A Turbocharged V8 For The C7?

[Camino LS6]

So, in sum, there is no real world advantage to DOHC. No exclusive capability. No inherent technical adavantage. No reason to place the format above the cam-in-block arrangement.

[regfootball]

If the quantity of something being built is an indicator of the quality of it's performance, how do you explain all of the 4-cylinder 4-speed automatic Corollas running around?

The Nissan GT-R is just a car racing game with really good graphics. The computer does all of the work for you.

but it also does 0-60 in 2.9 and 197 mph

[Drew Dowdell]

When the dust settles I see no problem keeping the regular engine around but I can see no reason GM should not have a top class DOHC to offer in Cadilacs and as an option in the Vette. While the Chevy engine is a good engine it is a markting nightmare in the Cadillac vs the other cars in its class. You know and I know that it is a fine engne as shown by the CTSV. But in the unwashed market of luxury cars people want the latest and most trick toys and will pay much more for them. Too many just see the Chevy engine as a pick up engine. Yes they underestimate it but too often to the point they don't even consider a GM car because of it.

Actually, I don't see anyone complaining about the CTS-V engines. Not the American journalists, not even the European ones.

It is not that people complain so much but how many pass it over for the more technical hardware? Preception is one of the largest factors in marketing.

I lot fewer than before. CTS-V sales are up.

[Drew Dowdell]

If the quantity of something being built is an indicator of the quality of it's performance, how do you explain all of the 4-cylinder 4-speed automatic Corollas running around?

The Nissan GT-R is just a car racing game with really good graphics. The computer does all of the work for you.

but it also does 0-60 in 2.9 and 197 mph

Turn off the computer, then what does it do? If the computer is doing most of the work, then you're not really driving are you? You're piloting.

A Boeing 747 does Mach 0.9.... but sitting in seat 27F playing GranTurisimo on your laptop doesn't really impart that much of a driving experience.

Any other car, don't care the brand, that can pull the GT-R numbers without heavy computerized support instantly gets more respect.

So, in sum, there is no real world advantage to DOHC. No exclusive capability. No inherent technical adavantage. No reason to place the format above the cam-in-block arrangement.

However, I don't mind it being there as an option in addition to a CIB engine. More options is more gooder.

[FAPTurbo]

When the dust settles I see no problem keeping the regular engine around but I can see no reason GM should not have a top class DOHC to offer in Cadilacs and as an option in the Vette. While the Chevy engine is a good engine it is a markting nightmare in the Cadillac vs the other cars in its class. You know and I know that it is a fine engne as shown by the CTSV. But in the unwashed market of luxury cars people want the latest and most trick toys and will pay much more for them. Too many just see the Chevy engine as a pick up engine. Yes they underestimate it but too often to the point they don't even consider a GM car because of it.

Actually, I don't see anyone complaining about the CTS-V engines. Not the American journalists, not even the European ones.

It is not that people complain so much but how many pass it over for the more technical hardware?

No, it's because they're badge snobs who believe that anything that isn't manufactured in a city that ends with 'stadt,' or 'burg' is inherently inferior. A great deal of journalists wouldn't know a crank from a camshaft.

[Z-06]

Example Benz may be offering a special edition engine from AMG that was done just for the model where as Cadillac offers an engine that is pimarily used in a truck. To you or I we understand and know that there is nothing wrong with that, infact we being GM fans we can overlook this very easily. But on the other hand to win a guy away from another brand who really has no love for GM but does like the styling on the new CTS coupe you need to offer what he wants logical or now. If he is willing to pay for it you need to offer it. Like I stated Marketing is a big part of this. Preceved value for what you pay also is a big part of the deal. The more complicated or advance the more precieved value.

The 6.2L AMG costs a cool $40,000 while the LS7 costs around $15,000, both produce similar numbers, with the LS7 certainly to give better fuel economy. Is it the price to pay for perception? May be GM should start marketing LS engines as most advanced engines in the world and go head on against AMG and M engines, then people will perceive differently.

In one thread there was a need to lower cost of Corvette, now there is a desire for having expensive engine in it. Does not work both ways.

[hyperv6]

Example Benz may be offering a special edition engine from AMG that was done just for the model where as Cadillac offers an engine that is pimarily used in a truck. To you or I we understand and know that there is nothing wrong with that, infact we being GM fans we can overlook this very easily. But on the other hand to win a guy away from another brand who really has no love for GM but does like the styling on the new CTS coupe you need to offer what he wants logical or now. If he is willing to pay for it you need to offer it. Like I stated Marketing is a big part of this. Preceved value for what you pay also is a big part of the deal. The more complicated or advance the more precieved value.

The 6.2L AMG costs a cool $40,000 while the LS7 costs around $15,000, both produce similar numbers, with the LS7 certainly to give better fuel economy. Is it the price to pay for perception? May be GM should start marketing LS engines as most advanced engines in the world and go head on against AMG and M engines, then people will perceive differently.

In one thread there was a need to lower cost of Corvette, now there is a desire for having expensive engine in it. Does not work both ways.

But what you overlook is many people will pay the $40,000 more because of what it is as much as what it can do. Like I said Marketing is a big key issue. Just the same with a strip down Vette Vs loades. Most people want all the toys while a hand full of guys want a stripper.

The LS7 numbers mean little to the many who what the more advanced or complicated engines.

The fact remains that if there were no value or money being made on DOHC engine they would not exist.

Like the Prius many buy it for the tech factor as much as any kind of fuel savings.

[hyperv6]

So, in sum, there is no real world advantage to DOHC. No exclusive capability. No inherent technical adavantage. No reason to place the format above the cam-in-block arrangement.

As of right now the cam phasing in a DOHC is much more advanced than the CIB right now. Add to it the DI system helps a lot too. Once they do the cam in cam phasing in the new Chevy it could be on the same ground. But we have yet to see it yet.

Right now with 4 cams and VVT you can do a lot of things in controling the engine. Also we have to see how they do the combustion chambers to get better flow and burn. They have improved but when you have 4 valves around the spark plug it make it hard to beat.

The bottom line is simple there is no reason not to have and offer both engines. Why totally abandon a market people want? I find it odd how some cry for wagons and manual trannys that take up less than 10% of the market but then get upset with the though of offering an engine that takes up 90% of the market.

