Pushrod or OHC

[Alastor]

Originally Posted by MetA

Nope...

Good　Stuff,

Thanks.

[zeta]

No one yet has done the camless technology. GM takes for ever with things or doesn't do things like that unless so else does it first.-Like the "displacement on demand" a concept. on the Cadilliac 16 w/ a V-16 (that would run on 4cyl. at idle and low speeds....) DCX bet them to production .-
BMW made the first VVT production car ,out of F1, with the first M3 in the early 80's or the earlier street ferrari's were doing that way before. Correct me if I'm wrong? Point is VV timing is definately Euro trait.

[SlickHolden]

Back in the 80's Holden made a OHC V8 engine the first in the hole GM family so guess what GM did? Scrap it. It was a rippa of a engine. Fully standard 190kw 450Nm. Ran so great first time they asked the guy on the starter button to turn it on when it was already running.

[megotmea7]

Originally Posted by SlickHolden

Back in the 80's Holden made a OHC V8 engine the first in the hole GM family so guess what GM did? Scrap it. It was a rippa of a engine. Fully standard 190kw 450Nm. Ran so great first time they asked the guy on the starter button to turn it on when it was already running.

cost was probalbly the prohibitor, like the LT5. its probly was too expensive to be put into production practically.

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by henk4

you now show the right mindset to switch to the new generation of powerful diesel engines, now just hope they will make it to the USA. (and they all have OHC's )

I wouldnt mind a diesel at all, especially with the rising gas prices were getting now (ha, I laugh at the people who think that bush went to war for oil).
Now only if they could make high end torque to go with the low end torque...

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

NO.

It is peak then take off 20% and then LOOK ON THE GRAPH FOR WHERE THAT LINE crosses the graph.

NEVER multiply revs or take 5ages or anything.

just READ the revs from the graph axes.

I'll try and get the time to draw it later

Ahh, all a big misunderstanding.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by zeta

I hope GM stays orginal with OHV motors, thats a good american tradition instead of flowing the Euro (F1) tricked out cam OHC style (all the time) "high tech". I they think should develop on pushrod engine technology- like figgerout how to improve the disadvantages over OHC(). Aside from all the other advantages , the OHV most importantly gets much better fuel mileage and is lighter weight, then OHC. The 6L LS2 gets the gas mileage of V6's, and the GM 3.8 series III (OHV) V6 gets the mileage or better of some (29city/32hwy) 4bangers This defeats the purpose of small engines for better fuel economy in (most cases) or that big motors pointlessly just waste fuel. Making american style performance and American trademark big motors, reasonable to exists. That comment on OHV valvetrain having reliable disadvantage because of 3 more moving parts or rocker arms not as quick as OHC set up , is rubbish

If some ever decides to make camshaftless motors it going to change the game forever, Slicks reminded me, the ECU/PCM controlling timing and lift duration, instead of the mechanically imperfect complex cams, the computer would balance out everything to almost endless revs- if its programmed (without factoring engine heat and motor endurance)

GM makes a large line of deseils the Duramax. in 6.2L, 6.4L, 6600 (they should put those as options in full sized trucks like the H2 and sclade, like the pick-ups.

*Realized. the GM 3.8 V6 is the most fuel efficent V6 in the world? what other V6 gets 29city/32-34hwy?

Even taking into the difficult circumstances I have to work under now, this is too good not to reply to.
American tradition of OHV? The USA is about the last country that produces OHV engines. (plus GM Australia). All other car producing nations switched to OHC and most of them already a long time ago.
The OHV "most importantly" gets a better mileage? In areas where fuel prices are three times as high as in the USA all engines produced are OHC. Would customers accept that if they knew that OHV would give a better mileage?
Chrysler has introduced the 300 C hemi on the European market, which therefore gets subjected to some serious testing. In general testers are full of praise but what do they critisize? You guessed it: the fuel economy. Auto Motor und Sport got to a test average of about 16 liters per 100 km, whereas a comparable V8 Mercedes E class or BMW 740 would use something between 13-14 liters. Now the Hemi is a pushrod engine and I accept that it is not an LS2. However as I don't think that GM is capable of sourcing pushrods that provide a much better economy than the ones Chrysler is using, the fuel economy of the LS2 engine might not entirely be attributed to it being OHV, but for instance also to the exceptionally high top gear, that resulted in a French comment that the C6 does not have 6-gear box, but a 5 plus 1 overdrive.
I have already mentioned elsewhere that last year I got one of GM's V6 OHV engines installed in a Pontiac Grand-Am Ram Air rental car. It was a 3.4 litre autobox. The average fuel consumption I managed was between 8 and 9 litre per 100 km, where you have to take into account that it was driven under holiday conditions, long distances with no hurry and sticking to the general speed limits. Under such conditions my own car (similar weight and dimensions) in Europe would take between around 5 litre per 100 km, but that is diesel powered. Normally I would get something of 5.5-5.7 litres per 100 km, and if driven on the German autobahn about 7.5 litre per 100 km. I am pretty sure that if the GM V6 would be driven under European conditions its fuel consumption would rise rapidly. Just wondering why that engine is not available over here.
I also just noted that the top versions of the new Buick Lucerne get the DOHC Northstar engine. Strange GM policy isn't it or do they need to get rid of some surplus camcovers?

