427 vette is back

I did not think i would see the day when a 427 vette would be back in production. Well, GM proved me wrong. The new Zo6 is a 427ci. In a small block no less. 500HP 475lb T. That ought to enough to
light up the pavement.
All i have to do now is afford one........
Bob
-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BOB URZ wrote:

Yup. I could not afford way back when and I still can't afford one now. :(
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.. wonders if you can buy just the engine and drop it in...
Fwed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think you can for about $20,000.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BOB URZ wrote:

A friend just took delivery of an LS-2 vette, and is planning on trading it back for a ZO6. He's already on the waiting list.
One of the reasons he wants to trade up is that he blew the rear end out of the LS-2 with less than 5000 miles and no modifications to the powertrain. You just shouldn't be able to do that. The ZO6 has a beefier rear end in addition to the bigger engine.
The thing I didn't like about his car when I saw it was the whole "keyless car" idea. I don't really want to always have to carry a remote all the time, and I don't really want to just push a button to start the car. But hey, that's just me. Other than that, its quite an impressive machine!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Keyless car...heh?! Another one of those GM gimmicky "systems", no doubt. Perhaps one can be ordered with a normal key ignition. That would be my preference a well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

FWIW Lexus is moving to the same keyless system (fob in pocket, press start button) on the GS350/430 and the upcoming IS350...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I suppose that's fine. But I'm not going to buy it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I wish they would just go ahead and call it a 427 instead of 7 litre. 427 sounds so much cooler.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm impressed that GM is able to push a small block to 427ci in a production vehicle. What started as a 265ci design in the 1950's sure has come a long way. Just hope it doesn't have the uneven cooling problems like the 70's 400ci SB had. Anybody know if the cylinder walls are 'siamesed' like the old 400??
Regards, Al.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Al Haunts wrote:

Al, no matter what you read about this engine, it has nothing in common with the old small block chevy engine. You can "call" it a small block, but seriously, it is nothing like the old chevy engine. I've got one apart at work, I'll have to take some pictures of it, so folks can appreciate what a difference there is in design. The only similarity is the fact that it's a "pushrod" engine.
From what little bit I've read about it, they sleeved the engine in order to get the large bore...as opposed to cast in liners. I'll be very surprised if there aren't "issues" with this engine. Thankfully, not that many will be sold out of our dealership, so we shouldn't have to deal with more the one or two of them.
Ian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanks Ian, that makes sense. Guess I'm showing my age. Last time I got 'intimate' with a SBC thay were still all cast iron, top & bottom

Yep, like anything, best to avoid the 'beta' version. I was considering buying the upcoming new Impala but a new body AND a new 3.5/3.9 engine might just be asking for trouble. Gonna have to keep the '99 Malibu a while longer (sigh).
Regards, AL
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Al Haunts wrote:

Well, they still are....in some versions. The truck engines all have cast iron blocks, except for one version of the 5.3 that appears in the Trailblazers and the SSR (which is nothing more then a two wheel drive Trailblazer). I've seen a few 6.0 litre engines that also have cast iron heads....I assume that this is some sort of heavy duty version. The 6.0 litre engines also seem to use a superior head gasket when compared to the 4.8/5.3 truck engines. But supposedly....they tend to be noisier (piston slap) then the smaller engines.

I think that the 3.5 has "got" to be better then the engine you have in the Malibu. The 3.9 looks like it has a number of design changes even when comparing it to the 3.5. Get something like a Buick Allure with the VVT 3.6 DOHC engine. That's a Caddy engine, and I think it may just end up being bullet-proof. Certainly no intake manifold gasket problems to worry about.
Ian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Al Haunts wrote:

The current "Gen III" v8 has no relationship to the small-block Chevy based on the 265. It quietly went out of production several years ago. The new engines (including the LS-1, LS-2, and 427) are all-aluminum, have reverse-flow cooling, iron sleeves, and few or no interchangeable parts with the old SBC.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The original 427 didn't have any shared parts with the SBC either... It was a Big Block Chevy.
--
Alan Gallacher
Born to Tinker!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Anumber1 wrote:

The only response I can think of is "duh!" The question being addressed was if the new 427 would have any of the problems that the larger small-blocks (like the 400) had, not whether it would be a pushrod-bender like the old Chevy big-blocks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Has the bore spacing changed since the '50s SBC?? IMHO, that is the biggie when it comes to how far you can push displacement without unwanted problems like the old 400 SBC had.
Regards, Al.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Al Haunts wrote:

Even if the bore spacing hasn't changed, they could avoid the iron 400's problems a number of ways. Getting to 427 with a smaller bore would be one thing, plus using an aluminum block with liners could avoid the cylinders actually being "siamesed" the way the 400's were.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
tony kujawa wrote:

"7-Liter" makes me think Ford 428 instead of Chevy. The high-performance Galaxy 500s were tagged "7-Liter" for a while back in the 60s.
http://www.tommackclassics.com/newsite/1966%20Ford%20Galaxie%207%20Liter/page_1.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.