As for the new sports cars with all the electronic controls. This is something that will not go away. The younger generations like this and they do give many cars the ability to be driven to levels few drivers could. I just hope that most keep in mind we like to shut this stuff off and keep that an option in all these cars. The fact remains many coming up grew on with Grand Turismo and like this kid of car. Times change and markets change. Those who keep up live those who done fade away like many others.

The Vette deal is like Harly Davidson. The Vette is as much an American Icon that it will sell even if it is a crap car. The crap interior is like the oil leak on a Harley just something to expect. Harley has stepped it up by getting updated with more modern bikes and engines while still offering some old school things. It has helped them and many others have tried to copy what they are doing. In todays market you must make an appeal to as many peopla as possible as the fortunes of a model can change fast. Few cars have loyal followings anymore as people are always looking for the next trend and options.

[Drew Dowdell]

Cam in Cam is already out there and working in the V10 Viper. They can license the technology at any time.

[hyperv6]

Cam in Cam is already out there and working in the V10 Viper. They can license the technology at any time.

I know it has been a part of the Viper but it is in so few numbers I really don't count it yet. The Chevy will be in the trucks as well as the Vette and any other GM V8 application. This I consider the first real world use of it. TYhat is if GM does go forward with this as I think they might.

[Drew Dowdell]

it's there as proof that the that the concept works.

[SAmadei]

Didn't GM already do the perceptionally "low tech" Corvette versus the DOHC "high tech" "Corvette" in the form of the XLR/XLR-V? The public already voted with their wallets and "High Tech" failed here.

[hyperv6]

Didn't GM already do the perceptionally "low tech" Corvette versus the DOHC "high tech" "Corvette" in the form of the XLR/XLR-V? The public already voted with their wallets and "High Tech" failed here.

The XLR was more a sporty luxury car vs a real sports car. The real issue was the XLR was not really a very good car for the money. Too little performance to be a true sports car. I would think the Vette team would have a totally different take on the high tech car vs what Cadillac offered.

[smk4565]

They can't offer both types of engines if they do a mid-engine car that is more like an Audi R8 or Lotus Evora. Then they probably have to go with the high revving, turbo engine. If they keep it front engine, rear drive they have more options. They can stick with the big pushrod and use the formula they have used for 50 years, but sales of that car are down. The Corvette isn't brining in new customers as it sits now, so why make the C7 just like the C6.

The GT-R may be a computer, but only the Veyron beats it 0-60 and around the Nurburgring it beats the ZR1 and a lot of other high priced exotics. The 911 Turbo is faster than the ZR1 also, so really if the Corvette is supposed to keep up with those cars, and attract a younger customer base, they probably do have to change the formula.

On a side note, I think an AMG engine is around $18,000, but maybe it depends on which engine. Regardless of cost, Mercedes doesn't care, nor do their customers. That is the difference between Mercedes and GM though. Mercedes spares no expense to get the best available regardless of cost, and GM does "good enough" on a nickel and dime budget.

[hyperv6]

it's there as proof that the that the concept works.

No one said it would not work. The real question is how much more expensive is it. GM and Chrysler have not rushed to it. It may have been the lack of money or what. It for the most is the out growth of the duel cam in block GM looked at and passed on.

It is coming and it will be interesting to see what it will do for the Chevy V8. It will be interesting to see what the cost is as it will also add to the cost to build it. But for what they gain it will be worth it.

[FAPTurbo]

They can stick with the big pushrod and use the formula they have used for 50 years, but sales of that car are down. The Corvette isn't brining in new customers as it sits now, so why make the C7 just like the C6.

Oh dear. I take it you're just ignoring the fact that sales of the Corvette's competitors, and other sports cars were down last year too.

The Corvette's 13,934 sales were the worst for the nameplate since 1961, when Chevrolet sold 10,939 models - and the car was still in its first generation.

As recently as 2006, Chevrolet sold more than two-and-a-half times as many Corvettes -- 36,518 -- as it did last year, as sales for almost all premium sports cars were pummeled.

Chevrolet confirmed the Corvette's sales history, while a spokesman noted total industry sales in the premium sports car segment were down 41 percent last year. Compared with 2008, Corvette sales slid 48.3 percent.

One of the Corvette's primary competitors in the market, the Porsche 911, dropped a less-precipitous 17.8 percent last year, but its 6,839 units accounts for only about half of the Corvette's segment-leading 27.7 percent market share, the Chevrolet spokesman told AutoObserver. Porsche's Boxster and Cayman were off 35.7 percent and 44 percent, respectively, in 2009.

The sports car market suffered the effects of the poor economy, with dismal sales across the entire segment in 2009. The Audi TT -- a comparatively new design -- fell 56.9 percent last year to just 1,935 sales for the year. Even sales for Audi's R8, launched in 2008 and revered for being a relative bargain, dropped by 22.3 percent.

At Mercedes, sales for the SLK plunged 48.1 percent to 2,566, and sales for the pricey SL were off 26.3 percent.

http://www.autoobserver.com/2010/01/corvette-drops-to-50-year-sales-low-as-high-end-sports-cars-sputter.html

It appears those DOHC engines aren't as recession proof or sales boosting as some make them out to be! And look at this!

Despite gas-price jitters, Corvette sales were up 21.9 percent, to 4,293 in the first four months of this year.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/may2011/bw20110531_642141.htm

That review also does not mention the engine being bad, or compare it to anything DOHC. Probably because Business Week doesn't know the difference between OHV and DOHC; only car nerds know the difference. What BW does criticize is the interior and amenities. THOSE are the reasons for the Corvette's ailments. Not the engine. Claiming OHV is the cause of any of the Corvette's woes is bunk.

I am not at all opposed to a DOHC engine for the Corvette. In fact, I'd welcome it, just to give the car a different personality for the people who DO want it.

[Z-06]

Fap,

The arm chair critics (H-R-S) still do not get who Corvette's real demographic is. Looking at the numbers of Cayman, Boxter, and Corvette it is clear that the demographic that purchase those vehicles were clearly hit by the recession.

In one of my posts in another thread about Corvette, I had made clear that Corvette demographic includes mostly people who are either self-employed or with small businesses that took a hit during the economy. Not the blue haired mid-life crisis men trying to show penile-power as press and arm-chair critics try to paint. Apparently no matter how many times the message is passed to the people (H-R-S), Bitch-Moan-Whine about what the "ideal" Corvette should be continues.