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Slicks

I wouldnt mind a diesel at all, especially with the rising gas prices were getting now (ha, I laugh at the people who think that bush went to war for oil).
Now only if they could make high end torque to go with the low end torque...

I suppose you have taken up laughing as your full time job now because all the people that you meet.

Anyway, your torque remark qualifies as one of the largest pieces of BS of I have come across lately (and mind you I have seen a lot of BS). First a flatter torque curve than a diesel would be difficult to find and second there is something like a gearbox.


Note: Smilies do not work from the place I am working now from, I had intended to put a few, you sort out where for yourself.

[charged]

[quote=henk4] The USA is about the last country that produces OHV engines. (plus GM Australia). QUOTE]
GM Aust doesnt manufacture any ohv engines any more the last was the V6 3.8, now they manufacture the hf v6,also agree with fuel consumption regarding diesels, I have a 3 litre td hilux surf, I average about 9-11/100km, my neighbour has 3.5 litre v6 Holden Jackeroo he averages about 18-23 dependent on driving behaviour.

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by henk4

Even taking into the difficult circumstances I have to work under now, this is too good not to reply to.
American tradition of OHV? The USA is about the last country that produces OHV engines. (plus GM Australia). All other car producing nations switched to OHC and most of them already a long time ago.
The OHV "most importantly" gets a better mileage? In areas where fuel prices are three times as high as in the USA all engines produced are OHC. Would customers accept that if they knew that OHV would give a better mileage?

M-a-r-k-e-t-i-n-g.
Its already brainwashed into Europeans that OHV = bad. Just like here people think that diesel is dirty and inefficient.

Chrysler has introduced the 300 C hemi on the European market, which therefore gets subjected to some serious testing. In general testers are full of praise but what do they critisize? You guessed it: the fuel economy. Auto Motor und Sport got to a test average of about 16 liters per 100 km, whereas a comparable V8 Mercedes E class or BMW 740 would use something between 13-14 liters. Now the Hemi is a pushrod engine and I accept that it is not an LS2. However as I don't think that GM is capable of sourcing pushrods that provide a much better economy than the ones Chrysler is using, the fuel economy of the LS2 engine might not entirely be attributed to it being OHV, but for instance also to the exceptionally high top gear, that resulted in a French comment that the C6 does not have 6-gear box, but a 5 plus 1 overdrive.

Keep in mind the 300C Hemi is a 4000lbs sedan. EPA rates it at 17/25mpg, not bad considering the weight. A 3300lbs BMW M3 gets 16/24mpg with an I6, and I dont even want to mention what the V8 M5 gets(Viper like gas consumption). Even Honda's S2000 gets the same highway gas milage as the 300C Hemi. And as far as MB E class, the E55 AMG gets 14/20mpg... and even the similar power/weight Jaguar XJR gets 16/21mpg.
So its seems that the 300C is more efficient.

I have already mentioned elsewhere that last year I got one of GM's V6 OHV engines installed in a Pontiac Grand-Am Ram Air rental car. It was a 3.4 litre autobox. The average fuel consumption I managed was between 8 and 9 litre per 100 km, where you have to take into account that it was driven under holiday conditions, long distances with no hurry and sticking to the general speed limits. Under such conditions my own car (similar weight and dimensions) in Europe would take between around 5 litre per 100 km, but that is diesel powered. Normally I would get something of 5.5-5.7 litres per 100 km, and if driven on the German autobahn about 7.5 litre per 100 km. I am pretty sure that if the GM V6 would be driven under European conditions its fuel consumption would rise rapidly. Just wondering why that engine is not available over here.

Whats your car? I doubt that the Grand AM is as light as what your driving, ill remind you that its a 3000lbs car that is 186in long(a Camaro is only roughly 7in longer).

