GM to revive LT5 name

[XfireZ51]

A quote from AutoBlog

"The automaker has already made it clear it will resurrect the LT5 name for the new supercharged V8, and if GM is already pulling 600 from the Z06, the big dog ZR1 would theoretically offer 700 horsepower. Either way, the range-topping Corvette will be suitably insulated from its less potent siblings. Stay tuned. We aren't likely to see the Z06 for at least a year, with the ZR1 trailing along at some point there after."

Holy Crap!

[XfireZ51]

A quote from AutoBlog

"The automaker has already made it clear it will resurrect the LT5 name for the new supercharged V8, and if GM is already pulling 600 from the Z06, the big dog ZR1 would theoretically offer 700 horsepower. Either way, the range-topping Corvette will be suitably insulated from its less potent siblings. Stay tuned. We aren't likely to see the Z06 for at least a year, with the ZR1 trailing along at some point there after."

With use of the LT1 nomenclature, I had a suspicion this could be coming.
Holy Crap!

[USAFPILOT]

It better have DOHC's!!!

[XfireZ51]

It better have DOHC's!!!

From your lips to god's ears!

[USAFPILOT]

Also it appears autoblog took the story from Motor Trend, who said "they could only HOPE GM would revive the LT5 moniker" not that they were doing it.

[USAFPILOT]

If they call any normal small block an LT5 I will be disappointed and will be regularly showing those suckers what a Real LT5 is.

[scottfab]

It better have DOHC's!!!

There, that's the ticket.

[Kevin]

GM....yeah we got nothing new

[XfireZ51]

Still, re-using the ZR-1 name appears to be the KOTH class of vehicle Chevrolet has decided on. On connection I have from GM seems to indicate there's STUFF
He can't discuss what's coming down the line, but its supposed to be awesome.

[Hib Halverson]

Aw...why not have some fun with wild-assed guessing.

I say the C7 Z06 will be a 2015 with a supercharged version of the LT1 for power. Figure on 650-675-hp. Even with AFM, I'll bet it will be a guzzler.

A future ZR1??

Maybe...but not until late in the decade, perhaps on a different platform and surely with AWD. An interesting path for GM to take would be a sort of "hybrid" propulsion system, like some other car makers are doing, with a 700 or so horsepower V8 driving the rear wheels and a generator. The front wheels would be driven electrically.

[Kevin]

Aw...why not have some fun with wild-assed guessing.

I say the C7 Z06 will be a 2015 with a supercharged version of the LT1 for power. Figure on 650-675-hp. Even with AFM, I'll bet it will be a guzzler.

A future ZR1??

Maybe...but not until late in the decade, perhaps on a different platform and surely with AWD. An interesting path for GM to take would be a sort of "hybrid" propulsion system, like some other car makers are doing, with a 700 or so horsepower V8 driving the rear wheels and a generator. The front wheels would be driven electrically.

if you had said toyota or audi i'd have believed you but "corvette" went dp, not wec

[mike100]

I could still see myself getting a coupe, but a ZR-1(ZR1) better be a dohc design with both cams running vvt to justify the price. I drive my Coyote powered mustang everyday, the 91 LT5 on the weekends and then my LS3 car when I feel sorry for the dying battery and flat spotting tires and all I can hope for is that the new LT1 is bad ***, because the 4v engines have been entertaining me much much more recently.

(the LS3 is still the fastest though).

[Hib Halverson]

(snip)

(the LS3 is still the fastest though).

I can't help but to think that speaks volumes about Coyote-powered Mustangs.

[VetteVet]

A quote from AutoBlog



With use of the LT1 nomenclature, I had a suspicion this could be coming.
Holy Crap!

Dom,

Did you just quote yourself? Is that even allowed? My brain just exploded!!

:-D

[XfireZ51]

Dom,

Did you just quote yourself? Is that even allowed? My brain just exploded!!

