Sarahgto

If you want a smaller motor to make power you gots to up the compression or force air. Remeber engine is a big air pump the faster it goes in and out the more hp is going to make. If the motor is so small how is it going to take in so much air without being forced in??

Irunelevens

These are some of the very first numbers from any owners at all... these are the numbers that matter. 13.3 @ 107mph from a "professional" driver is pathetic.
Not to nitpick, but yes OHC motors have been around longer. And pushrod = OHV.

SCM_Crash

iTrader: (2)

The argument of which is better - OHC or Pushrod - is really quite stupid.

They both have their pros and cons. To suggest that one is better than the other without using a basis for reasoning is like saying chocolate is better than vanilla.

It's been proven time and time again that both motors can make LOTS of power efficiently. It's also been proven that one can be better than the other in different categories.

Personally, I prefer pushrod because of its simplicity. 1 cam. Easy head swaps. Less rotating mass.

However, that's not to say OHC motors can't out do a pushrod motor.

The next generation of valve control will be actuators/servos. They've already been using that technology in race cars, Fiats (although who would want one?), and plenty of other road-proven applications. Removing cams all-together will prove to be far better for making power.

I'm hoping GM doesn't use a OHC motor in the future and just skips to using servo controlled valves. Then the only thing that the engine will have to power (besides the wheels) is an alternator. Everything else would be electric.

Sax1031

I can't wait for servo/electronic valvetrains.

Ke^in

But a stock LS1 fbody can take it. That can't be true.

SCM_Crash

iTrader: (2)

It's almost a reality.

Brief thread Hi-Jack time!

The new camless engines will no longer run on a 12V system. The auto industry is moving on to a 48V system. The start and alternators will be removed and replaced with a crank-mounted generator/starter. This will be the only engine powered accessory. The valves will then either be controlled by hydroelectric actuators, servos or "poppet valves". In performance cars, likely servos. Over conventional cam-based engines, we'll see 10-15% power and economy gains.

OK, done with the thread hijack.

The new mustang motor is only 1 step away from this technology. GM doesn't really have anything that can be converted over just yet other than maybe the Northstar motors.

GM's plans for the next Camaros is not to make the motor more powerful but to make it smaller. From what I understand, they're going to put the Camaro on a diet, change it's chassis to a smaller chassis, and keep it's power about the same.

If they can get it to weigh about the same as a 2011 GT, the competition will be better.

If I had to pick between the two, I'd prefer the GT because I hate the interior on the new Camaro. Blinds spots galore and a the gauges are too small and ugly.

99C5JA

There really isn't anything that makes an OHC motor more viable for actuated valves than an OHV motor. All you need is a timing signal to schedule valve events around and a PCM capable of handling valve scheduling (increased voltage will needed as well). Since you are divorcing the engine of the cam(s), timing chain(s), etc, the original architecture isn't relevant. You bolt on a head with the necessary hardware and wire into the engine management system. The head can have as many valves as you want since there is no longer any physical considerations other than being able to fit them in the head. A wider head would mean redesigning the intake and exhaust, but nothing earth shattering.

Irunelevens

I can imagine that since OHC heads are already physically larger, that it might be easier to use one for this new technology over an OHV engine.

JonCR96Z

iTrader: (33)

Oops, I used the wrong letter.

OHC has every advantage except for physical size. If Ford had any displacement over the last 17 years then they could have been fast.

99C5JA

While true, without the cams, tappets and gears I'm not sure how big the head really needs to be. If it did need to be wider it could be accommodated fairly easily since you don't really need any hardware to connect into the block anymore. Just revise the intake manifold and exhaust and you could do it.

Ke^in

You're just referring to the GT right?

JonCR96Z

iTrader: (33)

Yeah, cars with power adders have a slight advantage.

Ke^in

So do cars with larger engines...

It doesn't matter how you get there. One company goes with a larger engine, to make large HP, another goes with a smaller engine and f/i.

I've seen a lot of comments about people saying "Finally Ford made something to compete" when what they REALLY meant was, "Ford put a GT out that's faster than the Camaro." as Ford has been making Mustangs for a long time that have been faster than Camaros.

SCM_Crash

iTrader: (2)

The reason I say OHC is a better motor to start with for electronic valve control is because you don't have to modify the block.

OHV motors have a cam inside them. So the block isn't really setup for that. If I personally were to do testing on this, I would grab an OHC motor to start with.

JonCR96Z

iTrader: (33)

Maybe it's a good thing that GM quit building f-bodys. This is the first time that Ford has made a comparable Mustang, while GM is also building something, well since the early 90s anyway.

Ke^in

Why is that?
No, this is the first time Ford has put out a GT that was faster than GM's fastest Camaro. The Mustang GT is a mid-range Mustang. Ford has made many a car that was faster than GM's fbody line during this time.
Yes GM builds cars.. before the 90s I am sure

LWCS561

iTrader: (1)

uhg ill be so glad when the gt is on the street and all the **** slinging can stop, or at least settle down some

Ke^in

OR.. it might make it worse. I am hoping it doesn't. So what if Ford is now in the lead as far as stock cars go? I don't see that as being a big deal. Very few people who would race these cars keep them stock.

99C5JA

Why would you need to modify the block? Simply don't put a timing chain or cam in it. Neither is needed nor will they cause any major issues with their absence (you may need to plug or reroute cam oiling). The only thing you need is a timing signal for valve events (which any modern EFI engine will have) and PCM to coordinate them.

SCM_Crash

iTrader: (2)

Meh. I was just looking at the fact that there's a gaping hole where the cam and gear would be. Makes more sense to use OHC in that respect. But, yes, you're right you could just leave out the cam, lifters, push rods, etc and reroute oiling.

I'm not a motor guru, but I'm a software guru. I'd LOVE to build this kind of motor just to see, but considering that so many manufacturers have been trying to tackle this for so long, I'd imagine it's harder than it seems.