The only thing that can bring younger people into Corvettes is to make it appear snazzier with better interior and "hep". Speaking with an M3 owner, he said that the engine was the best part of a Corvette because how easily and cheaply it could be tuned, the LS engines are highly regarded in Porsche community, and so within the VTEC fanboys.

[Drew Dowdell]

The GT-R may be a computer, but only the Veyron beats it 0-60 and around the Nurburgring it beats the ZR1 and a lot of other high priced exotics. The 911 Turbo is faster than the ZR1 also, so really if the Corvette is supposed to keep up with those cars, and attract a younger customer base, they probably do have to change the formula.

What is the single mechanical attribute that those three bolded cars have in common that the ZR-1 lacks that would have a bigger affect on 0-60 and handling than the number of camshafts ever could?

The ZR-1 vastly out powers all but the Veyron. It weighs 500lbs less than the GT-R and 150lbs less than the Porsche 911 Turbo... yet you want to blame the slightly higher 0-60 time on the number of camshafts it has?

You need to pick up some intellectual honesty here sir.

There is one thing and one thing only that is holding the current Corvette back from completely wiping the 'Ring with the Nissan and Porsche. It's not the lack of DOHC.

[dwightlooi]

The GT-R may be a computer, but only the Veyron beats it 0-60 and around the Nurburgring it beats the ZR1 and a lot of other high priced exotics. The 911 Turbo is faster than the ZR1 also, so really if the Corvette is supposed to keep up with those cars, and attract a younger customer base, they probably do have to change the formula.

What is the single mechanical attribute that those three bolded cars have in common that the ZR-1 lacks that would have a bigger affect on 0-60 and handling than the number of camshafts ever could?

The ZR-1 vastly out powers all but the Veyron. It weighs 500lbs less than the GT-R and 150lbs less than the Porsche 911 Turbo... yet you want to blame the slightly higher 0-60 time on the number of camshafts it has?

You need to pick up some intellectual honesty here sir.

There is one thing and one thing only that is holding the current Corvette back from completely wiping the 'Ring with the Nissan and Porsche. It's not the lack of DOHC.

The GT-R's prowess has nothing to do with its twin-turbo, DOHC V6 engine. It has everything to do with the traction advantage of its AWD system and the handling advantage of having THREE active differentials metering torque to each of the four wheels.

In fact, the GT-R will probably be an even faster and better handling car if it had the LS7 Pushrod V8 instead of the 3.8 Twin-turbo V6, while retaining the same AWD hardware. Why? Because both engines make about the same amount of power -- 505hp / 470 lb-ft (LS7) vs 480~520 hp / 434~451 lb-ft (VR38DETT). The 7.0 liter LS7 pushrod V8 is the smaller, lighter, engine of the two -- 454 lbs (LS7) vs 608 lbs (VR38DETT), a 154 lbs difference.

[hyperv6]

Sports cars in general are not recession proof no matter what engine. These are cars for expendable money and that is something many are short on today.

The one thing that hurts the Vette more than anything else is some of the quality related issues and the service at many dealers. I have seen many electrical and other similar issues where they will get bugs even a good service department could not fix as it was a design flaw. My locl dealer told me of a Disc changer issues he had to tell the guy they could not fix as it was a GM software issue that they did not expect to get addressed. He said try telling that to a guy who just paid $65,000

The other is poor serice departments that are just providing poor service. A good example is the Turbo Upgrade for my HHR SS had a few issues from GM. This kit while not overly difficult to install it needs to have connectors crimped with the right Kent Moore tools. Many dealers are not doing it correctly and many owners are having drivability issues. Also the T map needs to be clearanced with the AC compressor. I was the one who figured this one out and shared it with GMPD as the engine would torque back and hit the Compressor and short out the sensor. Now they at telling the dealers how to fix it. My dealer is one of the best Chevy dealers around and I was lucky to have them. I see so many other dealers with such poor service it is amazing anyone buys cars from them. I know with the SS many have stated they will not buy Chevy again based on their service experience. I could see the same happening with the present Vette as even more money is at stake for the owner.

I tell many SS owners with Upgrade issues to seek a different dealer to get this fix and often it does resolve the issues on the first trip to the new dealer. I can only imagine the feelings of people paying an average of $75,000 and getting similar service.

I do not see the LS engine hurting sales but I do see I do see the new engine adding sales that would never have come in. The car can live with out it but it could do even better with it. That is why this is such a no brainer and a case where if the engine is shared with Cadillac it has nothing to lose. Many cried how the new Harley messed with tradition but now that it was here it complimented the line and brought in buyers who never would have bought in the Harly line before. Even Chevy in the past. In cars like the Impala the BBC was not really needed but it did compliment the line and provide buyers with an option. The fact is someone wanting a big engine would have gone to Ford or Chrysler if they could not get the BBC in the Chevy.

[balthazar]

^ Impala scenario was predicated on power availability; the SBC did not deliver anywhere near the BBC's TRQ.

Corvette has mountains of power that DOHC would not deliver more of without downsides.

This is besides the fact that light weight & good balance is far more pertinent in a Corvette than it was in an Impala.

To sum up: BBC vs. SBC- a very real tangible.

DOHC vs. IBC- semantics.

[hyperv6]

^ Impala scenario was predicated on power availability; the SBC did not deliver anywhere near the BBC's TRQ.

Corvette has mountains of power that DOHC would not deliver more of without downsides.

This is besides the fact that light weight & good balance is far more pertinent in a Corvette than it was in an Impala.

To sum up: BBC vs. SBC- a very real tangible.

DOHC vs. IBC- semantics.

The fact is 95% of the owners of the older Impala never needed the BBC. It was more marketing and Image much as the DOHC is today. How much torque did an Impala owner really need? The cars were not racy light nor all that sporting as the smaller cars could be. But it gave the family guy a car with the SS cool factor all the same.

Second you underestimate the modern DOHC engines with VVT today. The Solstice with the GMPD upgrade will do 340 FT-LBS all day with only 2.0 liters. It will hit max torque at 2000 RPM and keep it to over 5000 RPM. There is no down side. Others like the Italia and MP4C have DOHC and have no issues with weight, balance and handling so why would the Vette if engineered to take advantgage of said plant. I fully expect the C7 and C8 to lose weight only helping the full spectrum of performance in acceleration, braking and handling.

BBC in a smaller Camaro and Nova a very real tangible.

BBC in a Impala - Semantics.

