Been a While, Pics of the Car (56K Die In A Fire)

Come here to discuss the performance side of our vehicles.
User avatar
Penguin4x4
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:24 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast/Piney Woods

Postby Penguin4x4 » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:04 pm

Big Mack wrote:Yes, but it's at significant expense. Check out some of the HP numbers from MB or BMW or Lexus with smaller engines, and you'll see better numbers with more fuel economy. The rule that there is no replacement for displacement may work for some, but the world is changing. The new S550 is 5.5L, but pushes out 382HP. The BMW 750 is 360, but the 760 puts out more power (438) and STILL gets better fuel economy (not by much, but still there is a difference). The new Lexus LS460 is only 4.6L, and it's 380. The tuned version for the GS460 will probably get to the 400 level as well. Oh...and it gets better gas mileage than any of them, big surprise.

Big Mack


Yeah but don't they also require premium fuel (at least a few of those do)? So you're getting better mileage but that savings goes down a good bit (probably a good bit, lemme check some numbers again, could be insignificant) because you have to use 93 instead of 86? Possibly?

(don't get me wrong, I love all cars/trucks/suvs equally. Except for FWD models :cwm11: )
User avatar
Big Mack
Posts: 4622
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: Phoen-town, USA

Postby Big Mack » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:23 pm

Penguin4x4 wrote:Yeah but don't they also require premium fuel (at least a few of those do)? So you're getting better mileage but that savings goes down a good bit (probably a good bit, lemme check some numbers again, could be insignificant) because you have to use 93 instead of 86? Possibly?

(don't get me wrong, I love all cars/trucks/suvs equally. Except for FWD
models :cwm11: )


Where do you get 86 octane gas?? And the highest in my area is 91. Either way, it's an extra $2-3 ($4 if you have a 20 gallon tank, since premium is $0.20 extra a gallon) per fillup. Now, if you take it at highway mileage, the LS460 would get you 9MPG more than the Cobalt. So, if your tank is 20 gallons in both (just for numbers), you just went 180 more miles for that $4. Could you drive 180 miles on 1.5 gallons of gas? No, you'd have to buy an extra 13 gallons. Now you see why fuel economy is so important to consider. Even if you went to city miles, with the Cobalt getting 14 and the LS getting 19, that's 100 extra miles, or 7 gallons of gas in the Cobalt. Can you get 7 gallons of gas for $4? If so, I want in!! :)

Big Mack
User avatar
John
Posts: 8992
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:00 pm
Contact:

Postby John » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:29 pm

86 is kind of odd...usually it is 87 min, we have a few different fuels here that push 91, 93 is what I usually run in my old vehicles...
User avatar
k-mart
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 10:21 pm
Location: VA
Contact:

Postby k-mart » Wed Jan 31, 2007 3:50 pm

Big Mack wrote:First off, it's not an "argument", it's a discussion :p

One typo in a post that large wasn't so bad. :)



I'd be excited to see those numbers reproduced on a wide scale. I would venture to say that your performance is exceptional, given the rating of 17-18 city and 25-27 (coupe and convertible). But then, you're not basing any of your comparisons on their performance, right? You're basing them strictly on their ratings. Not entirely fair, but let's move on.

Let the excitement abound! http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1610817&highlight=mileage


Where did you find these erroneous numbers? I show (from Edmunds) that it's rated at 20/30. That's higher than your Vette, BTW. True enough, the weight is very close, but the engine difference is tremendous. I tried to keep my comparisons close to size, but let's move on again.

http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/M/z4mcoupe/techdata Straight from the BMW site. Check emunds for the EEEMMMMMMMMM Coupe. :cwm18:



