Lifted07Sierra

If the new C7 dyno'd at 406rwhp what do you all speculate that it'll hit with exhaust, intake and tune? 450rwhp?
I see this car getting close to 500rwhp with just a cam and full bolt ons.
Could 550rwhp be do able with heads/cam and full bolt ons?

McGirk94LT1

You have to understand power as a function as fuel and airflow. Also, as with most systems, an engine is only as good as it's weakest link.

The ls3 heads were far from lacking, so any improvement(lt1) would certainly yield more power, but not huge increases.

The ls3 intake was also quite good, and the lt1's looks noticeably different, so one might assume its a nice step up, but again, a 6.2 might not need all that much more air(for a production worthy, 6500rpm motor).

So it has plenty of air coming in, and direct injected fuel with a decent 11.5-1 compression.

So why doesn't this thing make more power? To me it's what it's doing with that air. I dunno the cam specs off hand, but even though it has variable cam timing, I don't think it has as much lift as the ls3 cam.

The intake manifold also might be a limiting factor. It may flow plenty, but what length are the runners? Are they low end torque biased?

Considering they came out and said they needed the torque of a 3.1 4 cylinder for eco mode, I don't doubt that the intake/maybe cam are heavily low-end torque biased and thus the hp limiting factor. I don't think the tune is gonna be all that bad, not any worse then an lsX at least. So if you want a ton more hp, I think you'll be looking at replacing hard parts, namely the intake manifold. Although it making its peak hp at the same rpm as the ls3 does throw a wrench in that theory sorta.

Sure a cold air intake and headers will help, but if it's not making optimal use of the air that's flowing in, then letting it spit more air out will only do so much good.

In looking into an 03/04 mach 1, I learned a lot about just how important the proper combination of heads/cam/intake is to a desired peak number or rpm range(and how much Ford dropped the ball and didn't need to).

0WildVettes

Cam swaps are going to be HUGE HP gains on the LT1. GM set it up for low end for fuel economy. (This is my opinion )

Lifted07Sierra

Yea I think you're right I bet a tune alone will probably pull 20rwhp. But also I bet most of these gains are seen in the mid rpm. I wouldn't even really care too much about what the peak number is if I could gain 50/50 from 3000-5500

04_Z06_CE

I would be willing to bet money it will pick up 20-30 rwhp from intake and tune. Just like the c6 and c6 z06. No difference

C7pimp

Quit being pansys and get a supercharger. Power problem solved :-)

SBC_and_a_stick

The proper way to make more power on the LT1 all motor is cam-in-cam and 4 valve heads. Everything else is **** in all honesty.

0WildVettes

I will be ok with mine.

DoctorV8

If by "proper" you mean "absurdly expensive," then you are correct.

zland

So how many C7 owners are willing to void the warranty on a new motor, never tested by consumers to yield another 20-50hp?

0WildVettes

Me! Immediately! It is why I bought it

Chicago1

screw the piddly bolt on crap for what really? Exhaust won't do crap just like it didn't do much on the c5/c6..Same with c7. if your gonna do it do it do FI/cam.

Daekwan06

I agree. Cam + intake + headers + tune = 475rwhp. Possibly more depending on how aggressive & risky you want to go.

When you look at all the tech in this engine, its pretty clear that GM is sandbagging hard and has left alot of headroom for quite a few possible reasons. 1) fuel economy 2) HP upgrades for upcoming base model years 3) making sure base model's output doesnt cannibalize upcoming Z sales. I have no doubt GM will one day sell the base C7 with the n/a LT1 outputting 480-500hp. Hell.. you can already buy a crate LS3 engine rated at 480hp. So its just a matter of time and money when the LT1 produces even more power, straight from the factory.

When production C7's finally fall into the hands of customers (and tuners) we will get to see what the LT1 is truly capable of.

Mike Mercury

The proper way to add unnessessary weight, complexity, and valvetrain noise is cam-in-cam and 4 valve heads.

0WildVettes

My Bolt on crap took my 350 RWHP Z06 to 401 RWHP. LT1 who knows because I feel that the cam is the limiting factor on this motor. Heads I don't know if we have flow info yet or not. I am guessing bolt on and cam cars will be getting close to 480-500 rwhp pretty soon.

sfc rick

sam90lx

Or just wait for the Super Beast next year and keep your warranty intact.

stevebz06

Where are the flames for what appears to be the assertion that GM doesn't know how to design engines?

C7pimp

If you're in the know, you can get a supercharger with a factory warranty on an LT1. I've mentioned it before, but I'm just gonna keep it to myself from now on.

sfc rick

I don't think it's necessarily flames at GM. I do think it's a non-starter to build an engine that is anemic to other offerings in this day an age. It's only numbers but given that most car guys LOVE numbers they can only hope that they will be able to squeeze more from the stock offering.

It's going to be quite interesting in the next year or two for sure. I'm guessing GM wanted to keep the new LT1 on the low end to gather more data for increasing the power levels in the future models. The majority of new owners will never drive their C7 on the edge and truly push it's limits, so 406rwhp will be more than they will ever need.