Technical Information on the GENV
Thread Starter
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 13
From: Texas
Technical Information on the GENV The information on the Gen V goes back to 2008. Most of the good information I find comes from Runge_Kutta on Corvette Forum who seems to have a lot of time to search through patents websites, etc. If you read his posts on Corvette Forum he has quite a knack for finding patents that make it into the production cars. Quite a bit of his posts on the C6 Z06 (Aluminum frame, etc.... all came to pass). Again, a lot of the informaiton on the Gen V goes back to 2008.
See the link below and search Gen V in the .pdf for the Delphi contract
http://www.soldiersofsolidarity.com/...ntract_all.pdf
5.5L OHV Direct injection with Cylinder deactivation
6.2L DOHC Direct Injection with Cylinder deactivation
both have cam phasing
3V Engines
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0000579.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2008/0190389.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7516728.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7516728.pdf
There are quite a few patents (and patent applications) from GM by the likes of:
Hayman, Alan W. (Romeo, MI, US)
Rozario, Frederick J. (Fenton, MI, US)
Patterson, Gary J. (Utica, MI, US)
Mazzola, James J. (DRYDEN, MI, US)
Sczomak, David P. (Troy, MI, US)
that, to me, look like the Gen V small block. Just go here
http://www.freepatentsonline.com
and type in, in quotes, "general motors" and then either one of these last names or something like engine or valves. Just download the .pdf files.
If you look through the many patents from these guys, it's really hard to not conclude that Gen V may use three values per cylinder in some Gen V engines and we already know they are going to use a high pressure direct injection system.
Patents related to 3V engine have been coming out of GM for a long time and as recently as 2008 and 2009. So, I can't say for sure that Gen V is a 3V engine but it sure looks like they have plenty of patenets around it if they so choose.
See the link below and search Gen V in the .pdf for the Delphi contract
http://www.soldiersofsolidarity.com/...ntract_all.pdf
5.5L OHV Direct injection with Cylinder deactivation
6.2L DOHC Direct Injection with Cylinder deactivation
both have cam phasing
3V Engines
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0000579.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2008/0190389.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7516728.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7516728.pdf
There are quite a few patents (and patent applications) from GM by the likes of:
Hayman, Alan W. (Romeo, MI, US)
Rozario, Frederick J. (Fenton, MI, US)
Patterson, Gary J. (Utica, MI, US)
Mazzola, James J. (DRYDEN, MI, US)
Sczomak, David P. (Troy, MI, US)
that, to me, look like the Gen V small block. Just go here
http://www.freepatentsonline.com
and type in, in quotes, "general motors" and then either one of these last names or something like engine or valves. Just download the .pdf files.
If you look through the many patents from these guys, it's really hard to not conclude that Gen V may use three values per cylinder in some Gen V engines and we already know they are going to use a high pressure direct injection system.
Patents related to 3V engine have been coming out of GM for a long time and as recently as 2008 and 2009. So, I can't say for sure that Gen V is a 3V engine but it sure looks like they have plenty of patenets around it if they so choose.
Thread Starter
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 13
From: Texas
You have to realize some of this information is a few years old. GM may have the technology and not be ready to use it, may have decided against its use, or it may follow on later.
So, 3V and DOHC may or may not appear. But GM has patents for it, and its certain they have done all the engineering cycles on them as well.
So, 3V and DOHC may or may not appear. But GM has patents for it, and its certain they have done all the engineering cycles on them as well.
Nice insight, thank you!
Having worked at an OEM supplier, I agree that while they may have the IP around a particular technology, there is no guarantee they will use it and it certainly doesn't mean it performs better or meets the overall business needs than what they have implemented already. Capturing IP serves a number of purposes. Sometimes it is used to block competitors. In the case of small competitors, just bringing a patent case up can put them out of business because they can't afford the legal costs to defend themselves. Sometimes the technology is intended to be used, but still needs refinement or is waiting on market conditions or regulations to dictate it's use. Sometimes the technology is a stepping stone and the IP ensures the final outcome is somewhat protected or at least the company doesn't invest into a technology that can easily be taken over and developed by a competitor.
I think a good case study is the LT5. They implemented a lot of more advanced (for the time) technology on that engine, but the program was abandoned for simpler LS variants. It may not have been due to performance (imagine an LS with DOHC, 4V, etc), but perhaps cost, reliability, etc.
Why I am rambling about this I don't know.
Having worked at an OEM supplier, I agree that while they may have the IP around a particular technology, there is no guarantee they will use it and it certainly doesn't mean it performs better or meets the overall business needs than what they have implemented already. Capturing IP serves a number of purposes. Sometimes it is used to block competitors. In the case of small competitors, just bringing a patent case up can put them out of business because they can't afford the legal costs to defend themselves. Sometimes the technology is intended to be used, but still needs refinement or is waiting on market conditions or regulations to dictate it's use. Sometimes the technology is a stepping stone and the IP ensures the final outcome is somewhat protected or at least the company doesn't invest into a technology that can easily be taken over and developed by a competitor.
I think a good case study is the LT5. They implemented a lot of more advanced (for the time) technology on that engine, but the program was abandoned for simpler LS variants. It may not have been due to performance (imagine an LS with DOHC, 4V, etc), but perhaps cost, reliability, etc.
Why I am rambling about this I don't know.
Thread Starter
6600 rpm clutch dump of death Administrator
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,983
Likes: 13
From: Texas
I do not. There is some information in this thread:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...lum-block.html
Where the user Big_Gunzz shares some information he says he has on the ECM. If it is accurate GM is using "off the shelf" technology like virtualization, and encryption which would not be eligible for a patent.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...lum-block.html
Where the user Big_Gunzz shares some information he says he has on the ECM. If it is accurate GM is using "off the shelf" technology like virtualization, and encryption which would not be eligible for a patent.
Last edited by J-Rod; Nov 6, 2012 at 09:54 AM.
i know, i just think the patent would be a bit more detailed than the "its for your safety" chanting.
any idea on who is supplying it?
any idea on who is supplying it?
Last edited by Wnts2Go10O; Nov 7, 2012 at 03:27 PM.