The SL550 is not really a fair comparison, as it's not really in the sports car class. It's a roadster, but I digress. It's also over 1000 pounds MORE than your Vette. Fair? Hardly. Why not compare the CLK that is a little lighter (but not much) and is a coupe that is more designed for sport. Don't think that's fair? Let's look at the numbers, maybe you'll agree my comparison is a bit closer than yours -- Vette (CLK) length: 179.7 (183.2), wheelbase 104.5 (106.9), weight 3246 (3719). The SLK is 178.5, 100.8, and 4065.3 lbs. I think you'll agree that the CLK is closer to the Vette. If you wanted to step up to the SLK55, that one's even worse, at a hefty 4318.9 lbs. Ah, but comparing the CLK makes it a better discussion. Here's why - the CLK gas mileage, with the same 5.5L engine as the SLK gets 16 and 23, respectively. Oh, but it's 500 lbs more than the Vette. Kinda makes 17 and 27 from your Vette not look very remarkable. If we were to take the increases we saw from dropping 600 lbs (SLK down to CLK), 2MPG city and 1MPG, and tack them on, we would be at 18 and 24. Yes, not the same as the Vette, but the CLK also would have more power by over 10% (382 vs 345), more torque by over 10% (391 vs 350), and still have a smaller engine (5.5L vs 5.7L) than your Vette. One last little tidbit...the torque from the 5.5L comes a full 1600 RPM below where your Vette makes it's highest number. And 2000 RPM below where the brand new Z06 makes it's number, which is also lower (it has 385). Hmmm...did you say crafty??

MB doesn't exactly make a car that competes directly with the 'Vette, so I did the best I could. Its funny that you mention weight so often because an all-aluminum LS1 weighs less than the 2.4L I4 in my 240sx. Smaller doesn't always mean displacement. I'd also venture to say that the Benz motor contribute to its higher curb weight. We all also know what a heavy nose does to a RWD car, don't we? Peak torque may come in lower in the RPM range, but the real question is where in the RPM range torque begins to build. I'd be curious to see a dyno sheet of said motors. The Z06 hasn't had 385hp since '01 then from '02-'04 it got bumped up to 405hp. The BRAND NEW Z06 actually has 505hp from a 7.0L (gasp) motor with the same (smaller than MB) EXTERNAL dimensions as the 5.7L LS1 that is in my car.

Hmm...the Lexus seems to be close, except it's 300 lbs more and 2 full liters less engine. Ah, but it makes 306HP from that 3.5L engine while still getting better gas mileage ratings than your lighter Vette. But, why not examine the new LS460? At 4332.1 lbs, it's the heaviest dog in the pack, but yet it gets better ratings than your Vette for gas mileage in the city (19), and the same on the highway (27). Oh, but it's only 4.6L, and it makes more power than your Vette. Yes, not a sports car in any sense of the word, but shouldn't the TREMENDOUS weight advantage of 1100 lbs translate to vastly better fuel economy for you? Or would you prefer to look at the new Z06 that lost another 111 lbs from yours and is rated at only 1MPG more on the highway? 5 more HP and 18 more lb/ft of torque, but it's a full 1.1L more than the Lexus. Hmmm...crafty indeed. What do you think might happen when that engine makes it into the GS and SC's? Bet it gets pretty damn interesting when the 500lb lighter SC gets 400 HP (that's the projection when the 4.6L moves to those bodies) and 400lb/ft of torque. Talk about a far more fair comparison, the SC weighs more, but is 1.4 inches shorter (WB) and 1.2 inches shorter (length) than the Vette.

At least the IS350 is a sporting car. You're talking apples and oranges here, mack. But I'll bite. Gear the 'Vette as tall and give it 8-speeds and lets see what happens. And again, the new Z06 is 505hp. Quite a bit more than your Lexus and look at that, MPG ratings are quite close. Oh, and it will do a mid 11 1/4 mile and go 200mph. Crafty americans.


I wasn't speaking solely on peak HP, I was speaking on the fact that newer engine technologies are bringing things up in the fuel economy and HP range, while bringing size down. Heavier and safer (not comparing it to the Vette per se, just in general), and yet they get more miles and more power. Not a bad trade off.



I would whole-heartedly disagree, and I proved it. Your 5.7L engine makes less power than the new 4.6L Lexus engine, and with worse rated fuel economy. I have to go off rated because the Lexus might, like you've observed with your Vette, have better performance. True enough, the 5.7L is an older engine, but the 6.0L Chevy V8 in the Cobalt is newer, and gets horrendous gas mileage while making roughly the same power. I'd gladly trade 20HP for 10 (or more) MPG on the freeway. Oh, but take a look at something before I go...the Lexus weighs 600 lbs more than the Cobalt, but still gets that. Damn those crafty Japanese...

Big Mack


That Lexus is nice, but it also costs $61k, is slower, surely handles worse, and at the rate Lexus's recalls are going will be in the shop quite a bit.

So, you're telling me that you'd rather have a motor that's heavier, physically larger, more expensive to repair, and gets nearly identical mileage just because its where technology is headed?

