2014 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray Z51 - C/D Underbelly
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- We take you on a technical tour of the C7 Corvette.
Full test of the C7 Corvette Z51: bit.ly/13buWvm
Corvette Mega-Hub: C7 stories, dozens of archived tests, comparos, and more: bit.ly/11eyoZw
C/D Underbelly takes you on a technical tour of the coolest and most interesting cars that swing through Car and Driver HQ.
Any corvette video makes me 60% stiffer.
"We need more light in this garage, Captain!"
what a poor lit video... the lighting seriously looks like you guys broke into a garage and needed to lay low.
Love how Chevy put in the extra work to make the Stingray so complex. Very nice.
Great to see up close what makes the new Stingray an outstanding automobile.
Great video. Tingwall does a good job explaining the tech that makes the C7 a great car and platform.
Great video. I love the detailed look at a car most reviewers will just drive and comment about. Keep it up!
AFM is straight trash on any vehicle
What a well done review so much more professional than most
Great video, it is cool to learn more about how the Corvette works. Well explained too, keep it up!
Here in 2020 now I can actually afford one!!
There is literally no point in a 7th gear on a car. Make the 6th gear longer. You will never be in 6th gear on any track that customers could go on.Pointless cost and weight addition.
and this is why it is worth the price
I think I beat up this guy in 6th grade.
Like the underbelly technical videos, keep them coming.
Cool to finally find out how the magnetic ride control suspension works. I wondered.
You are one cool Car geek :) Good review. I just love car tech and numbers :)
Seeing the technology of this car up close and personal with explanations is just as cool as the track review. C/D Underbelly is a valuable segment.
Here in 2020.
Good video! Thanks!
Interesting question but I very seriously doubt that has not been taken into account by GM. The torture test their performance engines like no other big auto maker. I am certain they have ran multiple engines to the point of failure with multiple driving situations. If they did need to change up the firing order in eco mode it wouldnt be difficult to accomplish.
thanks man! this video was really detailed
AFM was the dumbest “feature” GM ever came up with…BOO!!!!
"the proper way"? where did you learn, or who told you which way is the proper way? Fuel consumption is an indicator of thermal efficiency (as well as mechanical efficiency), since not all engines can extract the same amount of energy from the fuel - but even more critical to mpg are the vehicles weight and aerodynamics.
You are correct; however, in saying small displacement should be blindly taken as an indicator of efficiency - however, larger engines do have greater frictional losses.
You know what will really piss you off? Lets take your precious 4.0 BMW engine vs the small block. The small block is a smaller, lighter engine, that develops more power (and tq) and has better fuel efficiency. Not to mention its superior reliability, tune-ability (NA or FI). Oh and its tons of aftermarket parts. And its simplicity to work on. What does the BMW engine have? Revs? That's cute. Have fun swimming in your never ending, torqueless revs while staring at my tail lights.
The M3s engine is built for the M3, its calculated for the cars weight, aka BMW reccons it doesnt need more torque than it has so its built to rev.
Yes ofcourse its a bit heavier with 4 cams, cams are heavy, no its not bigger.
You fail to realize that you cant take a performance cars engine out of the car and then compare them, engines are made for the car theyre in and its respective needs.
You mean with the same displacement? The OHV would make equal or more torque and maybe a bit less hp. The 4.0L in the M3 is much larger than the 7.0L in the Z06 as said before. The M3's DOHC V8 is also heavier. It makes good horsepower but absolutely pathetic torque, and what torque it has is in a narrow range. It is very much physically possible for an OHC engine of half the displacement to be larger than an OHV engine of double.
An LS7 would not be able to withstand power like that. Perhaps an LSX 427 (same displacement and physical size but made of forged iron) or a forged aluminum engine similar or based off of the LS7, like the Venom GT's engine. All the LS engine have the same physical size, and the LS7, from the factory, is the most bored out and has the largest displacement, therefore it has the thinnest walls meaning it's weaker and less able to withstand high boost and compression.
