Corvette to shed the pounds and power in 2012
The new CAFE regulations might spell the end for big V8s, but future Corvettes will be packing a similar performance punch with a smaller footprint. Automotive News sat down with the Corvette's vehicle line exec, Tom Wallace, to discuss the future of the iconic coupe and he said that a 700 hp 'Vette is off the table. Instead, Chevy is looking to lighten the Corvette's weight and utilize a smaller V8 in order to keep the same power-to-weight ratio of the current generation models. Although Wallace didn't get into details, that didn't stop AN from speculating that the next Corvette could go on a 300 to 400 pound diet and get motivation from a 4.7-liter V8 (making 150 hp less). However, Wallace's own words are more telling, saying that the next 'Vette could be "more fuel efficient [and] even nimbler than it was before.
[Source: Automotive News – Sub. Req.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Dave 3:49PM (2/13/2008)
Dont get to excited about G M they just offered all their employees in the USA buy out packages and they want at least 16000 to take it They lost more money last year then any auto manuf. has ever lost .There used to be close to 20000 in the Oshawa plant now less than 8500 doesnt that tell you something Cant compete against $1.50 an hour Thanks to Buzz and his cronys for giving those guys $35.00 an hour now were all going to pay for it big time
Reply
Owain Ozymandias Buck 7:48AM (1/22/2008)
Amen! CAFE is not all doom and gloom. Lighter means nimbler.
I would truly pay a premium on a small car--not a Corvette mind youj--just a decent small car, if it was designed to be much lighter and built with advanced materials. I'd pay a couple of thousand as a premium.
Maybe the tech from the CAFE 'Vette will trickle down to a good replacement for the Cobalt.
All you old farts who actually own vettes (and yes, I'm jealous)--How do you feel about a light weight model?
Reply
The Other Bob 8:49AM (1/22/2008)
"I'd pay a couple of thousand as a premium."
I think you are dreaming if you think a couple thousand bucks will buy much in the way of light weight, advanced materials. Considering that 2.5lbs of carbon fiber bicycle frame will cost you $1500 bucks and up, how much do you think a significant amount of carbon in a car will cost? Of course there is aluminum too, which is used in the frame of the Z06 and ZR1, but again that is way more than a couple thousands of dollars of advanced materials.
With all respect, this is another example of having high expectations for fuel efficiency without the willingness to pay its actual cost.
Owain Ozymandias Buck 9:25AM (1/22/2008)
With mass production, a couple of thousand should be doable. Good engineering is the biggest part of the puzzle. Don't forget--there are a lot of parts besides the body structure. While the structure itself is the biggest chunk, small efficiencies throughout will add up.
What was it Lutz said last year--five thousand price premium? I'd pay that.
Dreaming? yes. Like Shirley Franklin said, fairy tale, no.
Carlos 9:50AM (1/22/2008)
Also might I add that you don't need to use carbon fiber in order to make a car with less mass. A good example of that is the Porsche 911, it's used a steel construction since it's beginning and it's always be less than 3000lbs. So all you need is a good engineering team and kill off a few bean counters and you could have yourself a 2500lb Corvette.
I would buy this car if GM made it, because while car makers are shackled by CAFE the after market is not. =)
Owain Ozymandias Buck 10:09AM (1/22/2008)
Can you show me anywhere in my post where I said Carbon Fiber? Hell, even steel--in it's modern incarnations--is an advanced material.
Last reply. I need to get back to work.
Seoultrain 11:38AM (1/22/2008)
lol, i can't believe you guys are using a specialized bike frame as a basis for cost of material. CFRP is really not that expensive, and will get cheaper in the future as the manufacturing process matures.
But also agreed that there are tons of other ways to save weight than the glamorous use of carbon fiber. Also, don't forget that replacement parts after a collision would be a ton more expensive with CFRP, which also means higher insurance. It's not just a couple thousand now, but also a few hundred more every year after you own the car.
naggs 1:55PM (1/22/2008)
"A good example of that is the Porsche 911, it's used a steel construction since it's beginning and it's always be less than 3000lbs."
a base 911 hasn't been less than 3000 lbs for at least 3 generations
len simpson 2:44PM (1/22/2008)
our vetteclub meetings quite frequently end w/jamming on how expensive it is to diagnose & repair the complexities of C 4,5 & 6,s.
Since my C2 is an ownerbilt custom, I just smile! I might buy a C7 if the KISS principle was properly applied.
Derek 5:33PM (1/22/2008)
To everybody talking about high-tech materials: smaller (with the same materials) means lighter in and of itself. Shorten the car, make it a little narrower and you can save weight without changing the materials one bit.
Majortom1981 7:53AM (1/22/2008)
Instead of decreasing hp couldnt they make the gas engine smaller and makeup the difference with an electric engine sort of like a performance hybrid?
