Official GTO Specs!!

[Scott R. Mraz]

Bob Lutz announces 2004 GTO Power

In a keynote speech at Kettering University, (formerly the General Motors Institute) in Flint Michigan about a week ago GM Vice-Chairman Robert Lutz announced that the 2004 GTO will have a 360+LS1 in 2004 and a 405 HP plus LS6, among other product notes. The GTO is known to be one of Lutz's pet projects and pretty much anything out his mouth regarding the car is considered gospel. With the cars debut quickly coming up expect more and more info to slowly come out of GM. Also on a side note Lutz called the 2004 Grand Prix the best handling FWD car he has ever driven. For the latest news stay tuned to www.NewAgeGTO.com and www.GMInsidenews.com

[Rba007]

I WANT!!!

[Sternie]

sounds good! which engine is the LS6?

[VTECSiGAH8R]

Sounds like a pipe dream unless the Corvette gets a slight boost in horsepower. Maybe 385 hp for the base vette and 420-425 hp for the Z06? Might gain a little more ground on the Viper too until the C6 comes out.

[442alero]

Originally posted by Sternie
sounds good! which engine is the LS6?
Z06 Corvette.;)

[Sternie]

Originally posted by 442alero

Z06 Corvette.;)

damn! i want!

[442alero]

Or 454SS Chevelle 1970 I want.:boogie:

[MattBatt]

I heard a rumor that chevy was going to bring back the 425 cuin engine for the corvette!!!! mind you that was just a rumor but i know lingenfelter bored out a 350 to a 425 a couple years back.

[Scott R. Mraz]

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
Sounds like a pipe dream unless the Corvette gets a slight boost in horsepower. Maybe 385 hp for the base vette and 420-425 hp for the Z06? Might gain a little more ground on the Viper too until the C6 comes out.

I think thats why GM changed it's Corvette is the only car that gets the best of everything rule because they are launching a new model a year and half after the GTO hits. Plus lets face it, the GTO is one of the most important car Re-launch in GM history. Thanks god they are doing it right!!! Finally GM comes through!!!!

[daddy_ja]

the sad part is, how many of us are going to be able to afford it at 40K....expensive!!!!

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by daddy_ja
the sad part is, how many of us are going to be able to afford it at 40K....expensive!!!!

That's what I was worried about. Bring back the damn 26K$ Camaro Z28!!!

:rage:

[Spoon]

Originally posted by daddy_ja
the sad part is, how many of us are going to be able to afford it at 40K....expensive!!!! I think your price is a little high, but it wont matter, there will be only a limited # available anyway for the 1st year of production.

[Scott R. Mraz]

Well 30-40k somewhere in there. It's not set in stone yet either.

[Macleod52]

FYI the Vette is getting totally redesigned for 2005 or 2006 whichever year... New engine and everything. Supposedly it's goign to be camless and have upwards near 500hp on the ZO6

[SilverGA2001]

Originally posted by Mike3800


That's what I was worried about. Bring back the damn 26K$ Camaro Z28!!!

:rage:

I'll find a way, I mean God didn't give me two kidneys for fun...

[Spoon]

Originally posted by Macleod52
FYI the Vette is getting totally redesigned for 2005 or 2006 whichever year... New engine and everything. Supposedly it's goign to be camless and have upwards near 500hp on the ZO6 Your half right on this one.;)

[MattBatt]

Which half was he right about?

[Costa]

Something like that would make my day...no wait, my year ! :D

[Scott R. Mraz]

Originally posted by Spoon
Your half right on this one.;)
Argh... mysterious son of a gun... Toying with us, argh! :) I hope it's the camless part, I think it's about damn time we see silinoid actuated engines. Or at least something along that line of technology.

[VTECSiGAH8R]

Originally posted by Scott R. Mraz

Argh... mysterious son of a gun... Toying with us, argh! :) I hope it's the camless part, I think it's about damn time we see silinoid actuated engines. Or at least something along that line of technology.

I think it might be the redesigned part because I know the interior is gonna be the main focus of change on the next one (they want a total redesign because that was the previous main complaint), and the chassis should be somewhat like the Caddy XLR hydroformed frame, which I believe is a new design also. But then again, the looks will be similar to the C5 but more aggressive (I imagine), so that might not be it. I just think the camless engine design is too great a feat to manage....it seems like they just mentioned the engine as a small possibility rather than a definite. From what I know at least, the first year of the C6 probably won't have a camless engine option, but I don't know about after that.

The first engine should be similar to the currrent LS1, but at 6.0L and with other enhancements. I think it will be called the LS2, and the performance upgrade (Z06 I guess) would have more power still, and I guess wouldd be 6.0L also (maybe more?-possibly at 427 ci like what Lingenfelter did?). I'm not at all positive on these numbers, it's just what I remember off the top of my head, and I don't want to look it up.