You're right, a lot of the European engines are actually much larger. I was over at BMW welt and BMW museum the other day (in Munich) and it was neat to see these *enormous* 2 - 3 and 4ish liter engines on display. Even their 2005 formula 1 engine on display was extremely wide for its displacement. With the exhaust manifolds it was easily wider than a chevy LS, probably and about the same length. It was a bit shorter though. Their car engines were gigantic.Lazy engineering, vulgar proportions
Well then, it would seem that an engine such as the BMW S65 4.0/4.4 V8 would be significantly smaller and lighter than the GM LS7 7.0 v8 but alas, it weighs 15 lbs more and is externally much larger than the LS7. Also bear in mind that an LS7 can be stroked to 7.2 liters with no significant change in weight and of course, no change at all in size. Never mind that the S65 is naturally aspirated, with turbos it would likely weigh ~30 lbs more and be even less space efficient.
Large disp generally means more weight/engine size/mass cutting efficiency. Small disp, low rpm IS more efficient, just harder to achieve. F1 engine rule changes will mean running 1.6L V6 turbo/hybrid engines with the same power, 15k rpm limit, instant power, reliability (one race before rebuild) as the current V8s (and use less fuel). F1 engine makers are already doing the R&D on these now to be ready.
Im sorry? The rules don't produce anything. The teams produce engines though, and they will always chase rpms as it's the most basic way to create power under the regulations. I don't know what you're getting at limiting max fuel flow or what that has to do with the original context of you stating the LS9 is comparable to the achievement that is an F1 engine. Yes, all hail the mighty LS9! What fools those f1 engineers are wasting their time with 18k redlines and sophisticated engine maps
What do you propose? To let teams do whatever they want? The main reason for rules is to limit cost. Otherwise the big teams with the huge budgets would just spend their way to the championship like many did in the past. Smaller teams with lower budgets would be even more helpless than they are right now. To answer your second question, i don't think limiting rpm's would be a wise decision given how many people love the sound of f1 which is surely something f1 has to be mindful of.
Actually DOHC pre dates pushrod technology by 30 years and throttle body injection was in GM production cars and trucks through the 80s yet F1 still uses it. Displacement means nothing, it is just but a static internal dimension of an engine. One of many dimensions. It doesn't determine BMEP, fmep, bsfc, external volume or weight. Actually, large disp. low rpm is generally most efficient. Rules make f1 engines what they are. Rpm is the crutch to get around them not the result of free innovation
Again different engines for different purposes. Am i supposed to be impressed that an engine with nearly 3 times the displacement is making more torque yet still less power? Torque is the result of displacement. F1 engines contain some of the most advanced automotive technology in the world. This is FACT not an opinion. The fact that your even trying to use an LS9 (which has some of the most outdated tech around....OHV) as a counter argument is laughable.
No, probably not, considering that an LS9 in the same trim as an F1 engine would make close to the same horsepower, over three times the torque, and add less than 200 lbs to the car. The extra 200 lbs would slow it down some, sure, but then again, I would hope a unique race engine that was 200,000 dollars more expensive would be *at least* significantly lighter than a production car engine. Nevermind a race prepped LS... that 200 lbs wouldn't matter when you are putting out 900hp/800lb ft
i understand your point but you seem to be missing the big picture. You're comparing apples to oranges. Different engines designed for different purposes so it's no wonder they are so very different. An f1 engine doesn't need to last for 100k miles nor does it need to average 20mpg so there is no point in trying to make it do so just like an LS9 doesn't need to weigh next to nothing and average 300hp/L. Each works well in it's own application but it makes no sense in comparing them and trying
Pushrod engine = no OHV setup, so the heads are smaller, keeping the engine package smaller. That being said, they're usually limited in the # of valves per cylinder. Rather than being able to run 4 per cyl, they'll run only 2. volumetric efficiency would then go down. Given the hp/liter of each, the BMW engine makes a lot more in that aspect, but the corvette makes up for it with being able to increase displacement w/o adding too much weight or making the engine too big.
Not so much. I like American cars like the Vette ( I am American) but you are way off. Plenty of Europeans enjoy modify cars and plenty of European cars can gain significant power on stock engine internals with mild tuning. Especially german cars. I have a friend with a 535 that has only an upgraded intercooler and a cat back on an E85 tune that makes 520 wtq. Stock turbos, stock internals. Also, Volvo believe it or not makes some engines that can put done 600+whp on stock internals.
What you are saying is the firing cylinders liners and rings will wear faster then the ones that do not fire.
The thing is it takes hundreds of thousands of kilometers for any of them to start wearing significantly. Even my 2000 montana with 300k on it, the engine is perfectly sound.
Remember when the cylinders are deactivated it is in a low load situation, where wear and tear are the at the least.
