did a host of tweaks for the MK IV's.
-
Ford have always done great in rallying, but its always been Ford (Europe), so British designed and built stuff originally, and more recently European collaboration (Germany/Belgium?).
wrt F1 thats the Cosworth DFV, although sponsored by Ford it was developed and built by Cosworth, a British Company, from the Ford Anglia 4-pot, again designed and built by Ford (Europe).
GT40? 95% British car.
[/flagwaving]
;)
SO THE british suspension handled the torque of the 427?
-
SO THE british suspension handled the torque of the 427?
Cap,they're talking about a 4 cylinder cosworth engine,not the 427,but yes the brits built suspension that handled the 427. They even managed to build suspension that handled over 1200BHP in a 1.5 liter turbo during the turbo days in F1.
:salute
-
Cap,they're talking about a 4 cylinder cosworth engine,not the 427,but yes the brits built suspension that handled the 427. They even managed to build suspension that handled over 1200BHP in a 1.5 liter turbo during the turbo days in F1.
:salute
Correct. Either Lola or Lotus designed it.
-
95% British? Sorry RT. That is probably more applicable to the MKI, MKII's. But Carroll did a host of tweaks for the MK IV's.
sure the IV was all-US, but really its a completely different car.
and it was ~5% of GT40 production ... ;)
-
sure the IV was all-US, but really its a completely different car.
and it was ~5% of GT40 production ... ;)
Sorry man. The MKII's and MKIV's were night and day in terms of performance and results on the tracks.
-
There is no insult if it is found that the british made or designed the highest percentage of successful lemans and formula one race cars....regardless of what brand name they carried.
The reason for this was the cancellation of many advanced english supersonic fighter and bomber programs which caused the engineers to move laterally and create the worlds most advanced hotspot of top race car designers and fabricators.
This is why most all F1 teams are based in england and even ferrari has a shop there.
Ray Mallock designed the Saleen race car and the guys responsible for lola cars did the ford gt40.
Upgrading peripheral parts does not begat an entirely new car because it is based on the same design.
Of course....the new ford GT is american......except for the ricardo transaxle (i'm tearing one down today) and various parts commonly sub-contracted out like brake and shock parts.
The new racing corvettes are also american in design so it's good to see american badged race cars actually being designed and built in america like this porsche 944 race car I worked on in the mid 80s which was built by Dave Klem of Fabcar.
(http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/attachments/944-turbo-and-turbo-s-forum/149681d1162562416-p-o-r-s-c-h-e-944-gtr-turbo-info-thread-dsc00257a.jpg)
And here with bodywork on along with the cars it replaced on the race team being.....1979 porsche 935 (hidden from view 750hp and 70,000 racing miles) and a porsche 934rsr.
(http://forums.rennlist.com/rennforums/attachments/944-turbo-and-turbo-s-forum/85023d1130756892-p-o-r-s-c-h-e-944-gtr-turbo-info-thread-944gtr-in-electrodyne-showroom-1.jpg)
-
back OT, why build a turbo engine which revs to 10k? :headscratch:
-
back OT, why build a turbo engine which revs to 10k? :headscratch:
Efficiency
-
Flagship models don't need to be practical and are usually technology demonstrators.
Honda gambled correctly that most who bought the S2000 wouldn't run it to redline 71 times per day and most made it out the warranty deadline because most never saw redline more than a couple times per week.
That said, we'll be running the ford gt out to 12,000 rpms with next evolution beyond our current 5.9 liter engine.......that revs currently past 9000.
-
back to the op.......regardless of whether or not that engine is real, if given the choice, i'd buy the same corvette that's been around. i don't need or want to wind an engine to 10k rpm to get the power.
For the 2013 corvette i'd like to see a powerplant that's like the Boss 302 in characteristics :aok
... broad, flat torque (low-mid to near redline) and the ability to still deliver strong torque near the redline without forced induction.
It would also be a big plus if GM comes with a dual clutch transmission for uninterrupted torque delivery.
-
The reason corvette engines are not double overhead cam 4 valve engines is that those engines are unbelievably wide.
-
For the 2013 corvette i'd like to see a powerplant that's like the Boss 302 in characteristics :aok
... broad, flat torque (low-mid to near redline) and the ability to still deliver strong torque near the redline without forced induction.
It would also be a big plus if GM comes with a dual clutch transmission for uninterrupted torque delivery.
it could be. it's hard to improve on the corvette. it's possible, but hard.
todays corvette is everything a corvette should be, and then some. and don't forget.....this is coming from a ford guy. :aok
-
The reason corvette engines are not double overhead cam 4 valve engines is that those engines are unbelievably wide.
although i don't think they need to, gm could get a OHC or DOHC engine in the vette if they wanted to. ford fit both into the mustang, in the sn95 chassis.
if i recall, all they had to do, was to convert to hydro-boost, eliminating the power booster, in order to fit it.