I still don't get the displacement arguement when talking about a LSX motor. Its physically SMALLER than the majority of its smaller displacement competitors. I like lots of puddin in a small cup, not a little puddin in a huge cup. But that's just me. :)
zilch
User avatar
Penguin4x4
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:24 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast/Piney Woods

Postby Penguin4x4 » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:11 pm

User avatar
John
Posts: 8992
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 1:00 pm
Contact:

Postby John » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:48 pm

Checked, here it's normally 87 & 91-92, or 87 & 89 & 91-92...Non-oxygenated gas is usually 93-96 (more if you choose a higher ehtanol blend), and there are some other very select fuels that push those numbers...E-85 is like 116ish...
User avatar
X-OvrDistortion
New Member
Posts: 10182
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Blacker then the blackest black times infinity
Contact:

Postby X-OvrDistortion » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:56 pm

I run 110 octane all the time!!
User avatar
Big Mack
Posts: 4622
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 1999 12:00 pm
Location: Phoen-town, USA

Postby Big Mack » Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:28 pm

k-mart wrote:One typo in a post that large wasn't so bad. :)


True, and I didn't see that pesky "M" when I wrote my reply about the Z4, so we're even. :)





I went there, and I am still not excited. Most of the owners there have modified their cars, and most of them weren't reporting the high numbers you were. Better than the rated numbers? Sure, for some. Not for all, and who is to say that the ratings for the Lex, BMW, or MB aren't low as well?


k-mart wrote:MB doesn't exactly make a car that competes directly with the 'Vette, so I did the best I could. Its funny that you mention weight so often because an all-aluminum LS1 weighs less than the 2.4L I4 in my 240sx. Smaller doesn't always mean displacement. I'd also venture to say that the Benz motor contribute to its higher curb weight. We all also know what a heavy nose does to a RWD car, don't we? Peak torque may come in lower in the RPM range, but the real question is where in the RPM range torque begins to build. I'd be curious to see a dyno sheet of said motors. The Z06 hasn't had 385hp since '01 then from '02-'04 it got bumped up to 405hp. The BRAND NEW Z06 actually has 505hp from a 7.0L (gasp) motor with the same (smaller than MB) EXTERNAL dimensions as the 5.7L LS1 that is in my car.


I went off what I saw on the Edmunds page about the Z06, and the comparison between a 7L engine and a 3.5L engine seems even more ludicrous to me. BTW, for what it's worth, the new 4.6L from Lexus is all aluminum, too. As is the 5.5L from MB. ;) I'd venture to say that their weight is probably not what you think it is, but I cannot locate any comparisons nor specs about it. If you have more than an assumption to go on, I'm open to reviewing it. As you can see, I'm not picking on anyone, if the facts are there, they're there.

k-mart wrote:At least the IS350 is a sporting car. You're talking apples and oranges here, mack. But I'll bite. Gear the 'Vette as tall and give it 8-speeds and lets see what happens. And again, the new Z06 is 505hp. Quite a bit more than your Lexus and look at that, MPG ratings are quite close. Oh, and it will do a mid 11 1/4 mile and go 200mph. Crafty americans.


Gear it as tall? Give it an 8 speed? The IS350's final drive ratio is 3.727, which is not a huge difference in gearing. And it's a 6 speed (manual or sequential auto). The LS460's 8-speed gives it a final drive of 2.937, but the 8th gear is close to the Vette, at 0.685 vs. 0.56. They both still end up with 2 overdrive gears, but the Lexus initial gear is huge at 4.596. And keep in mind, the Lexus runs to 60 in less than 5.5 seconds, so it's pretty nimble for such a big car. Also keep in mind that the Lexus still weighs 1200 lbs MORE than the Z06, which is a HUGE advantage, or at least, it should be. And remember as well, you're comparing a 7.0L vs. a 4.6L. Power per liter? Chevy: 72.14. Lexus: 82.61. Hmmm...crafty Americans or crafty Japanese? Jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.


k-mart wrote:That Lexus is nice, but it also costs $61k, is slower, surely handles worse, and at the rate Lexus's recalls are going will be in the shop quite a bit.


It's not a sports car, so it's not designed to plant your *** in the seat as much as the Vette is. Honestly, I've never been a fan of the Vettes because I don't like small cars (interior wise). I have driven a couple, and the ride is horrendous to me. But those are personal opinions, everyone has them. As for quality, however, surely you're not saying that Lexus has less than Chevy? Perhaps you've not seen the following:

Please note that Lexus took the TOP dependability award for the 11th consecutive year.