DOHC VS IBC Marketing to a new group of buyers that would not consider the IBC. They are out there and they are growing. Younger people today do not hold to the old ways logical or not. Hell many would rather have a Turbo 4 today vs a V8. Blasphemy it may be but it is what it is. In fact just the Turbo factor is not lost on the younger demographic. They love this kind of stuff and will pay more for it if done right.

[balthazar]

'Need' is individually definable.

If one 'needed' a BBC in an Impala, there was a definite return- more power.

If one 'needed' a DOHC in a Corvette, what's the return? - not more power.

Higher revs? Who 'needs' that, and how does it translate to the street?

Using the above example, a TT V-6 (gt-r) develops less power than the Corvette's 505/470, with a lot more weight on the front end.

Corvette is already very svelte, adding 150+ lbs to the nose yet losing weight overall is likely to worsen weight distribution, if a net loss could even obtained with such a heavy engine.

Kudos to Chevy & GM Engineering for having the Corvette at the same weight level it was in 1970- precious few cars have been able to pull that off. BMW 3-series is up about 1100 lbs over a similar span of time.

Bottom line is: what's very real in the market is results, and the Corvette provides 'em.

De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante', no matter what the spec sheet reads. There are already are other choices for that out there.

Edited June 2, 2011 by balthazar

[Drew Dowdell]

The only thing the Corvette needs in order to wipe the floor with the GT-R and 911 Turbo is AWD. The Corvette has traction issues that the other two don't have putting all that extra power (that the other two don't have) down to the street.

[regfootball]

AWD in fact is the most important performance item that needs to be added (as an option) on the Vette. TRACTION = better acceleration and handling.

I have a feeling it is coming.

The new v8 is probably something that is foreseen to be needed in world markets. I would also guess that perhaps Lotus may be involved. I could see this thing being crammed into a Lotus. In this regard, it makes sense to get it in cars, the Corvette is probably one way they can justify the cost to design and build and amortize it before it trickles down to other vehicles.

Look at all the Ford ecoboosts in so many models. They don't really need em, but as a company they decided it needed to be there for some markets so they spread it around as much as possible. We have no idea if this small v8 may end up in 2019 Cadillacs or whatever. In the meantime, the finances need to be planned and verified, and design needs to happen, and soon it has to get put into something. This vision of a small v8 corvette may be as much for 7-8 years from now as it is for say, 2014.

Edited June 2, 2011 by regfootball

[Camino LS6]

'Need' is individually definable.

If one 'needed' a BBC in an Impala, there was a definite return- more power.

If one 'needed' a DOHC in a Corvette, what's the return? - not more power.

Higher revs? Who 'needs' that, and how does it translate to the street?

Using the above example, a TT V-6 (gt-r) develops less power than the Corvette's 505/470, with a lot more weight on the front end.

Corvette is already very svelte, adding 150+ lbs to the nose yet losing weight overall is likely to worsen weight distribution, if a net loss could even obtained with such a heavy engine.

Kudos to Chevy & GM Engineering for having the Corvette at the same weight level it was in 1970- precious few cars have been able to pull that off. BMW 3-series is up about 1100 lbs over a similar span of time.

Bottom line is: what's very real in the market is results, and the Corvette provides 'em.

De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante', no matter what the spec sheet reads. There are already are other choices for that out there.

Nicely put.

Results, results, and results.

All that matters.

[riviera74]

So when does the Vette update its interior to 2011 standards?

[Z-06]

^^We may see a new one pretty soon. Scheduled as a MY 2013.

[hyperv6]

'Need' is individually definable.

If one 'needed' a BBC in an Impala, there was a definite return- more power.

If one 'needed' a DOHC in a Corvette, what's the return? - not more power.

Higher revs? Who 'needs' that, and how does it translate to the street?

Using the above example, a TT V-6 (gt-r) develops less power than the Corvette's 505/470, with a lot more weight on the front end.

Corvette is already very svelte, adding 150+ lbs to the nose yet losing weight overall is likely to worsen weight distribution, if a net loss could even obtained with such a heavy engine.

Kudos to Chevy & GM Engineering for having the Corvette at the same weight level it was in 1970- precious few cars have been able to pull that off. BMW 3-series is up about 1100 lbs over a similar span of time.

Bottom line is: what's very real in the market is results, and the Corvette provides 'em.

De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante', no matter what the spec sheet reads. There are already are other choices for that out there.

The small block provided enough power in the 60's to do what nearly all Impala owners ever needed to do. Unless they were towing a big trailer or were running a special weight class in drag racing the engine was more a novalty than anything else. Don't make it anymore than it was.

The DOHC engine in a Vette would provide a powerplant that would interst many who could care less now about the pushrod engine. As hard as it may be for some to beleive there are many who hate that engine as much as some hate DOHC here. You may call them snobs but if they have money they are potential customers. I don't care how they feel or if they are right or wrong but giving them an option is just good business.

I agree that keepimg the Vettes weight down is commendable. I still would like to see them lose some more weight and a little of the bulk of the car. I would love to see if more as a true sports cars and a little less a GT type car.

Ferrari has no issue, Jaguar has no issue BMW has no issue, Aston has no issue Mclaren has no issue in dealing with the power, weight or handling. I don't see that an issue with the Vette as long as the powertrain was intergrated into the design of the car. I Know GM is smart enough to be able to figure it out.

"De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante'" Where do you really get this stuff? I Know you are smarter than this. The fact is the Vette lead engineer has made it clear that they would do nothing to the Vette unless it made it a better car. If they did do a DOHC you can rest assured it would out perform the present car and perform better and no less than the Pushrod engine. Give them a little credit they are not that stupid.

The Vette is in good hands with Tadge Juechter and he will accept nothing but the best for the car by taking no steps backwards. If they do go with a DHOC it will not be ill handling nor slower. They have not let us done before. Hell where were you when they added the weight to the ZR1 with the supercharger. With your way of thinking that should have made the car damn impossible to drive with all the added nose weight. I never heard you complain then.

Lets face it you appear as a Pushrod snob as much as some are DOHC snobs. They are both wonderful engines and the fact is there is room for both.

Funny how so many condemed for for putting the Ecoboot in the F150. They look like geniuses now with sale climbing and taking near half the sales with a $795 premium on them over the V8. I think if you can get diehard V8 truck people to buy a TT DHOC V6 F 150 A DHOC TT V8 Vette should not be a hard sell.