Ok so lets make it not about price but build quality, I'm so sick and tired of ppl thinking if its from Europe then the " build quality" is better than every thing else. I'm an American and yes I live in Britain for me the joy of having a car is knowing that I paid half the price and still can smoke your A** and yes I want a sting ray vette! There are more that one ways to get from point A-B whats important is who gets there first! Btw there aren't many cars faster that the vette on a circuit...
infotainment does not weigh 30 lbs
speakers
In Britain a zr1 is 120 grand the vipers more a terbo s is £125 grand and the 991 turbo is about to come out.to say that the vette is the best car out your having delusions of grandeur.there are so many cars that have proven to be faster and when people mention build quality america mentions price.but if you were from Europe you wouldn't buy a werse car for the money that thay are over here.
Nothing Special here. None of this is new. As said below, this stuff has been on Ferraris, Porsches, BMWs for decades. I am also taking into account what hasn't been shown and mentioned that I have read and watched from press releases and other publications.
I am not trying to incite Corvette fans, but the underside and chassis tech is very underwhelming, FOR ME. For me, being the operative words.
So true American cars don't get the respect they deserve, some are crap to be honest but American cars companies of late have stepped up! Like the Shelby mustang, Cadillac cts v, the new Camaro and of course the Corvette. Put these on a track or as a daily driver and I'm sure they will stand up the their European competition! I know cause I own a Camaro (1979) and a Bmw m car. There is just a stigma attached to American cars, when in fact they out perform cars worth twice as much as they do
Except there IS such thing about trying to save gas. You seem a little out of touch, auto manufacturers have to avg 35 mpg's for their fleet by 2016. So v8's have to become more fuel efficient. No one likes paying to fill up every two days either. If you want a fuel chugging v8, then go buy one bub, there still out there. But isnt the point of engineering technology advancement? So yeah shits going to get more powerful, effecient, and durable. weather you like it or not.
I'm not comparing the cars, I'm comparing the engines. And it is larger in physical dimensions.
And there's thing thing called an engine swap. People compare engines when they look for one to put in whatever car they have. The most popular engine swap there is? LS. Into Porsches, M cars, Z's, Silvias, RX7's, 240's, off road vehicles, airplanes, helicopters, you name it.
My point is that hp/mpg is the proper way of gauging how "effecient" an engine is and not hp/litre. Fuel consumption determines how much overall work a car is doing.
So if a 2.4 liter V8 revving to infiniti guzzles more gas than a NASCAR engine it shouldn't automatically get an efficiency sticker slapped on it just because it's doing it with less displacement.
OHV and OHC have actually been around for the same amount of time. And OHV engines are generally more compact, lighter, more reliable, and have a lower center of gravity. Clearly these are all features that positively affect a performance car. But they are impractical in an economy car due to slightly higher fuel consumption. Stop being a troll.
Stronger chassis, less lean in the corners, less flexing, fewer cross members needed to avoid flexing, lighter metals needed to cope with other stresses on the car when pushed to the limit, can take more punishment easier. Engineers can look at suspension tweaks to improve ride without compromising structural integrity.
Its made to reduce cost so more teams can compete but you still want the engineering side of things. Williams had a car in 1976 I think it was, 1.5 liter straight 4 with a turbo. 1500 hp. Its so far the world record for bhp per liter.
I do agree thou, if you want to look at the most technologicly advanced racecars in the world look at the Audi R18 E-tron
Yes, over 100 kg. An LS9 is over 200 kg, more like 220 kg and an F1 engine is 95 kg.
Add that to a car that weighs around 500 kg it will severly effect its performance.
And yes I do, I race Porsches in modsport and PCSR here in Sweden, but I havent mentioned that because anyone can make shit up on the internet.
What the hell is your point? F1 engines are this expensive because they are the best they can be within the rules. You dont need more torque then they have since the cars arent much heavier than around 5-600 kg anyway. I can assure you that if you dropped your LS9 thingie in an F1 car it would be MUCH slower.
A lot of people think the ls7 engine is huge because of its 7 liter displacement but the the engine fully dressed weighs 440 pounds and and makes 505hp and 470tq whilst the bmw s65 (the engine in the last m3 ;'0 ) is 4 liter displacement makes 414hp and makes 300ft of torque but weighs 445pounds. Oh and these numbers are streight from the manufacturer.