[Waeninzil]

omg, you were at kettering? I was there too. I am an incoming freshman, A-Section

[WOLF]

360hp for 2004 and in 2005 (the same year the C-6 comes out) the GTO gets a 400hp option.

Remember to that the CTS-V gets 400hp too, so its really no big deal. The CTS-V will also be faster than the 400hp GTO due to less weight. $ will of course be higher.

If you want a cheap Camaro like car, hope that the Solice *sp?* comes out, much cheaper to make than another big V-8 car. I-4 sucks, but its cheaper to drop in a car than a V-8. Plus the Eco. can handle 400+hp and the car would weight 3000lbs which ='s fun. Still long for a V-8 T/A replacement though.

[SilverGA2001]

Originally posted by WOLF
360hp for 2004 and in 2005 (the same year the C-6 comes out) the GTO gets a 400hp option.

Remember to that the CTS-V gets 400hp too, so its really no big deal. The CTS-V will also be faster than the 400hp GTO due to less weight. $ will of course be higher.

If you want a cheap Camaro like car, hope that the Solice *sp?* comes out, much cheaper to make than another big V-8 car. I-4 sucks, but its cheaper to drop in a car than a V-8. Plus the Eco. can handle 400+hp and the car would weight 3000lbs which ='s fun. Still long for a V-8 T/A replacement though.

I thought the supercharged Solstice was going to be priced at or around 30,000? :confused: Still not camaro territory price wise. The base Solstice was said to be 20,000, but where's the fun in that?

The CTS with beefy power will make me rethink how I feel about that car. :)

[WOLF]

Sure the top of the line Soli. will run just about 30grand, but look what you can do other wise with a Ecotec anyway.

The aftermarket crud for that engine makes the aftermarket selecton for the 3.1 and 3.4 V-6 look like crap. Plus a base line Soli. for 20K will be ALOT better than the ripoffs from across the pond, Miata and MR2 which can go for more than 25K yet are slower than a GAGT. Both cars I've had the displeasure of driving and both blow and have yet to find anything worth mentioning otherwise for a car that costs that much is suppose to be a roadster.

1 reason for no cheap V-8 rear drives. Insurance costs makes people vomit *you would if you found out how much I had to pay per month for my 98 Vette* The only reason I had to give up that car!:mad: Plus most people that buy them are my age, and insance costs are much lower for eco. crap I-4's that get a ton of attention now rather than the big V-8's *grrrrrr*.

[SilverGA2001]

Originally posted by WOLF
1 reason for no cheap V-8 rear drives. Insurance costs makes people vomit *you would if you found out how much I had to pay per month for my 98 Vette* The only reason I had to give up that car!:mad: Plus most people that buy them are my age, and insance costs are much lower for eco. crap I-4's that get a ton of attention now rather than the big V-8's *grrrrrr*.

I have a decent idea on the insurance. :D :thumbs:

I dunno, like you said, there's work you can do to the Ecotec, but I ask myself this... Am I gonna wanna do it? I'm kind of getting modded out, to the point where intake and exhaust would be all I do from now on, cuz it's easy to do and not that expensive. So for me to have the power, I'd have to buy the 30,000 model, and that's just no fun. :(

[WOLF]

Who am I kidding anyway, I hate the sound of loud overdone I-4 in the morning.

30K seems alot, but have you looked up how much the avg. car goes for lately:eek: Its not that far away.

[SC/T02]

It would be costly for me to own one. That is why I am saving for the Solstice.

[Mike3800]

I think when a vehicle is forced inducted it changes everything.


For example... Small block 90 degree V6 + turbo = big block V8 SLAYER. (Regal GNX)

Bringing V8's back is nice but when they are downtuned... it's not the same. If they are going to bring them back bring them back with dignity, for Pete's sake it's 2003... a V8 with 300HP is nothing special. Things like the new C6 are impressive (even though it's not officially made yet). Too bad the cost is insane.

Putting 250Ft.Lbs of torque to the wheels of a car that weighs 2600lbs is impressive when it's powered by a 4cyl engine and costs 20 grand. (Neon SRT)

With the rising costs of fuel and the degrading atomsophere, 4cyl with forced induction is not a bad alternative especially with AWD, I'm anxiously waiting for GM to jump on the bandwagon and offer a compact performance vehicle that everyone can buy (willing to pay for) because of it's affordability (other than Saab 93), like the old Z28 that they killed and never marketed.

Who knows perhaps they will supercharge the Cavalier/Sunfire on a new platform. I'd buy one with the pulley puller and clutch allingment tool in hand to put on that smaller SC pulley and heavy duty clutch! Then I'd go looking for V8's any annoy them with my exhaust drone in addition to **** them off becuase they can't catch me! :)

[VTECSiGAH8R]

I think I saw a Turbo Ecotec Cavvy with like 220 hp recently as a concept. Prolly not gonna make it, but you never know cuz Saturn is bringing a turbo Ecotec to a dealer near you soon. Like 210-220 hp I believe. Maybe it will have some numbers similar to the SRT-4. One can only hope.

