Corvette Z06 vs. BMW M5...engine comparo

[Slicks]

What's not to get?????????????????????????????????????

Why people choose an inferior engine.

[Slicks]

m5 for me .more hp/L and it's a v10 .8500rpm for a 5L engine is alot.

Easily the best post in this thread, almost sig worthy...

[Kitdy]

It mystifies me how dead set some people are to hate anything american made, no matter if it's better. They just gotta find some excuse to not like it.

Hell, if someone offered me an M3 or a CorvetteC06, I'd choose the M3. It's just a beautiful beautiful car, but I'm not going to say that the M3 performs better, and I'm not going to say the engine is better because of some excuse like 'it's more impressive, it's more complicated' etc.

It's because people like to hate on America.

I'll take the Porsche 911 GT3's 3.6L flat-6 thank you very much. Screw BMW and Corvette. If that is not better than both of these engines, then what is?

[PerfAdv]

GM tried the whole OHC in the Corvette thing, remember? Knocked the price up over $30,000, and the car gained 200lbs. Whats the point of going OHC when you can make a lighter, smaller engine for cheaper, making the same power throught the rev range?

I don't disagree with you but you have to see the other side of the equation. The capacity difference between the LS7 and M5 engine is about 2,000cc, in technology-dipped cars (i.e. S2000) that's worth about 240 Hp. The LS7 does have its advantages, but why are its advantages the determinants of core values that matter? To me, the M5 makes almost as much power while having about 30% less displacement.

I know displacement doesn't add weight and OHV further saves weight. How about the engine block stiffness/strength? A block with more material is stronger or one with less material overall, and between hollow areas.

Edit: more not less

[Rockefella]

Slicks, stop punching walls and yelling at everyone around you because people disagree with your opinion.

I like the M5's engine over the LS7. I guess I'm an absolute idiot.

[TheOne]

gotta love the LS7....wish i had enoff $$ to swap it into my 240sx, it'd make it better @ cornering too than with the stock ka24de,lol.

the ls7 barely does much to get 500hp(even when bein restricted), the m5 engine has to have all this technology(look @ them headers!, so nice & shiney) to be able to make such hp, its about the best performer, at least in my opinion, i'd rather go for performance than luxury.(again, my opinion)

ls7 is just such a nice piece of art, its simple yet badass, the M5....meh, its supposed to be that way because its from BMW(just like the M3 GTR engine, which sucks if it ever breaks because ya gotta take it to a BMW dealership, not autozone to be able to read ecu codes,lol, yet still makes good power)

(oh and to those that say ohc is newer than ohv(if any), go ready some history about engines, ohc is older than ohv)

[Rockefella]

the ls7 barely does much to get 500hp(even when bein restricted), the m5 engine has to have all this technology(look @ them headers!, so nice & shiney) to be able to make such hp, its about the best performer, at least in my opinion, i'd rather go for performance than luxury.(again, my opinion)

Well, it is a bit harder to make 500 hp out of 5.0 liters than it is 7.0.

[-What-]

I don't disagree with you but you have to see the other side of the equation. The LS7 does have its advantages, but why are its advantages the determinants of core values that matter? To me, the M5 makes almost as much power while having about 30% less displacement.

30% more displacement, but equal power to the M5's engine....but less weight and better torque/power curve(s) than the M5's engine. Seriously, what's the point of arguing over displacement? Air doesn't add weight.

The capacity difference between the LS7 and M5 engine is about 2,000cc, in technology-dipped cars (i.e. S2000) that's worth about 240 Hp.

Technology dipped? You mean high-stressed? How useable are the 240 hp in the S2000? Torque curve?
TORQUE CURVE????------>

Never heard of that.

The LS7 isn't made of stones. It is a modern engine. How many large displacement V8's do you know of that could rev that high? Just because it doesn't have an exotic configuration, rev past 8000 rpm, or shown everywhere as a cutaway does not mean it is stone-age.
-----------------------------------
Here goes your 100hp/L LS7.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...ad.php?t=24670
But lets not get into the tuning potential of the two engines.

[Kitdy]

Rocke has the gist.

People are biased. I am biased. Rocke is biased. Slicks is biased. Maybe some of us are not biased - but I doubt it. Even if we try to evaluate something from a neutral perspective, people can accuse us of bias.

Which engine is better? I don't know first hand. I am no expert. GM and BMW both clearly have made excellent engines in this case it seems, saying one or the other is better is very difficult, but bashing someone because of dissent achieves nothing.

Take into account the expert's view:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_S85

I would rather Porsche have won it, due to my like of that marque, but I'd rather BMW than GM. Sue me - I am biased. For whatever reason - rational or irrational - I bet many of us have a certian preferance in car makers and would rather them be better than others.

