Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

Unfortunately, Hp/L must be a slowly diminishing factor according to the Euro exotic car manufacturers.

Just from reading here:
http://www.maserati.com.au/maserati/frame.asp
http://www.forbes.com/2004/10/15/cx_dl_1018feat.html

It seems like enlagring displacement has manifested itself with other designs too. If you now look at the newest Ferrari, M-B, BMW, Audi, and Porsche has to offer, they too seem to find that displacement becomes awfully hard to compromise when it comes to performance. Yes, they have made higher Hp/L from their designs over the years, but then again their gas mileage suffered until they too compromised some aspect of eliminating the number of valves and even more drastically, forced induction in the name of performance. Just look at the designs of their "standard exotics" and their "rare exotics".

Also, the real potential of a higher Hp/L engine would be if it is indeed small enough to fit into a small chassis. If that's the case, then how come there have been articles in some magazines where a retrofitted LS1 fits inside (minimal shoehorning is should mention) some of the smaller Japanese performance coupes ever produced (Nissan/Datsun Z's and Mazda RX's). Heck, even some of these retrofitted cars haven't even lost important creature comforts in the retrofit process.

We also should remember the venverable LT5/ZR-1 engine programme offered. Not only did that engine have a higher Hp/L compared to the LS2, but it also was heavier, more expensive, and more complicated, not to mention poor gas mileage.

Even though some enthusiasts would crack on GM for what they offer compared to let's say Ford, factory high performance does come at a significant cost. Ford and Diamler-Chrysler offer high performance out their doors, but in the past they have paid dearly.

Lastly, factory gas mileage is very important, as it has proven to make a car have greater range for the gas tank capacity. If performance is indeed needed, I'm pretty sure that there will be not shortage of reliable aftermarket tuners with substantial warranties to safeguard their work.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Nothing UNfortunate about it!

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

Tony, you're still missing the point... the point is that while hp/L is all well and good to brag about, it doesn't get you down the track any faster. For a given vehicle weight/configuration, all that matters is power.

As for the mileage ratings, I agree... any vehicle can be driven to perform better or worse than the EPA ratings... but since we don't all own all of the cars in question, we can't very well offer personal experience, now can we?? All we can do is look at a uniform test under uniform conditions... which is the EPA test. Granted, the EPA test has little to do with real world driving conditions, but that's not the point... the point is that it's the same test for all vehicles sold in the US.

Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

I know, but I just wanted to be sarcastic, since that was a common argument that quite a few Euro/Japanese enthusiasts used to argue and never realise what it was for. Those who seem to feel that European and Japanese Engineers have all of the "advanced designs" are somewhat correct, but the real question is, "Are the designs efficient in the manner needed for the end user?"

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Well said, Foxxton!

HumpinSS

iTrader: (1)

Tony you shoud buy a RC nitro motor. They are .15cc and put out 1+ hp and rev like hell. Hows that for hp/l

Tony Montana

Well I think it is safe to say that the vast majority of exotics come out of Europe. Also the 4.3L in the F430 produces 490hp.....compared to 500 from an LS7. That isn't far off 120hp/L. Thats an astronomical difference, and it's not only Ferrari doing this. You'll see similar figures from the new M5. I fully expect the next M3 to have a HP/L that will put the LS7 to shame also. Which is why I hope the aftermarket will take on the task of improving on the LS7 so those of us who don't have money to by an M3 can have fun too.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

So now you hope that the LS7 is a 7.0L? I take it you now understand how the (relatively) not-rich can go fast? Glad I could convince you.

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Oh, and for the record: My personal stance on the matter is that I hope the LS7 will have a lot of displacement, be affordable, and be largely interchangable with LS series parts.

And will fit into my engine bay nicely.

Velocity

How are you going to afford a C6 Z06 Corvette if you can't afford an M3?

HP/L

It's useless. It doesn't mean jack ****. It really, really doesn't.

By the way, ALL of those motors you just mentioned will have worse fuel economy than the LS7.

Tony Montana

If all you do is cruise at 1500rpm in 6th gear, I am sure they will...but on the track things would change FAST

Also for velocity and others, you can purchase engines without the cars . I am sure it won't take long until some guy thinking he has an exotic smashes his vette while racing an M3 or porsche, etc. Thats where I pounce and get his LS7 on the cheap

And if you think HP/L is useless, I must wonder what you do know...because even the people who have brought up real arguments in this thread wouldn't call it useless (at least I hope so)

ZO6 LandRocket

There will be more LS7's on the road than there will ever be 4.3L's..............

black_knight

iTrader: (1)

Yes, on the track, they're both going to get sh*t for MPG and the whole thing is moot. Again, the larger displacement has the advantage, at least in a performance car. I feel like I'm running in circles with you. GET... THE... POINT.

It's USELESS in the way you're advocating it. It's only useful insomuchas it's a factor in overall HP. That's IT.

BurnOut

iTrader: (1)

hp/L is completely useless. Or, actually, it's exactly as useful as tq/RPM... let's see, the S2000 motor makes a peak of 162 lb-ft and has a redline of 8000 RPM. So, doing a little math, we see... ummm, carry the two... a torque to RPM ratio of .02025 lb-ft for every RPM (.02025 tq/RPM). Frankly, I think Honda can do better. I mean, a lowly truck engine makes .1875 tq/RPM, so it must be better for performance, right??

See how completely useless that is??

LSONE

iTrader: (1)

a lot of European car companies drop displacement purposely, IE: f430 to 4.3L, M5 to 5L etc, but compare the torque numbers of the Ferrari and the ls7. the Ferrari will have a weak peaky torque curve whereas the ls7 will have a large flat torque curve.

and briefly onto another tangent: since when are people looking at $60,000+ 7.0L muscle cars concerned with 1.) hp/L and 2.) gas mileage?

[Edit] just read this genius comment

are you talking about gas mileage while racing?

70 TA

I posted that to him the other day and it likely went right over his head.

Oh well.

Gas milage while racing

GM has spent well over a Billion $ developing the Generation III engine and it has recieved nothing but praise.

52172

iTrader: (2)

7 liter is correct

70 TA

HP/L means **** all.

My friends Yamaha R1 has 180 HP @ 12500 RPM or so out of 1L, how would it do at pulling a 3000+ pound car down the road?

Torque is what moves the car. People in general are so enamored with HP when torque is really what matters.

HP is merely a function of Torque, HP=TQxRPM/5252.

High school physics.

So is a broad flat torque curve better for acceleration and drivabilty or a peaky one?

On the street the 7L will rule especially once I'm done modding it a bit

hondakiller

iTrader: (3)

the 7.0L c5r's seem to do ok at lemans against the turbo porsches and ferraris with much smaller motors. i guess the overwhelming displacement advantage makes up for all the extra gas pit stops

JonCR96Z

iTrader: (33)

I didn't really read all the posts in this thread but is there someone who actually thinks that hp/l will tell you anything about a car? I just assumed it was something made up by ricers who couldn't win anything else. Real money is on hp/lbs.