Like it or not the buyers are there and their money is as green as anyone elses.

[hyperv6]

AWD in fact is the most important performance item that needs to be added (as an option) on the Vette. TRACTION = better acceleration and handling.

I have a feeling it is coming.

The new v8 is probably something that is foreseen to be needed in world markets. I would also guess that perhaps Lotus may be involved. I could see this thing being crammed into a Lotus. In this regard, it makes sense to get it in cars, the Corvette is probably one way they can justify the cost to design and build and amortize it before it trickles down to other vehicles.

Look at all the Ford ecoboosts in so many models. They don't really need em, but as a company they decided it needed to be there for some markets so they spread it around as much as possible. We have no idea if this small v8 may end up in 2019 Cadillacs or whatever. In the meantime, the finances need to be planned and verified, and design needs to happen, and soon it has to get put into something. This vision of a small v8 corvette may be as much for 7-8 years from now as it is for say, 2014.

The whole Ecoboost deal is making for a lot of money and have people buying their cars in some cases just because of the engine.

I really am not a AWD fan but I see it as an option at some point again it has it's fans and will attract buyers.

I would really like to see the car get a little smaller and lighter. This would add performance an engine could not add. Imagine a 2900-3000 pound car. This would enhance handling to greater levels and improve braking to a retina detaching level.

The new Mclaren is I believe at 2800 pounds and does some great things.

Edited June 3, 2011 by hyperv6

[riviera74]

Hyperv6, McLarens are not known for being (semi) affordable. Now a 3000 Vette, that anyone can support. I am not as anti-DOHC as some people are, but that is because some people think pushrod = GM truck = unrefined. Those people have their perceptions stuck in the 1970s or the 80s. Since they are buyers, a DOHC Vette should do more good. Besides, what is wrong with one that slots in between the standard small block 350 and the DOHC of the ZR1 (or is it the ZL1)?

[balthazar]

>>"The small block provided enough power in the 60's to do what nearly all Impala owners ever needed to do. Unless they were towing a big trailer or were running a special weight class in drag racing the engine was more a novalty than anything else. Don't make it anymore than it was."<<

What am I making it out to be?? A 3800 lb Impala with a 195 HP 283 certainly got people from Point A to Point B.... but saying 'that's enough' is the same as people proclaiming a 275-HP DTS 'does all it's needed to do' in it's segment in 2011. Might as well just stick with the 155 HP I6 for the Impala- not much power difference between 155 & 195.

Point is; Chevy exploded once they delivered V-8 power, AND they had the BBC on the shelf- offering it in the Impala was easy, natural, in demand, and GAVE RESULTS. BIG difference between a 195 hp SBC and a 385 HP BBC. And again; it's the results at play here, not the buyer showing around the window sticker to let other's know how much power he bought. When you have to open the hood of your sports car and wave people over to show them your giant, wide, heavy DOHC heads, hoping they'll forget how your ride was slower vs. a Corvette, you've lost twice.

>>"Ferrari has no issue, Jaguar has no issue BMW has no issue, Aston has no issue Mclaren has no issue in dealing with the power, weight or handling. "<<

Ferrari has very little model heritage to pay tribute to (but plenty of brand heritage); they change models constantly. Also- the per car mark-up is so extraordinary- they always have ample development money. Jag has no sports car. But BMW has very real weight issues- the 3 was 2200 lbs when it came out, the current M3 is 3700. It needs to lose AT LEAST 1000 lbs. immediately. Another discussion.

>>""De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante'" Where do you really get this stuff?"<<

Repeating myself- I used the example mentioned above for comparison; the nissan TT V-6 with DOHCs. Less power, heavier weight.

>>"Hell where were you when they added the weight to the ZR1 with the supercharger."<<

You're disabling your position with this one. The ZR1 gained 273 lbs (with a LOT of hi-po equipment; not just the SC'er), but it also gained 133 HP and major TRQ, it didn't lose HP & TRQ; it got MUCH QUICKER. As long as the performance increases, weight gain is basically immaterial.

When it came out, the ZR1 was putting around 535 HP to the wheels, where the GTR was putting down only 420 (later increased).

Again, for family sedans this is not overly important, but for exotic sports cars, results are everything. Results is the only reason to have an exotic sports car, overlooking their many many compromises.

Sure; likely Corvette engineers could make a more powerful DOHC motor, but the compromises are very real, and at the current IBC's 505 hp / 470 lb-ft- is it really worth it? Corvette does not 'need' a DOHC offering as far as performance & being competitive goes, far from it, and in that there's no comparitive DOHC motor already on the shelf and money being as tight as it is, it's better spent elsewhere.

By the same token and logic you've presented here (semantics) : the GTR should offer a IBC motor for the fans of that configuration.... surely you support that, right?

Edited June 3, 2011 by balthazar

[balthazar]

The ZR1 may well be the best supercar bargain in the world, while at the same time being as mechanically sophisticated as any of the best supercars from Europe or Asia. People have complained that an engine based on the half-century old small block V8 is a travesty in the 21st century. Those people don't have a leg to stand on. The LS9 may share basic dimensions and architecture with a 1955 Chevy V8, but it has no common parts and has nothing to be ashamed of.

~ Autoblog

[Drew Dowdell]

DOHC has been around longer than OHV CIB.

ZOMG! Why is NiSsSAN USING SUch OLD Tech!?!

[regfootball]

'Need' is individually definable.

If one 'needed' a BBC in an Impala, there was a definite return- more power.

If one 'needed' a DOHC in a Corvette, what's the return? - not more power.

Higher revs? Who 'needs' that, and how does it translate to the street?

Using the above example, a TT V-6 (gt-r) develops less power than the Corvette's 505/470, with a lot more weight on the front end.

Corvette is already very svelte, adding 150+ lbs to the nose yet losing weight overall is likely to worsen weight distribution, if a net loss could even obtained with such a heavy engine.

Kudos to Chevy & GM Engineering for having the Corvette at the same weight level it was in 1970- precious few cars have been able to pull that off. BMW 3-series is up about 1100 lbs over a similar span of time.

Bottom line is: what's very real in the market is results, and the Corvette provides 'em.

De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante', no matter what the spec sheet reads. There are already are other choices for that out there.

The small block provided enough power in the 60's to do what nearly all Impala owners ever needed to do. Unless they were towing a big trailer or were running a special weight class in drag racing the engine was more a novalty than anything else. Don't make it anymore than it was.