Modern cars use coilover struts, not coil springs. The reason Chevy uses leaf spring is cost not performance. Not uncommon for the big tuners to switch them over to coilovers, though that's likely for more control over the tuning. The only advantages it has is cost, and a negligible advantage in weight.
Europeans forget that use Americans love modifying our cars. Most muscle,sports cars in America are not stock. European sports cars engines as far as hp are near There natural hp limit, this means with out turbos or a supercharger they are not going to gain 150 hp from bolt on. American cars love bolt on and respond to them real good.
I think that even if the c7 had all the tech from the mclarean P1 it would still get talked down because it has an american name behined it, no one is ever happy that the country some of you live in is making good cars for1/2 or 1/3 the price, owning a ferrari, lamb or porsche has that aura but take to the track price for price a cayman vs c7 and it would get trashed
I have given up on cars being made actually lighter until they are made of something besides steel and/or aluminum. It's far from a deal breaker, we've seen plenty of Sports cars weight closer to 2 tons and still be stupid fast and agile. A "stripper" model and a much more aggressive use of CF would be advised in the meantime.
This car is the base corvette,I got that but ask your self what can it can compete with.I think it should have more hp 500hp would make it more desirable and competitive.This car cant break 0-60 under 4 secs as they claimed...all this technology and still slow..advantage Shelbygt 500...
Loving the direct injection. The physical size of an ohv is so much smaller its ridiculous. I have a sc400 lexus with the 4 cam 32 valve 1UZFE v8 and im doing an ls swap. There is alot of space saved as well as 75 lbs potentially and the COG is lower as well. Ohv engines are way smaller.
There are definitely LS7's producing that kind of power to the wheels, and there are naturally aspirated LS7's producing around 750bhp. There are also FI LS7's producing up to 900bhp hp, but anything more than that would deteriorate and detonate pretty quick. No four-figure numbers.
It does, I didnt say it didnt. But to add an additional 100 kg to an F1 car will SEVERELY affect its cornering abilities. Your own fucking Indy car and Cart series arent even using these engines, but I guess you know better than all the world of motorracing dont you.
Okay Im done with this discussion, your level of ignorance is of epic proportions. Youre actualy and honestly saying that an LS9 (that isnt as light as youre saying it is, nor as small) is a better engine than an F1 engine, were actualy having this discussion?
An F1 engine weighs around 95 kg which is almost 3 times less than a fully equipped LS9. To reply to what you said about external dimensions, its just a big fat lie, an F1 engine is much MUCH smaller than any LS engine. To even compare a stoneage technology LS9 to an F1 engine is laughable.
Its funny because europeans want to say it looks like ferrari because its red or sleek so I guess a jaguar looks like a ferrari or astin martin and maserati. Or like saying the euro fighter looks like the f15 because it has two engines or there wings are both sleek back.
Why are people so judgmental against something they don't have it's like are you mad!? Lol and to all those people that knock a car down just bc it's from America, if you don't like America so much then stop using stuff we bring to your country and see how boring your country really is!-hater
Oh they uploaded one. Geez it's even worse. Was EVERYONE at Car and Driver on vacation when this car came available for review??? Oh my God. It's so bad. I can't believe I'm saying this but I'll be glad when KBB uploads a video. Or better yet Consumer Reports. What the hell C&D?!?!?
460hp...
Very good information,. I just borrowed my friends 15 Stingray and this experience of driving this Corvette has really changed my opinion of Chevrolet and the Corvette. I have a few small complaints but compared my turbo civic, supercharged CRX and VW 1.8T (all modified) This car is an absolute joy to drive. Kudos to Chevrolet and job well done.
civic? bahaha, not even the same league
I can see where you might be skeptical of the "more reliable" claim, but if you were to compare a 6.2 DOHC of near identical layout to the LT1, you would find that the small block is more reliable because there are far less moving parts than a DOHC engine.
Wish they did more In depth vids with other cars, seems like this is just a vette fanboy vid, only the vette had special episodes, if car and driver don't do in depth vids of LaFerrari, P1, & 918, then you'll know they are just fanboys...
They're also being pushed hard 100% of the time. fuel economy drops dramatically the minute you put your foot into anything. But you're talking about fuel efficiency in terms of mpg. what about thermal efficiency? or volumetric? or brake? or arbitrary?
It's a good thing that dohc is not the reason F1 engines are so advanced. It's a good thing they use many advanced technologies not used in road engines then isn't it? What is laughable is your comment and how it relates to the context of the discussion.
