why did chevy use an 6.2L V8 in the zr1?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marcellus H
  • Start date Start date
M

Marcellus H

Guest
Why not the 7.0L and just add renforcements and less boost?

would have been the samrt thing.

I guessing the ls7 (7.0) was iron

and the ls9 (6.2) was Al and less wait

But doesn't The Supercharge add 1.0L any ways??

I know a deccent amouat about cars, Buts it seems the LS9 was an better decision
Thanx for the answers, I still don't buy the too much boost thing because the ls7 had 505 Na at the crank right, The would need at least half the boost of what they have in in the zr1 Less boost = better relabilty i think it had more to do with Red tape and goverment regulations and for as much power as it has it does get good gas miles

Now on to the real questio

ZR1 VS. Mclaren F1
Extremly close power rise 400 pound weight diffrences

but .20 plus skidpad so we will see
 
A number of factors went into this. First of all a 427 (7 liter) is a big block (or a very highly modified small block). These are not practical in cars today because of gas mileage, weight, and cooling issues. I doubt GM will ever put one in another production car (not truck) unless this new muscle car 'era' goes off the deep end.

The 6.2 for the corvette is actually a smaller engine in terms of big powerplants, it's a smaller stroke/bore than the 383. A supercharger doesn't add displacement. The LS9 engine is very impressive, on the bottom end of the engine it has a square style crank housing and mains - like V type engines from before the late 50's. The main caps are actually 6 bolt which makes the block much stronger. This helps hold the rotating assembly in and allow for more hp but adds to the weight of the block. The block is comparatively heavier to older style small blocks because of the extra mass, but it makes up for it because it's an aluminum block. Gen. 1 small blocks can be ordered in aluminum with 4 bolt mains or splayed mains, making them lighter and almost as strong as the LS9.

The weight that matters more is the rotating inertia, the moving parts of the engine, where the LS9 outclasses just about anything out there. The supercharger helps too :) . Start to look up chevy engines, you'll be surprised to find 500hp/tq can be had out of a 5,000$ naturally aspirated engine if you do it yourself. 8 grand can give you an engine that shames the LS9.
 
I would guess the decision was based on weight, mpg, reliability, emissions, and cost. The government makes it so hard to design a car that is good on gas, and clean burning, and makes a ton of power. I'm sure this was a compromise for now.

GM won't give us everything at once, either. They have to design something better for the next year or model, and the 7.0L engine may just be next.
 
They could make more boost with the smaller engine. The 6.2 is also better on gas and lighter. Plus chevy was having problems with the crankshafts in the 7.0 and the high boost.
 
Back
Top