The DOHC engine in a Vette would provide a powerplant that would interst many who could care less now about the pushrod engine. As hard as it may be for some to beleive there are many who hate that engine as much as some hate DOHC here. You may call them snobs but if they have money they are potential customers. I don't care how they feel or if they are right or wrong but giving them an option is just good business.

I agree that keepimg the Vettes weight down is commendable. I still would like to see them lose some more weight and a little of the bulk of the car. I would love to see if more as a true sports cars and a little less a GT type car.

Ferrari has no issue, Jaguar has no issue BMW has no issue, Aston has no issue Mclaren has no issue in dealing with the power, weight or handling. I don't see that an issue with the Vette as long as the powertrain was intergrated into the design of the car. I Know GM is smart enough to be able to figure it out.

"De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante'" Where do you really get this stuff? I Know you are smarter than this. The fact is the Vette lead engineer has made it clear that they would do nothing to the Vette unless it made it a better car. If they did do a DOHC you can rest assured it would out perform the present car and perform better and no less than the Pushrod engine. Give them a little credit they are not that stupid.

The Vette is in good hands with Tadge Juechter and he will accept nothing but the best for the car by taking no steps backwards. If they do go with a DHOC it will not be ill handling nor slower. They have not let us done before. Hell where were you when they added the weight to the ZR1 with the supercharger. With your way of thinking that should have made the car damn impossible to drive with all the added nose weight. I never heard you complain then.

Lets face it you appear as a Pushrod snob as much as some are DOHC snobs. They are both wonderful engines and the fact is there is room for both.

Funny how so many condemed for for putting the Ecoboot in the F150. They look like geniuses now with sale climbing and taking near half the sales with a $795 premium on them over the V8. I think if you can get diehard V8 truck people to buy a TT DHOC V6 F 150 A DHOC TT V8 Vette should not be a hard sell.

Like it or not the buyers are there and their money is as green as anyone elses.

the Z06 would not be a Z06 if it weren't for the blower. Funny how Chevy even despite monster displacement, still could not get m5 killing power out of it with pushrod architecture, but without blower. Were they supposed to go to a 10 litre v8?

the dealer group i work for, primarily we have ford shops and let me tell you those ecoboost ford trucks are FLYING off the lot. Cannot keep em in stock.

Turbo with older folks has a bad stigma.........unreliability and turbo lag. Thank Chrysler, Saab, etc.

Modern turbos have changed the game and the young performance types dig em. VW's and Audi's are garbage but they are magnets for the young punks who wants to drive performance cars, or what they call em.

Seems to me as worthwhile investment for Corvette to revisit a DOHC engine as much as its worth GM's time to have things like a supercharged, rear drive, manual trans Cadillac wagon, or to even consider things like an El Camino revival. As has been alluded to earlier, if GM has money in the budget for that low return / good potential of not making money type of stuff, at least it seems fair for GM to stuff the vette with an engine type that modern performance car fans across the globe may be drawn to.

Edited June 3, 2011 by regfootball

[regfootball]

911 has awd, gtr does, r8 does also, i think buyers of hyper cars like that are expecting those options of AWD on the sheet...

AWD in fact is the most important performance item that needs to be added (as an option) on the Vette. TRACTION = better acceleration and handling.

I have a feeling it is coming.

The new v8 is probably something that is foreseen to be needed in world markets. I would also guess that perhaps Lotus may be involved. I could see this thing being crammed into a Lotus. In this regard, it makes sense to get it in cars, the Corvette is probably one way they can justify the cost to design and build and amortize it before it trickles down to other vehicles.

Look at all the Ford ecoboosts in so many models. They don't really need em, but as a company they decided it needed to be there for some markets so they spread it around as much as possible. We have no idea if this small v8 may end up in 2019 Cadillacs or whatever. In the meantime, the finances need to be planned and verified, and design needs to happen, and soon it has to get put into something. This vision of a small v8 corvette may be as much for 7-8 years from now as it is for say, 2014.

The whole Ecoboost deal is making for a lot of money and have people buying their cars in some cases just because of the engine.

I really am not a AWD fan but I see it as an option at some point again it has it's fans and will attract buyers.

I would really like to see the car get a little smaller and lighter. This would add performance an engine could not add. Imagine a 2900-3000 pound car. This would enhance handling to greater levels and improve braking to a retina detaching level.

The new Mclaren is I believe at 2800 pounds and does some great things.

[hyperv6]

>>"The small block provided enough power in the 60's to do what nearly all Impala owners ever needed to do. Unless they were towing a big trailer or were running a special weight class in drag racing the engine was more a novalty than anything else. Don't make it anymore than it was."<<

What am I making it out to be?? A 3800 lb Impala with a 195 HP 283 certainly got people from Point A to Point B.... but saying 'that's enough' is the same as people proclaiming a 275-HP DTS 'does all it's needed to do' in it's segment in 2011. Might as well just stick with the 155 HP I6 for the Impala- not much power difference between 155 & 195.

Point is; Chevy exploded once they delivered V-8 power, AND they had the BBC on the shelf- offering it in the Impala was easy, natural, in demand, and GAVE RESULTS. BIG difference between a 195 hp SBC and a 385 HP BBC. And again; it's the results at play here, not the buyer showing around the window sticker to let other's know how much power he bought. When you have to open the hood of your sports car and wave people over to show them your giant, wide, heavy DOHC heads, hoping they'll forget how your ride was slower vs. a Corvette, you've lost twice.

>>"Ferrari has no issue, Jaguar has no issue BMW has no issue, Aston has no issue Mclaren has no issue in dealing with the power, weight or handling. "<<

Ferrari has very little model heritage to pay tribute to (but plenty of brand heritage); they change models constantly. Also- the per car mark-up is so extraordinary- they always have ample development money. Jag has no sports car. But BMW has very real weight issues- the 3 was 2200 lbs when it came out, the current M3 is 3700. It needs to lose AT LEAST 1000 lbs. immediately. Another discussion.

>>""De-tuning the power with a heavier engine & worse handling is NOT going to raise the appeal ante'" Where do you really get this stuff?"<<

Repeating myself- I used the example mentioned above for comparison; the nissan TT V-6 with DOHCs. Less power, heavier weight.

