Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this thread(Page 1 of 2)
John Q. Law @ Apr 25th 2008 12:10AM
Thank god for forced induction. Or else it would take at least 12 liters displacement to make an American engine produce 638 hp.
hydrogenvodka @ Apr 25th 2008 12:13AM
LOL
Nick Vrana @ Apr 25th 2008 12:13AM
Just 8.4 (close enough)
http://www.dodge.com/en/2008/viper/
Rupert @ Apr 25th 2008 12:22AM
Yeah, but the Viper only makes 600 hp. It would take at least four more liters to produce that 38 horsepower.
Thetruck454 @ Apr 25th 2008 12:50AM
What do people have against forced induction... it creates low end tq.. something natural aspiration cannot do when you want to to rev and make power up high. Also what do you want to bet this motor is very similar in weight and probably smaller then the enzo motor.
Making fun of pushrods is getting up there along with ricer wings and fwd burnouts
Yar @ Apr 25th 2008 12:58AM
1 cam > 4 cams in 4 stroke gasoline applications.
Seriously, its one of the laws of Thermodynamics.
If you want to dispute it you can take it up with all the OHV powered race cars out there. Might have a hard time getting their attention though, with them busy winning and all...
Ford Wannup @ Apr 25th 2008 1:02AM
again...another hurtful, funny, and kinda true comment. Although I have to say, this is an engineering achievement to be able to do this kind of output, using "old tech", and yet claiming best-in-class mpg. We have no ground to criticize Corvette on this engine. If only GM can apply this resourcefulness to the rest of its lineup.
gmcbob @ Apr 25th 2008 1:11AM
Whatever man, knock the old school OHV V8's all you want, but my 98 Z28 was just as fast to 60 (faster in the 1/4 mile) as our new G35 and got better gas mileage on the highway (by a lot). Moreover, it took up less space in the engine compartment. This says a lot, considering that car was 10 years ago, with an "antiquated" 4 speed automatic.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it. GM V8's are good motors, period.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Apr 25th 2008 1:18AM
And this matters how? Even the non-blown LS7 is smaller and lighter than BMWs 400HP M5 (previous) V8.
This engine makes its peak HP at over 5500RPM. Any particular reason that's shameful?
Yar @ Apr 25th 2008 1:24AM
@ why not the LS2LS7?
The LS7 is also lighter (by 35 lbs) than the BRAND NEW M3's 420hp V8.
OHV plants are potent and competent engines and they will ALWAYS be on the top of the list when it comes to pure performance.
r33 @ Apr 25th 2008 5:30AM
LOLX2
PhattyDre16 @ Apr 25th 2008 1:41AM
That's retarded. A N/A motor would NOT be as fuel efficient as a Forced Induction motor would. Nor would it make the low end torque of a F/I motor.
So quit ur bitchin.
captainslow @ Apr 25th 2008 2:02AM
the truck454:
How are you going to even compare this engine to the enzo's ancient V12? The Enzo's engine was first developed and built in 1996 from a derivation of the '95 ferrari f1 car, which was let's see....12 years ago. Then it was finally put into production in 2002. It is also exactly 6.0 liters, and produces >650 hp. Ferraris are track cars built with the intention of having an almost constant torque curve (albeit low compared to your beloved pushrods) and tons of high end horsepower, which creates a power surge as you accelerate.
Step on the throttle in a ZR1 and all you see is tire smoke with uncontrollable power.
You can't compare American muscle to (old) Italian finesse.
captainslow @ Apr 25th 2008 2:09AM
Yar:
Check your facts.
The LS7 weighs 458 lbs
The new e92 M3's V8 weighs 445 lbs
Yar @ Apr 25th 2008 2:31AM
@ captainslow
My facts are dead on. The GM Performance catalog has the LS7 weigh in at 440lbs, including 30 lbs of packing material included with the crate motor. 440-30 = 410. 410 < 445.
http://www.gmperformanceparts.com/Parts/catalog.jsp
Page 24 is the GM Crate engine quick reference guide, with the power, torque, and weight of every engine offered by GM. On top of that, the LS3 weighs a whopping 50 lbs less than the BMW plant.
Bam.
Thetruck454 @ Apr 25th 2008 4:28AM
captainslow :
I chose the Enzo motor because it was of similar output. I shoulda choose the McLaren SLR 5.5 s'charged V8. It's only SOHC but none the less its barely smaller displacement wise and makes around 620/575. So are you calling that motor unimpressive to?
Also Since the Ls9 is of the the LS family and I started with the LS1 in 1997
MikeW @ Apr 25th 2008 10:54AM
The SLR McLaren engine is good considering that they the genesis of that engine was MB's lowly 5.0, 3 valve head, V8 302hp 339ft-lb.
and the improvement from 617hp@6500, 575ft-lbs@3250-5000, in the higher output version, SLR 722 edition, 641hp@6500, 605ft-lbs@4000 compares favorably with the ZR1.
Lysholm vs. TVS, 2 valve vs 3 valve, dual spark plug vs single
Brent @ Apr 25th 2008 11:33AM
The 8.3L Viper 500HP.
The 8.4L Viper 600HP.
The 12L Viper 5,408HP.
Fooman @ Apr 25th 2008 12:30PM
Get over 100 hp a litre NA and I will be impressed...
got M?
naggs @ Apr 25th 2008 1:11PM
hp/liter is a completely arbitrary statistic.
i am going to start using my favorite arbitrary engine stat, hp/camshaft
the ls9 makes 638hp/camshaft, ferrari needs 4 cams to get there only making 162 hp/cam. now that is what i call lazy engineering. ferrari needs to start outsourcing their engines from the same place they get their shocks!
bmw can only manage 127 hp/cam, PATHETIC! even a mustang gt gets 150 hp/cam. get your act together europe and japan. you have a lot of catching up to do.
but seriously, i swear you guys would keep bitching about hp/liter even if GM found a way to fit 10 liters and 800 hp in something the size of a shoebox that weighed 100 lbs and got 40 mpg. get over hp/liter and look at the numbers that actually affect the performance of an automobile and you will see why the chevy small block is the most successful performance engine in history.