Slicks, it would seem you in fact are biased towards America cars, so saying that anyone against American cars are foolish seems just as foolish as coming into this argument with your mind already made up. The true way to approach any argument is with an open mind ready to absorb new information - it seems this is not your goal. This question asks not even what engine is better in terms of performance first of all - but what you;d rather in YOUR car. Even if it did ask what was the better engine, it is hard to evaluate immeadeatly before others have weighed their opinion. As for saying you weren't angry when writing your posts, that seems a little far fetched, as I am slightly angry when writing this I must admit. The venom in your words betrays your true emotions which you seem to then rationalize by stating that it is entirely logical while it seems clear to many that you are speaking from passion, not logic. We are humans, not machines - I often wish we were all perfectly logical, but we are not. Our arguments are rarely airtight, especially when we exhibit initial bias - this often leaves our so-called logical arguments nothing but porous words that are fueled by emotion, not reason. Is my argument airtight? I doubt it. Is it fueled by emotion? Certianly, but I have tried to have a large amount of reason mixed with that emotion.

Hating and bashing usualy achieves little. It does not promote an open discussion and only reduces the level of discussion to a pathetic insult ridden yelling contest. To promote proper, gentlemanly discussion, we need to use proper passionless critical rebuttal, but this will never happen, as a great man once said: "There is nothing more exilirating in life than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?"

Less the hate, more the love.

P.S. This is the third time I have written this reply and I think the second time I wrote it was the best and I am quite tired.

[Rockefella]

People are biased. I am biased. Rocke is biased. Slicks is biased. Maybe some of us are not biased - but I doubt it.

Ah, c'mon. I like to pride myself on having VERY little bias.

[Kitdy]

Ah, c'mon. I like to pride myself on having VERY little bias.

I like to do that as well. And OK, not everone is horribly biased, but it is tricky to offer a neutral opinion when something you love is up agianst something you hate.

[PerfAdv]

30% more displacement, but equal power to the M5's engine....but less weight and better torque/power curve(s) than the M5's engine. Seriously, what's the point of arguing over displacement? Air doesn't add weight.

Displacement vs technology is a circular argument. I don't want to really want to go there. Let's just say it's easier to make more power with more cubic inches. Easier on the engine aswell. And because the engine isn't as stressed you can drive it easier and consume less fuel. Whats the point of driving it easy, we're talking about performance cars. All-out, I doubt the LS7 will sip fuel...

Technology dipped? You mean high-stressed? How useable are the 240 hp in the S2000? Torque curve?
TORQUE CURVE????------>

It's useable, just not as you'd drive a torque-rich engine. You can't have a small displacement engine without forced induction that has gobs of torque. Torque is mostly a function of displacement.

The LS7 isn't made of stones. It is a modern engine. How many large displacement V8's do you know of that could rev that high? Just because it doesn't have an exotic configuration, rev past 8000 rpm, or shown everywhere as a cutaway does not mean it is stone-age.

No, it isn't made of stones. And you don't necessarily need cutting edge technology to go fast, displacement just makes it easier.

Exhibit A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_300SEL_6.3

The 300 SEL is from the 60s and using its 6.3 liter it performed quite well. Today's Mercedes AMG 6.3 makes more than twice as much horsepower but just a little more torque. Torque is an automatic benefit but to make the Hp it took 40 years of technology.

Technology with displacement is the best of both worlds.

[charged]

ls7 is just such a nice piece of art, its simple yet badass,

No its actually an engine, a well designed engine that has been round for ages, it has large displacement for torque, short stroke length for revability. Its actually quite durable until high revs over 7500rpm are used for extended periods (race applications- I know slicks not the real world ).


Cant quite work out why the V8 fanboys are always trying to change everybodys minds, people may like 4, 6, V10 etc, it doesnt mean we are anti LSX engines. People like different engines and arent always interested in cubic inches.

Slicks your very good at taking shots at people via the keyboard, me thinks in real life it would be a very different manner. Some of your responses if said in real life situations would get you in trouble.

[fpv_gtho]

The question was, which is more impressive. IMO, getting 500hp from 5L is more impressive than a similar HP figure from a higher displacement, as is having 2 more cylinders with 2L less displacement.

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Low-end torque + classic engine note = bigger impression left on me.

The M5 sounds hideous at idle, and Honda got more bhp/l out of a smaller engine- more impressive than some jumped-up German saloon with the same torque as a lawnmower. I find the V10 to be one of the more boring engines- the 3.2 straight six got more bhp/l (as if that even matters) and more torque (proportionately), and it does that whilst sounding better than most Ferrari engines.