BTW, I like the SRT-4 ADs I saw on the billboards down the highway: "Turbocharged, not overcharged." :thumbs:

[WOLF]

The Vette's cost isn't that bad. The ZR-1 was 75K and that was what, 10 years ago. The Z06 runs circles around it for 20K less.

The Viper costs around 75-80, the NSX is a rip off at 90K, a maxed out 350Z runs 35K and its still a second slower than a baseline Vette for around 43-45K *Vette has a better sound system too:)* The RX-7 will cost you about 30K for a decent one and thats nearly 2 seconds off 1/4 mile wise and has the torque of a Chevy Malibu. A Porche 911 is slower and cost more. More come to mind but I don't feel like taking the time to type them all up.

Yeah its expensive, but compare it to comp. its a great value for the trill you get in return. When you own one, you never have to go on anti-depressants for depression, that Vette always puts a smile on your face once behind the wheel.

3800: Underpowered V-8 do **** me off to. A TrailBlazers I-6 makes 275 and the 3.8L s/c makes 260 easy so it steams me when I see little 4.4L and Ford's 4.6 make only 250hp. Dumb dumb dumb.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by WOLF
The Vette's cost isn't that bad.

The older ones were not too badly priced (every new car is overpriced), and it is good bang for the buck, but the C6 I imagine will be outrageously expensive. I just can't seem them offering that kind of technology for the same or near the same price as the C5, even if they should.

If I owned one, I wouldn't care how much it would cost. The Corvette will always remain the top sports car in my book no matter what.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
cuz Saturn is bringing a turbo Ecotec to a dealer near you soon. Like 210-220 hp I believe.

Hmmm.... depending on the price, I might be headded down to the Saturn dealer near me soon, but if it's 25 grand or so... screw that... SRT still holds the bang for the buck title.

[VTECSiGAH8R]

Originally posted by Mike3800
Hmmm.... depending on the price, I might be headded down to the Saturn dealer near me soon, but if it's 25 grand or so... screw that... SRT still holds the bang for the buck title.

I seriously doubt 25 grand. I think it will be around maybe 20 or 21 grand, like the SRT-4. The Saturn dealer near us has a hookup with rims too, so you could be rolling outta there with a turbo Saturn on 18s or higher if ya wanted.

It'll be gauranteed to fell cheap like the other Saturns tho, and like the SRT-4, but if they sell it for that much it will be cool I suppose.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by VTECSiGAH8R
I seriously doubt 25 grand. I think it will be around maybe 20 or 21 grand, like the SRT-4. The Saturn dealer near us has a hookup with rims too, so you could be rolling outta there with a turbo Saturn on 18s or higher if ya wanted.

It'll be gauranteed to fell cheap like the other Saturns tho, and like the SRT-4, but if they sell it for that much it will be cool I suppose.

I remember seeing a 2002 SL2 for 17 thousand dollars. I about craped myself. Is it me or are the new Ion's less expensive?

I hope it's at or less than 20g.. I seriously would consider buying one. Turbo at altitude is great.

[WOLF]

C-6 won't jump in price much, maybe a couple grand, thats it. Look at the ol' end the line C-4 prices vs. the C-5 and how much more the new C-5 offered for almost the same price. Chevy takes pride in making a world class car for 50K and I think they won't do something stupid to screw it up.

Ion, turbo model I think is to retail at 20K, but you never know since I read it in a auto mag. Sometimes they are way off the mark. And for a s/ced or t/ced Cav. ha, not going to happen, the current gen. will die off soon, real soon and then the next ge. will probably have something. GM more focused on moving those suckers out a bargin basement prices to clear them out for the next 1-2 years since they are so outdated and why drop cash into a hopped model right before the ol' gen. dies.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by WOLF

If you want a cheap Camaro like car, hope that the Solice

Camaro had 4 seats. Solstice is more geared tward the S2000 market.

[Black Z28]

no matter what you do to a 4cyl, its not gonna match up with a V-8. torque is crap on all 4cyls, although with boost, they have a nice top end, but no bottom end. Torque is what makes you accelerate and "feel it in your pants".... thats why i went with the best bang for the buck.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by GrandAmRamAir
no matter what you do to a 4cyl, its not gonna match up with a V-8. torque is crap on all 4cyls, although with boost, they have a nice top end, but no bottom end. Torque is what makes you accelerate and "feel it in your pants".... thats why i went with the best bang for the buck.

Have you ever driven a 4cyl car with a turbo?

Saab has engines that make peak torque as low as 1600RPM's and maintains that peak level of torque untill 500RPM before redline... THAT'S bottom end!!!