I dont even pretend to know about these things so if it cant be done then tell me why.
Reply
Shipey 8:00AM (1/22/2008)
All you'd be doing is adding more weight, and thereby decreasing overall performance.
While I'm no fan of this "ZOMG TEH V8S MUST DIE!!!" kneejerk reaction from Lutz, a ligher car with the same power-to-weight ratio will undoubtedly be an even stronger performer. Really the only downside is that, at least intially, it will cost more.
Shipey 9:19AM (1/22/2008)
Probably not. The combination of an electric motor, the ICE, and a battery pack will surely weigh more than a smaller, more efficient aluminum V8. While the weight savings elsewhere could make up the difference, why would you want to give up those improvements to handling, etc. just to go hybrid?
I honestly can't see the Vette needing too much here... it already has stellar economy for what it is. Simply downsizing the car a bit would probably do the trick. It's not like they sell enough of them to really impact the corporate average numbers anyhow.
Seoultrain 11:30AM (1/22/2008)
tom, please don't think hybrids are a cure-all. They add weight and complexity, and have no place in a light, fun sports car. Give me a 350hp, 2700lb vette over a 350+50hp, 3200lb vette any day.
naggs 2:05PM (1/22/2008)
but that would add thousands to the price and millions to the development cost
the future of sports cars is clearly less weight
if they can hold the current hp/lbs with less weight, the car will be even faster, more fun and more efficient than it is today
they big question that i have is this. a "smaller" v8 would have to be a completely new engine. right now all LSx engines are roughly the same size, from the 5.3 to the 7.0, they are all the same basic dimensions.
for this to make any sense, GM would have to develop a v8 smaller than the small block, like a super small block or tiny block series of engines. with direct injection, a 4.0 pushrod v8 could make 350 hp. how much less would that engine weigh? because just using a 4.x liter version of the LSx engines would not weigh less than the larger versions.
is gm already working on a tiny block chevy?
naggs 2:17PM (1/22/2008)
you seem to be of the opinion that an electric + IC powertrain would be just as good if not better for performance. this is not the case. no one has ever attempted a hybrid powertrain in a sports car because it doesnt work
for brake regeneration, you need a motor/generator on the front axel because that is where most of the braking gets done. by the time you add the batteries (which would overheat in a performance car), the motor/generator to the transmission, the drive shafts to send power to and from the front wheels, and the front motor/generators you have added hundreds of pounds to the weight of the vehicle.
it would cost many thousands of dollars to take that weight off with carbon fiber monoque if it is even possible at all and what do you end up with. a car that is at best just as fast, but costs $300k and gets 30% better mileage.
you can get that same 30% improvement in mileage for a $5k price increase if you just have a 2700 lbs 350 hp smaller car. except this car would be the fastest of the 3 options and the most fun to drive. the choice is easy.
sports cars are the one situation where hybrids make no sense because weight absolutely kills everything they are trying to accomplish.
94 taurus owner 3:24AM (2/21/2008)
Offer a supercharged V6 hybrid model.
Reply
Majortom1981 8:44AM (1/22/2008)
Yes but if they lower the weight and addin the electric engine woulldnt that allow them to have the same weight car and the same horsepower with lower emissions?
Kevin White 8:10AM (1/22/2008)
Yah, lighter sounds great, but these numbers aren't great. I can't read the article and won't bother to register, but I couldn't help but notice the "150 hp less" comment. A 430 HP 6.2 liter makes about 69 HP/liter while a 280 HP 4.7 liter makes about 59 HP/liter, so the specific output gets worse. Not good for a drop in displacement. Does it rev lower?
The summary mentioned 300-400 pounds lighter. I did a couple calculations based on the current base Vette's weight of 3217 pounds, a 150 pound driver, a 14% driveline loss, and 350 pounds of added lightness; I get the current Vette at 9.105 pounds/HP while the CAFE Vette is at 12.529 pounds/HP. Therefore, each HP is toting around about 37.6% more weight in the future. Torque/weight would be similarly affected, as each liter of displacement would be pushing 18.2% more weight.
However, these numbers so far exist in a vacuum (and are obviously subject to much change). Four years from now, what will the car's competition look like? Ten years from now? These figures may still put the Vette where it is today in the market performance/value-wise if all competitors are forced to adapt.
If it can get 33 MPG on the highway and 24 in the city, if it has advanced all-wheel drive and a good dual-clutch transmission, if it takes advantage of whatever else technology has to offer, it should still maintain market share. And still be a fun car.
Reply
Seoultrain 11:50AM (1/22/2008)
yeah, i also thought the 150hp figure was a bit much. a 35% decrease in power also means a 35% decrease in weight to keep the P:W equal. That means we'd get a vette under 2100 pounds. put in an oversquare V8 to rev to 7k rpm, and it'd probably be the greatest sports car ever. seriously, ever.
We can only dream...