Generation IV Internal Engine 2005-2014 LS2 | LS3 | LS7 | L92 | LS9

Why is the GM flat crank not used in production models?

Old 06-18-2012, 08:51 AM
  #1  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (33)
 
LS1-450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts

Default Why is the GM flat crank not used in production models?

Why is it used in the C6R, but not in production engines?
Old 06-18-2012, 09:20 AM
  #2  
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
 
The Alchemist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Doylestown PA
Posts: 10,813
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

Testing / development maybe?? Just like the C5R had the 427 and was used as the test bed for putting the LS7 into production in the C6. Who knows, the C7 might have a flat crank, smaller cube, higher revving motor as an option.
Old 06-18-2012, 03:37 PM
  #3  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (12)
 
Wnts2Go10O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 4,354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

the other thing is, the C6.R engine has 2 cylinders firing at a time iirc. but to answer your question... COST. the cranks they are using are NOT cheap and are tailor made for the application.

gm has already said the C7 will be 6.2L
Old 06-19-2012, 03:17 AM
  #4  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (33)
 
LS1-450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Wnts2Go10O
the other thing is, the C6.R engine has 2 cylinders firing at a time iirc. but to answer your question... COST. the cranks they are using are NOT cheap and are tailor made for the application.

gm has already said the C7 will be 6.2L

W/ the flat crank, would have to. Yah, cost is probably the reason. Maybe it will show up as an after market option somewhere.
Old 06-19-2012, 11:08 AM
  #5  
TECH Apprentice
 
Krom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 328
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

From an OE standpoint a crank is a crank, it doesn't cost any more or less to make a 180* than any other crank...
It prob comes down to things like NVH, or even the tone of the exhaust
Old 06-19-2012, 07:14 PM
  #6  
TECH Resident
 
moge11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Champaign IL
Posts: 814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

simple..gotta leave something left for the years to come
Old 06-19-2012, 07:52 PM
  #7  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Tainted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Krom
From an OE standpoint a crank is a crank, it doesn't cost any more or less to make a 180* than any other crank...
It prob comes down to things like NVH, or even the tone of the exhaust
You do know a flat crank just cant be simply swapped correct?

There was a thread a while back of an engine dyno flat crank lsx turning like 9000rpms
Old 06-19-2012, 09:27 PM
  #8  
UNDER PRESSURE MOD
iTrader: (19)
 
The Alchemist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Doylestown PA
Posts: 10,813
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Tainted
You do know a flat crank just cant be simply swapped correct?

There was a thread a while back of an engine dyno flat crank lsx turning like 9000rpms

I think you need to match the cam as well and I'm not sure what else. Probably have to do something with moving around injector harnesses and coil packs as well since the valve events will be different.
Old 06-19-2012, 09:51 PM
  #9  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Tainted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

I remeber there was a lot that was different. And not only the added complication but flat cranks arent as stable either.
Old 06-20-2012, 08:05 AM
  #10  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
 
Mike94ZLT1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Livonia, Mi
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Tainted
I remeber there was a lot that was different. And not only the added complication but flat cranks arent as stable either.

Why on earth would GM use it in the C6R if it wasn't as stable? Also, if it isn't as stable, why can they spin so high?
Old 06-20-2012, 09:35 AM
  #11  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Tainted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Mike94ZLT1
Why on earth would GM use it in the C6R if it wasn't as stable? Also, if it isn't as stable, why can they spin so high?
I cant explain all those details, look up the thread and there was lots of info about it and why its not stable, yet able to turn stupid rpms.
Old 06-20-2012, 10:46 AM
  #12  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (49)
 
bww3588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chillicothe/Lima, Ohio
Posts: 8,139
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts

Default

It's not stable at lower rpm's because of the harmonics. At higher rpm's, the vibrations come into balance naturally.

Remember the 4.3's with the balance shaft?
Old 06-20-2012, 11:20 AM
  #13  
10 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
 
Higgs Boson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

street car vs race car

always compromises. it's cool at first but drive it every day and you begin to hate your car. that's why i am done with nutty street cars. give me something stock to drive to work and i'll get my kicks at the track.
Old 06-20-2012, 11:34 AM
  #14  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (15)
 
wildcamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,501
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

I've read everywhere that C7 with be a 5.5l over head valve direct injected motor making around 420-430hp
Old 06-20-2012, 11:35 AM
  #15  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (15)
 
wildcamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,501
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

Oh yea and what do you guys mean when saying "flat" crank...I haven't heard of that yet...
Old 06-20-2012, 12:16 PM
  #16  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (9)
 
Tainted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

heres the thread with the flat crank engine dyno:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/multimedi...gine-dyno.html

lots of info in the thread explaining what it is etc.
Old 06-20-2012, 01:27 PM
  #17  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (1)
 
SSCamaro99_3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ballwin, MO
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by wildcamaro
I've read everywhere that C7 with be a 5.5l over head valve direct injected motor making around 420-430hp
Been reading to many crappy magazines that are making the assumption that becasue the C6-R program is limited to 5.5L (by rule), that for some reason this is some testament to the street version.
Old 06-20-2012, 06:04 PM
  #18  
TECH Junkie
Thread Starter
iTrader: (33)
 
LS1-450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,783
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by wildcamaro
Oh yea and what do you guys mean when saying "flat" crank...I haven't heard of that yet...
Think of it as the current "stock" LS crank looks like a + when viewed from either end where a "flat" crank would look like a - . Stock crank, bearing seats Are located @ 90*. Flat crank, bearing seats are *180.
Old 06-21-2012, 12:18 PM
  #19  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (15)
 
wildcamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,501
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

Oh ok I got you that sounds pretty cool...I love seeing the evolution of GM ohv engines!
Old 06-21-2012, 12:28 PM
  #20  
12 Second Club
iTrader: (49)
 
bww3588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chillicothe/Lima, Ohio
Posts: 8,139
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts

Default

Looks like a 4cylinder crank, except there are 2 rods on each journal, and 4 slugs at tdc at the same time and 2 firing at the same time.


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Why is the GM flat crank not used in production models?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 AM.