[Black Z28]

Originally posted by Mike3800
Have you ever driven a 4cyl car with a turbo?

Saab has engines that make peak torque as low as 1600RPM's and maintains that peak level of torque untill 500RPM before redline... THAT'S bottom end!!!

yeah, but peak torque is way less than hp.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by GrandAmRamAir
yeah, but peak torque is way less than hp.

That's actually incorrect. Turbo/Supercharging changes the rules... this is not some crack hyper high revving rev til you throw up VSUCK Honda engine we are talking about.

Saab's are known for having more torque than HP. Most other turbo 4cyl cars as well. These new Subaru's Mazda's and crap have more HP than torque but for the most part turbo 4's have alot more torque than HP.

250HP 258Ft.Lbs of torque on the new Saab 9-5.. that's impressive for a 4cyl.

The new Saab 9-3 has 175HP and 195Ft.Lbs of torque.. impressive for a 2.3 liter 4cyl too.

1992 Ford Probe GT turbo 145HP 190Ft.Lbs.

1995 Eclipse GSX turbo 210HP 215Ft.Lbs of torque

1991 Misubishi Galant VR4 turbo 195HP 203Ft.Lbs.

You will find most turbo 4's have the torque to back the HP and down low were you want it.

[VTECSiGAH8R]

Originally posted by Mike3800
That's actually incorrect. Turbo/Supercharging changes the rules... this is not some crack hyper high revving rev til you throw up VSUCK Honda engine we are talking about.

Saab's are known for having more torque than HP. Most other turbo 4cyl cars as well. These new Subaru's Mazda's and crap have more HP than torque but for the most part turbo 4's have alot more torque than HP.

250HP 258Ft.Lbs of torque on the new Saab 9-5.. that's impressive for a 4cyl.

The new Saab 9-3 has 175HP and 195Ft.Lbs of torque.. impressive for a 2.3 liter 4cyl too.

1992 Ford Probe GT turbo 145HP 190Ft.Lbs.

1995 Eclipse GSX turbo 210HP 215Ft.Lbs of torque

1991 Misubishi Galant VR4 turbo 195HP 203Ft.Lbs.

You will find most turbo 4's have the torque to back the HP and down low were you want it.

Very true, and this is the case with most non-tuned or lightly tuned turbo cars, not just the 4 bangers. The GNs had a lot more torque than hp, same with the Sy/Ty's. The Cayenne turbo (can't think of other v8 turbos right now) has more torque than hp. The SRT-4 has more torque than hp. The nice thing about turbos is that the peak torque comes low in the RPM range (depending on the turbo and engine size) and it is usually on a somewhat flat torque curve.

[Black Z28]

ok, you are looking at stock turbos, while i was thinking of high horsepower turbos. i know a bunch of guys around here have aftermarket turbo kits on their cars... they put out a lot of hp, but their torque numbers are noticeable lower. also, supercharging a motor is way way different from a turbo kit. i know they are both forced induction, but they way they generate the boost is way different.

[VTECSiGAH8R]

Originally posted by GrandAmRamAir
ok, you are looking at stock turbos, while i was thinking of high horsepower turbos. i know a bunch of guys around here have aftermarket turbo kits on their cars... they put out a lot of hp, but their torque numbers are noticeable lower. also, supercharging a motor is way way different from a turbo kit. i know they are both forced induction, but they way they generate the boost is way different.

Yeah, but looking at an engine that way will almost always give you higher hp number than torque numbers. Almost any engine, N/A, Turbo, S/C, of any size will have more hp than torque unless the RPMs are severely limited, which is just what you don't want to do on an engine when you soup it up. The only engines that I can think of that aren't like this are turbodiesels and huge displacement engines (big block v8s and the like) because they are limited to less RPMs because there is so much more rotating mass. This might also happen if an engine loses a lot of torque in the high RPM range for some weird reason or another. But you are right, done up 4 banger turbos do have more hp than torque, but it isn't bad like the N/A 4 bangers cuz there is still a crapload of torque and it pulls really hard through the high revs with turbo anyway.

[Mike3800]

Originally posted by GrandAmRamAir
ok, you are looking at stock turbos, while i was thinking of high horsepower turbos.

210+HP out of a 2.0 4cyl is pretty high especially when it has low end torque and mre torque than HP.

I was talking about stock cars and what the car makers should make. Even if you have a high HP turbo 4, it still generates decent torque down low and has a broad torque band. Turbo 4's are worlds apart from normally aspirated 4cyl.

Go test drive a used Eclipse turbo... nice sensation being pushed back into the seat after the boost builds up around what... 2000RPM's or so.

Forced induction changes the rules. Don't get me started on the Buick Regal GN/X T-Type with the little small block 3.8 liter 90 degree V6. :D Big block V8's back down against challanging those things when both modded.