-
although i don't think they need to, gm could get a OHC or DOHC engine in the vette if they wanted to. ford fit both into the mustang, in the sn95 chassis.
if i recall, all they had to do, was to convert to hydro-boost, eliminating the power booster, in order to fit it.
More weight, more space taken up with OHC setups. No point in not sticking with a pushrod setup, it's simple and it works :aok. long live the LSX :rock
Didn't really think I would stay out of a vette thread would ya :lol CAP I always knew you were a closet vette guy :neener:
:salute
BigRat
-
More weight, more space taken up with OHC setups. No point in not sticking with a pushrod setup, it's simple and it works :aok. long live the LSX :rock
Didn't really think I would stay out of a vette thread would ya :lol CAP I always knew you were a closet vette guy :neener:
:salute
BigRat
well.....it would almost be un-american to not like the corvette.
i hafta admit though.....just as the camaro, and the mustang, the current generation of vettes are the first ones i've really liked since the 69 model year.
-
tell you what man, we have been hammering that 800HP 2003 Z06 for a couple of years now. All I can say is there's not a lot of cars you can buy used for 30k, double the HP to 800 on a stock engine and not having to change anything ... Not the trany ... Not tte rear end ... Not the driveshaft ... Not the brakes ... Nada ...
-
tell you what man, we have been hammering that 800HP 2003 Z06 for a couple of years now. All I can say is there's not a lot of cars you can buy used for 30k, double the HP to 800 on a stock engine and not having to change anything ... Not the trany ... Not tte rear end ... Not the driveshaft ... Not the brakes ... Nada ...
-
narrow bore, long stroke, high rpm?
'scuse me?
Those 3 do not match.
There is a very real limit on how far/how fast you can sling a piston reliably.
If they want to build an rpm motor then it should be short stroke, large bore
ie: Offenhauser or that killer little small block, the 302 (327 block w/283 crank - large bore, small stroke)
It would be interesting to see them do a hi-tech version of that mean lil 302
..but jammin second at 8k+ wasn't for the weak at heart :)
Fun tho :)
-Frank aka GE
-
GE, don't forget the angle of the dangle. :)
Rash
-
tell you what man, we have been hammering that 800HP 2003 Z06 for a couple of years now. All I can say is there's not a lot of cars you can buy used for 30k, double the HP to 800 on a stock engine and not having to change anything ... Not the trany ... Not tte rear end ... Not the driveshaft ... Not the brakes ... Nada ...
I've already done a couple of transaxle repairs on the vette and it could really use some help in the final drive area.
The C6 stuff is much stronger and fits nicely inside.
-
narrow bore, long stroke, high rpm?
'scuse me?
Those 3 do not match.
There is a very real limit on how far/how fast you can sling a piston reliably.
If they want to build an rpm motor then it should be short stroke, large bore
ie: Offenhauser or that killer little small block, the 302 (327 block w/283 crank - large bore, small stroke)
It would be interesting to see them do a hi-tech version of that mean lil 302
..but jammin second at 8k+ wasn't for the weak at heart :)
Fun tho :)
-Frank aka GE
i drove a customers 69 camaro with that 302 in it.
it was a trailer queen till he got it. some goofball had the valve lash WAY the hell off, along with the ignition timing. it was run so raraly, that the advance plate in the dist. wasn't moving properly. i wanted to rebuild it for him(to keep it a lil more original), but he wanted an aftermarket ignition system. he went with a mallory system. it worked ok, and i got the timing set to a total of 36BTDC, and had it in by 2,000.
reset all of the valve lashes to where they belonged, and rebuilt all 4 of the calipers. then i got to beat the car a lil. customer wanted to know what it could do, but didn't wanna do it himself at first. :devil
first drive, i pulled out of the lot, and was almost a sissy./.....launched her at 3,000. just chattered the tires at first, but then they broke loose. powershifted 2nd, and they continued to have not much in the way of traction. powershifted 3rd, and they finally caught, but i was running out of road, so i had to brake.
second drive, launched 5500rpm, and pretty much just sidestepped the clutch. see above, 'cept there was smoke rolling from the fenders till the middle of 3rd gear. and this engine was still pulling at 8,000rpm when i shifted. the owner was in the car with me on the second run. he was white as a ghost when we got back to the shop.
THAT engine is one of chevy's big screw ups. as in they only built it for those 2 years. THAT engine should've been the one in the camaro all along.
oh yea.....the car only had 49k original miles. :aok
-
30 thousandths on both intake and exhaust?
-
30 thousandths on both intake and exhaust?
i forget what the specs were, as it was years ago. i do recall thagt they were set too tight. when i had looked up the specs back then, i seem to recall them being pretty big lash settings, compared to what i was used to working on. because of that, i waited, and left the car hanging on the lift over night, till i could get in touch with a local chevy racer that i've known for about 30 years. he verified the correct settings, and i set them.
that thing was a friggin BEAST.
