There IS replacement for displacement
 

I cant see this turning out very well....

I don't know, presuming it's well executed of course, this could really reinvigorate the Vette and broaden its appeal world-wide, well beyond the mid-life-crises-male demographic that seems to be the image of the current Vette.

In a way, it would be a return of sorts to the original concept or ideal of the Vette, as distinct from a particular model or technology from the past. In other words, the Vette as GM's technology leader and rolling test bed. While the Vette has done this in specific elements to some degree, overall, the car as a whole is rather rooted/mired in the past in a lot of major ways. Of course, it's always a tricky balance between maintaining a heritage vs. being relevant in the present (queue Porsche 911 discussion...).

A revvy hi-tech small turbo V8 would be an interesting step in this direction, rather like a Ferrari 458 or even more so, the McLaren MP4. Neither of these cars has been accused of lacking either performance or excitement. Do bear in mind that it sounds like they'll retain some yestertech pushrod V8s. Even less weight and most importantly, an interior not styled by Tupperware, will go far into updating the Vette. I would also hope it would serve as a platform for a DCT, which is becoming almost requisite for any serious world-class performance car these days.

While I agree when regarding the general public. I disagree that the car could turn out badly. There is a lot of potential here. I don't know why they don't just to a TT 4.0L. Heck, even consult Lotus like they did with the C4 ZR1. The potential is endless. It could truly change the brand. With the current iterations of the Vette, they are so skyward reaching and achieving a lot of respect. At the same time it has almost become completely over blown from a design and engineering standpoint. Dry sump supercharged V8 in that modified C6 body/chassis, really at this point GM has no where to go.

Think about it. An American supercar for the masses. It obviously isn't going to sell because look at the comments of the link above. This is the Corvette loving public. GM is either over reaching with this idea or it's trying to completely change its image of the Vette. Which isn't really a bad thing. Do you know how badly I'd love a Vector W4 powered by a Corvette engine?? Or think on the DeTomaso Pantera level. It's obvious the possibilities are endless. Problem is the most cost effective models, Acura NSX and Ford GT had tough times here in the states. I'd rather have a Ford GT than any other mid engined car. Why? That's a lot to go into here.

But I still think GM should either press on with this idea and going balls crazy with the idea. Or just tone it back a bit and get a grip on where they are going with styling and overall vehicle definition.

CERV
http://image.motortrend.com/f/classi...comparison.jpg

Agreed, I bet it ends up doing as well as a certain 4 cam LT4 engined vette did some years ago.

Thats sorta Corvette's schtick now, affordable supercar performance. They just need to work on the low-rent interior and getting great numbers with a little more finesse and by finesse, I dont mean slavishly copying the M3's formula, 4.0 liter V8 and all.

I think the biggest problem is reliability of that engine. I just don't think it will be able to last as long as current 6.2L and 7.0L, those can last forever.

Tru'dat, it would be highly stressed engine. Which makes me wonder why GM would consider going this route? Is it because GM powertrains are considered old-tech by alot of people? You've got people that scoff at GM's use of a single cam and pushrods with two-valve layout. From a cost, power and packaging perspective the engine certianly works and they respond exceptionally well to modification.

Engine 1 is a small displacement high revving forced induction. It has to be revved to the max everywhere it goes. The forced induction runs the internal tempertures high as more heat is produced in a smaller space.

Engine 2 has large displacment and is able to produce enough torque while keeping the revs low most of the time. The heat burned from the fuel is spread over a greater area so runs cooler.

Large displacement has spends most of its time running far below its design limitations. Small displacement must always be run closer to its design limitations.

The trade off is...
Small displacement buzzes down the highway at or near its max efficency point gaining it more miles per gallon but at the cost of longevity.

Large displacemet rumbles down the highway way below its max and so at a lower efficency. It burns more gas but will last double or tripple the miles.

So what do you want to spend your money on? Fuel or repairs?

Very well put. Sure you could get the same power from both but for how long. More displacement means more torque down low where most driving occurs. Therefore stressing the engine less

In the reality of it all, I agree with what everyone is saying. In truth, the high torque low revving engine is kind of the saving grace with Corvette. It keeps production cost down, keeping the Corvette still somewhat an attainable car.

I hate to say it but the formula works. Everyone loves a Ferrari but even if I could afford one, I'd rather have something else because it's such a volatile car. Upkeep is expensive, fuel is expensive, everything is expensive. Don't get me wrong, the flat plane engines would be exhilarating. But having sex with a supermodel is still sex. Just like racing cars, the C5 and C6R have motivated their cars into some good wins over the years. My point is that just like in the 60's American V8's power the cars through the finish line no worse than the super exotics. That 505 Hp Z06 isn't horsepower on some separate scale. I know that the engine is what makes a car sometimes, BMW is proof of this. So is Lotus.

I guess maybe GM wants to capitalize on the green and try to seem more efficient, but I don't know, it doesn't seem like much of a win in my book. I am optimistic about a future with mid engined twin turbo V8 powered Vettes, but I'm not that realistic about it. It just sounds awesome in theory. But with the price of the ZR1, GM will soon find out that mixing that formula with a high tech V8 will just end up putting you in Porsche territory. We all know what Porsche drivers are like. Even though we'd all drive the piss out of one.

The fastest cars in the world have a lot of engine under the hood.

Generic statement is generic?

But it makes me wonder if long term high mileage reliability has been solved. They should know people aren't going to buy a car where the engine is done after 50-70,000 miles

Maybe referring to cars like Bugatti Veyron, SSC Areo, Mclaren f1, Lamboghini Aventador.

Smallest engine in any of those is 6.1L in the Mclaren F1.

Just saying that in some cases they have two relatively large engines glued together to make it "the fastest car in the world"

technically there is no replacement for displacement, unless you are talking a static hp number.

You can make 400hp one of three ways, large displacment low revs, small displacement high revs, small displacment with boost.

Title: "There IS replacement for displacement"

Wrong. There is a substitute for a specific displacement by using smaller displacement with forced induction, but more displacement with same forced induction will always triumph.

So there is really no replacement for displacement when you get down to it, yeah?

/twisted logic. Funtimes. :fear: :)

jeez, tough crowd :)
didn't mean the title to be literal in that sense. just a play on the famous tag line.
the famous high displacement engines in corvettes are being REPLACED with less displacement engines

Well the zr1 started it with a 6.2? I think and boosted vs 7.0 in the z06

Not exactly.

"Significantly, Corvette won’t abandon its more classic powertrain roots entirely. There will be several different types of engines offered for the C7, including a more classic, big-block OHV V-8 designed to appeal to traditionalists" (from that very article)

They are just going to have another option as I see it. I'm good with the reduction in CI if FI is added. I would whine, cry, B*#$%, and complain if they went down to a 4.whatever DOHC NA engine. I like my power delivered just as I have since I got the HP bug. The Idea of a big block with LS advantages is very appealing to me at this point as well.