:-D

Jep,

Yes. I am just that conceited! ;)

[Fully Vetted]

I am convinced GM will never do another DOHC performance motor. They are as committed to the CIB architecture as Ford (and the rest of the world, BTW) is to DOHC. They can get the mileage they need with cylinder deactivation and they've developed the piss out of it so they can make the power. And if not, they'll just throw a SC on it. And they will certainly never do another limited run of anything with a special motor like the LT5 project. Too many bean counters in control for that. Those days are over.

[LancePearson]

I am convinced GM will never do another DOHC performance motor. They are as committed to the CIB architecture as Ford (and the rest of the world, BTW) is to DOHC. They can get the mileage they need with cylinder deactivation and they've developed the piss out of it so they can make the power. And if not, they'll just throw a SC on it. And they will certainly never do another limited run of anything with a special motor like the LT5 project. Too many bean counters in control for that. Those days are over.

There are others who already make better motors than GM's 2v architecture for power and they have proven not to be: too heavy, too tall, too complex which are usually some of the pc reasons stated by c6 owners for not going back to modern dohc architecture. The cylinder deactivation technology sounds good but not to be a wet blanket....when they had it in Caddy's it didn't last and wasn't that great. What are the long term use implications of it on motor function and wear? I think that's a valid question. the 7.0 liter engine currently in the ZO6 appears to have valve wear and valve guide routine problems as well so continuing on or ramping them up in either 6.2 or 7.0 litre engines does what to that? Lastly, tell me again why anyone but drag strip guys need more than 600 hp for anything? Most modern 500-550 hp cars with six speeds and the right rear ends already push or exceed 200 mph....which, in Virginia gets you jail time, a $3500 fine and loss of license as you will be going a minimum of 130 mph over the highest speed limit.

In addition, the one person I've talked to with a 700+ LT5 says that he cannot even kick the boost in until he's at least in third gear or he can't keep the car on the road as the tires just don't stick. I know Ferrari's f12 Berlinetta kicks out 730 hp from its dohc 64 degree v engine but I'd bet the ranch that they just about never get to turn all those horses loose even on road race driving other than long straights now and then.

Perhaps the question should be: how much horsepower is enough? I'd argue as above and start differentiating models not purely by power but by type systems, front engine, mid engine, dohc or two valve, naturally aspirated vs turbo, etc. so people have broader choices. They will never sell a lot of Corvettes at those prices for zo6 and zr1 if they can only sell them to people who need and want 650 plus hp in my view. You can burn up more than $125,000 right now buying a new one of those.

Some cost/function value equation for most people.

Just my new to LT5 but big fan, huge fan, of the dohc architecture...put dry sump under it and lower the hood line?

[Paul Workman]

I am convinced GM will never do another DOHC performance motor. They are as committed to the CIB architecture as Ford (and the rest of the world, BTW) is to DOHC. They can get the mileage they need with cylinder deactivation and they've developed the piss out of it so they can make the power. And if not, they'll just throw a SC on it. And they will certainly never do another limited run of anything with a special motor like the LT5 project. Too many bean counters in control for that. Those days are over.

Damn well said. (But, I hope you're wrong about "never" do (another DOHC) project?!) =D>

P.

[GOLDCYLON]

It would not surprise me. The LT5 name badge ="s power and was the head of the pack for the C4 generation as KOTH. I equate this to the Shelby name badge for the Ford platform. Both are power names. We will all forget that foray into the Dodge platform for Shelby as sometimng that never happened.

I agree DOHC will not revived anytime soon. The LSX platfrom had become prediticable, cheaper, dependable (Except for the Z06 guys) and a SC is always available for more power

[Kevin]

there's only a handful of people who know what the lt5 is. lt1 lt4 l88, which gm recently trademarked again, zl1 these are known.

[GOLDCYLON]

there's only a handful of people who know what the lt5 is. lt1 lt4 l88, which gm recently trademarked again, zl1 these are known.

Its generational. A lot of corvette fans know of the LT5 and the ZR-1 espicially if they were in the teens and twenties in the late 80s and 90s.

Prob the same number of people who knew what a Nickey, Grumpy, Yenko Camaro were back in the day and yes the ZL1

Younger folks not so much....

[Kevin]

yenko is a honda dealer now. makes me suicidal every time i see a yenko honda plate frame. Friend of mine used to work for yenko chevy, she had some awesome stories

[Hog]

One good thing about GM's use of cylinder deactivation (DOD then AFM) is that it forces the displacement of a V8 engine to stay higher.
That is one of the reasons why the C7 Vette's GEN 5 engine is 6.2 liters and not 5.5 liters. The smaller displacement V8 did not meet GM's criteria for torque while in 4 cylinder mode.
GM re-arranging the cylinder head port orientation has allowed the use of conventional rocker arms instead of the offest rocker arms which are used in the LS7,LSA,LS9,LS3,L99,L92 and the rest of the GEN 4 engines.

GM's new truck V6(LV3) is still 4.3 liters in displacement and will feature DI, VVT and AFM. But instead of dropping from 6 tp 3 cylinders while the Adjustable Fuel Management is engaged, it will drop down to V4 mode. This will provided enough hot exhaust gasses for proper catalyst function on BOTH exhaust banks. Dropping to 3 cylinders would not.

Honda has a V6 that has a 6 cylinder, 4 cylinder AND 3 cylinder mode. The V6 switches between 3 or 4 cylinders in order to keep both cats hot.
The 2014 GM trucks retain the 6.2(L86) and 5.3(L83) liter engine as well as the 4.3 engine, but will drop the 4.8 size. So it appears that GM's GEN V engines will use the letter "L" across the board in the cars and trucks.

peace
Hog

[mgg]

I have read form multiple sources that L88 is being kicked around a lot lately. It would certainley be a historical nameplate to resurect and I am confident that if chosen the car would be deserving. As far as cylinder deactivation goes, I have it on my Suburban and it works great. That huge vehicle is averageing about 17 mpg and on the highway with five people and luggage is getting around 20 mpg doing 75 mph. Quite impressive if you ask me. As far as Gm developing anothe double overhead cam motor with a high level of performance, I think that is out of the question. Packaging, weight, would be two huge reasons that will never happen. Yesterday, I sat down are re read a large portion of " The Heart of the Beast". I hope they never do try this again. I just think it is just incredible what was accomplished. I get the warm and fuzzies reading this book and know what a significant historical car the ZR-1 really is. It is unquestionably the greatest developemental story of any Corvette and the passion and drive it took to deliver this car is unmatched. Makes me feel VERY lucky to own one of the remarkable cars and to be able to drive and enjoy a peice of automotive history

[USAFPILOT]

My Pontiac G8 GT has the 6.0L L76 engine with the DoD tech. It drops to 4 cylinders and gets about 27MPG using 87 Octane on the freeway. It is 4000lb car too. It still makes 361HP, which gets the job done on a daily driver and has not had one hiccup since I bought it new. The reliability of cylinder deactivation is there now. It is also in most of the trucks GM produces now.

I saw the new Chevy SS will get the LS3, but in order for me to trade in the G8 it will need to eventually get the LS1 with the 450HO and gas saving technology. When you drive 110 miles a day it is nice to be in a fast comfortable car, but also one that can sip fuel.

[XfireZ51]

Really like the G8!

[Paul Workman]

I can't help but to think that speaks volumes about Coyote-powered Mustangs.

Ummmm.... Not sure its not apples and oranges.

The Coyote is a 5.0L making 412 peak net pulling a 3723# Mustang GT

The C6 LS3 is a 6.2L making 430 peak net pulling a 3208# car.

Now for some very interesting numbers check out the 4.5L Farrari in the 458, and then let's talk about engine architecture...

P.

[USAFPILOT]

I wonder why Ferrari engines get such terrible fuel economy, when a 662HP Ford can get in the mid 20's with a heavier car.

[Fully Vetted]

...The cylinder deactivation technology sounds good but not to be a wet blanket....when they had it in Caddy's it didn't last and wasn't that great.


One good thing about GM's use of cylinder deactivation (DOD then AFM) is that it forces the displacement of a V8 engine to stay higher.
That is one of the reasons why the C7 Vette's GEN 5 engine is 6.2 liters and not 5.5 liters. The smaller displacement V8 did not meet GM's criteria for torque while in 4 cylinder mode.
GM re-arranging the cylinder head port orientation has allowed the use of conventional rocker arms instead of the offest rocker arms which are used in the LS7,LSA,LS9,LS3,L99,L92 and the rest of the GEN 4 engines.

GM's new truck V6(LV3) is still 4.3 liters in displacement and will feature DI, VVT and AFM. But instead of dropping from 6 tp 3 cylinders while the Adjustable Fuel Management is engaged, it will drop down to V4 mode. This will provided enough hot exhaust gasses for proper catalyst function on BOTH exhaust banks. Dropping to 3 cylinders would not.

Honda has a V6 that has a 6 cylinder, 4 cylinder AND 3 cylinder mode. The V6 switches between 3 or 4 cylinders in order to keep both cats hot.
The 2014 GM trucks retain the 6.2(L86) and 5.3(L83) liter engine as well as the 4.3 engine, but will drop the 4.8 size. So it appears that GM's GEN V engines will use the letter "L" across the board in the cars and trucks.

peace
Hog



...As far as cylinder deactivation goes, I have it on my Suburban and it works great. That huge vehicle is averageing about 17 mpg and on the highway with five people and luggage is getting around 20 mpg doing 75 mph. Quite impressive if you ask me.

My Pontiac G8 GT has the 6.0L L76 engine with the DoD tech. It drops to 4 cylinders and gets about 27MPG using 87 Octane on the freeway. It is 4000lb car too. It still makes 361HP, which gets the job done on a daily driver and has not had one hiccup since I bought it new. The reliability of cylinder deactivation is there now. It is also in most of the trucks GM produces now.

Yeah, this is is not the old 4-6-8 of the old Caddy's. That was a great idea followed by a horrible execution. I'm sure they learned a lot from that fiasco which is probably why they now have it pretty much figured out.

[Fully Vetted]

...Now for some very interesting numbers check out the 4.5L Farrari in the 458, and then let's talk about engine architecture...

Another very close match for the 458 engine is the Lexus LFA V10.


Displacement –

LFA – 4.8L V10
458 – 4.5L V8


HP –

LFA - 562 @ 8700 rpm
458 - 562 @ 9000 rpm

Following info taken from LeftLanenews.com and Automobile-Catalog.com:

LFA –

4.8-liter V10 developed exclusively for use in the high-dollar supercar. Power is rated at 562 horsepower and 354 lb-ft of torque. Although maximum twist doesn't come on until the needle sweeps past the 6,800rpm mark, Toyota says that 90 percent of the LFA's torque is available between 3,700rpm and the screaming 9,000rpm redline.



458 –

4.5-liter V8 cranks out 562 horsepower at 9,000 rpm (125 horsepower per liter, a record for naturally-aspirated piston engines). Torque is rated at 398 lb-ft at 6,000 rpm, 80 percent of which is available from 3,250 rpm.

Across the board it still looks like the 458 engine wins in all aspects but it is very close. And you would not believe the screaming wail that comes out of the LFA's V10. It absolutely sounds just like an F1 car. The LFA revs so fast they had to use a digital tach because a conventional one would not sweep fast enough. It revs from idle to redline at 9000 rpm in astonishing .67 secs!

I think these are two of the greatest engines on the planet.

[rkreigh]

Another very close match for the 458 engine is the Lexus LFA V10.


Displacement –

LFA – 4.8L V10
458 – 4.5L V8


HP –

LFA - 562 @ 8700 rpm
458 - 562 @ 9000 rpm

Following info taken from LeftLanenews.com and Automobile-Catalog.com:

LFA –

4.8-liter V10 developed exclusively for use in the high-dollar supercar. Power is rated at 562 horsepower and 354 lb-ft of torque. Although maximum twist doesn't come on until the needle sweeps past the 6,800rpm mark, Toyota says that 90 percent of the LFA's torque is available between 3,700rpm and the screaming 9,000rpm redline.



458 –

4.5-liter V8 cranks out 562 horsepower at 9,000 rpm (125 horsepower per liter, a record for naturally-aspirated piston engines). Torque is rated at 398 lb-ft at 6,000 rpm, 80 percent of which is available from 3,250 rpm.

Across the board it still looks like the 458 engine wins in all aspects but it is very close. And you would not believe the screaming wail that comes out of the LFA's V10. It absolutely sounds just like an F1 car. The LFA revs so fast they had to use a digital tach because a conventional one would not sweep fast enough. It revs from idle to redline at 9000 rpm in astonishing .67 secs!

I think these are two of the greatest engines on the planet.

I followed an LFA into the Great Falls VA Sat Morning Cars and Coffee meet (another one was already there) First time I had seen these cars on the road. when he saw me coming up on him he hit it and I was impressed with the sound that little V-10 makes and clearly it was quick!

it would likely keep pace with the LSV once wound up due to the even broader power band. a great engine indeed. just lacking a bit in torque much like the ferrari's

if you are in VA and would like to see a whole bunch of ferrari's lambos, astons, vettes, lotus, a variety of rare exotics and muscle cars, check out the Great Falls Cars and Coffee early Sat morning. it's a hoot.

[Fully Vetted]

...just lacking a bit in torque much like the ferrari's

You can thank the Coke can sized pistons for that.

[Hib Halverson]

(snip)
Now for some very interesting numbers check out the 4.5L Farrari in the 458, and then let's talk about engine architecture...

P.

I think it's spelled Ferrari but, "Farrari" or "Ferrari", if it's got a prancing horse logo on it, it's waaaayyyy above my pay grade.

[Fully Vetted]

Ah, c'mon, Hib. We know you're living the high life out there in SoCal. ;)

[Paul Workman]

I think it's spelled Ferrari but, "Farrari" or "Ferrari", if it's got a prancing horse logo on it, it's waaaayyyy above my pay grade.

Doh! Yes, I know that [red face]

But...I think I made my point...

[ZR-1 Franz]

I think it's spelled Ferrari but, "Farrari" or "Ferrari", if it's got a prancing horse logo on it, it's waaaayyyy above my pay grade.

Ferrari is like a holy cow, sorry horse. Some weeks ago I was in the
auto shop of one of my buddies. He repairs often exclusive European
sports cars. There was a Ferrari on the lift, no rear suspension, the
whole engine and the gear box were pulled. All the panels from the underside were removed, it looked dramatically.
So I asked what had to be fixed. There was nothing special, just the two
rubber belts for the valve trains and the waterpump. The mid engine car
had no chains for the valve trains, and Ferrari "recommends" that you have
to change the belts every 10'000 kilometers as I was told.
I asked what the owner would have to pay for this service.
About $ 1.500- 2.000 for the parts + all the work! .......:mad:

[Paul Workman]

Ferrari is like a holy cow, sorry horse. Some weeks ago I was in the
auto shop of one of my buddies. He repairs often exclusive European
sports cars. There was a Ferrari on the lift, no rear suspension, the
whole engine and the gear box were pulled. All the panels from the underside were removed, it looked dramatically.
So I asked what had to be fixed. There was nothing special, just the two
rubber belts for the valve trains and the waterpump. The mid engine car
had no chains for the valve trains, and Ferrari "recommends" that you have
to change the belts every 10'000 kilometers as I was told.
I asked what the owner would have to pay for this service.
About $ 1.500- 2.000 for the parts + all the work! .......:mad:

$1500-2000 every 10,000 km!! :jawdrop:

Well, I was aiming at illustrating the differences between an engine that must also be suitable to power a (tree) stump pulling pickup truck to an engine architecture designed for uncompormising (sports) performance in a Corvette, e.g, the LT5 and the like...AND how deeply dissappointed I (and at least some other sports car "purists") are over the GM's decision to stop development of the DOHC platforms for the Corvette. Only thing is, I would hope the design could be such that it wouldn't require $2G every 6000-7000 miles! :frown:

Just sayin...

P.

[LancePearson]

$1500-2000 every 10,000 km!! :jawdrop:

Well, I was aiming at illustrating the differences between an engine that must also be suitable to power a (tree) stump pulling pickup truck to an engine architecture designed for uncompormising (sports) performance in a Corvette, e.g, the LT5 and the like...AND how deeply dissappointed I (and at least some other sports car "purists") are over the GM's decision to stop development of the DOHC platforms for the Corvette. Only thing is, I would hope the design could be such that it wouldn't require $2G every 700-800 miles! :frown:

Just sayin...

P.

I agree, Paul. The pickups are in a whole different price category unless you load them up for seriously heavy work....different economic issues so cost is real important at their price points. I just out of curiosity looked at adding bigger brakes to my Z.....in case no one has looked lately that isn't cheap either. We may not be Ferrari Prices but we aren't inexpensive if we want to take it to a race track either.

I'm with you on the lt5 architecture. further development could have carried them much further in performance, capability and probably even size and profile. The original LT5 that interested GM when they were shopping their specs before it was designed actually saw Lotus' 4.0 litre dohc design for racing and they thought I read that they could just plop it on top of one of their blocks. I want to watch and listen a Ferrari F12 Berlinetta run some day on a race track where I can see how you use 730 dohc 64 degree V architecture on a track. I personally am not a fan of the supercharger noise up front though there's no denying you can make them run.

[Paul Workman]

*snip*
The original LT5 that interested GM when they were shopping their specs before it was designed actually saw Lotus' 4.0 litre dohc design for racing and they thought I read that they could just plop it on top of one of their blocks.

Yeah... I read that too, somewhere. HOTB? (The book). However, Lotus quickly convinced GM a new design was what was needed to fill the bill. (God bless um!;))

:cheers:

P.

[Kevin]

its funny how reliability decreases as the cost of the car increases

[Paul Workman]

its funny how reliability decreases as the cost of the car increases

Must be a trade-off between belt-driven cams, revving to 9000 rpm vs. chains?

I wonder what Mercedes uses on their 8000 rpm V8s - belts or chains?

Then too, if someone can afford a Ferrari, then a couple grand every other year (the way I drive) wouldn't be the same as it would to you and me (especially). Then again, look what some of us spend on mods every year or two. After the purchase, what is the difference in outlay for maintaining vs. upgrading and maintaining? Suddenly a couple grand every two years doesn't seem so far out of line, huh?

And, so there is perhaps the "nut" of it all: On the one hand is a company that has to be able to spread (engine) costs to other product models (e.g., pickup trucks, etc), due to price point limitations of their buyers. On the other hand is a no compromise, all-out performance car company with an entirely different customer and price point.

But, be that as it may, GM did bite the bullet once for a no-holds barred, motor dedicated entirely to the Corvette. They certainly succeeded in meeting their performance goals at the time. They had the brass ring in their hand, but let it go. They had a world-beater and opted to go back to the pushrod "well"...once again...(and if that isn't enough, slap a SC on it...)[sigh]. I and most ZR-1 brothers - and those that want to be - understand completely. And, I (for one) feel privileged to be driving what was and still is one of the best Corvettes ever!

Well, like others said; if it wears an LT5 badge, it better be DOHC!!:cheers:

P.

[Kevin]

i meant in general. my honda is more reliable then my mustang and that's more reliable then my zr-1. my zr-1 is more reliable then my friends MP4-12c and my other friends gallardo or aventador

[Fully Vetted]

I've heard some real horror stories about the Aventador.