>>"Hell where were you when they added the weight to the ZR1 with the supercharger."<<

You're disabling your position with this one. The ZR1 gained 273 lbs (with a LOT of hi-po equipment; not just the SC'er), but it also gained 133 HP and major TRQ, it didn't lose HP & TRQ; it got MUCH QUICKER. As long as the performance increases, weight gain is basically immaterial.

When it came out, the ZR1 was putting around 535 HP to the wheels, where the GTR was putting down only 420 (later increased).

Again, for family sedans this is not overly important, but for exotic sports cars, results are everything. Results is the only reason to have an exotic sports car, overlooking their many many compromises.

Sure; likely Corvette engineers could make a more powerful DOHC motor, but the compromises are very real, and at the current IBC's 505 hp / 470 lb-ft- is it really worth it? Corvette does not 'need' a DOHC offering as far as performance & being competitive goes, far from it, and in that there's no comparitive DOHC motor already on the shelf and money being as tight as it is, it's better spent elsewhere.

By the same token and logic you've presented here (semantics) : the GTR should offer a IBC motor for the fans of that configuration.... surely you support that, right?

You really have hit the kool aide.

No the GTR should not offer the IBC as only people willing to accept it are Vette owners and pony car owners. IBC fans are in the minority today with limited models. Logical or not. The only sports car in the world that can really get away with a IBC V8 is the Vette. But you should already know that.

It is not likely that Vette engineers could make a proper DOHC engine. The fact is they would not do it unless it was as powerful or more powerful. Again offering it only give the Vette more options and the ability to attract new buyers. As you can see by last years sales they can never turn away any buyers as their sales ebb and flow.

I can also see you have no real concept about companies like Ferrari. They are nothing but Heritage. While they do change the names of the cars they are generally upgrades of the model it is replacing no different than Chevy does with the C4-C5-C6. They are not also affraid to mess with some of the sacred things in the name of performance and image. Things like the gated shifters are going away for more advanced systems.

Either way we are just going to have to agree to disagree. If they should ever choose what to do the DHOC sales will prove who is right here.

The questions that needs answered is if your view is so right why is it only Chevy really has chosen this path. Nearly all other companies have gone the other route with out even offering IBC. Why are they all so wrong and you are so right?

The ZR1 may well be the best supercar bargain in the world, while at the same time being as mechanically sophisticated as any of the best supercars from Europe or Asia. People have complained that an engine based on the half-century old small block V8 is a travesty in the 21st century. Those people don't have a leg to stand on. The LS9 may share basic dimensions and architecture with a 1955 Chevy V8, but it has no common parts and has nothing to be ashamed of.

~ Autoblog

We all know this to be true here. Now convince the general public!

[hyperv6]

911 has awd, gtr does, r8 does also, i think buyers of hyper cars like that are expecting those options of AWD on the sheet...

AWD in fact is the most important performance item that needs to be added (as an option) on the Vette. TRACTION = better acceleration and handling.

I have a feeling it is coming.

The new v8 is probably something that is foreseen to be needed in world markets. I would also guess that perhaps Lotus may be involved. I could see this thing being crammed into a Lotus. In this regard, it makes sense to get it in cars, the Corvette is probably one way they can justify the cost to design and build and amortize it before it trickles down to other vehicles.

Look at all the Ford ecoboosts in so many models. They don't really need em, but as a company they decided it needed to be there for some markets so they spread it around as much as possible. We have no idea if this small v8 may end up in 2019 Cadillacs or whatever. In the meantime, the finances need to be planned and verified, and design needs to happen, and soon it has to get put into something. This vision of a small v8 corvette may be as much for 7-8 years from now as it is for say, 2014.

The whole Ecoboost deal is making for a lot of money and have people buying their cars in some cases just because of the engine.

I really am not a AWD fan but I see it as an option at some point again it has it's fans and will attract buyers.

I would really like to see the car get a little smaller and lighter. This would add performance an engine could not add. Imagine a 2900-3000 pound car. This would enhance handling to greater levels and improve braking to a retina detaching level.

The new Mclaren is I believe at 2800 pounds and does some great things.

I agree people are not expecting as an option and a high tech advancement. I just am not a fan of it as some others. It would be ok to offer it as an option just as the DOHC engine. That way you spread the appeal of the car.

Let the buyers choose.

[Camino LS6]

I don't think I've ever seen such stubborn support for an engine architecture that has no advantage.

Further discussion seems to be as pointless as the proposed DOHC engine itself.

[hyperv6]

I don't think I've ever seen such stubborn support for an engine architecture that has no advantage.

Further discussion seems to be as pointless as the proposed DOHC engine itself.

Just because you see no advantages does not mean they are not there. Too many MFG are showing a lot of support for DOHC engines in their numbers and investment in them. Just might be you just are not seeing the whole picture. What is pointless to you is not pointless to those who build cars.

My whole point is what have you got to lose or fear if GM offers both. You get your ICB engine and the potential of an engine that will bring in more money with as good or better performance depending ont he tune. Who loses here?

I like both engines and see room for both but find it odd how only the two companies that went Chapter 11 have done anything with CIB while other have spent countless other have spent $$$$$$. They must be making money some where with this to justify the investment. Liked em or not DHOC are not going away.

I too remember many of the same people who poo poo'e the use of the Ecoboost TT V6 in the trucks. With sales as they are I would never underestimate the public on what they want or will accept.

[balthazar]

If the "only" demographic that goes for IBC is the Corvette pool (and you are totally assuming it's IBC that made them purchase in the first place), the question WRT the GTR offering a newer tech IBC option or not would be answered immediately on which valve actuation technology has more buyers; the Corvette or the GTR.

Naturally, people do not buy cars based on such singular criteria, or according to theory here, the GTR would be outselling the Corvette 10:1.

I don't think I've ever seen such stubborn support for an engine architecture that has no advantage.

Further discussion seems to be as pointless as the proposed DOHC engine itself.

True- Too many here always believe the grass is greener over the fence/border, dismissing the grass here because it's 'here grass'. These would be the first group to damn the abandonment of the Corvette's heritage when it didn't show any bump in volume (as if the Corvette chasing volume was in anyway an advisable approach).

[Z-06]

If the "only" demographic that goes for IBC is the Corvette pool (and you are totally assuming it's IBC that made them purchase in the first place), the question WRT the GTR offering a newer tech IBC option or not would be answered immediately on which valve actuation technology has more buyers; the Corvette or the GTR.

Naturally, people do not buy cars based on such singular criteria, or according to theory here, the GTR would be outselling the Corvette 10:1.

