Nope not a fact, the C5-R ls6 could rev that high all you need is a hypertech re-programer

 

I would assume a push rod engine with a lower max rpm, would have a larger sweet spot in the power band, and would be much easier to obtain INSTANT TQ when desired.

I know when i test drove a s2000 it sounded like I was going like a bat outa he11, but when I looked at the speedo, I was crawling. There was no TQ until you hit 4500 rpm. Not very functional for street/performance use, IMO.

 

That is also a good point, I can obtain great tq from 1500rpm to 4000rpm so in other words anytime I am just rolling at a normal speed in a normal gear saving gas.

 

Kinda seems like rearranging the chairs on the Titanic to me

 

levi the ls1 for 8 years and the ls2's for 2 years have been making 350/400 crank HP NA, get 28 miles to the gallon, and create tons of TQ, and run untouched for 150k miles.

Why would GM change anything?

 

The stock gen III blocks have also been known to hold around 1200hp totally stock with F/I, when i say stock I mean stock with nothing more than fuel management and fuel injectors. You swap the Alum LS1 bottom end for the cast iron 6.0 block in the trucks(exact same design) and you can get even more power from them. The gen III engines have proven themselves, anyone who doubts that read the article I posted.

 

see, thats not how i read that. the way it sounded to me was the block was stock, not the bottom end. i cant see how any production motor with cast pistons could support 1200hp. and ive seen a couple of chevy motors withthe cranks folded up from way less than 1200. im pretty sure he was saying that in that article just to compare the strength of the iron block to that of the aluminum block.

 

and comparing the torque curve of a 2 liter with a 9000 rpm redline and what? a 5.7 or 6.0 liter with a 6ksomething redline is a rediculous comparison. of course the big engine is going to have way more torque down low, because Honda designed that car to have power from 5k up. it really is a sports car, and ultimately was made to be raced. sure its a cool car to drive around, but until you get it on a track and drive the **** out of it, not even dropping below 5k for 5-10 minutes at a time, then it transforms into the car it was made to be. until they F-ed it up by going to a 2.2 liter anyway.[&:]

 

Because the ls1 is like a 5.7 litre I belive, so that 350-400 hp is what, about 70 or less HP per litre. A good starting point IMO would be alot closer to 100 HP per litre. Thats why GM should change it.

 

and comparing the torque curve of a 2 liter with a 9000 rpm redline and what? a 5.7 or 6.0 liter with a 6ksomething redline is a rediculous comparison.

how so? I assumed that looking at the TQ curve when comparing the attributes of the 2 motors was quite fair.

Honda designed that car to have power from 5k up.

My point EGG-ZACT-LEE......... what good is power above 5K? My point being, that I would imagine you only see 5k in your car less then 10% of the time? Why make a car, that will only be in it's "power band" 10% of the time?

it really is a sports car, and ultimately was made to be raced.

Then why use it for the street?



sure its a cool car to drive around, but until you get it on a track and drive the **** out of it, not even dropping below 5k for 5-10 minutes at a time, then it transforms into the car it was made to be. until they F-ed it up by going to a 2.2 liter anyway

prior to making my last car purchase, I looked into a s2000. Local dealer had a used garage queen that the owner had them selling for him. The car was mint, and priced very well. My wife thought it was cute. Dealer allowed me to take it for the weekend (I paid owner 100 bucks, and kept the miles under 250). Car was a blast to drive................ for about 30 min. Then it became work. Trying to get "performance" out of a car with such a high power band is work........ you are ALWAYS having to shift, and redline............and then you are out of the power band and have to do it all over again.

I will admit, at 8k rpm the thing was a blast..........just a blast. Sounded like you were doing a buck 50.........

Not for me ......... to much work to drive, if you goal is to be "on the edge".