I also just noted that the top versions of the new Buick Lucerne get the DOHC Northstar engine. Strange GM policy isn't it or do they need to get rid of some surplus camcovers?

Marketing man, why do you think that GM uses the less efficient Northstar in Caddis? But wait, they put the LS6 in the CTS-V, why is that??? The Northstar wouldnt fit, was heavier, and less efficent...
In that article I posted, the guy says "Buyers want that 'high tech' in their car."

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by henk4

I suppose you have taken up laughing as your full time job now because all the people that you meet.

Sorry to break it to you but even the people who hate Bush here dont think he was in it for oil, especially since the gas prices are still raising, dont you think they would be dropping?

Anyway, your torque remark qualifies as one of the largest pieces of BS of I have come across lately (and mind you I have seen a lot of BS). First a flatter torque curve than a diesel would be difficult to find and second there is something like a gearbox.

That would make a diesel less efficient(shortening gears), and their all about effiency right? And you were talking about performance diesels too. If they want to perform, they should beable to meet what petrol can put out.

[crisis]

Originally Posted by Slicks

Sorry to break it to you but even the people who hate Bush here dont think he was in it for oil, especially since the gas prices are still raising, dont you think they would be dropping?

I agree. Its much worse. I posted this elswhere but it gives an insight (albeit a frightening one) into the Bush administraion thinking and philosophy. I cant look at the prick now with any respect. Interstingly (and again disturbingly) Bush has put forward Paul Wolfowitz as head of the world bank. How cosy.


Heres a nice little taste of the Neo conservatives thinking.

Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;


• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;


• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;


• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

[henk4]

Originally Posted by Slicks

M-a-r-k-e-t-i-n-g.
Its already brainwashed into Europeans that OHV = bad. Just like here people think that diesel is dirty and inefficient.


Keep in mind the 300C Hemi is a 4000lbs sedan. EPA rates it at 17/25mpg, not bad considering the weight. A 3300lbs BMW M3 gets 16/24mpg with an I6, and I dont even want to mention what the V8 M5 gets(Viper like gas consumption). Even Honda's S2000 gets the same highway gas milage as the 300C Hemi. And as far as MB E class, the E55 AMG gets 14/20mpg... and even the similar power/weight Jaguar XJR gets 16/21mpg.
So its seems that the 300C is more efficient.

Whats your car? I doubt that the Grand AM is as light as what your driving, ill remind you that its a 3000lbs car that is 186in long(a Camaro is only roughly 7in longer).

Marketing man, why do you think that GM uses the less efficient Northstar in Caddis? But wait, they put the LS6 in the CTS-V, why is that??? The Northstar wouldnt fit, was heavier, and less efficent...
In that article I posted, the guy says "Buyers want that 'high tech' in their car."

Again you come up with the marketing argument and that we are brainwashed in Europe. Earlier on I replied you that the average carowner in Europe really cares about his valve drive. If you are talking about marketing, may be the word "hemi" is a pure marketing concept as the old engine still is in the back of many american's mind.

When I quoted the mileage of the 300C I gave you the source which was a road test and not a standardised EPA system (we also have an ECE mileage system here in Europe which tends to be highly optimistic) and I compared the test results (the total fuel consumption of the car during all testing activites including accelaration measurements and (ungoverned) top speed drives) with the test results by the same authoritative magazine for the BMW 7-series and the Mercedes E500. These cars can get less more than 10 km out of litre if they are feathered, the 300C managed 9 at best.

My car weighs 1400 kgs and is 4.75 metres long.

Stupid marketing man, if I were GM I would develop a tamed and smaller version of the LS2 and sell that as the junior Corvette engine keeping up America's best motoring traditions.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by crisis

I agree. Its much worse. I posted this elswhere but it gives an insight (albeit a frightening one) into the Bush administraion thinking and philosophy. I cant look at the prick now with any respect. Interstingly (and again disturbingly) Bush has put forward Paul Wolfowitz as head of the world bank. How cosy.

World Bank/IFC Aid will in future be first measured against the political correctness of the beneficary countries and their support of moral values. Poverty reduction is one of the focus activities of the World Bank today. I am afraid the clock will be turned back by years.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by Slicks

M-a-r-k-e-t-i-n-g.
Its already brainwashed into Europeans that OHV = bad.

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
Read what henk wrote abotu engines in Europe, it's the performance they deliver with the consumption. Grannies and school teachers (!) dont' CARE about technology. You've been given a lie and swallowed it

In that article I posted, the guy says "Buyers want that 'high tech' in their car."

yep, his OPINION, *NOT* a researched analysis of buying trends