2004 shows Lexus with 162 defects versus Chevy with 262

Please note who won the top premium sporty car segment, and who was the top again...12 years running

And also , please note how many Lexus' made the top ranking in 2004 and 2006, which would be 3. Chevy? 1.

2005? 3 to 3, but interestingly, the Vette wins none in the past 3 years.

And if you really want to dig deep on the numbers, why is it that Chevrolet's quality actually went DOWN from 2005 to 2006? The industry average improved by 10 full points, yet Chevy went from above the line at 232 to below it at 241. They seem to be moving in the wrong direction (as I've said many times).

Where did Lexus place? Oh, that's right -- at the top. Again. And their numbers went up from 139 to 136. That's 105 more problems in Chevy's than in Lexus'. Darn those Japanese for making a better product. Doesn't give them a right to charge more for it, though, right? Aren't you supposed to get filet mignon for the price of a chuck steak? And no, I'm not comparing a Vette to a chuck steak, just saying that you're actually getting something for the price, they're not just charging more and not giving the customer any benefits.

k-mart wrote:So, you're telling me that you'd rather have a motor that's heavier, physically larger, more expensive to repair, and gets nearly identical mileage just because its where technology is headed?

I still don't get the displacement arguement when talking about a LSX motor. Its physically SMALLER than the majority of its smaller displacement competitors. I like lots of puddin in a small cup, not a little puddin in a huge cup. But that's just me. :)


I have no measurements of the size of the blocks for the 4.6L or the 7.0L, but if you can show me actual numbers, like I said, I'm open. I find it very hard to believe that an engine with 2.4 more liters if displacement wouldn't have a bigger footprint, especially given that both are aluminum alloy blocks. For me, however, I'm still not sold on the argument that displacement is all there is. And truthfully, I'd love to see what kind of mileage the Lexus motor would get if it were in a car that only weighed 3115 lbs. I would bet it would be a pretty significant gain, given that it's pushing almost 25% more weight and still achieving decent (let's be real, 19 in the city isn't making either of them gas sippers) mileage.

Oh, and as for puddin, I don't care about the size of the cup, I just like a lot of it, so we're on the same page there. :D Probably part of why I don't fit into a Vette, but I digress...

Big Mack
User avatar
Penguin4x4
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:24 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast/Piney Woods

Postby Penguin4x4 » Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:53 pm

Image

obligatory

:D
User avatar
k-mart
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 10:21 pm
Location: VA
Contact:

Postby k-mart » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:37 pm

Notice that I'm too lazy to worry about this whole quoting thing. :)

Big Mack wrote:True, and I didn't see that pesky "M" when I wrote my reply about the Z4, so we're even. :)


In yo face! :cwm22:


I went there, and I am still not excited. Most of the owners there have modified their cars, and most of them weren't reporting the high numbers you were. Better than the rated numbers? Sure, for some. Not for all, and who is to say that the ratings for the Lex, BMW, or MB aren't low as well?


Just skimming over the posts in my link. The first page has well over 1/2 of the people reporting 30+. I'm not saying they aren't low. I am, however, providing "wide scale reproductions" of the numbers that I've experienced. As per your request.


I went off what I saw on the Edmunds page about the Z06, and the comparison between a 7L engine and a 3.5L engine seems even more ludicrous to me. BTW, for what it's worth, the new 4.6L from Lexus is all aluminum, too. As is the 5.5L from MB. ;) I'd venture to say that their weight is probably not what you think it is, but I cannot locate any comparisons nor specs about it. If you have more than an assumption to go on, I'm open to reviewing it. As you can see, I'm not picking on anyone, if the facts are there, they're there.

I never stated what I think the weight difference is. Though I do feel that at under 400lbs for the LS1, it is extremely light. I'm fairly certain that any V8 with quad cams and all of the components that accompany it (not including the required parts for vvt and direct injection) will weigh a fair amount over 400lbs. External dimensions aren't even a comparison. Anyone who's taken a look under a 4.6L 42V modular Ford can tell you that. I, like yourself, would love to see the crate weight for that Lexus or Benz motor.