I don't think I've ever seen such stubborn support for an engine architecture that has no advantage.

Further discussion seems to be as pointless as the proposed DOHC engine itself.

True- Too many here always believe the grass is greener over the fence/border, dismissing the grass here because it's 'here grass'. These would be the first group to damn the abandonment of the Corvette's heritage when it didn't show any bump in volume (as if the Corvette chasing volume was in anyway an advisable approach).

I would like to reiterate, again, that none of these armchair critics still get who the real customers of Corvette are.

[hyperv6]

If the "only" demographic that goes for IBC is the Corvette pool (and you are totally assuming it's IBC that made them purchase in the first place), the question WRT the GTR offering a newer tech IBC option or not would be answered immediately on which valve actuation technology has more buyers; the Corvette or the GTR.

Naturally, people do not buy cars based on such singular criteria, or according to theory here, the GTR would be outselling the Corvette 10:1.

I don't think I've ever seen such stubborn support for an engine architecture that has no advantage.

Further discussion seems to be as pointless as the proposed DOHC engine itself.

True- Too many here always believe the grass is greener over the fence/border, dismissing the grass here because it's 'here grass'. These would be the first group to damn the abandonment of the Corvette's heritage when it didn't show any bump in volume (as if the Corvette chasing volume was in anyway an advisable approach).

I would like to reiterate, again, that none of these armchair critics still get who the real customers of Corvette are.

I have seen the performance market fundamentally change in the last 18 years. While there are some tried and true areas where the pushrod engine is still dominate it no longer has the dominate lock on the market. Today I deal with a market that is now inclusive to V8, V6 and 4 cylinder engines. I see Single IBC to SOHC and DOHC. Turbo's in the past were novalties and today if you don't carry a lne of intercoolers and other turbo accessories you are losing money in a growing market.

Years ago it was Ford Chrysler and Chevy and nothing else but today it is now all makes types and models.

While most Vette owners will vote Pushrods many would show interest in a DOHC engine. Also if GM plans to push Chevy as a world brand they will have to offer things in other markets that may not be the first choice here. No they don't have to sell the Vette overseas but if they want to be taken seriously as a world brand they will have to sell their best world wide.

The auto market is changing and GM is playing catch up. Also yes they are doing ok selling their 15K-25K Vettes a year but if they can sell more world wide then why not.

I am well aware of what most Vette owners like and or want. I am also aware of what how GM wants to grow Chevy as a world brand.

Lets face it the loss of the pop up lights was startling to many Vette owners. They were lost for several reasons. Yes GM messed with a sacred cow but in time most have accepted it and the cars keep right on selling.

GM could just keep on selling the same things and keep the same group of owners. But as the youth of today grow older most don't give a dam about IBC let alone in many cases V8 engines. GM has tried too often not to mess with change and made money. An example is the Buick Le Sabre did fine in the 70's and 80's as it sold to a group that came back over the years. But they never appealed to the younger buyers and saw it hurt sales.

I see many areas in life where traditions are great but if they don't find ways to adapt they tend to in time die. Just look at many old time things that have not transformed to the present markets and are either dying or are dead.

The fact remains as long as they offer both engines it will satisfy most in the market traditional buyers and new converts. In no way would endorse a complete purge of the IBC engine but there is no reason to oppose a intro of a modern engine with equal or better power.

With the heavy investment in the Vette plant I suspect that they plan to go more global. They did not make the XLR just because it felt good, they built it to use up the extra capacity at the plant. It just was not the right kind of car and was in many ways to close to the Vette.

If the DHOC engine is as bad as many make it the engine will die or just go on with Cadillac. The way I see it if the IBC is as good as you say why would you get so worked up if they offer one. It would die on it's own.

Or are some affraid it may in time replace the IBC?

No matter I just see it worth the shot if they continue to offer both engines. If they do go more global they will need it. The rest of the world see the sports car market a little different than we do here. To survive in the future most companies will have to be global with lines of vehicles that are nearly idential less a few market tuning issues. The Cruze is only an example of where they are going.

[Potluck]

Just what I want.... more complications, less ability to customize, more cost, all just so I can go slower.

sign me up.

[z28luvr01]

Even the most stubborn import humpers do respect the small block, otherwise people wouldn't be stuffing an LS1 into a

,

, or a

.

Hey,there's an aftermarket outfit that sells LS1 conversion kits for E36 BMWs. Apaprently it's a popular thing to do.

The HEMI and Viper V10 are OHV too. Just saying.

No, I don't think the DOHC motor would make the Corvette any better, but again, I don't see the harm in offering it as an option. Keep the traditional Corvette buyers happy AND add some new ones.

[cletus8269]

waaaay late to the party but uh if they wanted to go smaller motor and boost why not sling the 5.5 corvette motors for racing in there? after all they make em right there with the others...

[Robert Hall]

Even the most stubborn import humpers do respect the small block, otherwise people wouldn't be stuffing an LS1 into a

,

, or a

.

Hey,there's an aftermarket outfit that sells LS1 conversion kits for E36 BMWs. Apaprently it's a popular thing to do.

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

[Drew Dowdell]

Even the most stubborn import humpers do respect the small block, otherwise people wouldn't be stuffing an LS1 into a

,

, or a

.

Hey,there's an aftermarket outfit that sells LS1 conversion kits for E36 BMWs. Apaprently it's a popular thing to do.

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

[Robert Hall]

That's just stupid and wrong on so many levels...

LS-1 Horsepower in a lightweight 318i body for a lot less than a M3 motor would cost... and he probably also lowered his maintenance costs. I see nothing wrong here.

Such cross breeding is fundamentally wrong and beneath contempt. You wouldn't put a Toyota engine in your Oldsmobile, would you?

[hyperv6]

Anyone notice with the many thing GM has reaffirmerd this week about the importance of being global. Cadillacs being built overseas and the importance of Chevrolet being a global brand.

It is all about appeal and marketing to the global market anymore no matter if it is a Sonic or a Corvette. While it will effect us here in the state is some ways positive and some ways negitive it is coming. The economic model anymore for most companies it to be one compny globally and not offer a totally different car in each market.

I think that is why there is talk of two engines. I could see the 32V as the primary export to suit the other markets but what the hell off it as an option here too. If you have it use it.

There again I would expect the perfromance to be nothing less than the new LS engine or what ever they call it. If it were slower the Vette team would not do it.