-
narrow bore, long stroke, high rpm?
'scuse me?
Those 3 do not match.
There is a very real limit on how far/how fast you can sling a piston reliably.
If they want to build an rpm motor then it should be short stroke, large bore
thats what I was thinking, 10k from a production 3.0l+ long-stroke engine? not a chance.
and if its turbo'd, why bother with a 10k limit? you start getting serious frictional losses at those high speeds, plus much beefier valve springs required means even more losses. it would also probably require titanium pistons, con rods, valves, rockers etc etc - all very expensive. pretty sure you also run into problems with gas flow at high rpms with all the turbo plumbing in the way. theres good reasons why no one else makes a turbo'd 10k 3.2l V8 ... even the new McLaren's turbo 3.8l V8 redlines at 8k5.
a high revving engine for the vette seems out of character too (unless they can make the C7 ~1000Kg).
it just doesnt add up :headscratch:
-
I've already done a couple of transaxle repairs on the vette and it could really use some help in the final drive area.
The C6 stuff is much stronger and fits nicely inside.
I agree, the C5's tend to start tearing up the rear ends when over 500 rwhp (reason why slicks are staying off mine :lol). Fortunately the C6 is really more like a C5 1/2 since most of the important stuff swaps, similiar to the C2/C3.
"i hafta admit though.....just as the camaro, and the mustang, the current generation of vettes are the first ones i've really liked since the 69 model year."
Cap quit snooping in my garage :lol, the 69 BB vert is the wifey's favorite to drive. I get a kick out of guys checking out my wife in that car, since you would never expect to see a chick driving a car like that, especially a 4spd one.
The last corvette engine rumor I heard was a 5.5L direct injection engine staying NA.
:salute
BigRat
-
chevrolet took that cam from the fuel injected vette 327s that made 365 to 375hp and put it in a 327 block with a 283 crank for 1967 and a beefier block with thicker crank for 1968 and 1969.
It was called the duntov 30-30 because the valve lash was the same for both intake and exhaust.
It sounds like you had a genuine 302 engine with proper vintage parts because of the insufficient lash.
This happens when valve seat wear from unleaded gas run in early engines causes the decrease in valve lash with mileage rather than an increase.
This also happens in early z cars.
-
chevrolet took that cam from the fuel injected vette 327s that made 365 to 375hp and put it in a 327 block with a 283 crank for 1967 and a beefier block with thicker crank for 1968 and 1969.
It was called the duntov 30-30 because the valve lash was the same for both intake and exhaust.
It sounds like you had a genuine 302 engine with proper vintage parts because of the insufficient lash.
This happens when valve seat wear from unleaded gas run in early engines causes the decrease in valve lash with mileage rather than an increase.
This also happens in early z cars.
THIS car only had 49k original miles on it. i think the tight lash was more due to the previous owner.
-
The service interval is 12,000 miles.
If the engine is original, then the non-hardened valve seats will wear quickly running the unleaded gas they were not designed to run.
-
The service interval is 12,000 miles.
If the engine is original, then the non-hardened valve seats will wear quickly running the unleaded gas they were not designed to run.
I've heard of this issue with several of the old "muscle lumps",that 302 was a sweet little screamer,the 290 hp it was rated at came at what 4000 rpm? It was years ago when I saw 1 on the dyno,maybe 71/72 and I dont recall the exact numbers but I was told the 290 hp was strictly use for insurance purposes!!!! :lol
:salute
-
I've heard of this issue with several of the old "muscle lumps",that 302 was a sweet little screamer,the 290 hp it was rated at came at what 4000 rpm? It was years ago when I saw 1 on the dyno,maybe 71/72 and I dont recall the exact numbers but I was told the 290 hp was strictly use for insurance purposes!!!! :lol
:salute
from the feel of that car, i'd put the hp somewhere in the upper 300hp range, maybe even touching on 400hp. i'd venture that with traction(which the one i drove lacked), it would've been a low 13 second car, possibly high 12's with a good driver. was one of the smoothest shifting 4 speeds i'd ever driven too.
-
Cap,
I dont think that 302 was built to do 1/4 mile runs,it was used in the TransAm series. IIRC it was GM's answer to the Boss 302 in the mustangs that were dominating in Trans Am. There's a reason it winds up so high,they only had 4 gears to make use of all that power and the tracks didnt have very long straight aways!
:salute
-
Cap,
I dont think that 302 was built to do 1/4 mile runs,it was used in the TransAm series. IIRC it was GM's answer to the Boss 302 in the mustangs that were dominating in Trans Am. There's a reason it winds up so high,they only had 4 gears to make use of all that power and the tracks didnt have very long straight aways!
:salute
i know what it was built for. in this case, it doesn't stop it from running a quick 1/4 mile. look at todays boss302. it was built to run the road courses. yet i've already seen one run 11 second 1/4 miles. stock. :devil