[mjk3888]

Not sure if this was talked about before I joined the forums but I found this today and had not seen it before. I would be shocked to see them ever offer a smaller displacement engine than the LT1. I don't see the benefit in it for them.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/06/...maro-race-car/

[DannyB]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

Not sure if this was talked about before I joined the forums but I found this today and had not seen it before. I would be shocked to see them ever offer a smaller displacement engine than the LT1. I don't see the benefit in it for them.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/06/...maro-race-car/

I remember seeing some stuff on this on here back when this article came out. From what i remember some people were all for it and others adamantly against it, you know, your typical online forum discussion....LOL

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by DannyB

I remember seeing some stuff on this on here back when this article came out. From what i remember some people were all for it and others adamantly against it, you know, your typical online forum discussion....LOL

Yep. Now that I think about it I'm sure this started the Small Cube high rev vs big cube lower rev arguments.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

Not sure if this was talked about before I joined the forums but I found this today and had not seen it before. I would be shocked to see them ever offer a smaller displacement engine than the LT1. I don't see the benefit in it for them.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/06/...maro-race-car/

It was discussed last summer.

For those that don't care to click the link to read the article, here is the important line:

"Why was the 302 engine so special? So, the formula may change a little, but it still needs to be a wicked fast track car more capable maybe than the comfort- and driver-oriented models."

For some reason, lots of people took it to mean that they're going to go back to a small (302 ci) engine for the Z/28. I see it as almost exactly the opposite.

You don't bring up the original recipe, then immediately follow that up with a comment about how you might be changing the formula, if you plan on going back to the way they were back in the old days.


My take is that he's preparing everyone for a Z/28 that does NOT feature a small, high revving, NA V8 engine. Of course, the 5th gen Z/28 at 7L didn't have all 4 of those characteristics either. But (rightfully so) nobody felt any need to soften the blow of that one. So assuming that he didn't say that in reference to displacement, it leaves 3 other characteristics: high revving, natural aspiration, and V8.

If I'm right on this, he's saying that the next Z/28 will lack at least one of those (and probably ditching 2, if not all 3). Mark Reuss's statement doesn't really make any sense unless thats what he was hinting at. The most obvious things to go away would be natural aspiration & revs. And if its still going to be a 'wicked fast track car' with forced induction (that is more capable than the other Camaro models), there is only 1 engine that I can see GM using: the LT4 out of the Z06 & CTS-V.

[Bhobbs]

I wouldn't consider going from a high winding, naturally aspirated small block to a supercharged small block slightly changing the formula. That would be completely abandoning the formula. The 302 was built to comply with displacement restrictions that no longer need to be followed. Going from a small displacement to large displacement is a slight change, and one that makes sense if you want to build a competitive Z/28.

[hotlap]

"looking at the original formulas of the Trans Am homologation of the Z/28.” “Why was the 302 engine so special?,” Reuss asked.“So, the formula may change a little, but it still needs to be a wicked fast track car more capable maybe than the comfort- and driver-oriented models.”

Recall Reuss say that the the new SS would offer a ZL1 driving experince. It does. Taking these comments as literally, the original Z/28's 302 was a overrsquare engine designed to rev higher.