Gear it as tall? Give it an 8 speed? The IS350's final drive ratio is 3.727, which is not a huge difference in gearing. And it's a 6 speed (manual or sequential auto). The LS460's 8-speed gives it a final drive of 2.937, but the 8th gear is close to the Vette, at 0.685 vs. 0.56. They both still end up with 2 overdrive gears, but the Lexus initial gear is huge at 4.596. And keep in mind, the Lexus runs to 60 in less than 5.5 seconds, so it's pretty nimble for such a big car. Also keep in mind that the Lexus still weighs 1200 lbs MORE than the Z06, which is a HUGE advantage, or at least, it should be. And remember as well, you're comparing a 7.0L vs. a 4.6L. Power per liter? Chevy: 72.14. Lexus: 82.61. Hmmm...crafty Americans or crafty Japanese? Jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.

I'd hardly call the Vette 5th an overdrive gear. If you've shifted from 4th to 5th at high speed, you'd agree. Weight doesn't come into play nearly as much once you get it going at highway speeds. Inertia is a wonderful thing when you're pushing 4200+ lbs. The good 'ol HP/L debate. I'll again wager that the LS7's weight is less than that 4.6L making less power. Its external dimensions are surely less, height especially. I just don't understand why you'd care what the displacement is if you don't sacrifice size or weight. Please explain that one to me.



It's not a sports car, so it's not designed to plant your *** in the seat as much as the Vette is. Honestly, I've never been a fan of the Vettes because I don't like small cars (interior wise). I have driven a couple, and the ride is horrendous to me. But those are personal opinions, everyone has them. As for quality, however, surely you're not saying that Lexus has less than Chevy? Perhaps you've not seen the following:

Please note that Lexus took the TOP dependability award for the 11th consecutive year.

2004 shows Lexus with 162 defects versus Chevy with 262

Please note who won the top premium sporty car segment, and who was the top again...12 years running

And also , please note how many Lexus' made the top ranking in 2004 and 2006, which would be 3. Chevy? 1.

2005? 3 to 3, but interestingly, the Vette wins none in the past 3 years.

And if you really want to dig deep on the numbers, why is it that Chevrolet's quality actually went DOWN from 2005 to 2006? The industry average improved by 10 full points, yet Chevy went from above the line at 232 to below it at 241. They seem to be moving in the wrong direction (as I've said many times).

Where did Lexus place? Oh, that's right -- at the top. Again. And their numbers went up from 139 to 136. That's 105 more problems in Chevy's than in Lexus'. Darn those Japanese for making a better product. Doesn't give them a right to charge more for it, though, right? Aren't you supposed to get filet mignon for the price of a chuck steak? And no, I'm not comparing a Vette to a chuck steak, just saying that you're actually getting something for the price, they're not just charging more and not giving the customer any benefits.

I was just joking about the quality thing. I thought that was obvious. I made a mistake, though. I was thinking about Toyota who had quite a few trucks to repair last year. http://www.cnn.com/2007/AUTOS/01/19/bc.toyota.recall.reut/index.html?eref=rss_topstories I'll agree that GM's quality has been lacking but I think you'll also agree that they're making efforts to improve. The Tahoe/Silverado, mid-size SUV's, mid-size cars (Aura/Malibu) all seem to be earning quite a bit of praise in the automotive world.


I have no measurements of the size of the blocks for the 4.6L or the 7.0L, but if you can show me actual numbers, like I said, I'm open. I find it very hard to believe that an engine with 2.4 more liters if displacement wouldn't have a bigger footprint, especially given that both are aluminum alloy blocks. For me, however, I'm still not sold on the argument that displacement is all there is. And truthfully, I'd love to see what kind of mileage the Lexus motor would get if it were in a car that only weighed 3115 lbs. I would bet it would be a pretty significant gain, given that it's pushing almost 25% more weight and still achieving decent (let's be real, 19 in the city isn't making either of them gas sippers) mileage.

The footprint of that 7L isn't any bigger than my 5.7L since its just a bored and stroked LSX. They're all the same external size, essentially. The weight loss would make much more of a difference in the city, I'd imagine. Maybe +2mpg or so......but then again those Lexus have such tall first gears that you'd lose a lot of that gain.

Oh, and as for puddin, I don't care about the size of the cup, I just like a lot of it, so we're on the same page there. :D Probably part of why I don't fit into a Vette, but I digress...

Big Mack


I'm just tired of everyone crapping on the LSX motors because they're not "technologically advanced." Its fairly obvious that they're very competitive when size, weight, and efficiency is taken into consideration........then there's production, repair, and parts cost.......don't even get me started there. You know that's a DEBATE you can't win. :)
zilch

Return to “Automotive Performance”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest