Rhino79

iTrader: (7)

I know that some of the high feature v6's are using those bearings for 12 and newer models. I saw the bearings first in a 2012 lfx I am building with forged pistons and twins. It was only on the mains on it though. Hell even that v6 3.6 has piston squirters on a naturally aspirated setup. They are really packing a lot of technology in these late model engines.

So Mr Gunz,
If you were building a 3.6 lfx with 2618 alloy Diamond pistons, what would you target for ring end gap? I am thinking .013-.015 on the top, .020 on the 2nd. I based this off of the specs on some of the current turbo v6s the general is running.

chazman

The 6th gen Camaro is just around the corner!

johnbell2

What he said. We live in a world of 4k lb Camaros... absurd.

Rhino79

iTrader: (7)

How much does your g8 weigh...lol. Pot calling kettle black again.

johnbell2

.....

sweet99ss

iTrader: (41)

Okay so what about my 99 Z28? What will gas requirements be for it? Will it just be grandfathered in or is my car going to be impouned when the gas requirements rise and my car has no cats, mufflers or anything?

NemesisC5

Obama will take it along with your guns

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

That's not how CAFE regulations work.

It's the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency for a particular model year. If the CAFE is say 40 MPG, all a particular maker's cars must reach that average in total. For every car they sell that's below average, they need to sell one that's above average to make up the difference. Makers that don't reach the standards are fined. The CAFE regulation goal for 1999 was 27.5 MPG for passenger cars.

Later years have no effect on prior year cars & trucks.

It's in the best interest of auto makers to lighten their vehicles but other regulations come into play such as crash survivability and other safety devices such as side air bags that add weight. It's really a game of compromises.

http://www.davidbarber.org/research/cafe.html

Bring the Noise

Questions to BG (something for when you get back off of holiday)...

1. Does the DI system use smaller fuel droplets in a wider patter to increase atomization?
As atomization could be reduced with the shorter amount of time for the fuel and air to mix (removing the intake runner from the mix time).

2. What is the fuel atomization level with the new DI setup on the Gen V's -vs- the multiport on Gen III/IV.

3. Does the DI system feed fuel in on the compression stroke (say to stabalize the air fuel charge and stop premature detonation/knock)?

4. Will the C7 LT1 hit 450hp and 26mpg on 87 octane and go higher on say 91/93 octane?

The reason I bring up higher atomization levels is simple, it could lead to a higher percentage of fuel exploding in the combustion/detonation. Which would leave less fuel to be burned off with the multi-spark ignition and catalytic converters.

This could lead to smaller cats with less back pressure (say high flow ceramic brick style over the charcoal brick style).
Also higher hp due to more bang in the combustion/detonation while offering better fuel economy (with a little trickery in the form of enhanced control's, something like what you've mentioned the new ECM is capable of).

If that is where GM is going then I'ld like a 450 to 500 hp 5.3L with AFM, VVT, and DI to drop into my 05 GTO as I really like this car. Oh and maybe an Air VI body kit

ChucksZ06

iTrader: (9)

I am saying that Carter and many overreacted. We had gas lines because our gov. regulated the price. Once market forces were allowed to come into play there was all the oil you wanted. 55 speed limit, 4 cyl turbo engines, stories about the end of oil, the end of the v8 engine, etc. It was all wrong and it is wrong again. I am not saying that we will have all the oil we want forever or that the price will not continue to rise but I doubt any of us will be alive when that day comes. I happen to have a 2013 5.3 silverado and the cylinder deactivation is incredibley well developed...I am anxiously awainting these new engines. With a light wt v8 versus a 4cyl engine the differences in fuel economy is much more dependant on the weight and aero qualities of the vehicle. Why give up the smoothness of the v8 in a 3,000lb vehicle for a rougher running 4 or 6 cylinder engine that gets 32 mpg and the v8 gets 30mpg. If have a gm 4 cyl malibu that can get 40 mpg under minimal load conditions but only averages 25 mpg in everyday driving. You can get close to that mileage in a vette if you drive with a light foot. The market will take the v8 most of the time. It will last twice as long also. I bet Ford is going to have lots of trouble with their turboed v6 in the trucks...the engine is going to be under a load more than a car and will wear out quickly. The auto makers will never meet the proposed CAFE standards. They are targets and will be lowered as the unrealisticness becomes apparent. Not trying to p--s anyone off, just observations.

obZidian

iTrader: (2)

The G8 is a 4 door sedan guy... not a musclecar. Wow.

Paul Bell

iTrader: (9)

I guess when I wrote "We have a few years to go so enjoy your V8 cars while you can" it does look like I'm saying they're gonna come and take away our eight cylinder engines.

I meant that they're gonna stop making new V8 engined cars and light trucks.

I'm with you guys, I also hope it doesn't come to that but with the looming CAFE rules coming, it looks like it will.

I'm planning a 598 CI (9.8L) engine for the Monte heeheehee.......

wssix99

iTrader: (5)

lol I guess its all a matter of perspective. When I bought my car, gas was under $1.00 a gallon. From where I sit, "that day" came several years ago! (Or, one could alternatively say that "that day" came at the very point where it became profitable to pump oil out of the ground in North Dakota.)

Counting inflation, my car costs over 3X the amount of money to run (and change the oil) than when I purchased it. When doing this modern math... I am very thankful that my Firebird is lighter than a current model Honda Accord.

Closer to this thread, there were long rumors that a hybrid Corvette was on the table for this go-around. Maybe its what we'll see for the next incarnation...
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...r-world-to-end

Rhino79

iTrader: (7)

You don't say? So a charger srt8 is a sedan but not considered a muscle car?

disc0monkey

iTrader: (10)

dont feed the trolls

disc0monkey

iTrader: (10)

that's the problem though, one braaaaaap in the vette and the MPGs go to absolute ****.

Rhino79

iTrader: (7)

Lol, I dont troll. I just though it was funny that someone with a 4100 lb car was talking about a 3900 lb car as being rediculous. And that line is getting used way too frequently to even find it entertaining now. Kind of like come at me bro or cool story bro, gay.

NemesisC5

Some good points you make. Oil is currently the most cost effective method to produce energy. Clean drilling and extraction methods give us capability to drill where we have not before. Hybrids are effective platforms with battery technology developing at a rapid rate as shown by both Porsche and Audi. With that said, I hope I will always have the option of some form of V8 gasoline powered high performance vehicle.


http://blog.caranddriver.com/um-wow-...es-14-seconds/

http://www.lemanslive.com/Lemanslive...e-Mans-in-2013

FirstLSx

iTrader: (8)

As much as I don't want to believe it, I agree that the writing seems to be on the wall. I would NEVER even consider a purchase of a V6 Camaro SS/Z28 or Corvette, but that's just me.

If what he is saying legit about this being the end of small blocks, you've got to admit it had one hell of a run.

Rhino79

iTrader: (7)

I agree. But I've been building a tt 3.6 camaro and there is a lot going into these little engines now. Even an integrated manifold for the exhaust rather than a conventional exhaust manifold. It makes for a very clean turbo setup!