There is sooooo much more technology pumped into this car that actually puts that 460 hp to use. This car is extremely underpriced for the technology it offers. Also do not underestimate power to weight when it comes to judging that 460 hp.
Seems like great bang for your buck...but I think its hideous. The C6 isnt gorgeous but its nice to look at. Just like the ugly Camaro, all the new chevy sprts cars look like they are trying too hard. Like a girl with too much make up and a fake orange tan.
V4 mode?? just say 4 cylinder mode.
plus you're buying a v8, you know there is no such thing as trying to save gas. i drive a jeep. the thought of trying to save gas is null and void. want to save gas, go buy a fucking prius, not a corvette
They mentioned the least important benefit of a dry sump oiling system. Yes it helps in high-g cornering, but more importantly it means the crankshaft isn't operating in oil (or even significant oil mist) which helps efficiency and power, and it allows them to lower the engine since there doesn't have to be space between the crankshaft and the bottom of the pan for 5+ litres of oil.
Equal displacement yes, but they arent equal displacement are they? Theres no way an engine with twice the displacement is smaller, its physicly impossible. And with the same size an OHV engine would make half the power.
Theres more to Europe than England. Also british cars has gotten an unfair reputation because of british leyland in the 70s. The cars were intentionally sabotaged by workers which ultimately led to its demise.
You do realize this is the entry level C7 right? In that regard its better than the C6 in almost everyway. The ZO6 is coming for sure!!! And i pray they make a ZR1 version of the C7. Use your noodle Mahew...
Exactly! I'm sick of this bullshit! All we're hearing is the same thing, over and over and OVER again. The C7 is ready! Time to test it! These car companies are still following the rules of the old days. (The waiting game.) But in today's digital age of the internet, there's no room for that anymore. Just give the people what they want!
So your saying an F1 engine doesn't use some of the most advanced engine tech in the world simply for the reason it uses dohc?? lol What is laughable is what your trying to get at here. Humor me please!
Yes. Don't get me wrong. I love the car just like But i think our car markers like GM and Ford Should have been able to give us one dame good car that does everything dam good like the GTR.
Great video. Thanks for explaining some of the features we don’t usually see.
Gigantic? Maybe in displacement, but in physical size, about the same. And can that F1 engine be used everyday in stop and go traffic? Oh yeah, they get rebuilt or trashed after every race
The current S65 uses a 5.5L biturbo producing and extra 120 lb·ft over the LS7 450 (215 Ib extra with the performance pack). Even with a smaller displacement. Weight unknown
Then you obviously dont know what McPherson struts are. On no single picture Ive found on a 991 front suspension is there any McPherson struts, its all dual wishbone.
The active fuel management is garbage. It failed on a LS powered car I owned at 30k miles. Ask anyone who knows anything about it. If you buy a vehicle with it, beware. You can fairly easily eliminate it though.
ASTRO , SAFARI and w body Grand Prix had COMPOSITE LEAF SPRINGS !!!
"More reliable" is kind of dubious. I think that matters from engine to engine more so than simply the valvetrain layout. The other points are spot on, however.
Same here. I had never even considered owning a Corvette, but this new C7 has completely changed my opinion. I'd gladly have one....in electric blue I think.
no what. why not . they took so long to revived the stingray line why come out with something that falls below the stranded of the top dogs in the game .
In terms of technology there is absolutely no debate. F1 engines are far more advanced. This is not even debatable. Anyone who denies this is hopeless.
great car z51 is sick cant wait for the z06 but sorry this guy talking needs to go to much of a nerdy guy
FYI in my 505 hp Z06 I achieved 30+ mph going 55 and 27+ mpg going 80 mph. Believe or not the C4 was getting over 25 mpg. This is a great car but Corvette has always made a great car.
Just saying it's not a sports car lol. I DD a supercharged C5 Z06 with 550 at the wheels. Burn through a set of MT ET Street II's every month.
The new C7 ZO6 & ZR1 should have a chassis construction and body all made of carbon fiber, also 100-200 more hp that would make it a true devil
But still man, its got over a litre of displacement on the stang but a measly 40hp gain? Come on, i know GM has the tech to do better than that.
This is more affordable to normal people, that's the point. They didn't sit in a room and say "Alright, were going after Ferrari and Porsche"
Why do people still complain about leaf springs? Reviews say that the car is very composed over rough pavement and has record braking grip levels.