The new ZR-1 is an absolute monster, putting out supercar power for sports car prices. Pushing the envelope even further is beginning to seem a bit ridiculous, especially without similar advances in handling. After all, the power output of the Corvette has grown by almost 50% over the last ten years while handling performance has made only incremental increases. Perhaps shifting focus to efficiency - and hence light weight, which contributes to better handling through quicker transitional ability among other things, is overdue.
Though it's hard to argue the fact that less power and less weight might make for livelier handling and a similar power-to-weight ratio, it's a different formula for performance. The executives at Chevrolet are already talking about the redesign due in 2012 - and a serious diet is in store, reports Automotive News. Losing 300-400lbs and 150hp, which is what is currently being considered, would leave a weaker pounds per horsepower ratio. Knocking the Corvette from its current 3200lb, 430hp/505hp (Coupe/Z06) size to a more Cayman-S like 2800-2900lbs and 280-350hp might make for more efficiency, but it'll also make for less fun. Power for the lighter, less powerful Corvette would come from a more efficient 4.7L V8, although exact fuel consumption figures are not known. The outgoing models get around 16mpg city and 26mpg highway.
Is a lighter, less powerful Corvette still a Corvette? Will it be able to deliver the experience its buyers have sought and loved, especially over the past decade? And will moving it to a smaller, less powerful state move it into competition with even less-expensive sports cars like the Honda S2000 or the Nissan 350Z, which both sport similar power-to-weight ratios to the postulated Corvette Coupe? Only time will tell, but it's hard to feel excited about the move to 'greener' pastures.
Reader Comments
Mon Jan 21 2008 4:13 PM
Gus says
Most people can't even handle 300hp, so this is probably a good thing.
Just two days ago a guy who just bought a brand new Corvette in Santa Clarita wrecked it just 100 yards from the dealership by hitting a center island after drag racing another car.
Now, I'm a car guy, and I love power, but maybe 300hp and 300 torque should be the limit on any car...
Mon Jan 21 2008 4:14 PM
SuperSkyline89 says
All I got to say is that a 4.7 L engine making 280-350 horsepower is PATHETIC.
Mon Jan 21 2008 4:51 PM
chris says
Yeah I'm kinda with skyline on this one. Sure, a big lazy V8 is a nice thing to have and it's an experience that a lot of people dont want to move away from, but ford has the GT Mustang with 300 hp and a 4.6L engine. simply put, if it isnt 100 hp/L then it isnt performance. 350hp from a 4.7L engine is better than the 300 hp in the 4.6L ford has but in the end, my focus has a higher HP/L count. thats sad.
Ford has been talking about putting the 3.5L v6 into the mustang. that's 0.5L smaller than the current 4L base engine, and it puts out much more power and much more torque than the 4L v6. they can turbo that engine to 400 hp... well over 100 hp/L.
Doesn't GM have something like that? you should be able to knock 430 hp out of a 4L. who cares if you have to turbo it. and then put an even bigger turbo unit on the ZR1's next gen.
maybe instead of F!, i should start harpin' on nascar to drop their engines down to 2L 4 cyls with X amount of boost.
Mon Jan 21 2008 5:12 PM
Gus says
What engine has 4.7 liters I don't see that anywhere in the article?
I do think that eventually V6 turbos will replace V8's one way or another, I just hope they are as smooth and torquey (at a low RPM) as the current V8 engines. I'm sure technology will make it happen, and at the same prices and reliability sooner or later.
But my other point was that I'm not sure any car needs more than 300/300, no matter how it's made.
Mon Jan 21 2008 5:22 PM
chris says
gus, right at the end of the third paragraph.
I agree; a 2 seater like the vette should be making due with 300/300, but then it would be a mustang. GM will never bring the vette that low. I was just showing that for the premium that the vette gets over the mustang, they could easily do what ford is sure to do with the mustang. give it a very good, medium sized v6, something that is found in a volume car, perhaps the 3.6L in the malibu? make it rock solid, and throw a $20,000 blower on it. I think GM would get a LOT of respect for taking their pinnacle of fuel consumption and doing something like that to it. sure they would lose sales to the guys who want a big V8, but the General wants to have a green image and the Volt is 2 years off.
Mon Jan 21 2008 5:32 PM
SuperSkyline89 says
I don't think there's anything wrong with a V8 but I don't like how the Americans go about it. Take the Z06 for example, an incredibly fast car. But with a 7.0L engine it is pretty underpowered. It should be making way over 650 horsepower with an engine that big. If the Americans would make lower displacement engines with higher power per hp ratings that would be cool. That is the main reason I prefer Japanese cars. They take a V6 and get loads of power from it, something that the Americans just seem to run from screaming.
Mon Jan 21 2008 7:58 PM
Gus says
Ah, I stand corrected about the 4.7.
True, but to make supercar power from 7 liters, you'd have supercar prices.
I think part of the reason the Vette is so inexpensive (relatively) is that it "only" makes the power that it does. Same thing with the Mustang.
But things will have to change eventually.
Tue Jan 22 2008 1:32 AM
AMcA says
Keep the power-to-weight ratio the same, and no one will mind.
Heck, keep the power-to-weight ratio the same, while making it lighter, and it will be way more entertaining to drive. Lighter cars change direction more easily . . . .
Tue Jan 22 2008 4:41 AM
Alan says
I agree with AMcA, keep the same power-to-weight, may be even improve it slightly, but do so by cutting weight not increasing power. I'm not a greenie, i even hate hybrids, but i do think we should make cars lighter and smaller
Tue Jan 22 2008 3:28 PM
Mark says
Consider this and the comparisons with the 350Z and S2000. The current Corvette weighs less than the "smaller" 350Z by about 120 pounds and has less power and yet gets a bit better highway fuel economy and bit less in the city. The fuel economy results are the same on the S2000. Why is the 350Z's V6 and especially the S2000's I4 so thirsty?
If the Corvette downsizes, the 350Z and S2000 will have to too in order to meet the high fuel standards. Why would one think that cars that today are essentially tied to Corvette for fuel efficiency, even with dramatically lower power, will also not drop?
Tue Jan 22 2008 6:06 PM
Nelson says
Hi Mark, author of the story here.
Regarding the comparison to the Z and S2000 - the proposed 2800lb/280hp Corvette would be thoroughly comparable to the 3200lb-3400lb/306hp 350Z produced today. Sure, the 'Vette would have slight power to weight advantage, but they'd be competitive, and that was the point.
Those following the development of the Z know that the next model, due out some time before the 2012 Vette update, is expected to get the 3.7L 330hp V6 now found in the Infiniti G37 (or a variant thereof), and will be going on a diet/wheelbase shortening, so it'll have a much better power/weight ratio than the current Z, or the proposed Vette for that matter - it might even compete with the proposed Z06 at 350hp/2800lb. And less weight will mean better in-town fuel efficiency, while more torque will mean lower cruising RPMs at highway speed.
So in short, you're right that pretty much everyone will have to get lighter and more efficient. But that will just bring competition closer together, not farther apart. Also, remember that both Honda and Nissan already have very efficient small cars that sell in good volume, and so they can support the less efficient, low-volume sports cars. GM, on the other hand, has very few small, efficient cars - at least in the American market - and its bread-and-butter sales come from the pickup truck/SUV segment, so it will be harder for them to justify a thirsty sports car.
Leave a Comment
Login or register to leave comments.
Please keep your comments on topic. Your involvement is governed by our Privacy Policy and Terms.