Corvette ZR-1!
#22
C'mon, we're in a ******* day and age in which 620+hp engines can go as long before maintenance/rebuilds as your mom's Buick.
Anyone have a Ferrari Enzo's maintenance schedule handy for comparison?
#29
And they do have a 3.5/6L V6 pushrod engine with variable timing via a phasable camshaft pulley.
And the new Dodge Viper has a variable timing via the same sort of camshaft pulley, but they use it to adjust the exhaust valve timing independtly of the intake valve timing via a wicked-cool, two-piece camshaft (whereas the GM V6 has a normal one-piece cam).
#35
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
Look at the first of the 4.6 Mod ford engines.. Yeah, they were only 281cid but their power output was pathetic.. The cobra 5 liter had bigger ***** then the 281 for years. I've yet to see any significant N/A power out of those engines from the factory anyway, and technically the Cobra-R doesn't count. They increased displacement and had a ridiculously oversize intake manifold setup just to obtain 385. Sure you strap Mr. Eaton onto them and you've got a handfull DAMN fast, but N/A I think they're pretty crappy. Thats just my opinion though.
#36
"Hey, my bass boat has good power, maybe we should put a MerCruiser in the new Vette?!"
And it actually happened.
Kind of like Ford wanting a good motor and asking Yamaha to make it (Taurus SHO)
#37
I hope you're joking. If what you said were true, then every engine raced at the top level would have pushrod activated valves. Imagine an F1 car, with probably the highest flowing heads known to man, having pushrods. They would self-destruct the minute the engine goes off-idle (which is like 5000 rpm).
GM is simply trying to generate press hoopla on nothing but an antiquated piece of crap that can be made cheaply and sold at a premium. I mean, come on, 100 hp per liter is cutting edge now? That too from a boosted engine? Sure, the chassis is top class and there is some state of the art body technology, but that engine doesnt belong there. Atleast on a car that says "ZR-1" on it. The SBC looks good where it belongs, on a 35-year old muscle car, not in an ultra-modern sports car.
Sorry to say, but IMHO, the LS9 is like the proverbial "polished turd".
#40
I hope you're joking. If what you said were true, then every engine raced at the top level would have pushrod activated valves. Imagine an F1 car, with probably the highest flowing heads known to man, having pushrods. They would self-destruct the minute the engine goes off-idle (which is like 5000 rpm).
GM is simply trying to generate press hoopla on nothing but an antiquated piece of crap that can be made cheaply and sold at a premium. I mean, come on, 100 hp per liter is cutting edge now? That too from a boosted engine? Sure, the chassis is top class and there is some state of the art body technology, but that engine doesnt belong there. Atleast on a car that says "ZR-1" on it. The SBC looks good where it belongs, on a 35-year old muscle car, not in an ultra-modern sports car.
Sorry to say, but IMHO, the LS9 is like the proverbial "polished turd".
GM is simply trying to generate press hoopla on nothing but an antiquated piece of crap that can be made cheaply and sold at a premium. I mean, come on, 100 hp per liter is cutting edge now? That too from a boosted engine? Sure, the chassis is top class and there is some state of the art body technology, but that engine doesnt belong there. Atleast on a car that says "ZR-1" on it. The SBC looks good where it belongs, on a 35-year old muscle car, not in an ultra-modern sports car.
Sorry to say, but IMHO, the LS9 is like the proverbial "polished turd".
I guess this arguement would hold up well if it didn't work so well...at 100K and smoking so called high tech cars costing twice as much, hard to argue...if it aint broke....650 plus HP, is 650 plus hp, at the finish line does it mattter if you get there first?